The first real Panasonic GH4 competitor is the Sony A7s. And today Sony unveiled the pricing which is $2499 at Amazon. So let’s just take a short look about the advantages and disadvantages of each camera:
Sony A7s advantages:
Super clean High ISO. ISO range goes up to 409,600.
Full Frame look (that for some people is an advantage).
Big pixels likely means Higher Dynamic range and Color fidelity.
Superior Stills Image Quality (but with a bit less Megapixels)
Panasonic GH4 advantages:
4K recording on SD cards (A7s needs an external 4K recorder and can record XAVC-s 50Mbit/s at best)
10 bit output (A7s has 8bit output)
Autofocus is much faster (A7s autofocus pretty much sucks)
More available native lenses and cheaper. A7 system only has five (mostly expensive) FE lenses right now.
Powerzoom lenses (A7s has one on roadmap but price and release still have to be defined).
$900 cheaper.
Actually it’s $2900 cheaper if you want 4K because the A7s “forces” you to buy the Atomos Shogun (here at BHphoto)
In short:
Let me know if I forgot to mention som major differences. But so far it looks like that overall the GH4 has the edge. I am sure at photokina we will get more and likely also cheaper 4K cameras. And we have to see by then if Panasonic managed to sell plenty of GH4 cameras…
127 Responses
It’s really 2900 more then the gh4. Have to add in the 2000 for a external 4k recorder. Is it worth it? Well yes and no, if you need to film or shoot stills from ISO 1600 to 6400 definitely worth it. If you shoot in a controlled set or in day light then probably not
If you are a “Professional” Photographer it may be preferable to the GH4. But . . . why would a “Pro” choose Sony cameras and lenses when Canon and Nikon offer every product a Pro could ask for and the highest possible Image Quality while Sony users mostly complain about a dearth of lenses?
but i don’t remember canikon have full frame mirrorless cameras…. people that will likely to but a7s is A.travel a lot B.elderly C.need flexible mount or D.need a second backup camera for serious job but still need to be light.
Yeap, You forgot to mention som major differences:
GH4 has better battery, time lapse, integrated flash, 200Mbit HD codec, touch screen, advanced video functions, fast touch screen AF, 96p
yeah because a7s is not sony answer for gh4?
Could this “comparison” be more biased? The A7s is not even out yet and this guy is already making assumptions…”the A7s AF sucks”?, “full frame is an advantage for some people”? The GH4 is hybrid camera that pays equal attention to video and stills, while the A7s is a still camera that happens to shoot good video. If your main thing is PROFESSIONAL stills I would NEVER take the GH4 over ANY A7 model. For stills, night time comes and you might as well shoot with a cellphone if you have the GH4. I’ve shot with micro 4/3 for many years and it’s just physics, it will never match APS-C (not to mention FF) when it comes to high iso (at the moment DR is also an issue, but this could be fixed with a multi layered sensor)
The DR for m43 is actually quite competitive with today’s APS-C sensors and is better than FF from a few years ago. People were happily shooting professionally with those cameras back then, why is it all of a sudden a necessity to have Nikon D4s quality?
“Boys and toys”
Good observation. This is exactly why I have moved from FF to m43 for most uses. Won’t sell my (fairly new) FF equipment but I hardly need it from a performance point of view. What the GX7 delivers in the AF domain (for instance) is simply outstanding (‘Chasseur d’images’ gave it a rare 10 / 10 rating).
Please please… If you cannot see the diff, you are either dumb or you lie. I leave you the choice.
Ha ha… solid arguments NotDXO.. lol
Who told you? DXO? An old 5D1 still runs rings on any M43 thing, I invite you to try.
Challenge accepted. Unfortunately, reviews for the 5D are pretty dang old and, at least on dpreview, they didn’t have an ISO RAW test (WTF) so I compared 3200 ISO JPEGs. They look pretty damn similar to me, though I personally wouldn’t use either as I find JPEGs always remove detail even with no NR chosen. And for fun, a DR chart at lower ISOs showing the EM-10 to have even better dynamic range than the 5D Mark II.
http://i.imgur.com/FJGsVSV.png
And here is a noise graph vs. the 5D Mark II against the EM-10 for RAW (because, who cares about JPEG):
http://i.imgur.com/MMhrXos.png
The Chroma and grey charts, there is literally no difference between the 5D Mark II and the EM-10. Of particular note is how significantly better Nikon does in this area.
Regardless, it is just not true objectively that a 5D1 is in any way better than a good m43 camera in terms of IQ. The 5D Mark II looks to be better simply because it has more megapixels, not because those extra pixels are giving you either more dynamic range, or better noise control
This is rubbish. You have to try yourself, not quote a website. If you don’t see any differences, give up photography – although I suspect you are into gadgets, not into photography.
Well, the charts are helpful because they are QUANTITATIVE not qualitative and are thus, not open to as much subjectivity as say, someone looking at two different images (even though I DID post crops of the JPEGs for you but whatever). How is this: I regularly shoot a Nikon D7000 at work. We can ALL agree that that camera is superior to the original Canon 5D. I also own an Olympus EM-10. I have taken test shots at work with both cameras up to ISO 1600. They are virtually identical in image quality. No charts, no objectivity… just my two cameras and my eyes looking at 100% crops I shot. And, can’t you be into both gadgets and photography?
There is nothing wrong with gadgets but they must do their job and have a reasonable price.
AF and responsiveness aside, which can make or break a shot, I doubt a D7000 takes better pics than a 5D1. If you see no difference, try shooting something else than brick walls and charts; if you still see no difference, M43 is the system for you. No way I would go back down there, myself.
Complete Hogwash. If you can’t get the job done with 13 stops of dynamic range and ISO 3200-6400 you’re not going to get it done with ISO 400,000 and 15 stops either. Personally, I’d rather have some 16 MP images in focus at 8 fps than 12 MP images out of focus at 2.5 fps (and so would my eventing clients). The A7s is only good at one thing, fixed focus in low light. How many clients do you have that demand this feature set above all else… less than 5%?
@ Rawfa: I don’t agree.These days I do appreciate it if I can rely on 16MP or 24MP in the stills domain. It’s nice that 12MP is a bit benefitial for 25k ISO but if this value really is so important then I wonder what photographers have been doing so far: sitting around, not shooting anything, discanting the high ISO gospel?? In addition to that I wonder how big the percentage of very high ISO uses really is. Again, what have folks being doing two or three years ago when fairly ISO was less than impressive even using FF bodies?
Video, of course, massively benefits from good high ISO handling (it can be a real challenge to capture 50 / 60 full pictures per second under low-light conditions) but you claim the Sony is ‘a still camera’.
If have said it another post here: I find the other two Sonys considerably more useful.
But it already matches APS-C.
I do think it’s a bit biased though but I also think that the A7s AF will suck indeed, besides the sensor, it doesn’t seem to have anything new compared to the A7 and A7r, and both suck at AF, so it’s kind of a logical conclusion, not just biased opinion. And “full frame is an advantage for some people” is not an assumption, the only mistake is that there are much more people that think that a FF look is important to look PRO, than not.
Still camera that has too few pixels by today’s standards. The Nikon Df is a far better camera. You have to admit that with its cRAW (stills) and 8bit output (video) it is a big compromise at best. Add the optimistic price tag and you have a very unattractive camera. I shoot with Sony mostly nowadays and this is a huge disappointment. I might upgrade from my GH-2 to GH-4 if I want to focus on videos.
The still image quality (for me) is just great, especially with that swivel LCD screen! 🙂
The A7r is not meant for people wanting high MP count. That is where the A7r comes into play. AND it does video! Lastly, it is only less than 1/3 stop than the Df at more than 2x the MP count. We will know soon how many stops advantage the A7s has over the Df.
???
The A7r is for high pix shooting.
You should do the same comparison between the A7r and the A7s and you will find that the claimed 400,000 ISO is a gimmick (prediction based on the blotchy high ISO image samples).
The A7r also does video like the A7 and every other NEX.
You said: “Still camera that has too few pixels by today’s standards.”
Answer: A7R – 36MP.
You said: “The Nikon Df is a far better camera.”
Answer: A7R – less than 1/3 stop than the Df at more than 2x the MP count AND records video.
A7 for professional use??? HA HA HA HA
Why would one so learned as yourself, shoot “with micro 4/3 for many years” when as a physicist you know perfectly well it could “never match APS-C (not to mention FF)”??
Not credible. Either you are dissembling or not very professional.
The A7S is going to be an amazing camera. But, and this is a big BUT, it’s a bridge camera. Sony will most probably have an internally recording 4K camera soon after this is released. the lack of internal 4k on this makes it a no go for me, as I’d be wasting money on a 4k recorder. Life would suck buying this, then two months later sony announces a real 4k camera.
Unfortunately Sony will probably charge $3500+ for a camera with internal 4K. The GH4 will probably remain the best value for a year or two, then the GH5 will raise the bar again, perhaps with 4K 60P and/or 10bit internal.
And full sensor read out, not crop of the center. Yes, then it will be a new winner!
I highly doubt Panasonic will make 10-bit internal or even 4:2:2, even more if it you want 4K@60fps. And the crop thing may be solved next time but Panasonic won’t be able to make a sensor exclusively for the GH line like they did with the GH1 and GH2. Ideally it would be a multi-aspect sensor that has 2:1 pixel 4K with that 1.86x crop for video. THAT would be great. I don’t think we will see a GH5 until 2016 so until then, the organic sensor tech may be implemented, that would also be interesting.
I bet you also doubted 4K internal recording would be implemented on the GH4 before the rumors started flying around the interweb. I really don’t think 10bit and 60P implementation is a stretch, it fits with the strategy of giving more pros what they want and are asking for. I do think a multi-aspect sensor is the best way to achieve a smaller 4K crop, but maintaining a 1:1 pixel readout is still preferable to binning higher MP sensors if only for the fact that it reduces moire and scaling artifacts while maintaining light sensitivity.
No, I didn’t doubt it would have internal 4K. It IS a stretch! There is a reason these cameras still don’t have 10-bit data, because it’s more data, it takes much more memory space and it needs faster cards, plus with 60fps, this means even more data. And not just because of that but, for me 8-bit 4:2:2 may come BEFORE 10-bit. And I think that 10-bit has to come with 4:2:2, it would be a waste to have more than and use it with 4:2:0.
I would like it to have all those stuff, but I don’t think it will, maybe until 2016, with faster cards and new encoding from Panasonic it may be possible, but who knows. My question is not a matter of logical next step but more like if the tech is possible and available for the masses.
Moreover there are other interests by Panasonic, they do have video cameras, there is a limit of implementation you would make in video for stills cameras rather than video cameras. The higher specs, codecs, data, etc. will go to the video cameras, so people that really need it, buy video cameras, not stills cameras with video. All these question come into account with these implementations and I don’t think you are taking these in consideration.
Do you understand what Moore’s Law is? The processing power will be there in 24 months, potentially at even a lower cost. Your gut feelings are simply not rooted in fact. I think it’s likely 4:2:2 will be implemented internally, never said otherwise. It’s synonymous with 10 bit, not aware of a camera in existence that is 10 bit 4:2:0.
I will discount the rest of what you said because it is not in line with Panasonic’s new strategy, which is to push everything forward to obtain a winning position in the market. You’re actually arguing that they will sit back and rest and say: “24 months ago we made history with the GH4, now let’s just take a break and let the competition catch up.” I disagree with that notion, fair enough?
Not sure Moore’s Law can be applied to the reality of camera processing technology manufacturing. Sure, it works for Intel, since all they sell are processors, and thus, burn through a ton of R&D cash for new fab facilities. These camera guys aren’t using 22nm tech in their processors let alone the sub-20nm processors that are on their way into our computers.
Processing power? That’s the least of the problem, there is no difference in processing power between 10-bit or 8-bit, actually if the sensor’s output is already 10-bit, it actually requires less processing power. It’s about data transfer and that doesn’t follow Moore’s Law, although, as I said, by 2016 they may achieve that.
First, the GH line up is a consumer line up and there is a limit of what Panasonic will pack along with it. Panasonic offered IPB compression @100mbps fo 4K. Which means that even with 200mbps, an All-I compression wasn’t possible or worth it. So, they need more datarate for a All-I compression and if it was 60fps, they would need even more than 200mbps to have a satisfatory result. And all this data rate is only about 8-bit 4:2:0. Let’s say you need then 10-bit, which already increases the data and then 4:2:2, that increases the data even more.
If you take Panasonic’s PRO codec, I think you would need at least 400mbps for 4k@60fps 10-bit 4:2:2 for the UltraAVC or something similar for the Sony XAVC 4K. And let’s remember that the GH will never have their PRO codec. I’m not sure but I think that these 4K PRO codec are pretty new and recent as well.
I think that the fastest SD card can sustain about 30MB/s, which is 240mbps, they already needed to launch a new type of card just for these new cameras, including the GH4. Because until the other day, you would not need more than 100mbps (12.5MB/s). And for what you want you basically need even faster, cards that can sustain 60MB/s. Plus, if you need higher datarate it also means that it will run out of memory faster – which is one of the main problem for those shooting BlackMagic ProRes and even more RAW.
Panasonic won’t sit and watch the competition catch up because the competition also has these worries when making a camera. There are always more evolutions rather than revolutions. The competition has yet to offer anything like the GH4 and even more something better in this hybrid market. Why would Panasonic risk hurting their pro video line up by rampering the GH line up? It makes no sense. The 4K for the PRO products has been barely announced yet, why would they offer some top of the line specs for the next GH? First I need to see their PRO cameras having all these PRO stuff.
For all these reasons I don’t think it’s likely to happen. Can it happen? Sure, who knows, but will it? I’m not so sure. 2 years is too little for all these changes. As there are 4K external recorders solution, those that needs it will use it, and manufacturers won’t worry so much about 10-bit 4:2:2 4K so soon. It’s much better to use R&D money on other stuff rather than focusing on this matter when you can simply buy an external recorder and anybody that is not willing to buy one is not one that really needs all the extra data the 10-bit file provides. I see no reason why they would change that.
They can offer a great 8-bit 4:2:0 or even 4:2:2 and let the 10-bit for those that really need it, to buy a 4K external recorder. As I said, you are not taking all of these into account, only your wishful thought of wanting it.
A possible A99 successor could have internal 4K but I doubt Sony would put a 12MP sensor on it, so I think it will still take some time. The way it is, the A7 form factor doesn’t make it possible to have internal 4K – Sony made too many compromises with that form factor IMO – and only a “DSLR-styled-SLT-whatever” would have a 4K internal, but it would have to wait until one would get this same 12MP sensor.
But the things you are not accounting is that not having internal 4K is not a deal breaker for most people and if this camera can do a great FHD, if Sony doesn’t fail on the video quality – something that not so many seems to care that much, hence the 5DMKIII softness still being considered THE camera for video by many – then this camera still has its place for video people.
The 4K from Panasonic shows some benefits that most people didn’t see it coming like how much better the 4K files hold in post for grading despite being 8-bit 4:2:0 or even how it gets better when output in 1080p. So even for those that work in the 1080p, the GH4 is a great camera but unfortunately not most people gets or even care for this kind of detail.
For me, or the person gets them both or the person chooses based on their needs, although both are video-oriented, they are not in the same category but the Speedbooster does make the GH4 very compelling.
I think that this A7s may be the new low light king and it can dethrone both D4s for stills and 5DMKIII for video at the same time.
So far I’ve gotten amazing results with the GH4! Thanks Panasonic!
Panasonic does it better !
No internal 4K recording is such a stupid thing when you choose not to offer it when you know how to deliver it.
It is not 900$, it is a lot more, one is a complete tool, the other it is not.
Totally agree with your comment!
…The A7s is the most powerfull low light moster and you compare it with a GH4?!… .
Yes, because GH4 is very good!
…Fanboy action… .
There might be two ISO stops difference betwen then, so who cares. With SB there only one stop difference. Those are facts, not fiction. Gh4 is a solid camera, with tangible 4K, not like A7s with 4K only on external HDMI rec which will arrive at the end of the year, maybe early 2015 LOL.
…Two stops? A normal 6D is more than 1.5 stops better in ISO performance.
Sorry, but I think you don’t see the potential of the Sony. This camera will open complete new possibilities. It’s not for those how say, im fine with ISO 6400. It’s for people how say, I want 25.600 and more.
It’s also not everything about Video in the world… .
Are you going out with lamps and dollies and assistants? 99% of us here won’t, so where is the point anyway? This is stupider than recommending a D4S to someone who cannot use flashes.
It is, but VERY often ‘low light’ means ‘crap light’. So high clean ISO in that case will let you make good-for-facebook photoes, but not the movie you bought cool cameras for.
no beautiful light – no ‘big picture’! (And we all know there are always exclusion and ‘film or die’ scenarios )
Serious question: which market is Sony aiming at? The A7 and the A7r are very interesting products but new model fails to impress me.
?
a7: entry level FF camera for those on a budget
a7r: FF camera for photography enthusiast
a7s: FF camera for video enthusiast
?
but no lenses !
BYOL
I have a set of FD lenses that I plan on using with a mirrorless FF camera someday.
They are targeted at different markets in the end…not everyone needs huge amounts of storage and processing power for 4K
If one already has 43 lenses then the GH4 is better
If one has FF lenses (for instance he is looking to upgrade from a 5D Mark III) then the A7s should work very well (and it is should still be a great stils camera too).
If one has neither, he can go either way depending on the way they are are going to be used (or the need for 4K).
Both are very good cameras and it is really a question of what kind of output one prefers..
Yes really huge amount of resources are needed for 4K, nothing to say LOL, this is so lame. You can edit GH4 4K content on Inter i5 and one hour of 4K content is about 20 GB of data. LOL. Your text sound like most of the people nowadays still use pentium 3 computers with 20 GB of HDD LOL.
20GB for 1 hour? I think you are wrong or you are recording at very low bit rate. This is what I found on the internet and that sounds more realistic :
Shooting 4K @100mb/s 30p on a 64GB card will give you about 29 minutes of shooting time.
And editing 1080p with i5 on a laptop is just possible, 4k will be impossible.
4k uses a lot of storage, and prices of harddisk have not gone down the last years as they used to do. Just as the processors have hardly gone faster in the last 2 years as they used to do before.
LOL
FYI, I have been shooting 4096*2160 with GH4 for some days, 1 min video uses 600-610 MB hard drive space. When I started to shoot 4K video with an empty 64GB panasonic card, the camera showed 1 hour 24 mins left.
GOOD!! If 4K resource consumption requires video artists to be more concise in their storytelling, it will be a positive benefit for everyone.
Reduced bandwidth, less wasted viewer time, more compelling stories, it’s all good.
“Brevity is the soul of wit.”
You sure do lol a ton.
So a good price fore the Sony and anway to high price for the very small sensor Micro43. Please do not compare this sony beast with a girly M43.
Troll alert!
Idiot alert!
LOL girly so true.
Panasonic is a clear winner! Sony lost big time by bringing in a 8bit cam with an extra recorder needed for 4K and at an atrocious price (GH-4 lists for 1499 Euros and the difference in the EU will be even more).
The fat pixel advantage (A7s) for better DR, etc remains to be seen. It may have its place but it is not going to be popular and I expect it will not sell well as well.
OTOH, the A7s can make the GH-4 a very popular camera!
Panasonic have to thank Sony! 🙂
why do people think a7s is sony answer for panasonic GH4? it more likely to challenge canon 5d.
How would it even dream about that? A fledgling system that relies on Canon lenses (with super slow AF)? Have you checked the prices of the 3 FE lenses in the EU vs Japan? Daylight robbery!
5D mark 5 maybe LOL which will also support 4K recording, only via external recorder like Sony does LOL.
I think they’re both winners. Multiple formats gives photogs multiple options. Products of multiple prices allows consumers to buy the equipment that best fits their need and budget.
And here goes another typical truism, which is, as ever, false. In fact, we have very little choice because so much of it is junk. Lots of toys for gadget collectors, few tools for photography.
And between the GH4 and the A7s… the A7s is the better tool for photography.
Have you tried it? In case you plan to try landscapes with the A7s and compare it with GH4.
For cat snaps and such, the A7s is likely better.
They are both toys, and they come at silly prices, too. Consumers should stick together against those “innovations”. I am only talking stills here.
This is a commercial site, or it has become it, so it is where consumers get screwed with bad advice. For example, suggestions on buying a GH4.
How are these toys not tools? No one is forcing anyone to buy these if you are just looking for stills – there are so many alternatives. This site and these “toys” are aimed at enthusiasts and not consumers.
Then don’t buy either and start looking at other brands.
There is a lot of excitement and camaraderie for folks like you over at CanonWatch. Why not go there and sling your snot?
Whiny little brat.
I’d rather “sling my snot” at your face. Yuck!
Very true, they are both just toys for gadget freaks. So very little common sense, so very little education online. The results on flickr etc speak for themselves.
Then why do spend time reading about m43?
Panasonic is the winner- yes. But, that doesn’t make the Sony any less desirable. It’s just a pure product of cost- I think they overshot there target market on this one.
Big FAIL from sony. It’s just a 12 megapixel camera with some processing to get 4k video with horrible rolling shutter!! Meta bones speedbooster plus GH4 a much better option!!!
To me it looks like Sony really wanted to bring Super high ISO camera to people.
1080p will benefit from this, but not for PROS as it doesn’t match their desired specs in output probably.
4k was a necessary evil. Its today’s fad, and A7 is not really technologically ready for it.
Sure the DR will be better a bit that A7r, but noise difference in prints or scale downs remains to be seen.
Not sure 4K is just “today’s fad”. It could be the fad for the next 5 years, till other camera maker’s catch up with the GH4 and until 4K TV’s and computer monitors become commonplace or passe’.
Sony…I just hate how they have to have everything proprietary.
That’s a carry over from Minolta. But at least some of the old Minolta stuff can be used on Sony cameras.
> That’s a carry over from Minolta
Yes, but Sony’s also always been like that. Back when MITI was an all-powerful industrial overseer in Japan, they tried to impose various standards, and Sony was always a refusenik. Actually, Japanese companies have historically preferred to have proprietary rather than standardized parts, with esoteric collections of exclusive suppliers; this is a lot less so now.
If i get both camera i’m sure the GH4 will work more than the Sony. For me the Sony has many limitations, 12MPxs, No in camera 4K recording, 2.5 fps, not so great autofocus, i’m just looking a great hybrid camera and Panasonic is more for much less.
I don’t get it. One has a 35mm sensor, the other has a m4/3 one. Of course they’ll be a price difference. Having 4k on their list of features doesn’t put these two cameras in the same category.
You forgot to mention tough screen and focus tracking. For me this is another advantage the GH4 offers over the a7s. For run and gun work this is a great feature
As long as you can not use cheap recorder (4k) with Sony 7s , Sony lost battle . 2500eur + 2000 recorder . And where is compact size of this system ? Too much things .
Correct. The Sony is a nice sensor in search of a complete system. The Panasonic is a complete tool.
In general, the complete tool will win everytime in the real world. I’d much rather have a car with a good engine, good handling and suspension, nice interior, etc…rather than a car with a more powerful engine, but poor handling, poor interior, etc.
It looks like apples and oranges to me, but it is a good subject, bound to ignite the nerd spirits over here.
Here Nerd . . . come to supper.
Nikon-FAIL
Intelligent, inspiring words that really defend M43’s “honour”. Muahahaha.
Nikon=FAIL
The Panasonic is a nice toy with lots of gadgets. But it remains a childs toy with such small sensor. Its a trying to be a Ferarri but it only has the engine of a Lada. Sony is the real deal with a fantastic sensor and fantastic output. Yes is a little bit more expensive. But that the diffrence between a toy (gh4) and a real tool like the Sony.
actually what did the Formula One do, they stepped back from V12 V10 V8…
also your camparison should be :
Trying to be a Ferrari with the engine of a Porsche and with the pricetag of an Audi.
and your Sony comparison could be:
Trying to be a Ferrari with the engine of a Porsche and with tne pricetag of a Bugatti….
grow up yourself, YOU are a still a kid with a small brain
You are being overly generous here. Nobody with a brain repeats himself so often.
has no brain definitely
If you would please quit spending time on any v43 forum. Your input is worthless and nobody cares about what you have to stay.
Very true. And you need lights, dollies, mics, booms et al to make the most out of it. I doubt many people are going to do that. A simple HD camera with great stabilization and a great sensor would be a lot more useful for the crowds, but so is the power of marketing.
Guys.
That simple fact that a sensor with same technology and same size but fewer megapixels has much better low light behaviour shows nothing else but the current sensor technologies are still fqing weak.
Theoretlically a 12 MP sensor and a 24 MP one downsampled to 12 should show essentially the same results…
Of course not. There are micro lenses and borders between pixels.
This Sony should be nice for stills (but not as good as the other two A7 bodies), but as far as video goes, it doesn’t come close to the GH4. I get that it’s trying to be both a D4 and a GH4, but honestly doesn’t come close to either.
@Admin, you forgot to mention that for the Sony, there is no binning; and that it has a special Gamma curve.
An overpriced camera calling another camera overpriced.
An overstupid troll, trying to make a living…
I have the GH4… I really want to love it… the resolution is awesome, the convenience of a lightweight all-in-one package is great. On paper, this camera is everything I dreamed of… But using it made me realize that the things I value more than resolution are dynamic range and depth of field control. I’m used to shooting with s-log or Canon wide-dr, and I love how much latitude I can capture with the C300, FS700, etc. I know the GH4 has highlight and shadow controls for creating a sudo-flat curve… but they actually capture very little extra range – raising the shadows (even at low ISOs) seems to introduce so much noise, and the highlight rolloff is still pretty stark.
I also think the 10bit output is not as useful as it might appear on paper. Testing externally recorded 10bit from my GH4 vs internally recorded 8bit from my C300… I found I could push the 8bit C300 WAAAAAY further than the 10bit GH4 – unless you’re really crushing the blacks, the noise from the GH4 gets ugly quickly!
I’m looking forward to the A7S (even at that price)… I really hope the promise of low noise, wide dynamic range is true.
You’re kidding comparing 14000$ (C300) / 8300$ (FS700) priced cams with 1600$ GH4 !!!
are you serious ?
It’s not as crazy as it might seem. The C300 has basically the same image as the C100… and I’ve seen at least a couple of people who’ve abandoned their C100’s in favour of one (or more) GH4s…
I just want to know why I seem to be the only person on the face of the planet that isn’t getting on with the GH4…
you are lying. It isn’t even remotely possible that you’ve had the GH4 long enough to know anything about it.
why not go back to your blah-blah 5 year old toys and sell the GH4 for a tidy little profit while you have the opportunity?
Go home…..
Canon bodies and lenses render colors very nicely. Your GH4 workflow may require just a bit of post work to give them a similar feel. Highly recommend reading EOSHD.com for their very informative posts about grading GH4 footage.
@endlos His comment is misleading, he is just a troll payd to discredit Panasonic in favor of Canon!
Don’t get me wrong endlos, I was referring to Alexander Leithbeeing as beeing a troll. How did I deduce that, because The YAGH extension unit is just starting to ship now, and without it there are no ways to test the 10 bit output yet. LOL
Because you must learn how to use it, that’s way. No offense but it is stupid to effectively destroy the image intentionally by trying to make it as flat as possible by lifting the shadows and bringing down the highlights. By doing so you introduce noise and artifacts, and then you complain about the image quality. GH4 has no LOG profile, so is not meant to be made as flat or treated like so. After you accept this and learn how to use the camera, it will bring extraordinary results. And 10 bits is not useless, they are very useful for grading, not to introduce artifacts like banding and preserve color graduations.
Hold on, that’s exactly the point I’m making! Out-of-the-box the GH4 has a fairly contrasty image… That’s great for selling to low-end consumers because they look at the punchy contrast with over-saturated colours and think “Wow! Look how vibrant the image out of that camera is!”. But I don’t want to make all my grading decisions at the time of shooting.
On the face of it Panasonic give us quite a few in-camera tools to flatten the image: choose the Cine-D profile, lift the shadows, drop the highlights, reduce the contrast, turn on iDynamic, etc… But they don’t work well together because you hit the noise floor pretty quickly.
I don’t think the GH4 is a bad camera at all. I feel it has greater latitude than many cameras I’ve used (70D for example). But I’ll put my peg in the ground and say it’s definitely not the 12½ stops figure that’s been bandied around. The C100/C300 has a 12 stop latitude in c-log (according to Canon), and side-by-side I can see further into the shadows AND rescue more highlight detail from them than I can from the GH4.
There’s a heck of a lot of hype around GH4’s on paper specifications. And when I complain that it’s not working as well as the hype should imply, I’m told I’m using it wrong!
And I know the in-principle advantages of 10bit vs 8bit. I’ve been working with both 8 and 10bit cameras for years. But I also know that in the real world you’re usually more likely to run into the noise in the image faster than you’re going to run into the advantages of 10bit (especially because most NLEs render in a better-than-10-bit colour space, regardless of the capture format.)
I haven’t tested extensively, but messing around with 10bit externally recorded footage, I’m seeing noise that I consider ugly long before I’ve pushed or pulled the image far enough to create banding, etc.
Lying Troll. Your first post??? Sounds 100% like the flaming, dissembling of our local anti-m4/3 Troll. Congratulations on becoming a troll so quickly.
Change login again, . . . come back spitting and sputter some other nonsense.
I can see why it might look like I’m trolling. But what the heck would that achieve?! Me vs the sheer volume of people who are happy with the GH4… I don’t think it would have much effect.
Plus I think I might choose to post anonymously if I was intent on trolling… AHEM! ;-D
I owned the GH1 and GH2 and loved them. I skipped the GH3 and managed to get one of the first shipment of GH4s here in the UK. My work is 80% video 20% stills. I want a hybrid camera, or at least a system that I can share lenses between video and stills bodies. I’ve been in the Sony camp (like the NEX stills cameras… but the ergonomics of the FS100/FS700 nearly killed me). I’ve been in the Canon camp (love the C100/C300… but really can’t get on with their clunky stills cameras).
I’ve never found a camera combination I totally love. On paper the GH4 looked perfect. However, there is a huge amount of hype around the GH4 – largely from people who are excited but don’t actually own one!
I was so willing to believe the hype that I’ve already sold all my EF lenses with the intention of kitting myself out with a bunch of m43 lenses. That might have been just a little bit rash!
I know most people are LOVING the GH4… I just don’t quite know why I’m not. :-(… Plus I’m going to stand by what I say about the 10bit output. My first tests weren’t very presentable, but if I get some time on Monday I’ll reshoot and post up what I found.
I think it’s good that you are posting your opinion. From my own experience some Panasonic bodies take a while to get used to. When I first got my GX7 for example my initial reaction was “Did I make a mistake” It was just a very different body. But now I love it! With my GH2 I never had this reaction. Each system has it’s advantages and disadvantages. I’m sure over time you will appreciate your GH4 investment a little more. If not, I’m sure you can sell it for a very good price!
A7S has 15.3 stops of DR. When the video comparisons start coming out then we’ll see. It’s still a pricey proposition.
15.3… Wow! Although… I may be a little more hesitant before jumping ship again this time!!!
Where did you get this figure from and at what iso setting is that achieved? Plus if that is for stills it will be lower for video use.
Right off of Sony’s overview listed on Amazon. It’s right in the advertisement. And I don’t know if that is for stills. I’m sure it is though I consider that a bit deceiving given it’s main attraction is video.
I know this isn’t necessarily the best place for this (as this is a discussion about the GH4 vs A7S), however as I started this it seems only fair to update my opinion. I’ve been continuing to test GH4 today and I think I may have found what was causing a good chunk of the noise… iDynamic (it was on AUTO). It’s pure noise evil! Turning it off and raising shadow detail in post yields a far cleaner image with more subtle, visually pleasing grain.
There’s still less “usable” dynamic range that my existing (expensive) cameras… but I’m now hoping I can find a sweet spot between in-camera noise and the widest dynamic range I can capture with it.
It’s a good idea to learn the GH4 before complaining. It’s a deep camera with loads of settings to adjust the image. Shoot in Cinema D, turn contrast to -5 and boom – nice and flat.
keep away from iDynamic unless you want to emphasize grain.
It’s not just the grain that’s emphasised with iDynamic… It become huge clumpy ugly blocks!
Then there’s other factors at play here if that’s what you’re getting. My advice is to shoot a few raw frames and use the in camera raw processing to try different settings to find what works for your personal aesthetic.
Also if you’re in LA I’m teaching a workshop at Samys on how to setup your gh4 like a boss.
Sony A7s advantages:
Super clean High ISO.. True
Full Frame look.. Ok, if you say so.
Big pixels likely means Higher Dynamic range and Color fidelity..
True and also better dof control
Superior Stills Image Quality.. True
Panasonic GH4 advantages:
4K recording on SD cards.. True. A mistake from Sony.
Autofocus is much faster.. Who needs AF with video?
More available native lenses.. With A7 you can use FF-lens you want.
Powerzoom lenses.. powerzoom lenses are a joke.