From GH2 to?....

F

Framerate

Well-known member
Hi, I'd appreciate some help here.

I've grown weary of the whole 'DSLR Rig' thing - I like my GH2, but the paraphernalia required to turn it into a full function video camera is just too much for me to cope with any longer.

Cage, rods, follow focus, mics, H4n, monitor, matte box......the kitchen sink and a toaster thrown in for good measure...:happy:....it's driving me nuts.

Ended up with a monstrosity weighing 7 kg, and looking like a spinal brace.... so I've made a firm decision to escape.

I have a reasonable (I hope) carbon fibre stabiliser on its way from Wondlan, and I want to change to a decent consumer/prosumer camcorder.

My budget is £2500-£2600 tops, and my options seem to be the JVC HM150, the Sony NX70, and the Canon XF100 (unless anyone can come up wih something else)

I instinctively prefer CMOS because of the better low light capability - although, at such small sensor sizes, would there really be a noticeable difference between a 1/3rd CMOS and the 3 x 1/4 CCD's of the JVC?

I'm tempted by the JVC because of the feature set and the lower price (about £300 cheaper) but I'd rather pay the extra if it got me something noticeably better.

Any advice? - which one would you get?

Thanks

EDIT - forgot to add that there's probably more chance of viewing a saddle for a Rhinocerus than of seeing all three cams locally (and, in the case of the JVC, a golden Rhino saddle studded with diamonds) so, I'll be buying pretty much blind - which is why I'd really appreciate your input.
 
Last edited:
Framerate said:
Hi, I'd appreciate some help here.

I've grown weary of the whole 'DSLR Rig' thing - I like my GH2, but the paraphernalia required to turn it into a full function video camera is just too much for me to cope with any longer.

Cage, rods, follow focus, mics, H4n, monitor, matte box......the kitchen sink and a toaster thrown in for good measure...:happy:....it's driving me nuts.

Ended up with a monstrosity weighing 7 kg, and looking like a spinal brace.... so I've made a firm decision to escape.

I have a reasonable (I hope) carbon fibre stabiliser on its way from Wondlan, and I want to change to a decent consumer/prosumer camcorder.

My budget is £2500-£2600 tops, and my options seem to be the JVC HM150, the Sony NX70, and the Canon XF100 (unless anyone can come up wih something else)

I instinctively prefer CMOS because of the better low light capability - although, at such small sensor sizes, would there really be a noticeable difference between a 1/3rd CMOS and the 3 x 1/4 CCD's of the JVC?

I'm tempted by the JVC because of the feature set and the lower price (about £300 cheaper) but I'd rather pay the extra if it got me something noticeably better.

Any advice? - which one would you get?

Thanks

EDIT - forgot to add that there's probably more chance of viewing a saddle for a Rhinocerus than of seeing all three cams locally (and, in the case of the JVC, a golden Rhino saddle studded with diamonds) so, I'll be buying pretty much blind - which is why I'd really appreciate your input.
Click to expand...


No-one got any thoughts????
 
Honestly going from a GH2 to anyone of those cameras is going to seem very, very underwhelming. The GH2 blows them all out of the water quality wise, especially when hacked. I made the step from a GH2 to an FS100, but that's a little out of your budget, I would stick with the GH2 and save up some pennies, because upgrading from that little beast is going to cost a bit.
 
EDIT - forgot to add that there's probably more chance of viewing a saddle for a Rhinocerus than of seeing all three cams locally (and, in the case of the JVC, a golden Rhino saddle studded with diamonds) so, I'll be buying pretty much blind - which is why I'd really appreciate your input.

framerate, I take it you are in the UK. If you can make it I recommend visiting the Broadcast Video Expo show at Earls Court in February - link below. If you pre-register online you may still be able to get free entry. Takes place over three days and you can pick up examples from a wide range of cameras and see how they handle. I also recommend checking out the free seminars (programme on the website) because there's a good chance there will be at least one you will want to attend. I've been twice to the expo and haven't regretted it, particularly in regard to the seminars and NLE demonstrations.

http://www.bvexpo.com/bve/website/default.aspx?refer=6
 
Last edited:
LiamR said:
Honestly going from a GH2 to anyone of those cameras is going to seem very, very underwhelming. The GH2 blows them all out of the water quality wise, especially when hacked. I made the step from a GH2 to an FS100, but that's a little out of your budget, I would stick with the GH2 and save up some pennies, because upgrading from that little beast is going to cost a bit.
Click to expand...


Thanks, appreciate your input.

'Underwhelming' in what way? - noise?, or resolution?, or something else?

I understand about the DOF issues - but, in all honestly, I've grown a bit bored with shallow DOF and would be happy with 'almost everything in focus'

If anything, I found the GH2 underwhelming compared to my GH1 - better in some ways, but the only thing I really appreciated about it was the HDMI feed to a monitor while recording. Certainly, GH2 noise has been a bit disappointing. Ironically, I've seen quite a lot of low light/night footage from the Sony HXR-MC200E (which, as I'm sure you know, is basically just a Hanycam in a big shell ) that is much cleaner than my GH2.

Horses for courses, obviously - and I'm certainly not knocking the GH2, it's just that I want a simpler soluton that doesn't require an array of bolt-on extras to make it perform ergonomically like a video cam.

£2600 has to be my budget, I'm afraid ;)
 
Get rid of all the bolt-ons. That's my opinion. Look at the entire setup and ask yourself what do you need, and which bits, if removed, makes it impossible to film. See there are a ton of things we want, a lot of things we need, but only a few things we cannot live without. Weight is good from a stability point of few - but you know that.

My 2 cents, and being in South Africa and you in the UK, those 2 cents aren't worth much. :Drogar-Happy(DBG):
 
Inprogress said:
Get rid of all the bolt-ons. That's my opinion. Look at the entire setup and ask yourself what do you need, and which bits, if removed, makes it impossible to film. See there are a ton of things we want, a lot of things we need, but only a few things we cannot live without. Weight is good from a stability point of few - but you know that.

My 2 cents, and being in South Africa and you in the UK, those 2 cents aren't worth much. :Drogar-Happy(DBG):
Click to expand...


Dunno - have you taken a look at the UK economy lately? No-one in Government dares to come out and say it, but we are in deep sh*t (to use the offcial Bank of England parlance... )

As far as the add-ons go - it's like Topsy, it 'just growed'

Growed to about 7Kg, in fact - and that's with a lightweight lens.

Trouble is, everything has a definite purpose (each of which is doing its bit to help the GH2 be a real videocam) That's why I'm going to *get* a real videocam - and morbidly obese Topsy can go to ebay :happy:

The only gadget I really want is the Wondlan stabilser that's supposed to be on its way to me - which is another reason for dumping the bolt-ons, the stabiliser isn't going to work with a behemoth of a cage on it (although, apparently, it's good for 5Kg) which means I'll have to use it the camera stripped of all its goodies. In that case, I might as well have a camera that has some of the goodies (like decent sound) built in and just enjoy those smoooooth shots that Wondlan assure me are mine for the taking.. :happy:

That's the theory, anyway.
 
I do still love the look of the EX1, for what it's worth. Step down imagewise from the GH2 but a step up for more usability/run and gun.
 
To be honest with you, the GH2 is a great low-light camera, I've shot scenes with it in barely any light and it has been completely noise free, I am not sure what you're doing, but I've seen many people say how great it is at night. The GH2 beats those camera's in every category, look at the tests Philip Bloom has just finished, the GH2 did superbly in the resolution test. is your GH2 hacked at all? I never picked mine up after I got the FS100, but then I hacked it and now I use them both. With that sort of money I really think buying one of those cameras is a big step backward, why can't you for hold on the purchase and wait?

I really think your only option if you cannot wait is to do as brunerww said and buy second hand, only way your going to get anywere near what you want for the money you're willing to spend.
 
I've grown weary of the whole 'DSLR Rig' thing - I like my GH2, but the paraphernalia required to turn it into a full function video camera is just too much for me to cope with any longer.

Cage, rods, follow focus, mics, H4n, monitor, matte box......the kitchen sink and a toaster thrown in for good measure...:happy:....it's driving me nuts.
Click to expand...
I well understand the aversion to bolting on frankenrigs just to turn a stills camera into a faint replica of a fully-functional video camera. Which is why I just don't shoot that way.

If you already have a GH2, then the upgrade path is obvious - get a used AF100. You can use all your lenses and adapters, and ditch all the rigging and external recorders and all that stuff.

I don't know what used AF100s go for over there, but over here I bought one for $3500 and we just had a killer one listed here in the marketplace for $3000. That's about £1900, well under your budget cap. You should easily be able to find a used AF100 that fits within your budget.
 
Interesting thread. It's a non issue really since few cameras add up all your rig elements in one package well. That's why we all started the rigs (mine was and is the Canon HV20).
The bottom line is that if you have a budget then listen to al the other sage voices that seem to be saying. Stick with the GH2 till your budget is much higher (which by the way = A job is going to pay for it all anyway).
I am VERY much against aspirational gearheads. Ever since College (35 years ago??) I learned that lesson and have very very rarely regretted saving my money.
I have a governing document and credo that I constantly refer to every time i seeth at some annoyance or other on my rig. After reading it, meditating for 10 seconds, I go back to work.
The smart money is on allowing your skill and jobs in hand to overtake your equipment.
I have never seen great work and money follow a gear purchase.
Having said this, I can buy any camera that I want under $50,000 and not break the bank. I am close to running my HV20 into the ground and i now have overtaken it's upper limit.
Can you truly say that about your work and your GH2?
If so, I'll buy it off you, get it hacked and save myself the many thousands that little voice in my head wants me to spend on an upgrade just to avoid the bother of the nasty rig syndrome.
Hope that i've been of help.
 
It sounds like small and light weight are the key drivers here? So preferably no dual system sound, no monitor and no follow focus? All of the large sensor cams require a follow focus, however the AF100 would possibly do away with the need for separate sound and a monitor (assuming the built in focus tools are adequate for you).

Funny how indie trends have affected this part of the world...I wonder how many of us on this site are up to date with the small sensor cams.
 
framerate - if you're still intent on swapping out your GH2 for a pro quality camcorder for less than £2600, and if you haven't been able to find a used AF101 at your price, your best bet is probably the £2480 Canon XF100. Relatively inexpensive CF cards, 4:2:2 color space, 50Mbps - accepted by the BBC. No HD-SDI, though, unless you want to pay another £500 for the XF105 . Philip Bloom speaks very highly of the XF100/105 series cameras, and shoots his BTS videos with one.

Cheers and good luck with your decision.

Bill
 
as someone else mentioned, going with a "video camera" won't necessarily get rid of the franken-rig syndrome. If you felt the need to dress up your GH2 with things such as a matte box, rails, etc... you probably will feel the need to do the same with any video camera.

Here's a fun thread for you on the AF100
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?243190-Post-Pictures-of-your-AF100-Rig

You may save yourself some of the bits like audio recorder, but you may not get rid of all of it. Good luck in your decisions!
 
I'd avoid the AF100, as the quality compared to your hacked GH2 might be disappointing and you're still stuck without a servo zoom. But I would think about the EX1r. We had one for a year (it just wasn't working so sold it) and LOVED the image, as did our clients. The very high resolution image will cut well with the GH2 and some of the higher end hacks (seaquake, etc), and the zoom is pretty good. Nice workflow, same SD cards if you use an adaptor. We'll likely pick up another EX1 in the future if a job could justify it.
 
Barry_Green said:
I well understand the aversion to bolting on frankenrigs just to turn a stills camera into a faint replica of a fully-functional video camera. Which is why I just don't shoot that way.
Click to expand...

Exactly my thoughts. If you don't like the extra stuff, just don't use it all.

If you need filters, get screw-ons. Matteboxes are completely unnecessary and a bit ridiculous for these cameras IMO.
If you need sound, do it double-system. It'll sound way better anyway. Not sure why so many people try doing it all onboard unless you don't even have the one extra person necessary to hold the sound gear.
If you need stabilization, put it on a tripod like they did for the past 100 years or use a steadicam. Or, if you want the handheld look, fold up the tripod under the camera and shoot that way.
Don't bother with a follow focusl, they're extra weight bulk for no perceivable benifit. Pull off the lens. Also, I've never met an AC who could pull better than me even while I'm simultaneously operating. Getting good at that will make a big difference.

I think people expend waaaay too much energy trying to make it look and work like a normal camera. Embrace its differences and be really good at exploiting them! Don't force it into being what it's not. Sure, having a tiny little camera naked on the tripod next to tons of lights and expensive crew and props and trucks and stuff looks silly, since we're used to bada** looking rigs and stuff, but I got over it fast when I realized how much easier it was to embrace that than try and beef up the camera.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top