Graduating from DVX100- 7D or GH2?

[arottler]

I'm an undergrad film student (looking to get into grad school next year), I've had a DVX-100 for 4(ish) years, and I reckon it's about time I move up in the world to something at least marginally more professional looking. I've never done any filmmaking with a DSLR, but have extensive experience with still photography so I'm generally well educated in all the principles of photography/cinematography, as well as what to expect from various brands and the impact of certain lenses and sensor types. I have all the necessary equipment for external audio, so that is a non-issue, and all of my still photography equipment is Nikon, so neither brand loyalty nor previous investment in glass is of serious concern. When I approached the idea, I was basically set on the 7d. I'm aware of it's limitations (aliasing, audio, non-articulating VF, etc) but my god, when it looks good it looks unbelievable. Then I start reading about the GH2 and it throws my whole plan into disarray. It's cheaper, and although the sensor has marginally less appeal in terms of directly compatible fast lenses and a larger crop, the articulating LCD and apparently massive improvement in the aliasing and moire patterns that plague the 7d make it a option worth genuine consideration. Between the GH1 and 7d it's no contest in my mind-7d all the way-but the GH2 presents something entirely more competitive. I've read dozens of pages of vague deliberation and watched a host of video comparisons which have left me more frustrated than ever because I think the 7D has slightly better DOF but the GH2 is better in low-light (if you find a good, fast lens) and appears to suffer slightly less from rolling shutter.

Essentially what I'm looking for is advice from someone who has used both (regrettably I don't have that opportunity). If anyone can state from personal experience if the things I've written are true that would help greatly. The camera's still capabilities are almost entirely irrelevant, I'm just really struggling to find a comprehensive and unbiased comparison of the two; all I ever see is "60d vs. gh2" or "7d vs. gh1". The sensor on the 7D has this inherent 35mm perspective that just makes me drool, but the GH2 makes some beautifully sharp videos as well. I'm at quite an impasse.

Sorry if this is posted in the wrong place, or if its incredibly vague and/or a repeat. Thank you so much for your time and input! I've got a notebook full of ideas just waiting to be filmed in beautiful HD.

-Adam

 

[averan]

if you don't care about the still photography abilities of either, then why a 7D? you should be looking at the 60D.

and none of these dslrs are going to look 'more professional' than a big honking video cam.

additionally, 'better dof' is entirely arbitrary. i take it that you mean that 'shallower' is 'better', but in fact, i and several of my indie filmmaking mates have come to the conclusion that a super shallow dof is actually more difficult to work with on run-n-gun shoots or anything other than a totally controlled set and even then you might want to consider hiring a focus-puller!

but all in all, i think that you should be basing your decision on other factors, such as: how you like to shoot and what you like to shoot. the difference in image quality between the 2 is not enough to base your decision on while the form-factor and feature set vary greatly between them.