60D vs. GH3

Its seriously like you guys don't even try. Google it first. Next try to the search bar. Search exactly what your thread title is, im not going to do it for you because I don't give a fuck which one you should get. Nothing come up? Search one camera at a time, make a pros and cons list. Still can't decide? Google more. Lurk and pay attention more, make stupid and unnecessary lazy threads less.

Actually Julius, I have been for a few weeks now. Except, most differences I can find I don't really understand the meaning or how it affects the camera when it comes to filing skiing. Here I come because I am very aware multiple people on this site have experience with both, so this is me trying and using the internet. For the record I searched on here to and nothing came up comparing the two.

huh strange

check out this thread to help you make a better thread IF you don't find anything through search bar.

People still buy Canon DSLRs for video?

Gh3 puts Canon to shame in every aspect.

How so? A lot of people use the 60D

it's a photo camera, not a video camera.

It is, however its video capabilities are insane. with an attached mic you can't go wrong.

i wouldn't exactly call them insane when a $200 GH13 is much better. i don't see the point in buying a canon dslr for mainly video use, there's much better options out there.

It's usually "enough" for most people and people also have a huge boner for canon lenses too..

Just because something is popular does not necessarily mean it is sensible (people use Beats headphones to listen to .mp3s, for Christ's sake).

Canon's DSLR video capabilities were kind of impressive when the 5DmkII was released, but even then it was (and still is) plagued with flaws, and in some respects has gotten worse (overbearing AA filter on the 5DmkIII).

Of course, it should go without saying that none of these issues should have any impact on the integrity of your art. Your support and lighting matter more than your camera body, which in all reality is probably one of the least important pieces of equipment; as long as it meets some minimum, rudimentary criteria, it will enable you to do your job. Amazing image quality alone means nothing (care to explain why 99% of RED videos online are garbage?), while some of the best videos I've ever seen have had mediocre or terrible image quality. How does that work? Your technological means of communicating an artistic concept, and that artistic concept itself, are entirely separate. You can polish a turd all you want, but at the end of the day it's still a turd.

But if we must step into a vacuum for the sake of technological discourse, here's the reality: Canon's DSLR video capabilities have been far surpassed by numerous camera manufacturers for a fraction of the price. To consider Canon as a competitor at this point is laughable.