Personal View site logo
Should I switch to Gh2?
  • 38 Replies sorted by
  • DeShonDixonDeShonDixon

    @mrbill No actually I feel the GH2 does much better at low light than my old T2i. I can bump my iso to 5000 on my GH2 and barley see any noise. On my old T2i if I went anywhere past 1000 it looked horrible. I used to have a 50mm f/1.4 on T2i and then moved over to the GH2 and got a 35mm f/2 and the 35mm f/2 did better in low light on my GH2 than the 50mm f/1.4 on my T2i.

  • bwhitzbwhitz

    I was a huge canon fan... but the GH2 looked like a great camera, so I picked on up. And once you actually start working with some real 1080p footage... there is just no going back. I cringe whenever I have to watch 7D footage full-screen... but the GH2 is a shear joy. Plus, there just isn't enough bit-rate on the canons for anything. They're just too muddy and soft in the end.

    I also use slo-mo allot and the GH2's 60fps is just worlds better. There's actually a bit more detail than my 7D/5D in their 1080p modes. Plus, it actually looks better than the C300's 720p 60fps material.

    Also, allot of people talk about lenses being more important... but when a cameras resolving power and detail are as bad as the 5D/7D/60D/ect... they really don't make that big of a difference in the end. I laugh when I hear about people talking about using Ziess on their canon's like it's actually going to make a difference. They can't even fully resolve that $100 50mm 1.8 "nifty-fifty" lens...

  • shianshian

    I haven't "switched", per se, but I was shooting on the 5D (did not own one), and bought a GH2 a year ago. Now every time I have to shoot on a Canon, I groan. With the exception of a better selection of auto AI type lenses, I see no advantage to any Canon camera over the GH2. If you are the type shooter who relies heavily on those Auto features, then the GH2 is probably not for you. If you are a full manual guy, like me. The huge selection of lens and mount types, and the sheer data rate and picture quality vaults the hacked GH2 over any camera short of the Scarlet (unless the BMD camera actually turns out to be a game changer) IMO

  • artiswarartiswar

    @Vitaliy_Kiselev

    Sorry. Fair enough. The bulky form factor, lower resolution and less than desirable macro blocking doesn't lend itself to my style grading. That said, glass dictates body. I started from scratch with my GH2 so I had the luxury of buying adapted LOMOs. @antcuc - if you don't own glass, switch and invest in some Nokton, Lomo, etc.

  • OzNimbusOzNimbus

    Switched from the 60d to a GH2 a few months back. Aside from the increased resolution, it's much nicer on a handheld Glidecam HD1000 (also known as "the back breaker") as it's much lighter. I already have quite a few vintage primes from Nikon & Pentax, so making the switch involved purchasing some adapters.

    The one thing I really miss about the 60d is the focus peaking with Magic Lantern. Other than that, the GH2 has been fantastic. I'm quite happy I made the switch.... I even purchased a second GH2 for multi-camera live concert shooting.

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    @artiswar

    Canon assholes often laugh us off set. I can push the GH2 worlds beyond the 60D or 600D And you don't get cheated out of 1080p like Canon's faux-1080

    I understand your position, but, please be more constructive. Without such extremes.
    I much prefer 600D to the GH2 if later is used to shoot crap. Also many people have big amount of very good Canon glass, and I do not advise to move to Panasonic in this case.

  • artiswarartiswar

    @antcuc - Honestly, the biggest con is the perceptual size of the camera, Canon assholes often laugh us off set. Until post, when they wished they had listened. I also respectfully disagree with @Brian202020. If you meter and expose correctly with both cameras, I can push the GH2 worlds beyond the 60D or 600D, especially with a @driftwood hack. @antcuc - Take a look at @shian 's work and you'll see just how much more worth it it is. The latitude might be less evident with the lack of Cinestyle but it's there. And you don't get cheated out of 1080p like Canon's faux-1080

  • mrbillmrbill

    @antuc - you won't like the low light performance or the form factor as much, but you will love the lack of aliasing and moiree, and the increased resolution.

  • Brian202020Brian202020

    T2i: Better resale value, Better LCD, More DR when using Technicolor CineStyle, Larger sensor, Benifits of Magic Lantern.

    GH2: Benifits of Vitaliy's hack, Smaller/lighter, Can use a larger variety of lenses.

  • DeShonDixonDeShonDixon

    No not really other than the canon camera's have better LCD screens

  • antcucantcuc

    Thanks for your input @artiswar and @deshondixon . Aside from higher bitrate/latitude for play and the obvious sharper detail, are there any other things you like about the gh-2? Any cons you can think of?

    Thanks for you time it's really helping my decision.

    As for glass, I'm renting for now so I can always get the best glass. Im trying to figure put which camera makes better use of that glass in my price range.

  • DeShonDixonDeShonDixon

    @antcuc Yeah I used to have a T2I and sold it to switch over to a GH2, it was great choice.

  • artiswarartiswar

    @antcuc - Personally, I feel glass is more important than any camera body (at this level anyway) but at this point, you could probably turn a profit by selling your T3i and buying a body (and use said profit on a SanDisk Extreme Card) and be well on your way to much more flexibility in post. The latitude I can pull off the GH2 footage especially in the shadows is incredible, not to mention how well the footage holds up when blown up to cinema screen size.

    So yes, I would switch.

Add a Comment