I currently shoot with a pair of hacked GH2s, but I might be starting a new job that wants to buy their own equipment. I love my GH2s and I'm not looking to upgrade them myself, but if I were to start over and someone else is footing the bill, what would make the most sense to do?
I've been intrigued by the G6 because it has the GH2's oversized sensor and throws in focus peaking (which is really nice for a compact!), as well as the addition of 60p at full HD, but I'm also getting the feeling that it is less pro-level than the GH series, and since it clearly doesn't have the same amount of community support backing it (hacks, performance tweaks and workflow tricks), and if it has the same green cast that I've been dealing with I'm wondering if I wouldn't be better off sticking with a GH2.
Meanwhile, the GH3 looks pretty nice, I've heard excellent things about the build, I love that I can run audio straight into the camera and monitor it live- but the sensor size is smaller than the GH2 that I've been using (standard mft, not the oversized kind) and I've heard it is slightly more prone to moire as well.
Then there's the D5200. I've heard this new kid on the block has excellent DR and really solid video modes. No full HD at 60p, but its not like I have that now either. I like Nikon's color rendition, but then I'm stuck in Nikon land with Nikon glass. One of the perks of sticking with MFT is that I can probably get the 35-100 f/2.8, which Nikon has no equivalent to. The IS and AF of those Lumix lenses make it really compelling for run-and-gun work, which this may require a lot of.
I'm going back and forth with this and can't decide. There are other options also- Canon 70D? BMCC? Heck, maybe even a full sized model like the AF100? I'm just sticking to what I'm more comfortable with, but open to other reasonable options!
