Hey guys,

I am thinking of changing form my 60D to a GH3.

Was wondering if the default 14-140mm kit lens of the gh3 is usable?
I will be selling my 60D + canon 50mm 1.4 + tamron 17-50 2.8 + video mic + extras to buy the GH3 with the 14-140mm.
Or would it be better to save a bit more cash to get the 12-35mm 2.8?

Was wondering if it would be better to get the GH2 with a better lens, or are the improvements of the GH3 worth the premium over the GH2, then save up and get some good lenses + battery grip etc. to go with the GH3 over time?

Also was wondering the AF mode for video has improved over the GH2, as I heard that the AF during video on the GH2 was not great?

Thanks,

Mark.

Mark~

The 14-140 is decent enough for run and gun docu-style, but it seems like most GH-series shooters around here prefer primes. Looks as though in addition to the 1080p/60, dynamic range, base-firmware resolution, and color reproduction is better on the GH3.

Andrew Reid over at EOSHD just posted some new footage and comparisons worth taking a look at: http://www.eoshd.com/content/9355/w...asonic-plus-a-useful-gh3-vs-5d-mark-iii-video

Thanks for the reply mate.

Good luck, & if you want to bounce ideas off me feel free to shoot me a DM!

I've just done exactly that! I've sold my Canon 60D and plan on either getting a GH3 or 5DmkIII, now that the price has dropped on the later. All my lenses are Canon L glass primes (which I plan to keep), so if I go the GH3 route I'd have to get an adapter, I can live with manual aperture, but not sure which adapter to get? Also, my spare batteries, charger, and mains adapter for the 60D are compatible with the 5Dmk3; do I sell the lot and completely go the GH3 route? I've got about a month to decide before I start filming again - decisions, decisions!!!

The Panasonic 14-140mm lens isn't a constant aperture lens, so it will take a little bit more messing around with when you zoom in video mode.

Yup, important detail on the 14-140, Kirk. That's why I only use that for run and gun, mainly outdoor footage when those aperture changes during zooms aren't going to be that big a deal.

So far as adapters for L series (or EF) glass, on the lower end you can get adapters that have their own apertures, then you'd just slap the glass on the adapter wide open. Not the most elegant solution, but it works. Also, old FD glass and old Nikkor lenses look great on the GH2 (and presumably 3) and can be found for cheap!

Hmm, I wonder if the manual adapters aperture control will effect overall image quality?

Not sure - I'd troll around Personal View and over at EOSHD, I'll bet someone around there has more experience than I do.

As much as I enjoy m43, if you already own a mess of Canon L's and other accessories, I think you'll be better off with a 5D3. The manual adapters for Canon lenses often induce vignetting due to the after-the-rear-element iris. Electronic adapters are available and functional, but a smidge clunky in operation and expensive.

If you were starting over new, the 12-35/2.8 + 35-100/2.8 zooms are hard to beat. Add in a fast 17.5-25 prime and it's quite a complete body and lens kit for ~$4500 total, and it will all fit in a medium shoulder bag.

Wedding is in complete without the pictures and so you need an exceptional photographic artist. So here is an exceptional and expert wedding camera person they are master is the wedding and other capacity scope. This is the best thing you ca have with the least charges.

Might be worth looking at the 'End of World' shoot outs linked on this page before taking the plunge

https://vimeo.com/shian

Testing the GH2, GH3, Black Magic and 5d MK3

It only makes sense, imo, if you have a very specific reason in mind... and as you're asking us, I think you don't have that reason. Both cameras, the 60D and the GH3, are very capable, and the general public won't be able to tell the difference when watching the final product. Getting rid of your Canon gear would certainly imply financial loss, so in my opinion, stick with it.

On the other hand, if I were to start from scratch, here is what I would buy:
GH3 body
Panasonic Lumix G X Vario 12-35 mm/F2.8

Panasonic Lumix G X Vario 35-100mm f/2.8

It only makes sense, imo, if you have a very specific reason in mind... and as you're asking us, I think you don't have that reason. Both cameras, the 60D and the GH3, are very capable, and the general public won't be able to tell the difference when watching the final product. Getting rid of your Canon gear would certainly imply financial loss, so in my opinion, stick with it.

On the other hand, if I were to start from scratch, here is what I would buy:
GH3 body
Panasonic Lumix G X Vario 12-35 mm/F2.8

Panasonic Lumix G X Vario 35-100mm f/2.8

I have heard that AF for video was improved dramatically.
Here, great review:

Ivan is right. Most of the general public won't be able to tell the difference between the 60D and the GH2 but you will and that is the most important factor. Filmmaking is as much about pleasing the audience as it is about satisfying yourself. The latter being the most difficult.
Even with the GH2 I am not 100% satisfied but I am content with the fact that it is a budget camera that achieves awesome results.

There are a tone of arguments for the GH2 over a Canon or a Canon over the GH2 but one of the most defining factors that cannot be disputed is that the M4/3 can take any glass you throw at it (Not literally. Please don't throw your glass at it). This puts the Gh2/3 above any of the Canon DSLRs in my opinion. It's also a lot smaller and lighter which can be both great and not so great.

One thing I have to add though. Why are people still talking about AF on video cameras. You should never be using AF when shooting video, it's one of the basic principles of videography. I maybe overstepping the mark but this is a video forum and I think it's important for us all to remember that if you don't put in the effort (even just to focus manually) then it will definitely reflect in your work. Sorry if I have offended anyone, I don't mean to, but I just want to help and eliminate any unnecessary factors when choosing a video camera and lenses.

Agreed, Tobias - pair a 60D with the right glass and you'll get great results. Pair a GH2 with the right glass (which you'll have a wider selection of) and you'll get great results.

And 99 times out of 100, I agree re: AF. These kinds of cameras aren't designed for the same AF smaller chip cameras are. Once in a blue moon with frantic run and gun documentary situations, AF may come in handy, but for narrative and even wedding work, I'd prefer sticking with manual. My go-to lens kit is all manual glass anyhow - Nikor non-ai 28mm/f2.8 & 50mm/f1.4 and the SLR Magic 12mm/f1.6. I have the 14-140 and pancake lenses, but those usually stay in the gear bag or at home.

I currently own a Canon 60D + a decent amount of canon glass, a Panasonic GH2, and now also a Panasonic GH3 and some select MFT glass.

I started out with a very similar setup to you, I had the 60D + canon 50 1.4 + tamron 24-70 2.8 and added a few other lenses. I ended up being frustrated with the 60D for a few reasons. Image degradation over a long period of shooting due to poor heat radiation, moire/aliasing issues, and finally lack of resolution in certain wide detailed shots. I learned how to get around these issues fairly well, like most canon dslr users, but on a suggestion and seeing a great deal on a used GH2 body I tried it out.

I used a GH2 with the flowmotion 2 hack, and I used it with a ZF.2 28 f2 lens which I had been using on my 60D. Immediately I was blow away by the detail captured by the GH2, and not having to worry about recording time and image degradation or the camera shutting down. I was very annoyed not to have a standard size audio jack, however, and the low light performance was not so great. I wasn't really happy with the low light performance until I got the voigtlander f0.95 lenses, the extra stop helps and hopefully the metabones speed booster will help a good deal as well. I got it to be a 'b' cam and I ended up using it as my primary camera. I recently got the GH3, and now my 60D is finally going up for sale.

Some issues to consider: I really loved the colors I got out of my 60D, with the GH2 I spend a little more time color correcting/denoising with neat video, and if I don't I regret it. However the colors I could get back in post, the lost detail and moire/aliasing can ruin a shot sometimes. I haven't had enough time to see how this impacts me on the GH3 so I won't comment there. However the Dynamic Range of the GH3 is better than the GH2, and I feel about as comfortable with the GH3's DR as with the 60D. The GH3 is weather sealed, the 60D and GH2 are not (even though the 60D feels like it is). I would not go for the kit lens. The 14-35 2.8 is a good choice, the olympus 14-35 f2 would be even better but it's quite expensive. Personally I am generally happy with primes, but the panasonic 14-35 is on my eventual shopping list. I can't really afford the olympus one myself. I plan on keeping my EF manual primes and selling my electronic aperture lenses.

I have been a 60d owner for 2 years and I have shot many professional projects using the camera. Its been particularly awesome when using Zeiss Primes and L Series glass.

I too became frustrated with the image quality coming out the camera (which I blame on my experience of the non-comparable FS700). Particularly shooting in 720p50/60fps, which is a very messy mode in most situations.

I tried out the GH3 and I have to say that I find it a vastly superior camera to the 60d. The image out of the GH3 reminds me of the FS700 image (only less film-like in the way the image flows). The lens mount is fantastic and the overall features and performance is staggering for such a small, affordable camera. I get to use my Canon FDs and these make for a very organic image.

Having also shot with the 5dmkiii, I prefer the Panny. I prefer its image and the form factor. The lightness and smallness is a big plus as I can be operating the camera on the shoulder for around 8 hours a day sometimes, which gets tiring. The GH3 feels much more like a 'next generation' camera due to its unbelievable power at the price.

My favourite lens is the SLR Magic 12mm. Can be tricky to focus sometimes but the shots you can pull off are very unique (as it also doubles up as a wide angle macro!)

Does anyone think the engineers made a mistake making the GH2/3? Maybe they made it too good by accident?

Forgot to say. On the autofocus for video thing, I agree that you should be manually focusing for the sake of your skills, however, the autofocus feature on the GH3 is pretty intuitive. If you need to shoot really quick and fast, I think its a great feature.

99% of the time, I manually focus, but I have been naughty and tried things like the face detection feature on slider and jib shots. Works great when there is no time left to fiddle.

I currently own the 60D, and at most times I wish that I had a better camera.

For last couple of months the sharpness of the image really bothered me and in the past weeks I've been so annoyed by the lack of detail. I thought about switching to a used GH2 and then installing a hack on it but after I discovered Magic Lantern I kind of settled back a bit.

I don't use the Magic Lantern anymore and I really wanted to upgrade to a better camera like 5D Mark III or Blackmagic Cinema Camera but GH2/GH3 seems to be better for me. And I plan on buying the f/0.95 lenses in the future for Micro 4/3.

The problem is that I dropped my 60D after 2 weeks of using it and it has a broken top LCD screen and the tripod mount is not leveled anymore. I don't think that anyone would buy it for a decent price. And so I think about keeping it as a B-cam.