Are the GH2 and other DSLRs practical for weddings

[Martyn Hull]

Reading that the new Canon XA-10 can match the GH2 in low light except possibly with the very fastest lenses, I cannot personally see the attraction of filming weddings with any DSLR compared to the ease and convenience using a cam like the XA-10, which is a superb performer by all accounts.

[Jeff Harper]

Martyn, what are you using for weddings?

[Kevin McRoberts]

I personally can't see the attraction in filming weddings, but then that's the crux of every question like this: what are your personal aesthetic preferences?

Some people might like the look of the GH2 more, and it's a few hundred dollars less expensive. Maybe they like using their Bokehriffic Zoolander 25/f0.65 lens. Maybe execs at Canon purposefully murdered their dog and they can't bring themselves to buy their products. Whatever the case may be....

In the end, I'm having a heck of a lot more fun shooting my GH2 than I ever did my previous comparably-suited HV30, even though the HV30 is "easier" and "more convenient"... and heck if I could put my finger on exactly "why."

[Jim Snow]

I personally like to use my GH2 in conjunction with my EX1R. I think they complement each other very well. During the course of a full wedding shoot, they each have a very appropriate place. I don't subscribe to the notion of 'one camera fits all'.

[Jeff Harper]

The attraction for shooting wedding varies with the individual. It pays bills, is easy to get into. I personally make my living doing them, along with a few corporate gigs here and there.

The Canon does look to be a very nice camera for the money, and I am anxiously waiting it's release.

But back to Martyn's post. Martyn, you often discuss which cameras you like better then the GH2, but you do not take into account that these are tools and that as Jim so succintly says, one size does not fit all. They all have there place.

The Canon could not do many things the GH2 could do, and vice versa. The Canon would be an excellent addition to a wedding videographer's arsenal, at any rate.

[Jeff Harper]

What really sucks about the new camera, for my purposes, is that it does not shoot 60p or even "real" 24p, but instead 30p or 24p in a 60i wrapper.

No 720p is a real disappointment for me, as that is what I shoot in.

[Martyn Hull]

I don't do weddings for a living. I have done various ones over the years for friends and family. If i was forced to do one now it would be with my HV30 as personally I could do a lot better job with it. I rarely use the HV now as for general hobby filming I love the GH2, but the XA10 that has been out for a while now is getting rave reviews regarding use, and picture quality including low light that rivals the GH2 with the 20mm f/1.7.

Regarding me discussing cameras I like better than my GH2, I think a slight preference for Canon DSLR skin tone, poor etc. and overall camcorder ease of use is about it.

[Kin Lau]

For recording the events of the day, a camcorder like the XA-10 is great. For a cinematic look though, isolating the subject, and generally just a more pleasing rendition of the scene, a GH2 or DSLR would be my choice.

[Jeff Harper]

Yes, I see it is out Martyn, it's just not available anywhere here, at least that I can find.

The lack of 720 60p is a deal breaker for me anyway, but it's like everything else, when you are using consumer grade equipment there are usually compromises. The next cam up I'm sure has the features I'd like, but it's out of my price range today.

[William Hohauser]

Somebody asked me to shoot an Off-Broadway show this week with a single GH2. I told them flat out, this is the WRONG camera for this. A video camera is the way to go. In such a situation the GH2 is b-roll and inserts at best. The same goes for weddings. Yes, some shots will be fantastic but too much will be lost while fiddling with the focus/exposure/shutter/ISO.

[Nigel Barker]

I would like to see the proof of the amazing low light capability of the XA10. It's the same sensor as the XF105 which I own & in low light the GH2 with the 20mm F/1.7 lens is miles better. ISO on the GH2 can be cranked up to the max without much deterioration in image quality whereas the XF105 even at +12db is noisy.

[Jeff Harper]

Interesting Nigel. The Canon is rated at 1.5 lux, but at what gain setting, I wonder? I wondered how a 1/3" single chip camera could produce equal low light performance to the Sony VX2100, but then I remembered the way they measure varies from manufacturer, and that the whole deal is subjective.

[Joe Ogiba]

For low light at weddings I think the GH2 with Voigtländer Nokton 25mm f/0.95 and Steadicam Merlin might be an interesting setup.
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5092/...98777113_b.jpg

[John Wiley]

Are the GH2 and DSLR's practical for weddings? No, not really.

However I think the real question is "are they worth the extra effort." Usually after trying them out, the answer for many people is unquestionably yes.

As has been said already, they fit perfectly with some styles and not so well with others. For one man weddings they are probably too much hassle but with a crew of 2 or 3, it opens up the possibilities immensely and gives you more opportunity to play to the strengths of DSLRs/GH2 and avoid the weaknesses.

[Martyn Hull]

Originally Posted by William Hohauser

Somebody asked me to shoot an Off-Broadway show this week with a single GH2. I told them flat out, this is the WRONG camera for this. A video camera is the way to go. In such a situation the GH2 is b-roll and inserts at best. The same goes for weddings. Yes, some shots will be fantastic but too much will be lost while fiddling with the focus/exposure/shutter/ISO.

Yes as good as my words, regarding the doubts of the XA-10s light I have seen films showing its ability if the doubters want to search they are there. Anyway for my casual filming nowadays mostly nature and documentary my GH2 is great.