Reading mode: Light Dark

GH2 vs Canon EOS 60D

Go to last post
tinternaut

tinternaut

Veteran Member
Messages
8,141
Solutions
1
Reaction score
1,000
Location
Manchester, UK
FYI, this should be of interest to some here:

http://www.eoshd.com/content/459

Note: The findings really only apply to video but with comments like "Sadly, it seems November 2010 is to be the month Canon lose the DSLR video image quality fight to Panasonic", it comes as a surprise to me.

Sorry if this has been posted already (I did a quick scan beforehand).....

--
Regards
J

Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/jasonhindleuk
Blog: http://jasonhindle.wordpress.com



Photos: http://www.flickr.com/photos/jason_hindle

Gear in profile
 
Came as a surprise to me as well and I wrote that article!

I just didn't expect the GH2 to beat Canon's sensor at high ISOs.

The same does not apply to stills (though it's a close call) but in terms of video the GH2 is way way ahead.
 
As a video camera, it looks excellent, but the Panasonic AF100 looks better. As a combo cam for stills and video, it kicks tushie! :-)

Dan.
 
Can you speak a bit to how they compare for stills?
 
I remember a GH2 comparison with the 60D here on DPReview in the JPEG image viewer on 60D review page 14 or somewhere, but the GH2 now seems to have been taken off?
 
DPR's own Canon 60D review conclusion:

'Dynamic range, noise and color are all up the the high standard we'd expect from our experiences with this sensor in its sister models. It's a sensor that - after all - helped the 7D and 550D produce some of the best image quality in their respective classes. Looking at images from the 60D alongside its competition we are impressed to see that it holds its own very well against the recently announced (and soon to be reviewed) D7000, and (less of a surprise) that it outperforms the new multi-aspect sensor of the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 towards the upper end of the ISO scale.'

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos60D/page20.asp

Seems DPreview suggests exactly the opposite for still.
 
I think M4/3rds will stay a little behind larger sensors at higher ISOs (I would expect them to remain 1 to 2 stops worse year after year) the question is color rendition and IQ at, let's say, 100-1600...
 
nRequimM said:
DPR's own Canon 60D review conclusion:

'Dynamic range, noise and color are all up the the high standard we'd expect from our experiences with this sensor in its sister models. It's a sensor that - after all - helped the 7D and 550D produce some of the best image quality in their respective classes. Looking at images from the 60D alongside its competition we are impressed to see that it holds its own very well against the recently announced (and soon to be reviewed) D7000, and (less of a surprise) that it outperforms the new multi-aspect sensor of the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 towards the upper end of the ISO scale.'

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos60D/page20.asp

Seems DPreview suggests exactly the opposite for still.
Click to expand...
I think the difference is that DPreview is talking about the STILL images, whereas the EOSHD.com is reviewing the MOVING images. EOHSHD is reviewing the "DSLR video image quality". The 60D still images look cleaner "towards the upper end of the ISO scale". I agree with this statement for still images. All the way up to ISO 3200 the image quality of the 60D is pretty much on one level with the GH2. Beyond that (ISO 6400 and 12800) the 60D still images look cleaner.
 
The gap in image quality for stills has been dropping with each generation of sensor between these formats in still images. To see a difference you really have to go searching for it at 100%, and then the quality of the optics that you're using (not to mention the small issue of the photographers skill) will have a far bigger impact on the overall IQ than any sensor differences.

The idea that Canon and Nikon have any sensor advantage let along a large one is really just a fairytale these days. You can still see differences between FF and m4/3 but even there its not as big as some people imagine.

When it comes to video, 1080 is using a much lower pixel count, so the differences drop further. A far more significant factor is the effect of the heat produced by the sensor. While Canon has been focusing on a traditional stills only set-up, with live-view and video as an extra feature, Panasonic have been refining their sensor design with live-view and full time live-view cameras. Obviously they're getting better at controlling heat-related noise with every generation.

On a practical level they don't seem to be making the same mistakes as Olympus did with the original 4/3 system - they're introducing lenses with mass-market appeal that provide tools just not possible at anywhere near equivalent sizes in larger formats - ie. the 20mm pancake or the 100-300mm zoom. Throw in support from other lens manufacturers that are coming out of the woodworks such as Cosina and its going to be a compelling stills and video format. A dream for photographers and videographers.

The GH1 was the camera that should have been better than the DSLRs at video, the GH2 is the camera which actually is.
--
Veo el mundo: http://www.veoelmundo.com my blog about travel photography
 
Holgs said:
The GH1 was the camera that should have been better than the DSLRs at video, the GH2 is the camera which actually is.
--
Click to expand...
As far as I can establish at this stage (just from reading on internet) the current GH2 video performance is no better than what is possible with the GH13, but the GH13 is certainly preferred to any dslr for video.

(GH13 = hacked GH1)
 
Porkins Wingman said:
Holgs said:
The GH1 was the camera that should have been better than the DSLRs at video, the GH2 is the camera which actually is.
--
Click to expand...
As far as I can establish at this stage (just from reading on internet) the current GH2 video performance is no better than what is possible with the GH13, but the GH13 is certainly preferred to any dslr for video.

(GH13 = hacked GH1)
Click to expand...
I think this may change your mind about the differences:

http://www.eoshd.com/content/460-Canon-60D-versus-Panasonic-GH2-Full-Review-Part-1

Not sure if you can do 1:1 cropping on the GH1 in any format... looks like you won't need big heavy zooms for many of those super-telephoto video shots anymore!

--
Veo el mundo: http://www.veoelmundo.com my blog about travel photography
 
Holgs said:
I think this may change your mind about the differences:

http://www.eoshd.com/content/460-Canon-60D-versus-Panasonic-GH2-Full-Review-Part-1

Not sure if you can do 1:1 cropping on the GH1 in any format... looks like you won't need big heavy zooms for many of those super-telephoto video shots anymore!

--
Veo el mundo: http://www.veoelmundo.com my blog about travel photography
Click to expand...
Not especially, no, although I haven't read that article you linked thoroughly. It is undoubted that the GH2 offers a greater feature range to the GH1, but I'm currently basing my opinion on views offered over at dvxuser.com by several who have compared output from the two cameras. So admittedly my own argument is very weak, but as a GH13 owner I don't think the GH2 is significantly better to warrant an upgrade at such expense. Perhaps when a/if a GH3 comes out...
 
Porkins Wingman said:
Holgs said:
I think this may change your mind about the differences:

http://www.eoshd.com/content/460-Canon-60D-versus-Panasonic-GH2-Full-Review-Part-1

Not sure if you can do 1:1 cropping on the GH1 in any format... looks like you won't need big heavy zooms for many of those super-telephoto video shots anymore!

--
Veo el mundo: http://www.veoelmundo.com my blog about travel photography
Click to expand...
Not especially, no, although I haven't read that article you linked thoroughly. It is undoubted that the GH2 offers a greater feature range to the GH1, but I'm currently basing my opinion on views offered over at dvxuser.com by several who have compared output from the two cameras. So admittedly my own argument is very weak, but as a GH13 owner I don't think the GH2 is significantly better to warrant an upgrade at such expense. Perhaps when a/if a GH3 comes out...
Click to expand...
Well the features like offering a full HD 1:1 crop from the sensor mean that the GH2 is delivering a very different video output. In terms of versatility it also means you can use one lens at two different focal lengths.

I prefer opinions from people that have experience using video than random tests on forums where often people don't know what they're looking for or how to shoot properly in the first place, or just compare auto modes. Phillip Bloom for example is saying: "Better than hacked GH1…yep for me it is, as the hacked GH1 no matter how high the bit rate goes it still SUCKS in low light with those damn vertical lines."

It may not be worth upgrading for many users, but that's not the same as saying the output isn't any better.

--
Veo el mundo: http://www.veoelmundo.com my blog about travel photography
 
The first part of the review is online now: http://www.eoshd.com/content/460-Canon-60D-versus-Panasonic-GH2-Full-Review-Part-1 and the most important part is not the comparison, but this: "There is an adapter coming soon which allows AF, OIS and aperture control on the GH2 with Canon EF, EFS and L series lenses."

It would be a huge boost to m4/3, although I believe AF would be slow, because Canon lenses are not CDAF optimized.
 
MirosIav said:
The first part of the review is online now: http://www.eoshd.com/content/460-Canon-60D-versus-Panasonic-GH2-Full-Review-Part-1 and the most important part is not the comparison, but this: "There is an adapter coming soon which allows AF, OIS and aperture control on the GH2 with Canon EF, EFS and L series lenses."

It would be a huge boost to m4/3, although I believe AF would be slow, because Canon lenses are not CDAF optimized.
Click to expand...
that website has no credibility whatsoever. Remember his Nex-7 in Septmember claim? The author is a troll anyway, as his posts to Sony forum showed a few month ago.He is usually ignorant and clueless too. Any idiot can start a web site. That does not make them an authority on future products.

There won't be any adapter that would allow full time AF with Canon lenses on M4/3 bodies. Want to bet?
 
Porkins Wingman said:
Holgs said:
I think this may change your mind about the differences:

http://www.eoshd.com/content/460-Canon-60D-versus-Panasonic-GH2-Full-Review-Part-1

Not sure if you can do 1:1 cropping on the GH1 in any format... looks like you won't need big heavy zooms for many of those super-telephoto video shots anymore!

--
Veo el mundo: http://www.veoelmundo.com my blog about travel photography
Click to expand...
Not especially, no, although I haven't read that article you linked thoroughly. It is undoubted that the GH2 offers a greater feature range to the GH1, but I'm currently basing my opinion on views offered over at dvxuser.com by several who have compared output from the two cameras. So admittedly my own argument is very weak, but as a GH13 owner I don't think the GH2 is significantly better to warrant an upgrade at such expense. Perhaps when a/if a GH3 comes out...
Click to expand...
Last time I read the GH2 thread over at DVXUser, Vitaly himself (the author of the GH13 hack) posted several times that he believes the video quality of the GH2 surpasses the hacked GH1 - when using the new 24MB/s mode - which includes support for B-Frames - the other modes are generally no better than the standard GH1 apart from high iso noise, which is much better in all modes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top