I know you've heard it a million times before but...GH2 or 60D?

P

Plazm

Member
Hi guys,

Quick background about me. I've been seriously into audio and video since I was 13, and I'm 24 now.I have been shooting on my own VX2100 since 2006 (editing with Premiere Pro). I've used the camera for a lot of different applications, from shooting art exhibitions and corporate market research work, to music event coverage which has become my niche (stuff like this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8_0eX4zhZw)

I've always known I'd need to upgrade to HD (and never even thought about dSLR) but have always put it off until about 3 months ago when I saw similar stuff I do shot on a 5D MKII. Needless to say, I was blown away and left totally discouraged due to the fact that I'd never be able to get IQ like that out of my camera.

So for the last few months I've been trawling Google (seriously, 10 pages of results are all purpled out) trying to find the best camera to upgrade to. For awhile, I was looking at the Canon XF100 but the price of CF cards and the video look started to move me in the direction of DSLRs.

After another month of research spent totally on shooting video with DSLR, exhausting Philip Bloom's site and watching pretty much every comparison video I could find on Youtube and Vimeo I narrowed my choice of cameras down to the 60D or GH2. Now here's where things get tricky.

In terms of the 60D, I'm totally in love with the IQ. The aesthetic just blows me away and the availability of lenses and accessories in this country (South Africa) are great. Canon seems to be an industry standard here when it comes to DSLR video (as it seems to be around the world) and there appears to be a bigger Canon community which is always a great benefit when it comes to networking and collaboration and also education. I've found tons of Canon tutorials but very few as refined when it comes to GH2. Magic Lantern also seems awesome. The fact that it makes for a great stills camera is also awesome because I'd love to get involved in that side of things as well. I love good timelapse and HDR photography and think it'd be awesome to integrate the former into video work However there're a couple of things that bug me.

1: Obviously the moire and aliasing issues I've seen and heard so much about. Realistically, how big of an issue is it in the field? Is it something that just crops up a small percent of the time or is it an issue that can cripple a shoot and ruin reputations?

2. The line skipping. I find it disappointing that I'm not getting true 1080p resolution like the GH2 offers. Would there ever be a firmware fix that can resolve this or is it something hardware related which I'll always have to live with?

Now for the GH2 I've heard from a lot of different sources that it's the best video DSLR on the market and on some days I seem to be leaning towards that side. The fact that it shoots true HD, is comparable to much higher end cameras for a fraction of the price, better audio controls, the diminished moire and aliasing and just generally improved video controls appeal to me. However, like the 60D there're some issues preventing it from being my perfect camera.

1. First off, I haven't seen many videos that really impress me aesthetically. A lot of the stuff I've seen seems to be benchmark/pixel peeper stuff and examples of different firmware hacks. The narrative stuff I've seen - which looks awesome and sharp - also just looks like a high quality camcorder, somewhat lacking that cinematic aesthetic of the Canons.

2. The crop factor is a bit of a bummer, it may not be as bad as I think but effectively doubling the focal length of lenses used on an FF kind of worries me. If I see someone recommend a 50mm lens for the 5D I'd need to look for a 25mm for the GH2.

3. Availability here seems quite weak. Panasonic doesn't seem very well represented and I've only found one local brick and mortar place to purchase the body and kit lens, but when it comes to other lenses I think I'd have to order online from overseas.

4. The whole GH2 menu interface (from what I've seen) looks very convoluted and non-intuitive. While I'm sure I'd get used to it, it seems like a bit of a bother.

5. I've heard the stills quality isn't as good as the Canons.

I know all about the bitrate hacks and while they sound awesome I'm worried about camera stability. Are the hacks best for benchmarking and short snippets of eye-candy or are they stable enough to go through a days' shooting without any issues? How good does the camera look vanilla and unhacked?

So for me it seems the GH2 has more pros but also more cons while the 60D has less pros than the GH2 but also and less cons. However, I'm still so on the fence it makes me queasy. When it comes to shooting within a team, would it make that much of a difference if the rest of the cines are using Canons while I'd be using a Panasonic? Is it enough of a reason not to be hired for a shoot?

One caveat - which my friend thinks I'm ridiculous for - but I actually haven't spent time physically handling either camera so I've got no point of reference when it comes to feel and handling. I've heard the GH2 is less ergonomically pleasing than the 60D but I imagine that to be pretty subjective.

Either route I go, I'd invest in a full rig (stablization, new tripod, external microphone and most probably a separate audio recorder) but I'm still just looking for that push in whichever direction would be best.

Or should I just wait it out until the Black Magic camera is out and start looking at that?

Thanks for reading this vent/wall-of-text. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. :D
 
Last edited:
music events tend to be darker. so the larger sensor of the 60d will benefit you no end. remember to factor in whether or not your camera choice allows full 1080p output via hdmi for monitoring options. I know the 550d does not feed a true hd output during recording meaning external monitors are kind of pointless. do your choices the have articulated screens?

the gh2 is considered the absolute best in terms of video quality (once the firmware is hacked). Canon tends to be the industry accepted option, but the sony nex5n, nex 7 both outperform your two selections in terms of out of the box performance. they also shoot 50fps/60fps in full 1080p. the nex 7 outperforms the canon 60d in both video and stills for that matter. here is a music event I shot with the nex 5n:- http://vimeo.com/38921135 there was no scripting or preproduction. i just went in and shot what i can keeping out of the way as best i could. glass was zeiss
 
ps. for crop factor. dont worry. canon 5d has too big of a sensor meaning your lens choice is if anything more limited. a 35mm f1.8 on an apsc sensor will be more film like than a 50mm f1.8 on a 5d full frame. 50mm f1.8 on full frame is too shallow it looks so cliche nowadays.
 
pps. the nex 5n smokes the nex 7 in low light video. and is worth going for over the nex 7 if you can live with the lack of mic input and external flash port
 
If it were me and I needed a camera right now... A used FS100 or AF100.
If I didn't need one right now, I'd wait and see.

By the time you spend your money trying to make a DSLR workable with all the rig crap and external audio fix and such you could be shooting with a real video camera.
 
One thing that's really impressed me with the VX2100 is its low light ability, how does the GH2 fare in low light? I've heard mixed reports. Is the 60D noticeably better? Full 1080 output doesn't really bother me. I've never shot with a monitor and expect to be using a magnifying view finder attachment for the most part. Great video, the Nex-7 is interesting. What hassles in regards to video do Nex cameras exhibit, if any?
 
GH2 is best bang for the buck. Its small, light, cheap, and powerful.
Ergonomically, its still considered one of the better HDSLR type cameras. The menu system is actually very simple and fast for getting to various "other" video controls. The 60D, has a similar video focus design, with it's articulating screen and dedicated video buttons. It does have a much better feel and build quality, as its an entry level semi-pro photo camera. But the video tech is still years behind.
If i where you, id wait till the new GH3 and possibly the newer line of Canon and possibly Nikon (D3200 just was released and is impressive) cameras come out.
As the GH2 is still amazingly powerful... STILL!, but the new line of cameras will probably/hopefully have caught up to the 2 year old GH2. As a side benefit, it'll kick the GH2's price tag down a bit.
 
David W. Jones said:
By the time you spend your money trying to make a DSLR workable with all the rig crap and external audio fix and such you could be shooting with a real video camera.
Click to expand...

I disagree. An AF100 is what $4000 now? an FS100 is $5500? If you buy a GH2 you can have it completely rigged up and still have 2K in your pocket. Not only that but you have a larger sensor (slightly) than the AF100 and the ability to increase the bitrates with the hack to shoot higher quality video.

The only advantages the AF100 has over a rigged up GH2 is not having the sync the audio in post, more picture controls and peaking which you can get on the GH2 with an EVF and still come in much less than the AF100. Its not even like the AF100 is a great form factor. You still have to rig it for shoulder use anyway.

I use both. Have an AF100 at work and use the GH2 for side business and B-cam applications. If money is tight I'd get the GH2 for both applications in a heartbeat.
 
I would just like to chime in and validate the OP's concern about color. The Canons, for all their limitations, do produce EXCELLENT color and skin tones. Much more so than the GH series in my experience. However, and I can't stress this enough, there is no perfect camera.
The Nex series from Sony is pretty good, and sits nicely as a compromise between your concerns stated earlier- According to reviews and comparisons, the Nex 5N and 7 shoot great color, but the resolution in post isn't quite as sharp and moire-free as the GH2 from what I saw- also EOSHD's Andrew Reid claims that grading their flat profile video causes the image to fall apart quickly.
Personally, I keep both Panasonic and Canon DSLRs in my bag.
Now, before you say you can't afford two cameras, consider this:
The t2i/550D has the same video quality as the 60D, however is a bit smaller and less ergonomic controls (plus, some things like manual kelvin value need the Magic Lantern hack to access). But, you can get one for about the price of a decent lens these days (under $500). For that price, I really don't mind keeping it around as a companion for times I think the color would come out better than I'm getting with a GH2, or when I want better stills without a post workflow (the GH2 does take decent stills, but their JPEG compression is weird. You need to shoot raw and fix it up in post).

Do you need a full sized camera? That's entirely up to you. I can tell you that you probably don't need as much rig as some folks imply you do. Sure, having a rail system and matte box is awesome, but you don't need to get all that right away. I always recommend people start off with a camera on a tripod, and slowly build out your kit as the need arises. You may find that you don't need/want a follow focus wheel or EVF (especially if you go with a Nex 7- that OLED viewfinder is GORGEOUS and includes focus peaking built in!).

Hmm. Just occured to me that we may be actually making your choices HARDER. There's too many option, I have to agree. But I'll say this- any option you choose out of the one recommended in this thread sound great. I don't think you'll go wrong with whatever it will be.
 
richg101 said:
music events tend to be darker. so the larger sensor of the 60d will benefit you no end. remember to factor in whether or not your camera choice allows full 1080p output via hdmi for monitoring options. I know the 550d does not feed a true hd output during recording meaning external monitors are kind of pointless. do your choices the have articulated screens?

the gh2 is considered the absolute best in terms of video quality (once the firmware is hacked). Canon tends to be the industry accepted option, but the sony nex5n, nex 7 both outperform your two selections in terms of out of the box performance. they also shoot 50fps/60fps in full 1080p. the nex 7 outperforms the canon 60d in both video and stills for that matter. here is a music event I shot with the nex 5n:- http://vimeo.com/38921135 there was no scripting or preproduction. i just went in and shot what i can keeping out of the way as best i could. glass was zeiss
Click to expand...

While I agree with some of what this post reads, I don't agree with all of it. First off, No offense. But I thought the video you uploaded from the sony looked, well... not so good. Although I'm not looking at a great laptop. So that may have something to do with it. To me it looked soft, and noisy, with lines rolling all over the image. I have never used any nex cams, but then again, I have never really been a sony fan until the F3. I imagine their plaent capable of making beautiful images. Heck even a point and shoot can do that.

I own the gh2 and a t3i. The t3i is almost the same cam as the 60d, just a tiny bit smaller, and a few other differences that really dont change the video functions. I do have a battery grip, which adds to the size, so it fits my large hands better. Many people say the Canon is a better build, and the gh2 is like a toy compared. After spending some time with the gh2, I find the build quality to be just fine.

The gh2 crop is really a 1.8, the Canon is a 1.6x. So it really is not a huge difference when comparing the two. On occasion, you just have to take a step back to get the same field of view. No biggie. As far as glass goes, the gh2 has a few options than the canon. You may find it more of a challenge to find wide angle lenses for the gh2 on tyhe cheap, but there's always the lumix glass thats slow but wide.

Honestly, their both good cams, each have strengthes the other doesn't. I used the Canon for my kids first communion the other day because I knew I wanted to shoot stills and video. In my opinion, the canon is much better than the gh2 in that dept. Although I dont have a ton of experience shooting stills on the gh2. I suppose if you took the time to learn it, you could get great still shots with it. Now if I were gonna shoot a narrative piece, It would depend on the subject matter of course. But more than likely I would grab the gh2 for the superior resolution. Now I know everyone wants that cinematic look, but i'm sure you know, that really doesn't come from the camera alone, it's the framing, lighting, acting, editing, grading, ect....... you get the point.
 
1: Obviously the moire and aliasing issues I've seen and heard so much about. Realistically, how big of an issue is it in the field? Is it something that just crops up a small percent of the time or is it an issue that can cripple a shoot and ruin reputations?
Click to expand...
it can be managed. but for me, the problem is i dont usually have the time or opportunity to manage that kind of thing. say your client is an architect. their building is made of bricks with a bamboo hedge. you have to shoot that. and these things are prime offenders in the aliasing / moire discussion. i cant very well tell my client. "sorry, cant shoot your building because i use a still camera for video."

1. First off, I haven't seen many videos that really impress me aesthetically. A lot of the stuff I've seen seems to be benchmark/pixel peeper stuff and examples of different firmware hacks. The narrative stuff I've seen - which looks awesome and sharp - also just looks like a high quality camcorder, somewhat lacking that cinematic aesthetic of the Canons.
Click to expand...
i wouldnt debate that too aggressively. but the right glass has a HUGE effect on that. i hated my first experience with the gh2. but i was using stock lumix glass (specifically the 14-140 and 20mm pancake) hated everything i shot with those. but once i got an adapter and started putting old nikon glass on it. and more recently, experimented with olympus, voigtlander and higer end lumix pieces - i got a LOT happier with what i saw

2. The crop factor is a bit of a bummer, it may not be as bad as I think but effectively doubling the focal length of lenses used on an FF kind of worries me. If I see someone recommend a 50mm lens for the 5D I'd need to look for a 25mm for the GH2.
Click to expand...
for me, the crop factor (be it 1.8 or 1.6 makes little diff) just makes you look harder for glass on the wide end. what i enjoy about shooting with the 5d is that my lens is what im used to it being. i dont have to always remind myself that i need half of what id normally use for a specific need.

4. The whole GH2 menu interface (from what I've seen) looks very convoluted and non-intuitive. While I'm sure I'd get used to it, it seems like a bit of a bother.
Click to expand...
it is a little non-intuitive. but you do get used to it VERY quickly

5. I've heard the stills quality isn't as good as the Canons.
Click to expand...
absolutely true. it is not as good. but again. with the right glass and in the right situation, its more than decent. you can take GREAT pics with it. just not as mindlessly as you can with a 5D or similar pro-stills camera. and it certainly has a different "look" not particularly better or worse. just different. so if you like the traditional canon look for stills. you probably wont be as happy with it. you just need to think about it more like a different artistic tool than a traditional camera.

where it would really fail is in a photojournalism use. where you only have split seconds to get the shot. as the shutter speed and aperture are controlled by the same interface. and you cant change both at once OR QUICKLY. but this is the same for nearly ALL sub-$2k dslrs.

When it comes to shooting within a team, would it make that much of a difference if the rest of the cines are using Canons while I'd be using a Panasonic? Is it enough of a reason not to be hired for a shoot?
Click to expand...
thats a situation by situation basis. i have seen many requests (mainly craigslist type situations. which are often hacks, hobbyists and other misguided fools) where it says YOU MUST HAVE A CANON DSLR. about the only place i can see that having a real professional impact is if you wanted to start working with wedding shooters.

I've heard the GH2 is less ergonomically pleasing than the 60D but I imagine that to be pretty subjective.
Click to expand...
ABSOLUTELY TRUE. and youve probably read ME saying that. but it is subjective to a large degree. what one person is used to, may not matter at all to another. i WANT my camera to have a little heft to it. it helps steady your shooting and simply gives ME a little emotional comfort ; )

the facts are:
- the gh2 IS smaller, as are its buttons.
- it is light and does feel "plasticy" when compared to a 5d or 7d. but the same thing can be said for a 60d in that comparison. and ive NEVER heard of anything physical in the gh2's construction ever actually causing any problem.

Or should I just wait it out until the Black Magic camera is out and start looking at that?
Click to expand...
absolutely not. the black magic camera is not a corporate or even camera. same could be said for DSLRs, but from what im seeing, the black magic cam is more intended for studio or feature type work.

having either used or owned all the major DSLRs. i can say with extreme confidence that for what you do. the GH2 is mathematically the better choice.
about the only thing id consider in your shoes is do i NEED the camera today, or can i wait (maybe as long as end of this year) to see what a potential gh3 version has in store
 
Last edited:
Thanks for your stellar responses guys! In terms of waiting, I can hold out a couple of months but I'd like to be up and running before the end of the year. For all you guys who transitioned from a traditional video camera to DSLR, how did it affect your business? If you were charging xxx per day with a normal camcorder, how did it reflect on your rates when you moved to a new system you were inexperienced with? Did you spend a few months learning the ropes of DSLR shooting or did you jump right back into the game? Thanks again. :D
 
maranfilms said:
While I agree with some of what this post reads, I don't agree with all of it. First off, No offense. But I thought the video you uploaded from the sony looked, well... not so good. Although I'm not looking at a great laptop. So that may have something to do with it. To me it looked soft, and noisy, with lines rolling all over the image. I have never used any nex cams, but then again, I have never really been a sony fan until the F3. I imagine their plaent capable of making beautiful images. Heck even a point and shoot can do that.
Click to expand...

Some of the softer shots may have been due to using a olympus zuiko 50mm at f1.4 (known to be soft wide open) for the darker shots.. ISO was also set to 'Auto' meaning some of the clips may have been captured at iso 1600 at times! in which case i thought the noise wasn't too unpleasant. add to the fact myself and my mate who were shooting had both had a skinful of booze. drunkeness wouldnt have helped our pursuit of sharpness:)
 
For all you guys who transitioned from a traditional video camera to DSLR, how did it affect your business?
Click to expand...
i didnt "transition" as one is not a replacement of the other. they are different tools for different uses.

i still have and rely on my hpx170 (HD, 3ccd video camera) as ALL DSLRs are generally pretty crap for shooting ENG type things. like when you need servo zooms (or remote zoom/focus access), built in ND, pro audio input, multi-channel audio, live reliable audio metering, timecode, or need to follow fast action quickly (like sports)

and it didnt effect my billing at all. my clients pay for my eye and my experience. if im using an epic or a fisher price camera. its just a matter of tool choice for the job at hand.

if you are used to a traditional video camera and think ANY DSLR is going to be a drop-in replacement. i'll tell you from experience - you are going to be painfully disappointed.
 
Last edited:
After looking at the video you posted, I'd have to pull my recommendation of a used AF100 or FS100, and say you were on target with your original cam Canon XF100 for that type of work.
 
The XF100 seems like a logical upgrade but it's also double the price. I'm always keen to step up my game though, I don't believe there's ever an end to learning but when I look at a non-interchangeable lens camcorder I feel a bit restricted. I'd love to expand and apply a knowledge of lenses that only comes from experience, look at the craft from a different perspective and just generally improve my skills. I feel that for me, a DSLR presents more of a learning curve but also rewards good use with an incredible, emotional image. I'd love to be able to transform my style of shooting. I'd also like to expand the kind of stuff I do both narrative and factual (although I guess a video camera is best for varied types of shooting.)

That's one of my reasons for leaning towards the DSLR route rather than going for the XF100.
 
I've been using my 5D for a while now and even when we have experienced DP's on board, they are continually stunned by the quality of the footage...never ceases to amaze seasoned pro's. I have the 50mm f1.8 (such as the lens mentioned above) and if the 35mm is anything like the 50mm, you will sh** a chicken when you see what it can pick up! I love the 1.8. The only one better I saw was the 85mm f1.2, but I spent just as much BUYING the 50mm than I did renting the 85mm for two days. I'd go the 60D, hands down. Unless you wanted to go the new Black Magic cam...but you would have to wait for it.
 
You are really going to miss the servo zoom and on board audio going to a DSLR for the type stuff you shoot.

I own a few DSLR cameras, both Canon and Panaonic and the only time they come out of the case is when it's the right tool for the shoot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top