Why I Ultimately Had to go with the GH2

[jrod81]

I thought in one of the threads over in the Canon section you said you already had a T2i? If so the HMC-150 would be perfect and would be all you need to get. The T2i could serve well enough for the short term as cool shot B cam. Maybe then you could get them to spring for the GH2 after seeing some of the T2i bonus work you will do. Why a new DSLR when you probably don't absolutely need one?

this is true... i could keep my t2i and that is what my wife has been gunning for... i was planning to sell it and use the money to go toward a gh2 if i used my own personal money... this may sound greedy, but i guess i am just a bit annoyed that i will be using my own equipment for their needs but i know they won't give me "rental" pricing or anything... i guess it just seems awfully convenient for them and lets face it- its not like lawyers are a struggling breed when it comes to finances... anyway, either way, either keep the t2i or sell it and get the gh2- the plan will be for them to get me the hmc and i will do shallow dof when i find it necessary with my own equipment...

as to the comment on the hmc40... i have looked into it as well and even posted a few things on some threads in that section... everyone says the hmc150 would be better...

 

[irguy]

i assume people will say the TM700 is not for professional applications too right?

Isn't "professional" a matter of whether or not you get paid?

I'm the in-house technical/creative for a manufacturing company and I've shot the majority of our promo videos with prosumer and consumer handycams. The TM700 would be better than any of the cameras I've used - by far.

Like most starting out, I was equipment crazy... Editing hardware. Editing software. Cameras. And it's completely understandable because of the investment involved and the desire to be successful and not hit some unexpected wall because of a wrong choice. But what I've discovered is that for my type of work, content, audio, and lighting are the determining factors in getting a professional result.

If you're using the camera's built-in mic then your audio WILL be quite poor most of the time. I've used a Canon XL-1, Sony V1U, and GH1 for interviews, but NEVER with their built-in mics. I either use a Sennheiser wireless system or a shotgun.

I have no problem investing my personal money in key audio equipment because, unlike video equipment, analog audio equipment costs less and takes a very long time to become obsolete. I can produce an acceptable finished product with pretty much any camera IF the the lighting is adequate and the audio is GREAT. And I know that with my equipment I can achieve great audio.

The best advice I can give you is to buy whatever camera you feel comfortable with. If you want remote Start/Stop/Zoom control of the camera during live events, pick up the HMC150 because it has a LANC port. If you don't need that, consider the TM700, a JuicedLink audio interface (w/phantom power), a couple of great mics, and a set of Sony MDR-7506 headphones. The audio alone should set you back about $1,500, by the way.

If you need to record voice-overs, get a good mixer with USB I/O (Mackie makes a nice one for about $250) and a good mic (check out the EV Cardinal - it picks up FAR less ambient background noise than anything else I've evaluated). Figure in another $300 - $400.

Then there's the matter of lighting...

And camera support...

The moral of the story is to leave enough room in your budget for the equipment that will help you achieve professional results. FYI, this is what a Sennheiser wireless sounds like plugged directly into a non-pro camera (GH1): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iRg2-wBLUWU

Guy