Video review of the Panasonic GH4 from Philip Bloom Reviews & Tutorials on Vimeo.
Philip Bloom posted his GH4 review (video is on top) and writes:
I am excited by this camera. It’s small, is packed with astonishing features, gives me a terrific image, and is bloody cheap. I need to do a lot more testing before giving my “Should I buy it” sort of opinion, not that I am ever black and white like that, but so far the biggest issues are the low light performance and the usual rolling shutter issues. Those issues aside, from my experience with it the past 5 days, I can see this camera potentially becoming THE next big thing for low budget filmmakers…maybe! It is also truly 4K for the masses, as the file sizes are not monstrous and can be edited a lot easier than any other 4K I have used. The HD is good, it just looks kinda average when compared next to the 4K of the camera. It’s not surprising, as once you shoot 4K everything else looks not as good!
GH4 North American store links:
GH4 camera at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, Ritz Camera and Panasonic. Price: $1,698. In Canada at Vistek.
GH4 camera with interface unit at Adorama and BHphoto. Price: $3,298
Interface unit only at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto and Panasonic. Price: $1,998
GH4 Europen store links:
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.
Asian store links:
Digitalrev and Digidirect Australia.
4K cards
Kingston 16-32-64 GB SDHC UHS-I Speed Class 3 at Amazon (Click here), Adorama (Click here) and BHphoto (Click here).
Sandisk 16-32-64 GB Extreme PRO SDXC UHS-II Memory Card at Amazon (Click here), Adorama (Click here) and BHphoto (Click here).
Transcend 64-128 GB High Speed 10 UHS-3 at Amazon (Click here) and BHphoto (Click here).
Panasonic 16-32-64 GB SDHC-UHS-I U3 Card (90MB/s) at Adorama (Click here) and BHphoto (Click here).
78 Responses
Good review, but the audio of the video is terrible. What’s wrong Philip? You’re mumbling:) I need to use an amplifier to raise your voice a bit.
No problems here… sounded just fine through desktop speakers.
The level of hype for this GH4 video camera is astonishing.
One reviewer put it best. It’s a video camera for people who like to sometimes take stills.
Is it a must-have camera for someone that never ever does video? Probably not. But maybe you’re forgetting it takes excellent pictures too.
Hmm, as several reviewers have pointed out the GH4 is very interesting for stills shooters — especially because of DHD with (unfortunately only) Panasonic Lenses. I hope they add support for the Olympus 12mm, Olympus 45mm and Olympus 75mm. Those are really great lenses.
THe GH2 and 3 are pretty darn good too. You can find them now for a quarter of the price and if you can’t pull nice video from those you’re in the wrong racket.
Yes, and how fortunate that Panasonic is years ahead of Olympus, Canon, and Nikon, in being able to make a sensor that is optimized for not just stills but video. In years past, like 2014 and 2015-2016, camera manufacturers were only able to make a sensor optimized for one or the other. Yes, a camera could take decent video, but not top of the line optimized.
Fortunately, the world in 2014 has Panasonic’s 2020 technology, which beats every other manufacturer in BOTH stills and video.
It’s funny that people say that. It’s gotten so much less press than the EM1 did when it was released. I guess it just seems like a lot of hype since everyone who tests it absolutely raves about.
The em1, however, deserved the hype. It was optimized for one thing, stills, and did them extremely well.
Must be that Panasonic sensor. 😉
almost gettin brainwashed with all the GH4 exposure. Without doubt a good camera with iall its video capabilities in 4K which i would choose if I were a capable moviemaker.
if the hd is only average whats the point…where would you show the 4k
4K results in better 1080p. Usually better technically, always better when it comes to versatility (i.e. fixed camera pan and scan).
I have problems playing the 4k video on my 2011 macbook pro with 16gb ram. I discovered the GPlayer app on the Aple app store and it actually allows you to transfer 4k MOV files and play them on the ipad mini retina They look really good. While not 4k(2048×1536) resolution – the video on the ipad plays back without stuttering and audio syncing issues. Can’t wait to upgrade to 4k monitor and laptop that can handle it.
Try VLC player, I have no problems with this player on 4K files.
Thanks, Eno. I tried it but still stuttering. I’m on OSX 10.9.4, 2.3ghz core i5, 16gb ram, samsung ssd. If I convert to Pro Res it plays back no problem. Something with the h264 decoding is slowing my system down. The Gplayer app in hardware acceleration mode works like a charm.
Try shooting in .mp4 instead of .mov, the quality is absolutely identical in 4K, they both have 100 Mb/sec bit rate. You might have better look with it. If not, maybe you need a better machine… I don’t know.
WOW! Thanks, ENO! Worked like a charm. Quicktime is playing the 4k mp4 files no problem. I wonder why my mac can’t play MOV files if MP4 and MOV are just wrappers. I take it the image quality is the same as they have the same bitrates. Are there any disadvantages shooting MP4 over MOV? Or the other way round. Thanks.
I sincerely don’t know. I must examine which profile each of them uses. If I remember correctly .mov uses h.264 high 5.0 or 5.1 profile, but .mp4 I shot only once. I personally could not find any difference between them, but it was only a quick test and I may be wrong.
Thanks, Eno. Do you know which format(MP4 or MOV) is easier to work with Final Cut Pro X? I was shooting MOV and even after FCP X does the coding, footage would stutter during playback. I had much better luck converting GH4 4k footage to Pro Res using Permute App and then editing those. Flawless playback during the edit process.
We edit the files in Premier pro, and the GH4 4K runs smoothly there until we grade. I saw no difference between mow or mp4 in editing time or resources.
Short answer: .MOV is a smaller file, MP4 is easier to work with. Really, only use .MOV if you need a really really long continuous shot or there is some other storage issue, but the GH4 has small files for 4k anyways, so shoot MP4s almost always and buy a bigger external drive.
I have a 13 inch 2011 Macbook Pro (i7) with 16gm also. I have no problems playing 4k videos. Like Eno said, use VLC.
I am shooting 4K with my GH4 and it plays perfectly with the Apple QuickTime player on a new MBP 15″ with Retina Display and 16 GB RAM.
Haven’t tried editing 4K video in FCP X. 4K video is power hungry for sure.
I guess the idea is you shoot 4k and then finish in HD and it looks better. Kind of the same principle as shooting stills at 24MB editing them and then posting a 200kb photo on the web, or shooting HD in your camera and posting on Vimeo at 480p. You start big and make smaller it should look better. It’s not about shooting at 4K and showing at 4K. ok?
The full HD is not average, it is one of the best there is on the market, only Canon C300 with 4:2:2 color sampling has a little better image quality. He made that statement in relation to 4K downsized to full HD.
I almost was ready to upgrade to this but this Sony A7s which is full frame and shoos in super-low light has me smitten…
The difference in low light between GH4 and A7s is a little more than one ISO stop in favor to A7s in jpg. If you use a Speed Booster on GH4, you almost get in video mode a super 35mm film look (in regular stills you get less crop than an APSC with the SB). With the speed booster you get a full stop more light, so the difference between the two cameras is minimal.
BUT: Gh4 records internaly 4K and has a very good codec, A7s dos not, GH4 has a decent roling shutter in 4K mode: http://www.eoshd.com/content/13082/real-world-sony-a7s-rolling-shutter-test-vs-blackmagic-pocket-cinema-camera , A7s is has by far the worst rolling shutter ever! A7s needs an external recorder to record 4K video, that thing cost 2000 more.
I’m not saying A7s is good for nothing, it has it’s strengs, especialy if you shot mainly stils, but GH4 is just better for video and costs 2800$ less if you plan on shooting 4K.
Great camera, but it is certainly more than one stop vs. A7s.
From the presentation, one got the feeling that the two “disappointment” of the GH4 from Philip was low light (you had to use speed booster….after all it is a small sensor….he said) and internal mic sound. – his words
He may be disappointed but the facts are facts, just compare for yourself, don’t take my word for it. In RAW, there is 1 and 2/3 stops difference, and in Jpeg about 1 and 1/3 stops difference between them:
http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM
Considering the sensor size, GH4 is quite good at high ISO, better than many APSC out there.
Perhaps, you may be right but I only noted the two things he said that was somewhat disappointing. Not in a major way, but more as matter of fact.
The A7s, is apparently a beast in low light while GH4 is somewhat disappointing and require speed booster…..and only difference is one stop….does not sounds right.
Eno, pardon me for asking this here, but have you used the GX7? How is that compared to a Canon Rebel? I’m shopping for a compact 1080 video for a food & travel travelogue series.
A shorter answer than my previous one:
GX7 is comparable to the GH series, minus the GH4 obviously (no 4k), not only that but it’s smaller, has tilting evf and IBIS (for stills) and the wifi lets you use a tablet or phone as external LCD so you’re not loosing anything to the tilting LCD of the G/GH cameras. As for a comparison to a Rebel, well, there’s no comparison, Rebels are way behind in video, they’re good enough still cameras but Canon hasn’t updated their tech in years meanwhile Pany is at the forefront of video along with Sony. Besides, as I said previously, for the same bulk of a rebel you can carry a lot more m43 gear, or carry the same equivalent lenses and keep it a LOT lighter and smaller.
All cameras nowadays are very good for stills, GX7 is no exception.
GH4 on the other hand shines on video side.
Sorry, I did not used the GX7 but you can find a lot of tests on the internet. I’ve read it is a very nice camera and the picture quality is also very good. Just compare samples for yourself with any other camera and get you answer:
http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM
The video of Panasonic cameras is the best, so no point in comparing it with canon or any other camera manufacturer, it is miles away in terms of sharpness, lack of more, aliasing, it has fluid auto exposure, and usable auto focus.
Come on now for someone who shoots with every top camera out , you obviously haven’t looked at the images. The GH4 has the exact same high ISO still image quality as every other mFT .The GH4 is at least 2 stops behind the DF { if you want the same level of noise and detail} and the A7s is a little better than that. I do agree with all your other points the GH4 is a far a more rounded tool but at high ISO the A7s is a very clear winner
Sony is SO good! If only they would get their doo-doo together and make lenses as well as bodies! They had an article at TOP recently that really nailed it. The only person with a really great Sony camera is the guy that bought a fixed lens model.
I have a RX1. Why don’t you like the A7 series?
My problem with sony is I despise their user interface.
I love the images though..I mean drool-love. Just using it is counter-intuitive.
The answer is easy to find that is to get both the a7s and gh4, or even better to get the a7r plus the gh4.
Oh now I get it. You’re the guy who chucks out the chum at the back of the shark tourism boats. “I was ready to upgrade to this” indeed.
If you really like the “butt ugly” Sony A7s you should buy it.
Sony cameras are just damn weird to hold. The A7 series grip seems to have been made for chimps. The RX1 has none to speak of. And the NEX designer should be shot for inspiring a whole range of products from other manufacturers copying an ergonomic disaster.
Of course it is a groundbreaking camera!
The only problem that it has is the lack of availability in the stores :).
I tried getting it from BH for a while. Finally got it from uniquephoto.com. Got a free transcend 64gb card which has so far worked very well. Getting a spare battery is the big problem. All backordered on Wasabi and BH.
I live in Europe, and from the 4 cameras we’ve ordered we received only 2, the other two will come only with the next shipment, at the end of the month (I hope).
It is beginning to be available in stock at some of the larger UK dealers . I got mine from WEX with no pre-order:
http://www.wexphotographic.com/buy-panasonic-lumix-dmc-gh4-digital-camera-body/p1550272?awc=2298_1404555408_180405a49342a623aeabf48120dc0abc&utm_source=aw
I just got mine from Unique Photo, too. Ordered through Amazon. I haven’t even scratched the surface of it, yet, but damn, it has a ton of amazing features for both stills and video. It’s a huge upgrade over the GH3. 4K, 200 mb HD, frame rates, zebras, and focus peaking for video. Tons of new features for stills. It’s a freaking amazing camera!
I got the GX-7 last December and was blown away at how many features they could pack into such a small body. The GH4 takes it to the next level. I am a life-long Nikon user and very disappointed in their progress and introduction of features into their pro cameras. We had to pay $560 a pop to add Wifi to our fleets of D4s. I wonder if they’ll have in-built wifi and 4k by 2020?
How is the GX7 as an events or compact run & gun camera? I’m looking for a travelogue camera for a backpacking series. Currently considering Canon EOS-M, Sony A6000 and the GX7. Tried the Blackmagic Pocket and it’s quite good, but needs quite a bit of post work to get the best out of it, really. I’m looking for camera where I can upload clips to a blog or YouTube with minor editing while on the road.
I think you have to consider not just the camera body but also the whole system you’d be getting into, in that regard the eos-m is neither competitive as a body nor as a system, simply put it’s just Canon’s scape goat for those critics demanding a mirrorless system from them, they’ll never cannibalize their DSLRs in favor of it. As for the other two, the A6000 is getting a lot of praise, but that’s just the camera body, the system itself is not there yet and Sony seems to have no idea where to take it (NEX>Alpha, more support towards A7, lackluster lens development). The GX7 is a superb camera, if you don’t need 4K I would say it’s a very capable 1080 camera, it’s certainly more than enough for blogs and youtube (some would say even overkill), it’s pretty much up there with the GH series.
The GX7 gives you access to a very versatile and adaptable system, the advantage of m43 compared to others is the diversity of bodies and lenses you have at your disposal, that means you can have any kind of configuration from a P&S-zised GM1 to a DSLR-esque GH4 and anything in between. You can also use speedboosters and get the same crop and DOF as the other mirrorless systems BUT retain access to small body-lens configurations. A fact that trolls seem to forget it’s that once you go ILC it’s not just about the bodies or lenses by themselves, it’s about the overall volume of them together, that’s why this system is so versatile, it can go big or small as required. They also seem to forget that cameras are used in real world situations instead of lab tests, meaning you either use them in your daily routine or while traveling, in which case bulk and wight is critical, why ? because you simply won’t use a dslr as a P&S daily camera and because while traveling you’re limited by weight restrictions and that gives an advantage to m43 because for the same weight:volume ratio of a APS-C/FF DSLR/mirrorless+couple of lenses you can carry double the ammount of gear OR carry the same equivalent to that combo for A LOT less wight, either way m43 is more convenient.
You should also look at Fuji, together with m43 it’s one of the most developed systems, although not as versatile it compensates in quality, photography gear is a give and take game, weight the pros and cons of each system, m43 imo is the best compromise, the sweet-spot.
From a stills perspective Fuji is great , alas the video is even worse than what Olympus gives us lol. I would like GH4 video, EM1 5-AXIS and Fuji still image quality in a GX7 sized body , pretty please !
Totally agree. I wouldn’t consider Fuji for video. Olympus is not good at video, but still better than Fuji.
I’ve been shooting stills professionally for about 17 years(14 with digital starting with D1) and this camera is definitely a game changer.
For those who say “It’s a video camera for people who like to sometimes take stills.” I would also say “It’s a video camera for people who mostly take stills and need video.”
I find myself shooting a lot more video and converting the frames to stills. The 4092 wide images look sweet and a little tweaking in Lightroom makes them look superb.
I am often asked to shoot video and stills and since getting this camera I find it provides a very elegant solution to the demands of my work.
This camera gives you an advantage. I also tested it with the speedbooster and that helps out with the low-light issues Bloom mentioned. I have to say the image quality(video and frame grab) was very respectable when I shot some video yesterday at iso 6400 in an outdoor dinner lit by a single bulb from the porch.
I totally agree with you.
We’ve used two GH4’s at our last wedding event and the clients where trild by the posibility of giving them both video and stils. I also think 8+ Mpix is enough for most aplications. Heck those 4K extracted stills look better than may old D200 pictures, I think they are comparable in resolved detail to D300 12 Mpix jpegs.
The high ISO performance is quite good until ISO 3200 in 4K, and ISO 6400 can easely be cleand with Neat Video. ISO 1600 after a careful cleaning with NV looks like base ISO LOL.
I’m extremely happy with the camera.
compare the D200 stills or the GH4 stills with what you get out of a 5D III or D800…
I’m a panny fan but I think people get a bit carried away with the “game changer claims”….the GH4 is also BUTT_UGLY. hate to be superficial but it’s nice when your camera looks nice.
You really have no clue why it’s being called a game changer, have you. Not a video guy, I take it, eh.
No everybody needs so many megapixels, and not everybody prints larger than A2, as a matter of fact I owned a D800E and 2 D600 before the GH4’s. The very high resolution is needed only for special applications. Most of the time I gave the clients the finished product at 12 MP, all the extra resolution was a waist of space and time for them. Now if I need more resolution I shot with 5D mark 2, and if I need more than that, I rent a D800E, but for the vast majority of application, 16 Mpixels form GH4 or 4K suffice.
http://mirrorlessphototips.com/making-a-60-inch-print-from-a-lumix-gh4/
I used to be a pixel peeper long ago but now I am more concerned with the better pictures I can get with my GX7 & GH4 because no one is staring at my D4 or rattled when its shutter goes off. I am sure I can get technically better images with my D4 or a MK3.
I love the silent shutter on gx7 and gh4 — that feature is a game changer for me and why I got Panasonic over Olympus. I am able to shoot in sensitive situations – similar to a situation where I was previously threatened after a single, loud d700 shutter release broke the silence and enraged some tough guys wearing bandannas over their faces and sunglasses during a candlelight memorial in a tough neighborhood. I am now able to shoot way more stuff without interrupting an event with a sonic boom.
I also have 20×30″ prints from Adorama from Nikon D700 & D3 & D2x. I am sure the GH4 will look just as amazing.
I’m liking the GH4 over the A7s from what I have seen. Some people say the GH4 looks to digital but I did a color grade test and it came out nice for me. This was the only thing that bothered me a out the GH4 but I’m happy with the test I did. https://vimeo.com/99380213
That was good. Thanks. That’s been my problem whenever I see Panasonic footage — they look like video. I don’t have a Vimeo account so can’t leave a comment there.
Thanks for watching. I have had the. GH3 and it has the same video look so I learned how to make it look a little more organic, works with the GH4 as well as, you seen in the video.
This camera really is a game changer. Stills quality as good as anything in m43, best CAF in m43, and video which can’t be touched without spending 10x as much. I’ve seen examples of extracted stills, and they look FANTASTIC at 20×15. It’s not just a game changer for filmmaker so or videographers, it gives still photographers options they never had before. And it’s really inexpensive. Under $5000 for the body and the 3 pro zooms.
all things being relative “$5000 for the body and the 3 pro zooms” ain’t cheap.
also why do videographers like to call themselves “filmmakers”? As if they ever used film.
Price out the nearest alternative and you’ll see why it’s called a game changer. BTW, about the filmmaker thing: does the OP need to be pink in order to call her/himself “Pink”? You just have too much time on your hands, eh.
Haters Gon Hate…
I’m sure everyone here started with film. So the medium has changed, big whoop.
The 1080 down-res samples from 4k got me excited. The fact that you can now be a “lazy” photographer by just shooting video and extracting a frame out of it later, that part I’m not very keen on.
Those extracted stills are not very pleasing when looked at critically and subject motion is a serious issue when frame grabbing. For me I bought the GH4 for superb quality 1080 rather than 4k. The AF is a real step up on my previous mFT kit.
Love his review style, his short film of southern Thailand is really beautiful. He is really great.
Bloom; didn’t look at autofocus he has forgot what that is as he usually has a junior do focus for him. 4k GH4 CAF focus is terrible a failure DFD =depth from despair. Great camera though!
The AF in 4K is slow because the sensor read out is also very slow at that high amount of data. You are asking to much from this little baby. The AF is absolutely fabulous in 1080p or in picture mode.
It really is a shame that GH4 dos not kook my meal, really shame!
ohh..ahh.ohh.urgah..ohh.ahhh..ohhh…ahhh…
The price sure is groundbreaking… You get better cams for a fraction of the price…
Of course you can get a Canon C500 for very cheep 25.000$, a Sony F55 for 28.000$ and so on. Get out of here troll!
If you want better stills you can get significantly better image quality for a fraction the price. 4K is of dubious value for nearly all shooters and this time next year it will be in dozens of cameras.
Yes and in 2020 we will have 8K cameras so why bother to buy now a super camera if you need one, just wait and wait and wait :))
O and I forgot, GH3 was mile ahead of Canon, Nikon and the rest of the pack, regarding video quality and function. Now GH4 is so far away from them, than all the trolling in the world will not make people blind ;).
Haha. Just ignore the ignorant idiots. They don’t have a clue why the GH4 is a game changer.
They tray to fool other by trolling the camera, this is a very nasty thing, I’ve seen it on other forums to.
They are so bad! Good job you watch over us with your brilliant thoughts and entertaining writing.