GH2 vs Canon 60D

Hi, I'm looking for a DSLR for video shooting and photography. I found out that the 60D is almost identical to the 7D, just that the 60D is better cheaper and better for video. Now I'm down to 60D vs GH2. Any comments about pros or cons for the 2 cameras? I
 
The 60D is a great camera. Although is is getting out of date still produces good images in video and still. I'm selling all my Canon cameras for Samsung Nx1 systems because of 4K, and Samsung is leading the way with features. The Nx1 is the top of the line Samsung with no higher end cameras to save the newest technology for as with Canon. Canon hasn't made any image improvements in 5 years.

I would look at the Nx500 instead of the 60D. Not quite the same as the Nx1 but for half the price an awesome deal.
 
Last edited:
I'm surprised people are still comparing these cameras, as the GH2 is so much leagues better. But I understand why....people are still stuck in the Canon mindset trap.

In that price range I would also consider: Sony A5100 (my favourite at the moment which I work with,but the overheating is a bummer), Sony A6000, Panasonic G6, Panasonic GX7, Nikon D5200.
 
Nikon's video image (to me anyway) beats Panasonic and Canon, for some time now. The 7100/5300 bodies are capable of really great looking footage (if you're looking at used gear, which it seems from your post?) - the 60D is pretty old-school. The GH2 leaves you with the smaller sensor as well. GH fans will rave about "sharpness", but much of the video from that body just looks "video" to me and many others. In the hands of a good DP, it can look good I suppose. Very hard to beat the Nikon "look" though.

I'd agree the NX1 is the best bang for the buck out there (though H265 may cause headaches until the NLEs catch up). And Samsung is just kicking ass with firmware and support, right out of the gate. If this is the just the beginning for Samsung, I'm curious to see where they are in a year or two.
 
I used to own a GH2 for about a year (a GH1 for a year and half before that) and traded the GH2 for a 60D back in 2013. Both are nice cameras. The GH2 is definitely more video oriented. It's quicker and easier to get to your white balance and the EVF is great. The video is also very sharp and high res.

The 60D on the other hand is more photo oriented. The image is not as sharp/high res and it's a little harder to work with for video. But the colors are great and the image is a little more cinematic in my opinion. You just need to get a viewfinder/loupe to put on the LCD screen. The 3.5mm mic jack is also nicer than the 2.5mm jack on the GH2.

They're both great cameras in their own way. You can't go wrong with either, but it depends on what you're after. How important are still photos? In my opinion the 60D is better for that. How important is high res sharpness in video? The GH2 is better for that.

Personally I prefer the 60D. I like the bigger feel of the camera in my hand and I like the slightly more cinematic (even if softer) images it produces compared to the colder colors and video-ish looking GH2 footage that is sharper. I also like shooting photos a lot, so I use it as much for that as video. Ultimately I decided to go the Canon route because I wanted to start building an arsenal of lenses and figured the Canon route would be a better long term investment. I can take EF lenses to a full frame camera or to their cinema series cameras. I can even take them to a few Blackmagic cameras that have EF mounts or a BMPCC with a speedbooster, which is actually the next camera I'll be getting to use alongside my 60D. Along with an original 5D full frame just for photos.
 
I sold my Canon 60D and all my Canon lenses after owning the GH2 for about 2 weeks. For video the GH2 beats the 60D by a mile. Much sharper image, no moire, very little aliasing, 10 dB quieter when recording internal audio, no recording time limit. Take a look at Shane Carruth's Sundance winning feature "Upstream Color" which was entirely shot with the GH2.

Upstream Color
 
Back
Top