Mirrorkisser

@Finn Schäuble, no need to be rude to people who try to be helpful. Nobody here can read your mind, although the thought seems appaling. If you are all on the nex route, then instead of being impolite rather be "not lazy" and read the forums which compare your sony cameras. if you ask for opinions you get them served as they are.

I think it looks quite alright. Its terrible when people just judge a movie by its technical setup and shortcomings. Actors and compositions looked interesting, not my kind of movie (not too much into this guy ritchie thing. lock stocks was ok, but after that it got pretty much redundant) but pretty decent. still i wonder why they chose a gh2. if you can afford more than 3 average actors, you can afford to rent something decent. perhaps production fell into the pre ml 5dmkiii, bmpcc or bmcc period.

Thanks for the replies. I suppose those Nikkors would also fit on my precious gh2 with an adapter? I am also still keeping my left eye on the bmcpc...

can i put canon fd glass on that camera?thanks!

Lol each week a new cow is chased through the village. just like people were all freakin out when the bmcc was announced, just to find out it wont be available for ages, jello etc. and then everybody jumps on the next bandwaggon. the mkiii doing raw sounds superb, but lets wait till a big crowd uses this in real life conditions and checks this for flaws intensively. if it passes that, then i will get all excited.

Getting away from technical obsessions is a good thing! Sometimes i read specs aswell like its a bloody novel by Tolstoi or Dostojevsky and then i ask myself for what? Recently i have been studying the c-mount solutions for the new bmpcc like a nutcrack. Luckily i manage to pull myself away from that and just go out and shoot, creative time is 90% of all cases better spend out in the field, getting things going with what you got already...

Can only recommend the canon fds aswell. very good and cheap. the minolta mds are not bad either.   my starter kit contained the canon fd 20,35,50,85 and the lumix 14mm f2.5 and that was already more than enough for everything i needed.   a fabulous lens for the price is the vivitar 28-200mm f3.5-5.3 with macro, its a very good run and gun lens during the day. the best cheap low light solution is the canon fd 50mm 1.4.   And yes, dont fall into the trap of buying too much right away. i expanded too eary and too fast, now i got plenty of stuff i hardly use.    I would also recommend getting something in the 17.5-25mm range as a standard to go lens.    Regarding expensive m43 lenses: dont worry, i think they are here to stay. nobody knows what will happen tomorrow, i am also sometimes unsure whether full frame is a thing of the future (for photography for sure, but for videograpy?)

@Jason: you should get the canon and listen to your guts. Its not the look that "we" grave for. everybody has his own aesthetics. I dont like the canon dslr look for example. It looks like a more expensive porn magazine in my opinion. and people have overdone the superduper shallow depth of field already 1-2 years ago. Go to Berlin etc, there are so many 3rd wave canon dslr hipsters. while the pioneers have already moved on, as the market is saturated with that look. it was nice at the beginning, wow, we can shoot like this with what is basically a photocamera. but now, when i see something shot in those asethetics, i get either tired or angry, or both. especially since most people are not even doing it well. a whole short film or 4 minute clips in those aesthetics? for crying out loud, its a technique to put a certain object or subject above its surrounding, to put the emphasis on it, in the cinematographic language. and now every boring unimportant thing filmed in that look? pure overkill!   if i had to choose i would pick the panasonic ones for video anytime, unless stills were important. Overall i am also looking for something that is superior to the gh-series. which is not another 8bit dslr though. 8bit will always remain 8bit. For the budget, why dont you think of the black magic cinema camera with an EF or passive m43 mount?   the Nikon d5200 is also a very good and cheap choice.    Or the Sony FS100, you get used ones in mint condition for almost the cash of a mkiii.

Amen Chrad. I find myself sometimes becoming a shopping bitch and worrying more about which glass to buy or what gear to get next instead of what i shoot next. Gear is only there to support the content. If there is no good content, all gear is useless.   if you got good content, need a certain gear to make a certain shot possible and you can afford it, go for it by all means. Always use the best gear you can get and then forget about it and just see it as a tool.   the gh2 is the best in its priceclass but also has its of limitations (banding, DR, rolling shutter like all dslrs, and i dont like the dark objects on it in lower (but not dark light) although its possible to denoise it well), still i dont see why a good filmmaker should not make a good movie on it.   For my purposes it has always been more than enough. When i was making things for television i always had professionals working the camera (non dslr stuff) and editing the footage with me while i focused on the content and how i wanted things to look. Sometimes i brought it with me as a static-cam to film stuff from weird perspectives and angles. the material could always be intercut with the stuff that cameras did which cost 20 times as much.   Regarding your questions: so far there is no hack for the gh3. as far as i have heard, some people are not too happy about the options (all-i has a too small bitrate etc). so i would wait and see if it ever gets hacked. i would also wait for blackmagic before i get the mkiii.   One thing that just popped in my mind: you said you just film stuff around you, which means you will also carry the stuff. when i do the same thing, i always carry around 6 lenses etc etc. the 5d and EF glass is most of the time heavier than a gh2, plus the gh2 has a decent stealth factor, people dont expect you to film with that tiny beast.   As mentioned before, if you dont film for the big screen the sharpened 5d footage is all fine. if you really blow it up though, it looses its appeal in my opinion. I use plenty of old legacy glass on the gh2 and a hack which focuses on gradations (intravenus or valkyrie) and i would not call sharpness an issue, the old glass is way smoother than most lumix lenses.   regarding whether its clever to invest in EF or m43 or nikon glass: only time will tell :)

If you dont intend to do a lot of photography, i would not go for a 8bit camera anymore. i would rather go for one of the blackmagic ones. true, extra storage costs and you need a decent pc, still, it appeals a lot more to my eye.   if you want to go the 8bit route, i think the gh2 is still a fine camera for the price, it has its limitations, but if you dont need it for paid jobs, its absolutely a decent camera. there is a tendency these days to just live the postcard-syndrome, as Robert Bresson put it. People should think less of their gear and more about their ideas and concepts and what they got to do with themselves. I have seen wonderful things shot on average cameras. The dslr canon super shallow depth of field-thingy is terrible in my opinion. i would not even call it cinematic. result is most amateurs shoot 70% of the shit out of focus, even in interviews.People like Sven Nyqvist would have spanked the shit out of most of the people out there with an iphone. These days i watched agnes vardas glaneur et glaneuses (excuse my poor french) shot in terrible digital camera video look. and what a wonderful and poetic movie it was, rightly awarded many prices.   Only reason for me to pick the 5d over the gh2/3 would be the option to take superb stills and a better DR than gh2. 

@pulp writer and cantsin:cheers a ton for your tests, you helped me a lot as i was looking on some of those schneiders on ebay. now i know a lot more! thanks!

one more thing that was mentioned elsewhere about the pocket camera: with the cropfactor of the sensor a 7mm full frame equals roughly 21mm on this baby. so it wont be easy to get really wide on that camera. still for that price and package i am all sold!

i would go for the gh2 aswell. the 14-140mm is a very good allround lens. not very fast, but still. you can still sell it later on without problems if you dont like it. another route is to buy the body only, and get old prime lenses, like the canon fds or by minolta. you will need an adapter, but they are worth it by all means. excellent picture quality. old zoom lenses are sometimes so so, its said the newer ones utilize technical improvements.   the 14-140mm also offers you OIS, so you can shoot handheld.

Just tatooed blackmagic on my forehead!   Holy cow. I might be going for both of them. The pocket camera for sure. This is just what i have been waiting for all the time: something small with a stealth factor, good for run and gun and no 8bit crap, no 420 color space. This just sounds way too good to be true. Please dont fool my passionately beating heart!   Thats what the world needs, companies that kick the lazy big players, who just see us as cash cows, rightly in the bum. Oh well, would not surprise me though if canon fan boys kept buying their crippled down stuff just too feel good.   If they release this, i will definitely support them.