Keep the GH2 or get a 60D

[Roman707]

I'm in the US, so that will not be a problem for me.

 

[dvxjiro]

Appreciate the advice on stills/video capabilities of both cams.
My opinion is to have both 'theoretically'. Until i get the GH2 though, i can't say one over the other yet but, i would go for a GH2 and a full-frame Canon (5DMkIII later). Thats my plan.
I would like to see stills from the GH2 with a top lens like the Voightlander. I want to believe the GH2 is a very capable stills cam. If so, then i wish to go with the new Lumix 100-300 instead of a Canon 70-200/2.8IS.
Have you guys done any comparison tests? That speaks a bit louder then opinions. I want to do a bunch of tests when i get the GH2 with my 550D.

 

[TheDingo]

Tell you what - let's come back to this thread in a year's time and see how many TV shows and movies have been filmed using Canon equipment and how many have used the GH1/2 or Olympus.

This is where I think the new Panasonic AF-100 steps in, as it's by far the best large sensor video camera in it's price range ( Under $5K ), which isn't that far from the Canon 5DMK2 once you add on professional audio recording.

I am also very curious to see what Canon and Sony come up with over the next year to compete with the AF-100. Competition is always good, and I have no allegiance to any one company, so I will happily switch to Sony if they can out-do Panasonic. ( The Sony F3 looks very interesting, but way out of my price range. )

The opportunities for PAL based countries (which out weight the NTSC countries in size and population) are not exactly good with the GH2. I'm not even going to pick one up and look at it if they can't support 25p. Shame on you Panasonic.

Yeah, I don't get that at all. I can't imagine why Panasonic would not fix this, as it should just be a bit of firmware coding to add 25P to the camera. I am guessing that this is just a temporary thing.

 

[TheDingo]

I would like to see stills from the GH2 with a top lens like the Voightlander. I want to believe the GH2 is a very capable stills cam.

I think the GH-2 can be a very good stills camera, but it needs faster pro lenses, which might mean buying Olympus lenses for the GH-2 body. The Olympus pro lenses are outstanding. Tac-sharp and as fast as you could ever want, with the exception of super-wide lenses, which I hope they fix.

My fingers are crossed that the current rumor of an Olympus micro 4/3 pro body are true, as this would take care of both a pro quality stills body and super-fast micro 4/3 lenses, which I could use for video work with the GH-2 and AF-100. ( I plan on buying an AF-100 for work this summer. I don't like being an early adopter, so I'm waiting to be sure all of the bugs are gone before I buy. )

 

[Furinox]

...I bought the GH-2 in December with the idea that I would either keep it and sell my 60D, or keep the 60D and sell the GH-2. After owning the GH-2 for a couple of weeks I've come to the conclusion that I am keeping BOTH cameras.

60D Pros
- Much better stills photography camera
- Much better "hands on" feel when shooting ( especially with the grip and wrist-strap )
- Batteries last a long time for both stills and video
- I already own 2 very good lenses ( 50mm f/1.4 and 100mm f/2.0 )

60D Cons
- Aliasing and Moire image problems when shooting video
- 12 minute recording limit on video takes
- High bit-rate, but poorly implemented video CODEC ( no B frames )
- Image not as "film-like" compared to GH-2
- Audio 10 dB noisier than GH-2 ( -53 dB vs -63 dB noise-floor )

GH-2 Pros
- Much better video camera: virtually no moire, no aliasing, image is far more "film-like" than 60D
- EVF means that I can always see my settings while shooting with my eye to the viewfinder. ( better in sunlight and no LCD finder required )
- No recording limit on video takes
- Proper AVCHD CODEC implementation with B frames
- 10 dB quieter audio than 60D

GH-2 Cons
- "Hands on" feel is crappy compared to 60D. ( very small body that feels slightly fragile )
- Currently no grip available ( I've heard that one is coming in a couple of months )
- Very few fast lenses available without resorting to other brands and adapters
- Still images noisier in low-light compared to 60D
- LCD lower res than 60D ( making images harder to judge )

...I plan on buying a Panasonic AF-100 by next summer, so the GH-2 is going to eventually be my B Camera, but I also like to shoot still photos which is why I am keeping the 60D.

I've heard that a new pro m43 body is coming out from Olympus later this Spring, which might convince me to sell the 60D if it's as good at shooting still photos. ( Canon needs to up it's game this year if they want to stay relevant in the DSLR video market )

I agree with everything you've posted as I too have both a 60d and a GH2. The one thing that bugs me most about the GH2 is it's build quality is "toy-like".

 

[qap15]

I agree with everything you've posted as I too have both a 60d and a GH2. The one thing that bugs me most about the GH2 is it's build quality is "toy-like".

Could this "toy-like" feature be an advantage to those shooting in places where visible high quality video cameras are not allowed :banned: ?

 

[Kastro]

Could this "toy-like" feature be an advantage to those shooting in places where visible high quality video cameras are not allowed :banned: ?

good point. I would guess you would choose the right tool for the job. So if you're having to shoot at a location (formal party or something) where you dont want everyone looking at you as "the pro photo guy" (since people see the camera and instinctively think you're taking photos instead of video). It would be good to have a nice camera that is discreet.

Again, choose the tool best suited for the job.