G2 or GH2?
 

I'm considering another shot at using a Lumix camera for video. As far as I can see the main difference between the models is that the GH2 shoots full 720p and 1080i whereas the G2 shoots only 720p. Are there other differences that make it worth paying the extra as I'd be happy with 720p. I did try a GH2 with the 14-140 lens but was a bit disappointed with that lens, is the 14-42 better, I know that some of you like the 20 but I don't think that would be much use for what I need to do, or should I not bother with a kit lens. I have a bunch of Olympus lenses from my OM1 and an adaptor for micro 4/3 cameras. I'm not planning to be too ambitious with it to begin with, probably use it in a static locked-off position. covering stage shows to replace the HDV camera I'm currently using for that role.

Re: G2 or GH2?
 

If you look up the kit lenses individually by model # on Amazon, you can see the difference in the reviews.

The 14-140mm is a decent lens, great for outdoor, poor in low light. The 14-45mm is considered superior to the 14-42, as the specs suggest. The 20mm is a fine lens but not offered as a kit lens. If you need a zoom, stick with the 14-45 or 14-140mm.

I'm still sorting out the adapters. Birger engineering has released or is about to release the best adapter, but it will cost over $700, and it's made for the Panasonic Af-100videocamera, but will allegedly work on the GH2.

If you have lenses that will work for you initially, forget the kit lenses. But again, the 14-140 is great, just not for low light situations. The 14-45 I think might be 1/2 stop faster, don't remember.

Here's a typical discussion of the 14-42 vs the 14-45 http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=15153