When perception becomes reality...

P

pulpfiction007

Veteran
This is in response to a question posted in a thread that was closed earlier today (I can see why, because you could just tell some big arguments were coming)
The question I'm referring to (stated of course in abbreviated format) is essentially this-
Why does "Everyone" shoot on Canon? and not the GH2
Without any quality comparisons of any kind to the GH2/1 (both brands are very capable) the answer is simple -
1. Canon's shipping and production have been very efficient and the cameras are kept IN STOCK
2. Canon advertises HEAVILY on television
3. Canon has name recognition from their long standing (with Nikon) domination of the SLR and DLSR market. (yes it's shifting- to mirrorless and others, but not yet)
4. Canon holds a GIGANTIC segment of the market share
5. A lot more retailers in Anytown, U.S.A carry the Canon line.
6. Canon has made some smart moves teaming up with Pro photographers to help get their mesage out there.
7. Thus - Perception that Canon is the best becomes reality before a single second of footage is ever shot.

Like I said earlier - There are definitely real reasons why a serious buyer will choose EITHER system, this is NOT about that, both are great systems in their own regard. This is to let people know that they should choose based upon their own - Handling/testing/research of whatever cameras they are comparing. Also, be aware that there is a huge amount of available great footage from the Canon's as opposed to the smaller amount of great GH2 footage because of the simple mathematics of the sales figures/in stock figures.

Now...Go shoot, whatever camera YOU decide.
Please feel free to agree/disagree with my theory.
 
Last edited:
I agree perception is everything these days. Reality is that trends ruel no matter if one product can outperform others. It is often measured against what the masses are using. Panasonic has allot of catching up to do in marketing and distribution. Canon and Nikon are Kings as much as Budwiswer and Coors lite is to beer. In the end it doesn't make them better they are what people believe they are.
 
Not having any knowledge of the previous thread, here's my take on just the topic coming from a photographer of 12 years now doing motion work for not quite 2 years.

I have used Canon cameras since 2004 when I switched from Nikon. I was needing a full frame camera for my work and the 1Ds was the right tool then. I have since stayed with Canon and have owned the 5DII since the Oct/Nov of 2008 when first available. I didn't use it for video until the following year.

I added a 7D for both stills and video early 2010 and use both continuously.

As of today I added a GH2 buying it from a fellow dvxuser. I am doing a crash course on using it since I want to put it into play this coming Monday alongside the Canons for a new client video project. My brief pound-the-pavement testing today tells me that the GH2 24p mode is incredibly good, better than Canon, but the GH2 60i/30p footage is less inspiring and honestly a tossup or less with the Canons. I do all my work at 30p, I don't project on large screen my video projects, they are for marketing, web, DVD (not distribution), so the Canons actually do very well regardless of their shortcomings.

I can operate a Canon with my eyes closed practically, in my sleep, I find them that easy for stills and video. The GH2 is different, quirky to me for now but that may change. Could I shoot everything I do on the GH2, not sure. My lens lineup for the Canons gets everything I need done. It will take some thinking and research to build up a lens lineup for the GH2 that will accomplish the wide variety of shooting that I do, from people, interviews, products, architecture and more as video work. I am not a feature film maker and have no desire to do so. I make money at stills and video, it's a business decision when I get gear.

My main reason for the GH2 is to have a tool that will allow moire free footage when I know the Canons will go to hell. Autofocus during shooting is a nice touch as well. The swivel screen is probably the next best reason. Beyond that, I can't say the GH2 will make me more money at creating motion pieces for clients. I'll stick with the little camera and give it a fair service but my go to cameras will still be the Canons, for me.
 
I agree, except that I think your number four reason should be the number one. at this point in time, it's ridiculous that Panasonic doesn't have an adequate supply. After the GH1, they had some measurement of what the demand might be for the GH2.
 
editguy said:
I agree, except that I think your number four reason should be the number one. at this point in time, it's ridiculous that Panasonic doesn't have an adequate supply. After the GH1, they had some measurement of what the demand might be for the GH2.
Click to expand...

Thank you..I have to agree with you on your point - post has been edited to reflect that.
(I had to wait so long for the GH1 to come to my neck of the woods that Vitaly was already hacking away!)
 
I think canon is king for all the reasons that you stated.

I can live with that. I will chose what ever tool suits my needs, but I see your point. The marketing gods have gotten so good that people really fell strongly about gear and will fight over it.

In another 10 years I have a feeling thats its all going to be amazing, so maybe it won't mater anymore.

Personally I think people shouldn't get attached to things.

But my lens collection is a different deal :happy:
 
Last edited:
Cannon is better then panasonic. Lol! True! Gh2 only better in video but nobody but us zombies buys for video! We the crazy ones! Everone else want still shots for the facebook! Lol. Cannon better for still picture.
 
Well, the reality is that up until about 8 months ago, Canon had the only DSLR's that natively did progressive footage. The Nikon D7000, GH13, and GH2 have really changed that game, and already many projects are using the GH2. It took what seems to be 4 years for the Canon's just to seep into the Hollywood circle, I say that it'll be awhile before the GH2's take over. After all, they aren't even mentioned on the Canon forum.

Beyond speaking of trends though, I will say some negatives that I already spot with Panasonic; lens selection is extraordinarily expensive and none of them are useful, smaller field of view than the Canons (16mm?), camera stores don't have them nor do the people who work at the stores recommend/know anything about Panasonic, the files aren't easy to view quickly on computers, ect ect. Personally, if I had to pick between cameras based on body features alone, I would probably snatch a T3i right up - I do enjoy Canon's new spin on the DSLR's. Video quality wise though, you expect much more from a hunky DSLR machine, mainly the absence of nasty moire/aliasing. Plus at the end of the day, the GH2 has many more features than even the T3i/60D from what it seems, so why not shoot GH2? I mean hands down, the GH2 is what seems to be a "dream DSLR".

I'm wondering if the footage looks a bit too harsh and contrasty for it's own good, I'm sure it's just a setting, but honesty is saying that at least as it is, the Canon footage tends to look extraordinarily like film when it's downrez'd like crazy. Very smooth textures. While I definatly want a higher resolved resolution, I hope that the GH2's footage also isn't so sharp that it looks extremely pixelated or very prone to the aliasing form of moire.
 
Maybe it's also that Panasonic is new to the DSLR game in and has been known to produce some nice point and shoots. Things can and do quickly change. Look at the DVX. That completely changed the industry and spawned this very site. Perception is so true but it also has to work for you...

I could also care less about what I shoot with and what others do. That's why I cover up my camera logos and some people don't like it or think it's cheap or stupid, but the idea is that I'm more than my camera.... and it also keeps the looky loos from coming around bothering you while you are shooting. For some reason it happens more with still people than when I'm shooting with a video camera...

No to go down a slippery slope, but the still world is a world of amateurs and hobbiest. Last week I had to show a friend how to shoot some portraits cause he had lined up a paying gig. He had the camera, didn't know how to use it, didn't know how to light, and didn't know bubkiss but he already called himself a photographer and lined up a paying gig for a client who expected him to be proficient... Of course you see it with the video side of things too... There's lots of amateurs passing themselves off as professionals......

All in all though, if you are happy with the final results than all else is meaningless.
 
Canon has achieved an enviable lock-in with their line of EF lenses. No one who's made a sizable investment in Canon EF lenses is likely to look elsewhere, regardless of the merits of any other DSLR video system. Panasonic's M4/3 cameras appeal to Nikon, movie lens, and vintage lens collectors, including Canon FD fans. We're a relatively smaller and more diverse group that's inherently harder to target as a market.
 
lpowell said:
Canon has achieved an enviable lock-in with their line of EF lenses. No one who's made a sizable investment in Canon EF lenses is likely to look elsewhere, regardless of the merits of any other DSLR video system. Panasonic's M4/3 cameras appeal to Nikon, movie lens, and vintage lens collectors, including Canon FD fans. We're a relatively smaller and more diverse group that's inherently harder to target as a market.
Click to expand...
I agree, but what good does it do to find the target and then frustrate it by not having the product readily available. Or, at the very least, make themselves available on this forum and let people know why supply is so short. I know that for many years Jan has had a presence on the video forums and I think that has been advantageous to Panasonic. I understand that they're different divisions, but still.

I have a GH1, am happy with it, and so I'll wait for the GH2. But if I hadn't experienced the potential already, I would have moved on to something else by now. It just seems to me a strange way to conduct business, but maybe there is some method to the seeming madness?
 
#5 is a biggie. I bought my GH2 based solely on online research. No one within 100 miles carries any of the Panasonic interchangeable lens cameras.

Even though I'm glad that I did, there aren't very many people who are going to plunk down that kind of money for a camera without getting to hold it in their hands first.
 
The wedding photographers I work with when shooting wedding videos often ask me,"what is a Lumix"...they're used only seeing videographers shooting with Canon DSLR's. :D

My girlfriend thought it was funny when she first saw my camera, and saw "Lumix" on the front. As in, she was thinking: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lummox

For a short time I put tape/labels over the Lumix name, designating Camera 1 and Camera 2, and thought maybe it would keep people guessing. But then all the photogs started asking if it was a T2i or something, so I moved the labels to the back of the camera. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top