In my opinion if you’re after visual effects and great resolution, you cannot get a better camera than the Panasonic GH2 … (its at the price point of the 600D). GH2 focuses mainly on video while 600D is more based on photos. They both take both videos, but GH2 seems to be more sharp and usually gives a more cinematic result (having a good resolution makes it perfect for green screen work also). While the canon dslrs are more diffused and usually have a better depth of field. So it greatly depends on what you’re after.
GH2 is a micro 4/3 camera, so its compatabile with almost every lens out there with the use of adapters.
The GH2 was also hacked and the image quality got up to extraordinary level, with the new hack it can see in darkness that even you cannot see!
I own it and if I had to buy again… I will chose the GH2 , but as I said, it depends on your style. Canon dslrs are perfect fo certain things while GH2 is perfect for others. I personally prefer GH2 for video work though.
I totally agree that gh2 is better for video. Canon is maybe a bit easier to use, or it’s maybe just my subjective opinion because I’m canon user.
Agreed…Canon 600D, 18-135mm kit lens and 50mm f1.8 for nice depth of field shots (pretty cool lens for that price…)
And moreover, a pretty versatile lens – covers most needs. The chip on the 600D is smaller than the Canon 5D. The chip on the 600D is the same as movie 35mm film (around 22mm wide). The 5D chip is the same as stills 35mm film (36mm wide).
That means that lenses with a focal lenght of 18mm will be more wide angle on the 5D than the 600D.
The 600D’s a good all round camera and the h.264 quality it shoots is pretty good as it goes. It has the kind of compression artefacts and lack of lattitude that you expect from h.264 footage. I’d recommend underexposing by 1/2 – 1 stop when shooting video. Especially if it’s intense light.