having trouble deciding between a 5D/7D and a GH2?

wgzn

wgzn

Veteran
as an old school SLR dude, it was hard for me to accept that the GH2 was better suited to my current needs than say a canon 7D. but the reality is that i will use this camera more for video than for stills. and the way i work. the GH2 just made more sense.

after a few days of slow start with the GH2, i have finally got my head around what i considered to be it's non-standard menus and controls.

and i have to admit. im very pleased with my decision!

it still doesnt feel nearly as solid in my hands as a 7D does. and im not wild about the viewfinder. but all in, it does what i need it to do. as i expect it to do it. and doesnt suffer from the moire issues or clip limits that soured me on the canon offerings. i also LOVE the way it handles white balancing. WAY more intuitive and flexible than any camera ive used!

so i post this in the spirit of easing the mind of other folks who might also be on the fence between a GH2 and a 5D/7D.
 
I have this similar problem if I choose DSLR over regular Videocamera. (which I am still debating) Are there any rumors about what is coming down the pipeline in terms of something that will be comparable but better?
 
there is ALWAYS something in the pipeline better, faster, cheaper, bigger, cooler, whatever...
as many of us say here, get what you need and can afford. get shooting and you'll earn the money to evolve your gear as needed.

but on the other hand, here is my take on YOUR question:
right now, barring some radical paradigm shift in delivery or glasses-free-3d. there isnt much more you could ask from a sub $10k camera, that one of the existing offerings wont well handle. it just comes down to how many features that you want, can you afford? and thats pretty much it. every camera out there is a compromise to one degree or another.

about the only thing on the horizon IMO that would change the landscape is the removable lens red scarlet. and if i were to bet, id say (considering that red has removed all formal mention of it from their website) its never going to actually hit the streets. but thats another discussion.

but on your decision between a DSLR and "regular" video camera. and im sure people are getting tired of seeing me saying this. but it depends on the kind of work you do. if all you do is "artsy" stuff or indie feature type things. a DSLR will generally be great. BUT if you do ANY traditional run-and-gun or ENG (news, sports or event type stuff) a DSLR as your ONLY camera is an exceptionally BAD idea. two primary reasons being the lack of convenient, standard "pro-quality" audio inputs. and absence of servo lens controls.

i have an hpx170 for traditional video work. and for use on my jib. but the GH2 will serve as my more "painterly" camera for things requiring the filmic DOF
 
Last edited:
I came to the same conclusion after purchasing both a GH1 and a 7D. I'd love to use the 7D more for video, but it just doesn't have the same capabilities the GH_ does. At least after the hack. It's also too light to do camera moves easily, embarrassingly small and difficult to work with because of that, and it just feels cheaply built. Which is too bad; I'd love to have a hybrid of the two. I guess I do own one of each, but I'm worried that if I try to get my cameras to mate and it doesn't work out, two camera shoots will get really awkward.
 
A hybrid of the 7d and the gh2 would be pretty cool.

Like others have said, there isn't anything that really offers the best of both worlds yet... The gh2 comes the closest so far but there is still room for improvement. If I had to choose between a camcorder and a DSLR, I would get the DSLR. It is a more versatile tool. They are slowly turning into the swiss army knife of the camera world.
 
wgzn said:
i also LOVE the way it handles white balancing. WAY more intuitive and flexible than any camera ive used!.
Click to expand...

I agree with this. I'm just starting to test my GH2 after coming from the canons and various camcorders. i love how right on screen you can color correct as well as white balance and it works.

I wish it was built a bit sturdier though.
 
Aaron De Pry said:
If I had to choose between a camcorder and a DSLR, I would get the DSLR. It is a more versatile tool. They are slowly turning into the swiss army knife of the camera world.
Click to expand...

Even if the camcorder was an AF100? What if it was an Arri Alexa or Red One?

For me, the AF100 would resolve so many workarounds for me, I almost feel like selling everything just to get one.
 
A lot of it is shoot-specific. I'll be shooting extremely tight spaces (think small 2 person tent) - an AF100 (or Red!) would be like trying to fit a cow in; but the GH2... the smaller the better, so even better than a 5D. It's specific not just to these scenes but to the entire film, in that there will be a lot of small rooms and the like.
 
Even when I posted this question in the 7D forum, people were recommending the GH2...are these forums just a bit biased, or is it really the best value right now? Comments like Jester2138's makes me feel like the GH2 is the way to go.
 
Depends on what you want to use it for. I can echo jester, I had a 7D, sold it, have a GH2 now and I think it's just vastly superior in just about every possible way.
 
Barry,

I concur on the video side except for one thing... I believe the Canon codec is less artifacty than the 24mbit 24p. It just looks cleaner and doesn't break on heavy detail fast motion. Ive managed to break the GH2 codec 4 times already on 24p 24mbit, the canon codec only twice that i remember, flock of birds, and waterfall closeup. If hacked the GH2 would be superb.

On the photo side, the 7D is not only better, its on a class apart, I just cant trust the GH2 for still images, the 7D is just so far apart.

Disclaimer: I own both the 7D and GH2 and use them extensively!
 
It all depends on what you shoot. I have a GH1(3) and a 7D. In low light, the 7D gets used since I have way more fast glass in the EOS mount, and the 7D has been high ISO performance - the GH2 might be better, but there's still a horrible lack of f2.8 zooms in m4/3, and there's nothing like the Tokina 11-16/2.8 available in m4/3.

But if I want to just grab a camera and start shooting video, then the GH1 is my go to camera. The EVF, 14-140 lens with OIS, useable AF etc, all just work, and it's improved in the GH2.
 
Orpheus said:
Even when I posted this question in the 7D forum, people were recommending the GH2...are these forums just a bit biased, or is it really the best value right now? Comments like Jester2138's makes me feel like the GH2 is the way to go.
Click to expand...

I find these forums are pretty brand agnostic, unlike most other camera forums on the net
 
I did back-to-back shoots with the D7000 & GH2 and found the difference in image quality and vastly superior HDMI out not nearly worth dealing with lens adapters, the flimsy GH2 body, and learning another new "crop factor."

A lot on the forums seem to think the difference between the GH2 and 7D are massive and that the D7000 compares unfavorably even to the latter, so I guess I just didn't do the right things to break the codec...
 
That's true.. People will tell you the straight honest truth. Like for me. I would shoot stills with the 7D and video with the Gh2 and I have. It's all about the process and if Canon 5D mark 3 kicks booty.. I'll move over there...

The nice thing is that we really don't have too much money tied up in any one thing.. Sure it's somewhat expensive but it's not 10's of thousands of dollars....
 
I'm grabbing the GH2 as soon as it's available. But I'll keep my T2i for stills.... an area where the T2i still performs like a champ.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top