Magic Lantern T2i 550d Vs GH2 Which Is The Best Overall Camera Right Now And Why ?
- Thread starter produce12
- Start date
* Broken Record....
How many times are you going to ask this question? NO camera is going to make you a better film maker nor be able to tell a story better. It seems like you have your priorities wrong here..... A camera is actually one of the last things to worry about. There are many many more accessories to have that are more important than any camera.
Since you FAIL to answer my question , let me ask you this again.... What is the Canon 7d NOT doing for you that you want to buy another camera?
How many times are you going to ask this question? NO camera is going to make you a better film maker nor be able to tell a story better. It seems like you have your priorities wrong here..... A camera is actually one of the last things to worry about. There are many many more accessories to have that are more important than any camera.
Since you FAIL to answer my question , let me ask you this again.... What is the Canon 7d NOT doing for you that you want to buy another camera?
cap10kirk
Well-known member
+1
And I love my ML T2i.
kevinottawa
Well-known member
Hacked T2i is the best overall camera, because it has so many bells and whistles.
Its like comparing a swiss army knife to a steak knife. Sure the steak knife cuts cleaner and better, but what happens when you need a screw driver or corkscrew.
Right now the T2i will save you money if you wanted to get a fancy monitor or audio recorder... it has focus peaking, zebras, false colors, rack focus, usable audio, actuation free time lapse.
Like others have said, its not the camera that makes the project good, but having extra tools helps.
Its like comparing a swiss army knife to a steak knife. Sure the steak knife cuts cleaner and better, but what happens when you need a screw driver or corkscrew.
Right now the T2i will save you money if you wanted to get a fancy monitor or audio recorder... it has focus peaking, zebras, false colors, rack focus, usable audio, actuation free time lapse.
Like others have said, its not the camera that makes the project good, but having extra tools helps.
That is not entirely true,well shot story and presented in professional standard wont make your viewers think "ah another youtube video that i could record with friends on my handycam".Story is important thats true but good story deserves good picture and some quality standard.Camera is important. If it wouldnt be ,we would not have HDSLR forums here...
I prefere t2i becuse i dont like crop factor on panasonic.
I dont think that anyone thinks "ill buy DSLR and ill start to write great scripts",its different issue.
Very often Hollywood movies dont have great scripts too but they look great.
This is coming from me, a Canon person. Right now the GH2 has a much cleaner image than the T2i. I like the color asthetics and rendition of the Canons and I don't like the 2x crop on the GH2. You also cannot get a decent wide angle lens on the GH2. The over priced Panny wide angle does not accept filters, so it's basically useless for outdoors shooting unless you have a matte box. Panny is not known for lenses.
With that said, the Moire is bad on the Canons and it is something that I repeatedly run into. If you want the much cleaner image and that is the most important aspect, get the GH2. Canon has better lenses though.
However, with the lens thing, I think it's better to get neutral platform, manual lenses, that way you have a long focus throw (better for video), and you are not tied to either Canon or Panny, and can switch back and forth.
With that said, the Moire is bad on the Canons and it is something that I repeatedly run into. If you want the much cleaner image and that is the most important aspect, get the GH2. Canon has better lenses though.
However, with the lens thing, I think it's better to get neutral platform, manual lenses, that way you have a long focus throw (better for video), and you are not tied to either Canon or Panny, and can switch back and forth.
Common Sense please....... We Are talking about Dslrs here, so when I say a Camera ( Gh2 ) is not going to make you a better film maker than using a ( 7d ) than most if not all will agree. I would rather have_________ Famous Director with a consumer camera than most people here with a DSLR. There is MORE to a picture than a camera, a lot more
Nobody's ever said a better camera will make you a better film maker. A better camera = better picture. That's is all they are discussing. You can agree or disagree. Good luck on persuading Famous Director to use a consumer camera for his next feature.
If you want to talk about better film making there's other forums to discuss that.
I have a t2i and I simply want to know all points of view before buying the GH2.
Don't concentrate so much on individual camera models - no matter which camera you buy today, you'll want a new one in 3 to 4 years from now (if not every single NAB show).
No, the real advantage of DSLRs, are those removable lenses. THAT's where you'll be spending the big money. The best glass will usually cost you much more then whichever camera you have - even if it's a very expense one.
Cameras, esp DLSRs, are not forever. But good glass nearly is. Barry just wrote a good story of how all the old PL glass has gone through the roof. Zeiss CPs will keep their value for decades. Ditto a lot of Nikon and Canon glass.
So buy the camera you want to invest your glass money on. One thing about the Panny, it's mount may limit you to certain types of glass, as least in the near future. Course, adapters are already coming down the pipe, so that may be a non-factor.
BOTTOM LINE - worry a lot less about which camera of the moment you want and more about which brand of glass you like.
No, the real advantage of DSLRs, are those removable lenses. THAT's where you'll be spending the big money. The best glass will usually cost you much more then whichever camera you have - even if it's a very expense one.
Cameras, esp DLSRs, are not forever. But good glass nearly is. Barry just wrote a good story of how all the old PL glass has gone through the roof. Zeiss CPs will keep their value for decades. Ditto a lot of Nikon and Canon glass.
So buy the camera you want to invest your glass money on. One thing about the Panny, it's mount may limit you to certain types of glass, as least in the near future. Course, adapters are already coming down the pipe, so that may be a non-factor.
BOTTOM LINE - worry a lot less about which camera of the moment you want and more about which brand of glass you like.
Most of these points have already been made, but my personal experience may be helpful to the OP. I sold my (non ML) T2i after I got the GH2. I couldn't stand the Canon moire or the lack of autofocus in video mode. Some people don't mind working around those issues, but I did.
I also shoot speeches and events, so the 12 minute record limit was a problem, as was the fact that the viewfinder went dark in video mode. And I bought my T2i before the T3i was available, so the fixed LCD was also frustrating for me (I'd gotten used to a flip out LCD with my old Casio EX-P505 still/video hybrid). None of these things are issues with the GH2. The camera is not perfect (the LCD has about half the resolution of the T2i's, battery availability is still a problem and if you live in PAL-land and need 25p, don't buy it).
As for glass, mirrorless cameras have a short flange back distance, so adapters are not "coming down the pipe" -- they are already plentiful and inexpensive. Lots of folks are using old Canon FD glass with Panasonic and Oly micro 4/3 cameras like the GH2. I have only had the camera for a few months, and have already bought adapters for my existing Nikon and Canon AF-S glass (which I kept). I also have adapters for Leica M and Konica glass, none of which cost more than $30. To be clear, all of these adapted lenses are manual aperture and manual focus (except for the Canon, which has no aperture ring), but the camera meters them just fine -- and when I need a lens with silent video autofocus, I use a native Panasonic lens.
So pardon me for being a little confused when John V. says,
There are almost no limits on the type of glass that you can use with the GH2, so this is already a non-factor.
Cheers and good luck with your selection,
Bill
I also shoot speeches and events, so the 12 minute record limit was a problem, as was the fact that the viewfinder went dark in video mode. And I bought my T2i before the T3i was available, so the fixed LCD was also frustrating for me (I'd gotten used to a flip out LCD with my old Casio EX-P505 still/video hybrid). None of these things are issues with the GH2. The camera is not perfect (the LCD has about half the resolution of the T2i's, battery availability is still a problem and if you live in PAL-land and need 25p, don't buy it).
As for glass, mirrorless cameras have a short flange back distance, so adapters are not "coming down the pipe" -- they are already plentiful and inexpensive. Lots of folks are using old Canon FD glass with Panasonic and Oly micro 4/3 cameras like the GH2. I have only had the camera for a few months, and have already bought adapters for my existing Nikon and Canon AF-S glass (which I kept). I also have adapters for Leica M and Konica glass, none of which cost more than $30. To be clear, all of these adapted lenses are manual aperture and manual focus (except for the Canon, which has no aperture ring), but the camera meters them just fine -- and when I need a lens with silent video autofocus, I use a native Panasonic lens.
So pardon me for being a little confused when John V. says,
There are almost no limits on the type of glass that you can use with the GH2, so this is already a non-factor.
Cheers and good luck with your selection,
Bill
M. Gilden
Canon DSLR Moderator
You are right about the lens selection, but I think he was referring to native-glass since some people like to get all the native features (autofocus, etc). But yes, if you are open to using third party lenses, especially vintage ones (and I'm of the opinion everyone should, honestly!), then that's not really a limitation at all. If anything, there are more lenses available via adapter than the EOS mount. The only problem then, is the size of the sensor. The size of the sensor lets in less light which means you need to pump up the iso more often, to my understanding. Also some of my softer vintage lenses looking great at 1.6x crop on the EOS, but show their softness the more you crop inward. That means you have to be more careful about the quality of the vintage lenses you choose at the size of a GH series.
But here's the bottom line- Popularity of a product means something in this industry. Allow me to explain-
I'm someone who's not into name-brand equipment for the sake of recognition, especially if there is an alternative that is better (albeit not as popular).
At face value, the GH2 is better than the Canon series because of the more video-friendly features and footage quality. The thing is, its not as popular in the industry which means that there isn't as much community support behind it.
Its sad but true- The Canon series have far more accessories available for it (loupes, extended batteries, etc) as well as dozens of hacks/mods to bring features to the table that didn't exist before, many of which the GH2 does not (and likely will never) have, such as live headphone monitoring, adjustable bitrates, and dozens of focus assisting tools for manual lenses (zoom box while recording for focus pulling is FANTASTIC).
When it comes to these kinds of things, the more popular product tends to have a healthier community supporting it, and the healthier community makes these kinds of things more useful tools. Ultimately, any kind of wall you hit while using the Canon will likely have someone who's already dealt with it and come up with some kind of solution by now. I just don't feel that is the case with the GH2.
That's why, in my opinion, whenever you see a DSLR used in Hollywood or on Network TV, its almost always a Canon. Not because the Canon is the best, but because the ins-and-outs are so well documented, and the workflow is so well understood already, they already know what they are getting into and can plan ahead for whatever they would need to work out.
The community is one of the only reasons I'm sticking with my Canon for now. If ML or something similar ever makes it over to the GH-series, and it starts reaching the community popularity that Canon currently has, I'll change my tune.
But for now, it seems kind of like BetaMax- it was "better" than VHS, but no one cared.
(bad analogy and a low blow, nothing personal to GH2 users, power to you! Just saying in the future, people will likely look back and remember what Canon did, not Panasonic).
M. Gilden
Canon DSLR Moderator
Oh yeah, and also:
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?241415-Magic-Lantern-Canon-550D-VS-Panasonic-GH2
That thread isn't so old that we really needed to rehash this.
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?241415-Magic-Lantern-Canon-550D-VS-Panasonic-GH2
That thread isn't so old that we really needed to rehash this.
HDkilledFILM.
Burnin' down the House
OP, what gear do you already own? Tripod? Handheld rig? These are things that if your on a budget may make the decision for you.
Dishe makes some great points - Canon wins the popularity contest hands down. One thing not mentioned in that the GH2 4/3s format may or may not be your to your taste.
Phil Bloom's latest take (from March):
http://philipbloom.net/2011/03/17/whichdslr/
Phil Bloom's latest take (from March):
http://philipbloom.net/2011/03/17/whichdslr/
deltoidjohn
Veteran
The size difference between the the 2 sensors in video mode is negligible. The GH1/2 has an oversized sensor so that it can use the extra width in 16:9 mode, whereas the Canons simply crop off the top and bottom of the image. So instead of being 1.6x versus 2x, it's closer to 1.8x versus 1.9x.