Canon 600d or Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2

there are a ton of threads on this topic. a lot contain misinformation from people pretending to be knowledgeable.

this is the most recent thread. no point in reposting stuff that has already been posted.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1250564/dslr-for-shooting-video

to sum it up. blah blah GH2 is good but only if you "hack" it but it will have less dynamic range. T2i no hack has comparable video quality when viewed on youtube. anything bigger than a normal size computer screen and you will see the flaws that DSLRs have in video mode. T2i is the best bang for your buck DSLR with video and its quality is barely less than a GH2 if you are only caring about the actual sharpness of the image over how well the image looks overall. better lenses can provide higher quality video but you dont have to spend top dollar to get top quality. canon/nikon has better selection of lenses and larger sensor which means you can get shallower depth of field without spending as much money. GH2 has teeny tiny sensor but its not a bad camera at all


oh yea so i didnt read your whole post... but the GH2 was not made for video. if it was it would have soo many more features that newer DSLRs are now getting. just fyi
Edited by Conspiracy - 4/30/12 at 6:32pm

hacking the t2i gives you more control over the settings some as an example is more control over whitebalance with easier ability to manually adjust with the push of a button rather than taking a picture of something white and then setting it to custom WB and then selecting custom WB. you have control over audio levels. pretty sure you can still turn off AGC which is a biggie. you can adjust bit rates if you know what you are doing (this is not suggested for new shooters)

GH2 will give you sharper appearing video (after hacking and changing the bit rate of the video) with deeper depth of field. but the actual appeal of the video itself looks very bland without processing because of the slightly less dynamic range. anyone that tells you GH2 is better for video is either saying that because they hear everyone else on the internet say it and dont know any better or honestly still just dont know any better.

if you are ok with having to hack your camera and process the footage after shooting to make it look normal go ahead. the video straight out of a t2i will look great and with some post process work that is rather easy you can give it a cinema film look. GH2 is a micro4/3 sensor while not a bad thing is just very small and will honestly give you the same quality of video as a really top notch camcorder except the GH2 lets you change lenses even though the lens selection is considerably less than going canon. i will say there are some really awesome m4/3 lenses out there but you have more to chose from with a lower budget going canon.

im not exactly sure what questions you have that are not being answered. let me know what you are curious about and ill explain it to you

the GH2 doesnt have better depth of field it just will have slightly deeper which means the area that is in focus is longer whereas with a full frame 35mm sensor its much thinner, like almost paper thin. it depends on aperture settings and distance from the subject. with the T2i you can get really thin area of focus to get very nice blurry backgrounds to say it simply. with GH2 it might be slightly more work because its a smaller sensor but it also has a larger crop factor. its really complicated so im not going to try and explain it myself but there are websites that explain it very well.

18-55 kit lens and a 50 1.8 is an excellent starting kit.

because the T2i has a crop sensor it crops the effective field of view of an image without changing the image size itself so your 1080p will still be 1920x1080. the crop factor is X1.6 so whatever your focal length is you multiply by 1.6 and that is what your field of view is equivalent to on a full frame 35mm sensor. so a 50mm which is considered the normal perspective lens for full frame is actually more like an 80mm lens when you looks through the viewfinder. so the reason you were suggested a 30mm lens is because it looks like the 50mm equivalent. the 50 1.8 is the best bang for your buck prime lens to start with and lets you experiment with really wide apertures and shallow depth of field. if you find that 50mm is too long you can get a 30mm prime lens that is wider. there are other wider options as well. the 30mm is a better decision assuming you want to have that 50mm look. people that suggest 30mm are giving bad advice because they do not know if you actually need a 30. there is a chance that the 50 length is perfect for your needs and for the price its the best to start with because once you look at other prime lenses the price goes up pretty fast.

Why do you keep saying this?
I have previously told you specific reasons as to why the GH2 is better - the main ones being less moire and aliasing. I have not made these terms up - please look them up.

Every comparison shows the GH2 excelling in these areas and more (see the links below).
edit: stills are a different story, but this post regards the aspect of video

http://www.teddymedia.com/blog/gear/107-panasonic-gh2-overhaul-part-1.html (especially the first video)
http://www.eoshd.com/content/4279/how-the-gh2-is-still-top-dog-for-video-quality (also read about the sensor size fallacy here - the GH2 has a native 16:9 sensor)
http://www.slashcam.de/artikel/Test/Panasonic-GH2---der-kompakte-Ueberflieger--Aus-dem-Messlabor.html (just look at the screenshots, don't worry about the German)

Most DSLRs have these issues due to poor line skipping implementations.
http://provideocoalition.com/index.php/awilt/story/overview_several_first-generation_versacams/P1/

In addition, you can use Canon lenses on the GH2 with an adapter (but not the other way around). In fact, almost all lenses from all camera brands can work via adapters on most mirrorless cameras like the GH2 due to the cameras' short flange distances (no, that is not another made up word), though only with manual focus.
Edited by aldfig0 - 5/1/12 at 9:28pm

im not going to argue with a micro4/3 fanboy. go enjoy your teeny tiny sensor that you have to hack the bitrate to get better video.

GH2 is more of a pain to get great video. have fun processing your footage to get it the way you want it. T2i straight out of camera is legit no retouching.

my advise is obviously worthless compared to websites that are pixel peeping screenshots of still video frames

and again all you ever do is post links to these websites but you have never actually provided your own personal opinion or experience which means all you are able to do is copy/paste links to websites and what you read on the internet is the extent of your knowledge it seems.

i dont recall accussing you of making up words lol. and only an idiot would want to adapt a canon lens that is made for a 35mm sensor on a micro 4/3 sensor... and why would i want to adapt those lenses to even smaller mirrorless cameras as well...

OP go GH2 if you want but have fun spending extra money on overprices lenses or adapters to put cheaper lenses on your camera to only be able to use them in manual focus. you will also probably lose control of your aperture when putting new lenses on a camera they are not made for but obviously thats not important lol.


oh yea. so there is nothing wrong with suggesting a GH2 to people but telling them its the best camera and their budget is only $1000 is dumb.

a 7-14mm lumix is $1000 if you need a wide angle lens that isnt the kit lens
25mm prime is $1000
45mm f2.8 panaleica POS is $900
25mm f1.4 $600

the lenses from panasonic are cheaply made and super overpriced compared to canon. so why would someone with a budget want to commit to a GH2? once you buy it your stuck unless you sell it used and barely get your money back. paying that kind of money for glass is not easy for a newcomer to video and if you push them to get a GH2 they will be stuck with a kit lens and be too scarred to try anything new because of the prices. and most users are not aware of the quality of 3rd party lenses and stray away from them because of lack of knowledge. so in the end everytime you post your garbage about how awesome the GH2 is you are only cornering a new video shooter into something that limits them with a low budget. you should care more about the people you give advice to and give them help that makes more sense for someone in their situation on not because you are stuck in this "GH2 is da best everything is crap" mindset that does not help people on a limited budget and limited understanding of video. the OP clearly has limited knowledge of DSLR and video so all those threads are gibberish to them most likely. if OP said i have plenty of video experience and a $5k budget then i would suggest a GH2 but even then with a higher budget a D800 blows the GH2 out of the water with better uncompressed HDMI out and a headphone jack to monitor audio. its not all about how well a camera performs under test charts and video stills. its about overall performance and the GH2 does not always win which is why people shooting professional video with DSLRs have been sticking with canon because while it may not win in all those tests its more reliable and easier to use and matches the cinema look and feel much better.

on a side note i would like to see you post all the links to websites that show the OP how much processing and converting he needs to do to get his footage to look good after he hacks the GH2 of course. and how he will need to convert his footage to prores 422 if OP knows what they is and then will need to process the footage to get all the details to come out. but when you start seeing the Digic5 on entry level canon cameras i think your GH2 will begin to fall short until panasonic makes a newer camera soon
Edited by Conspiracy - 5/2/12 at 7:08am