GH1 vs T2i

Status
Not open for further replies.
Psynema said:
Barry when people say there's no fast lenses for the GH1 - they mean FAST ZOOMS WITH IS - which is true - the GH1 is TOTALLY VOID -

Canon you can have a 70-200mm 2.8 IS - you can't get that on the GH1, just a kit lens two stops slower on a body that's at least a stop slower ISO wise.

You can adapt primes sure, but again, no IS, and no 85mm 1.2, which is worth maxing out a credit line for.
Click to expand...

This statement is such fail given the quote from Barry you also listed where he says it can take every Canon lens ever made. Sure you might not be able to set aperture without a Canon camera but it can take that lens. However, Nikon makes a lens that's pretty much the same (70-200 with IS at f/2.8) and you can control aperture with a bolt adapter on the GH1 with it.
 
N.E.S. said:
Yes it is pro and yes it has better compression. Now if you shoot live video at 720/60 and have found that works best for you then fine. The T2i just came out less than 2 weeks and judging by your post the GH1 was/is your first dslr you worked with as you come from standard cameras.

I owned several dslrs including the Gh1 and my opinion is I like the T2i better & factual statement is it has better compression and looks better online which I mostly post my work.
Click to expand...

all opinions... and assumptions...

a 'pro' video camera that shoots 12 minutes... just funny stuff...

Don't get me wrong, I am not saying the GH1 is pro either...
 
Last edited:
The GH1 has no recording limit, takes more glass, has an articulating LCD and a great viewfinder that can be used for video, and is a better value. For $1200 you get the camera and a kit lens priced at $800. So for $400 than the T2i you're getting $800 in glass. The kit lens for the GH1 works great in lots of situations. It is a wonderful lens, and can easily be supplemented by fast, inexpensive primes from any just about any brand ever made with any mount ever made, or by more expensive glass should you so wish.

As for the camera's image quality, I would recommend you watch this video I did. It cuts just fine next to the 5D mk II even though I shot 720p on the GH1 (the video is edited in 720p but the GH1 does just fine in 1080p, I just happened to shoot 720 that day) and has some great shots in it that are taken with the kit lens. Specifically the train-track rack focus and the shot down the cliff with the slo-mo water. All lenses are labeled and you can see what the kit can do.

 
They're two very different approaches. As a strictly video camera, all the Canon DSLRs are lousy. As a replacement digi-cine camera, Canon has several things that are advantages over the GH1.

Again, to bring out an oft-used and perhaps overused analogy, trying to flatly declare that one is better than the other is equivalent to trying to flatly declare that a motorcycle is better than a pickup truck.

The GH1 is different. If you want to directly compare the 7D to the t2i, go right ahead. But if I was forced to keep only one of these (7D and GH1) I think I know which one I'd keep.
 
Barry_Green said:
They're two very different approaches. As a strictly video camera, all the Canon DSLRs are lousy.
Click to expand...

Barry, could you elaborate? I try to read everything you write, and I can't recall you coming down that hard on the Canon DLSRs...

I ask because that's all I would be using it for - I just sold my JVC100 - taking the plunge on one of these DLSRs....

Thanks!

john
 
Now, that article doesn't come close to saying all Canon DLSRs are "lousy" as video cameras. In fact, I took the article to indicate it was better than the GH1 in many ways...


john
 
Barry_Green said:
They're two very different approaches. As a strictly video camera, all the Canon DSLRs are lousy. As a replacement digi-cine camera, Canon has several things that are advantages over the GH1.

Again, to bring out an oft-used and perhaps overused analogy, trying to flatly declare that one is better than the other is equivalent to trying to flatly declare that a motorcycle is better than a pickup truck.

The GH1 is different. If you want to directly compare the 7D to the t2i, go right ahead. But if I was forced to keep only one of these (7D and GH1) I think I know which one I'd keep.
Click to expand...

That said, and having read your article several times, I use the GH1 as a digital cinema camera and love it. I think it's better for extreme low budget and student digital cinema people who don't have access to or can't afford all the accessories to make the Canon DSLRs usable for digital cinema (monitor, z-finder, support systems, etc.)

That said, I have an external monitor (which yes, doesn't work too well on my GH1), I have friends with the 5D and z-finder (which I have shot on), and I have several camera support rigs, some bought some DIY, and I still prefer the GH1 for digital cinema. Using it reminds me more of using a prosumer video camera than using these other cameras does...if you handed me something with the same video features and software as the GH1 that had no photo features and said, this was designed for shooting video, I'd have some questions about what you were thinking and many suggestions for improvements but I would BELIEVE YOU...you cannot say the same about the Canons.
 
Good points Ben...


jdv said:
Now, that article doesn't come close to saying all Canon DLSRs are "lousy" as video cameras. In fact, I took the article to indicate it was better than the GH1 in many ways...
john
Click to expand...


Also the 7D has features that the T2i does not... And if you subtract those features from the article the t2i is left with little to be 'better' at.
 
jdv said:
Now, that article doesn't come close to saying all Canon DLSRs are "lousy" as video cameras. In fact, I took the article to indicate it was better than the GH1 in many ways...


john
Click to expand...

It comes down to how you're going to use it. What type of video work will you be doing?

The DSLRs make quality cinema cameras, but if you're going to need it for a good amount of ENG, Event, etc. then it's a very good solution.
 
Full length narratives - usually horror. 4th feature going out to fests right now...

Gotta start planning for the next one :)

john
 
jdv said:
Now, that article doesn't come close to saying all Canon DLSRs are "lousy" as video cameras. In fact, I took the article to indicate it was better than the GH1 in many ways...


john
Click to expand...

Barry means a video camera as opposed to a digital cinema camera which is already a replacement for a film camera. Basically he's arguing that the 7D is more like a replacement for a film camera, better suited for cinema, and the GH1 is more like a replacement for a video camera (wow look at all those "replacement for a") which you might use to shoot an event like a wedding, or a documentary, or your vacation, or your kid's school play, or do ENG with.

And that's true, the GH1 is a better "video" camera for the purposes that video cameras have played historically. Video camera as opposed to film camera (keeping in mind that many of you have used video cameras as replacements for film cameras already: that's not what we're talking about.)

That said, the GH1 is a great camera for digital cinema, especially for the ultra-low budget and student filmmakers, and even has some advantages on the higher end. For example, a stock GH1 can be fitted with a PL adapter whereas the 7D requires extensive modification rendering it useless as anything but a digital cinema camera (can no longer take pictures outside of liveview or mount any other kind of lenses.)

And, to top it all off, lets not forget that we are comparing the GH1 and the T2i, which lacks many of the 7D's features, and for which no PL version exists as of yet (not that that matters to most of you, but again, I feel that the GH1 is already better than the 7D on the low-end of digital cinema.)

So if the T2i is not a better video camera, and it's not a better digital cinema camera, and it's on Canon's low end stills market...what does it do better? Some might say lots of things, but I might disagree with you on those things...and here it comes down to personal preference.

But for me, the GH1 takes the best parts of the motorcycle (fun, fast, and nimble to shoot with, thanks to its flip out LCD, live view finder, and more video oriented software) and combines it with the best parts of the pickup truck (versatility, the ability to do a lot in many situations.) I'll stick with my pickupcycle.
 
Last edited:
pete, I think you are saying dsrls are not for eng, event, etc right? I agree and that is what I use a "video" camera for. Which is why I vote GH1 if I have to use a non-pro camera.
 
Last edited:
lol, seems to me like GH1 owners are coming in here to justify their purchase.


GH1 is pretty much dead, Canon 7D and T2i are the kings now..... So hop on board or get left behind. GH1 section must be pretty dead that you guys are over here
:violin:


No worry though you guys put up a good fight, but truth is your time is over
 
N.E.S. said:
lol, seems to me like GH1 owners are coming in here to justify their purchase.


GH1 is pretty much dead, Canon 7D and T2i are the kings now..... So hop on board or get left behind. GH1 section must be pretty dead that you guys are over here
:violin:


No worry though you guys put up a good fight, but truth is your time is over
Click to expand...

It seems to me that you're a junior member with 12 posts who joined in Feb 2010 (which is when the T2i came out) that you have not been part of this community for long and don't really seem to know what you're talking about, so I will try to set a few things straight for you regarding these cameras and this community, as well as the purpose of this thread.

Show me another video SLR what gives you a liveview finder (1.4 megapixels worth of one) an articulated LCD screen, support for every lens ever made, that has no recording limit or heat problems, and that costs $600. Or show me one for $1,200 that does all that and autofocuses during video, has image stabilization, and a 10x zoom range.

I see no real reason to justify my purchase for you (and if I was trying to simply justify it I would point out that when many of us bought our GH1s the only other option was the 5D which had no 24p and cost $1,000 more without a great $800 lens that the GH1 came with). I have shot some great looking stuff on my GH1 that I am very proud of. Now people are here trying to make the choice as to what to buy today. So we are giving them the reasons why we love our cameras.

People in this community do this strange thing called helping each other. Sharing information. If that doesn't sound like something you're interested in there are plenty of other forums on the web. I can't promise we'll miss you here...maybe we will if you actually start contributing something...I hope that you do.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top