I didn't really realise just how good the hacked Panasonic GH2 is!
Why does everyone go with canon when the hacked GH2 is much better on paper? The main drawbacks of other DSLR's for video are improved drastically, namely (there could be more, I'm a newbie):
1) A lot less aliasin, namely Moire; and
2) Less Rolling Shutter; because of the
3) Super high bitrate (170-ish MB)
4) No overheating
The first three alone make it a super duper extra triple awesome DSLR for video, and footage projected onto a large screen would look 100's of times better than a Canon DSLR (refering to Black Swan, and Phillip Bloom's promo video he made for Lucas Films at their Ranch).
So why doesn't every indie filmmaker use this little beast? And why don't the Pro's use this instead of the limited Canon DSLR's? Again, Black Swan and the host of other movies that use Canon DSLR's, like Iron man and even Newlyweds (Ed Burns) come to mind.
The only things I can think of are:
Lack of lenses, unlike with Canon - but adapaters should be readily available?
Poorer low light performance due to the smaller sensor - but the hack and extra bitrate allow filming at much higher ISO's cleaner, so it should even out?
For the record, I own a 600D and love it and and WAS lusting after a 5D MKII, until I put some serious thought into the GH2...
I'm mind boggled, there must be something I'm missing?
Why does everyone go with canon when the hacked GH2 is much better on paper? The main drawbacks of other DSLR's for video are improved drastically, namely (there could be more, I'm a newbie):
1) A lot less aliasin, namely Moire; and
2) Less Rolling Shutter; because of the
3) Super high bitrate (170-ish MB)
4) No overheating
The first three alone make it a super duper extra triple awesome DSLR for video, and footage projected onto a large screen would look 100's of times better than a Canon DSLR (refering to Black Swan, and Phillip Bloom's promo video he made for Lucas Films at their Ranch).
So why doesn't every indie filmmaker use this little beast? And why don't the Pro's use this instead of the limited Canon DSLR's? Again, Black Swan and the host of other movies that use Canon DSLR's, like Iron man and even Newlyweds (Ed Burns) come to mind.
The only things I can think of are:
Lack of lenses, unlike with Canon - but adapaters should be readily available?
Poorer low light performance due to the smaller sensor - but the hack and extra bitrate allow filming at much higher ISO's cleaner, so it should even out?
For the record, I own a 600D and love it and and WAS lusting after a 5D MKII, until I put some serious thought into the GH2...
I'm mind boggled, there must be something I'm missing?