The first real competition for the Panasonic GH4 has been announced. And it’s hard to say if it’s a real challenger. First of all Sony didn’t unveil any pricing. From a tech point of view these are also very different cameras. For example the Sony A7s cannot record 4K internally on SD cards (the GH4 can do that). And Sony also doesn’t offer something like Panasonic’s handy YAGH interface (Sony says you have to buy a third party external 4K recorder). And the A7s uses the same slow focusing system of the A7-A7r camera which are by miles behind the GH4 speedy, reliable and video optimized af. There is also little info about the software. Overall it looks more like an A7 camera with 4K added feature rather than e specifically designed hybrid camera. The big plus of the A7s is that it doesn’t use any pixel binning and from a pure photography point of view it’s curious to get back to 12 Megapixels which on a Full Frame camera like that should deliver impressive IQ (ISO goes up to 409,600).
But like I said, it’s too early to get an idea about the A7s. it will be also interesting to see the specs of the new JVC 4K MFT camera.
North American preorders, shipping date and price:
GH4 camera at Amazon (Click here), Adorama (Click here), BHphoto (Click here), and Panasonic (Click here). Price: $1,698. In Canada at Vistek (Click here).
GH4 camera with interface unit at Amazon (Click here), Adorama (Click here) and BHphoto (Click here). Price: $3,298
Interface unit only at Amazon (Click here), Adorama (Click here), BHphoto (Click here) and Panasonic (Click here). Price: $1,998
Europen preorders, shipping date and price:
Germany: Wexcameras, Marcotec-shop.de.
UK at Wexphotographic, CameraWorld, UKdigital, CVP, TipTop.
Holland at Fotohanskeuzekamp.
Belgium at Fotokonijnenberg.
Norway at Fotovideo.
Sweden at Cyberphoto, Skandinavianphoto.
Finland at Telefoto, Topshot, Verkkoauppa.
France at Photocineshop.
Spain: Fotoboom.
57 Responses
I will get the A7s for its low light capability rather than for videos
You can downsize a higher-res picture if you like to and still have higher resolution if required for cropping. See here for example:
http://nikonrumors.com/2012/04/10/nikon-d800-vs-d3s-and-d7000-comparison-by-cary-jordan.aspx/
Work flow is faster though, if thats of interest, or the -4ev.
The sample you link to shows exactly why downsizing doesn’t always help: Noisy blacks and greys will remain noisy. Apart from that, the D3s sensor is older than the one in the D800.
It helps for a certain range of ISOs. And as you retain more detail, you can even add additional luminance and color noise reduction until you achieve the same detail. The remaining difference is only visible at 100%.
DXOmark shows the same when comparing cameras at print size (S/N ratio which is different at screen size is similar among the D4s,D610 and D800 at print size, for example).
Unless you need over 25k ISO (and most photographers I know don’t need it, but who knows) I prefer the downsizing. The work flow is the only point worth looking into lower-res. bodies for ME.
Agree!
Look at this discussion, too on image noise and MP:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/dxomark_sensor_for_benchmarking_cameras2.shtml
I’m open however to scientifically based arguments or real world examples proving the opposite.
While I think this camera is a rush to market job by Sony, it does offer several very tasty specs. Full Frame and Low Light capability never seen before in a DSLR. The external 4k recorder is a deal breaker for me though. I’d rather spend that money on lenses and use the internal 4K of the GH4. The external recorder kinda defeats the purpose of having a small and nimble dslr setup for video.
Sony shoudl have spent its time rushing some lenses out instead of thinking it needs to compete with the junior wastebasket, the GH4.
They didn’t do it to compete with the GH4 though. They just did it to jump on the 4K bandwagon as quickly as possible. About the lenses, they definitely need a few more decent lenses.
The GH4 is a more complete package. It will be easier to work with and the results obtained by non-experts should be more pleasing. However, there is little doubt the A7s can produce superior footage in the right hands.
That said, in filming the importance of content is even greater than in stills photography. Technicalities are rarely the limiting factor of quality.
“Overall it looks more like an A7 camera with 4K added feature rather than e specifically designed hybrid camera.”
Are you nuts? The camera has a “designed for Video” sensor, how many Hybrids have that? None.
“how many Hybrids have that? None.”
Um, the GH4…
It does look like a bit of rush job though. 50mbps bitrate 1080p compared to the GH4’s 200mbps. 60mbps 4K compared to GH4’s 100mbps. Poorer consumer grade codec. The need for a $2k external recorder to capture 4K. Etc, etc.
Another 12 months and a lot of these shortcomings would likely have been addressed. And what a camera it will be when they are.
You’re wrong, The GH4 is a stills’ sensor.
It crops to use the centre of the sensor when in 4K mode to a size similar to BMCC and it does pixel binning. The A7s has no pixel binning on a Full Frame sensor.
Factually Incorrect on a number of counts.
The GH4 has a brand new sensor specifically made for video centric purposes. Hence double the sensor read-out speed of previous m43 sensors.
Thus it can do an 1080p 200mbps All-I encode when the A7s is limited to a bitrate of just 50mbps.
The GH4 also does not downsample its 4K footage. Both cameras do a 1:1 pixel readout of the sensor. There is no line skipping or pixel binning happening in 4K on either. The significant difference here is that the A7s is limited to 8bit encode when the GH4 offers 10bit.
Plus you seem to be overlooking one important point: to shoot 4K on the A7s you will need a recorder that costs more than the camera itself.
Don’t get me wrong, I love where Sony is heading with this. I might even pick up an A7s along the way.
Yes, no binning in 4K, but the area used on the sensor is reduced to something similar to the BMCC.
No binning, higher dynamic range, and a better ISO performance. These are quite of a big deal but price also matters.
Typical Sony. AWESOME SENSOR, BUT…crap camera, gadget gear oriented (not photography inspired), and too much marketing BS.
Oh please. To say it’s a crap camera and just gadget gear oriented, etc. speaks of blind fanboyism. How do I know? I have been shooting strictly mu4/3 for the last 2 1/2 years (www.fotosiamo..com) and have been shooting with the a7R for the last 3-4 months. I still have my GH3 and understand how to best utilize both my cameras without being just being a major fanboy.
The a7R is definitely a major image quality improvement for my fashion/commercial/product work. I know what it’s good for and what it’s not good for. The same w/ my GH3 which I still use for video work (for now).
ahahahaha yea yea
Admit it, Joe, you are too cheap to buy a MF. 🙂
I thought all fashion shooters have one.
Well there’s the Pentax 645z now, hehehe
Sony doesn’t need to design the machine to work, it only need to design so that marketing department have something to write about….
Actually, Sony A7s is not in competition with GH4. Sony A7s can record 4K ONLY with an HDMI 4K recorder, which for the moment does not exist. Atomos sad it will have in stores at the end of the year, maybe… So practically, Sony A7s may represent some competition next year to GH4 🙂 or maybe GH5 LOL, who knows…
This seems to be a common themse with Sony and the A7 series. Lenses that don’t exist, recorders that don’t exist. I’m reminded of the Dan Akroyd and Belushi skit from SNL form the 70’s where they seek to impress those New york girls with their huge Polish vacuum cleaner. The shutter sound the a7 makes is certainly close enough.
That sound is so annoying and loud. I envision the shutter breaking a little with each click. I would be fearful of shooting a continuous series. Seriously, I’m exaggerating, but not by as much as you would think,
Don’t get me wrong… If I had the money for both and the resources I would get both cameras for different reasons. I’d get the A7 just because it’s a full-frame mirrorless. I really like the GH4 though and Micro Four Thirds will always be adequate for my professional needs. Both cameras are more than just capable. Both are professional tools.
Agree, but I wish A7s at least looked different 🙂 in current form is not very sexy 🙁 (not to be rude and say is one of the ugliest cameras I ever seen, defeated in ugliness only by Nikon J2 and some Pentax mirror-less).
Correction, Nikon V2, not J2 🙂
It was designed by a committee in an electronics company. The base was very smooth, and then, they added the extra parts, as though there were different teams designing, only concerned about the points of attachment.
Sony cameras are crap, abysmal high ISO performance, poor dynamic range..this is just another worthless piece of junk. Who needs ISO higher than 1600 anyway?
it´s a quite interesting concept actually… 99% of my photos do not really need more than 2 megapixel (standard hd monitor display)… of course maybe you want to print or crop it, so 12 is pretty safe.. 12 is also perfect for 4k video… trash out the unnecessary pixels and therefore increase quality aka light gathering ability in the remaining ones… I´d say that´s pretty cool.
and yes certain times I´d wish for more than usable 1600 iso (filming moving subjects in dark surroundings where you cannot open aperture for focus reasons… or try filming fireflies at blue hour or moonlight for example)
but I guess you were just trolling anyway
Actually you are wrong, Sony A7s is supposed to ho have the greatest dynamic range, richest colors and cleanest files of all Full frame sensor. That statement I do not doubt, at least in RAW, because Sony got from bad to worst JPG engines lately :(.
Considering that there are Sony-made sensors and there are Canon-made sensors…
I bet a lot of concert and wedding photographers are crying out for sony to make some decent lenses this morning. I’m excited to take some pictures of the inside of a camera store at f22 and 1/4000, but I’m sure not buying one haha
This beast can probably give nice results in very low light. Problem will be the focusing system. What is clean iso 12500 good for if the camera does not focus in such bad light?
It can focus down do -4EV, a 4EV improvement over the A7r.
Forget the video, I’m looking at the DR and ISO. The Sony has the potential for some great stills and with that ISO, it’s practically night vision.
Sony ones again burns the competition. But is a format with such a small sensor as M43 competition? I don’t think so. M43 can compete with point and shoot thats it!
Smartphones also come close by now. M43 is dead, it is not going to go anywhere at those prices. I don’t know about video…
Troling! M4/3 is very well and alive!
Ssshhhh… Nobody asked you.
M43 is a nice compromise between size and weight Sony has come out with a small body with FF sensor but very few lenses and no fast zooms as the will be to heavy and large – note the 70-200mm F4 for $3000. Large and heavy So many Pros have just decided to hang on to their FF DSLR with a much better lens selection and yes fast zooms
I know there is advantage of a larger sensor so therefore I own the Sony RX100 as a pocket camera vs another small pocket camera so likewise M43 is a very nice size – smaller and lighter than APS-C or FF and has a huge selection of lenses including fast zooms and primes and much cheaper than FF. So m43 has it’s place I like my m43 gear better than my FF
I wonder what is more annoying, trolling or fanboyism?! Get your facts right. The Sony FE 70-200 F/4 is just below $1500 and NOT $3000. That is equivalent to a 35-100mm F/2 m43 lens. How much is the Pana 35-100 f/2.8? 😉
I do see now it is $1500 – I did see it for $3000 few months back in an Ad I got. Thanx for correction. I got my Panasonic 35-100 F2.8 for just under $1000 which is a lot less than my FF Nikon 70-200 F2.8 or the Alpha A mount or Canons
Is not DOF one thing vs light gathering? Not every shot needs shallow DOF
I’m not a fan brand person. I own Nikon FF gear Canon APS-C gear as well as Sony NEX5n and Nex7 as well as Fuji X-100 and 100s as well as Olympus Omd-em5 and 2 Panasonic GX7’s and GX1. In small bodies. Sony Rx100. & Sony HX50V & Fuji X20 & Olympus Stylus1 & Nikon P7100 so not sure you can call me a fan boy
To me size and weight is important – for others not so the use medium format – My most expensive Mirrorless body was under $1300. I wish I could have said that for my FF bodies. But the key is all these cameras have their place as there is no perfect camera out there
But you cannot compare Panasonic 35-100 F2.8 to Nikon 70-200 F2.8. It’s like saying, you got a VW for a little less than a Porsche, wow.
Panas 35-100 f/2,8 is under 1000. I must atmit, original Panasonic lenses are not cheep, but at least they are pretty sharp and they do exist. I can not say the same thing about Sony lenses which are only “next to come” :).
Any idea how much the A7s would cost?
(I gave up on Pana altogether because of their battery policy)
I expected around 2000$ but since they wrote the a7s + new atmos recorder is a good solution for UNDER 5000$, i assume its around 3000$ (recorder will be slightly under 2000$)
Thanks! That is the first realistic indication/answer i got. 🙂
The GH4 is more complete, but IMO maybe the A7s is the way to go. It should have superlative still image quality, and full frame which still has advantages over anything smaller, especially at the lower MP count. You need an external recorder to enable 4K, but to me, realistically anyone that is going to do serious 4K, would probably write to an external recorder anyway. The A7s will record smaller video formats in-camera and to be honest, I think that’ll suffice for many users.
Since it’s likely using a modified version of the Nikon D4/Df sensor, it should have great image quality for stills. It’s using Sony’s equipment that requires patience, though. I see many comments about how slow and awkward the A7/A7R can be. Since this one is doing 4K video, can it be fast enough to be similarly slow with 4K video?
The DF/D4 are 16mp sensors this is a 12mp sensor so I doubt that it is anything to do with that sensor. I imagine it will be totally new as the last FF camera with a 12mp sensor was the D3/s
You missed the word “modified”?
One huge problem with the A7s: only 90 min of battery time when filming video. Better take a bunch of batteries…
Sony were on the Mega Pixel hype then as people got less interested in MP counts they created the Full Frame in a small body hype but with very mixed revies of the A7/r and a lack of lenses for the FE mount and with Fuji going FF they are now trying to create a new hype -the ISO hype – why not focus on more fast zooms and more primes ?
The A7-r really needs improvements especially if Fuji put all the X-t1 tech knowledge in the new Xpro2 as the are also more likely to come out with more lenses
Like before Sony will get all the hype and talk and praise while Panasonic and Olympus keep getting knocked down – although my FF has ISO far higher than 3200 I very seldom find my self shooting above 3200 and I think that goes for most. ISO is a booster or magnifier fast glass better and Sony is not excelling in that area
3000 $ is 2450$ TOO MUCH in times you get a BMC C URSA for 6000$
for a toy like r7s and all the SONY-CASTRATIONS I will give only 550,-$
550$ is my first and the second and wait in 3 months 450,-$
and if you dont want my mony… you dont get it.
How about headphone jack and mic i nput…..?
Lumix GH4 wins Videomaker Best of NAB award
http://t.co/6MF1SpOwHw