A7s vs GH4 Shootout w/ 4K Atomos Shogun
One Year Shooting the Panasonic Lumix GH4 Review (Daniel Cox).
42.5mm and 30mm Panasonic lens preview at Mirrorlessons.
Pana-Leica 15mm f/1.7 versus the Lumix 14mm/2.5 and 20mm/1.7 pancakes (Tyson Robichaud).
DxO Optics Pro 10 support for the OM-D E-M5 Mark II is scheduled for May 15th
A Guide to Using Sliders with the Panasonic GH4 (Suggestionofmotion).
Recent thoughts on using the Olympus E-1 (Thephotographersblock).
Frederik: “Here is a test which shows the E-M5 II video stabilization capabilities using a long lens (120mm equivalent). The video shows that this is way superior to the GH4 with Lumix X 35-100mm f/2.8. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_USkqE4_RI”
Ben: “Thought you’d be interested in this project as it was shot over about a 3 year period on the GH2, GH3, and GH4. http://www.yonderbluefilms.com/blog/2015/3/25/an-homage-to-panasonics-lumix-cameras”
26 Responses
a7s is unmatched in low light but the GH4 has its good qualities too
wow, what a difference in low light 🙁
gh4 record internal record card,yeah.
a7s need external record as Atomos Shogun that price $1559,what ? you can buy GH4 system.
King of low light full frame sensor vs smaller sensor. No surprise here.But the look are more similar than i thought.
It’s not the size of the sensor that make the A7s a low light specialist. Super35 is the cinema standard and it’s not 24×36 as we all know.
Ya. all things equal, bigger sensor should have better iso performance no?
The GH4 is at a disadvantage because the speedbooster softens the image and slightly reduces contrast, and the Sigma zoom wide open isn’t too sharp and blooms a little, further reducing contrast. That’s why the GH4 images doesn’t look great in comparison.
Whereas the A7S has a Canon prime stopped down to 2.8 and is optimum sharpness and contrast.
Low light obviously nothing can touch the Sony.
That was my first thought, too. The lenses are nowhere near similar IQ-wise.
Why not use a Panny 25mm or, even better, a Voigtländer 25mm to match the field of view.
Level the playing field…
Yes either of those lenses would have given a much crisper, punchier image at f1.4, to match FOV and DOF with the full frame.
Best one is the SLR Magic 25mm Hyperprime 0.95 stopped down to 1.4, razor sharp and really nice image. WAY better image than the sigma zoom/speedbooster combo.
Wow, we need better standards for comparing image quality across different cams.
Well pointed!
Appreciate the feedback! Unfortunately we only had a limited selection of lenses and the Sigma and the Canon were about as close as we could get to match. Ideally you’d use the exact same lens on both cameras for a truer comparison.
This wasn’t meant to be a scientific test by any means but more in line with how people actually use cameras, trying to match certain looks from one format to the next. The goal was to get the images as close as possible in terms of depth of field, exposure, sharpness, etc but because each system has its strengths and weaknesses we had to make tradeoffs in both systems.
A lot of people would shoot the A7s at f2 or f1.4 to really emphasize that full frame look. Whereas you have to throw a lot more at the GH4 to accentuate that shallow depth of field such as a speedbooster and shooting wide open.
I really like the added flexibility of full frame or S35 over the smaller micro4/3rds size but the GH4 offers so many incredible features that even with the low light and full frame capabilities of the A7s, I still prefer the GH4.
> Frederik: “Here is a test which shows the E-M5 II video stabilization capabilities using a long lens (120mm equivalent). The video shows that this is way superior to the GH4 with Lumix X 35-100mm f/2.8.
IMO Pana has no choice but starting adding the IBIS to their cameras. Especially the GH.
If it translate into a trade off with video horse power, I am not sure right away about the reception among videographers. Especially the GH.
Well, they simply have to find new ways how to combine sensor cooling and IBIS.
For the past years, beside obvious weakness in the sensor design, Pana was really pushing boundaries.
Were I into betting who would do IBIS for video, my money would have been on Pana. But this is a rather calculated shot: Sony and Canon have to deal with a larger sensor. For Pana, the problem is only half so big 😉
Pros would jump on a camera with GH4’s video spec which can shoot handheld, without steadicam rigs. After all, they got over their rejection of high ISO very fast after the A7s release.
It’s hard for me to second guess on what does “pros” really want, specially given the reception that the GH4 already has.
When you start puting the YAGH module in, the rig isn’t out of the equation anyways.
So, add ibis and lose Video quality?
Ha.
Obviously, videographers have decided that they’d prefer the best video quality over stability.
Ibis is nice, but at a loss in video quality. Only a rookie or someone who doesn’t need the best in video quality would chose Olympus. But a pro would chose the GH4 easily And HAS, even over the competition.
You’re not alone, many want a video camera with efficient IBIS badly. That’s why there are unhappy M4/3 users in E-M5II which doesn’t offer very good video code.
If Pana or Oly can manage to put them together without some sort of sacrifice, M4/3 gets another advantage. Whoever thinks M4/3 is supposed to decide between video or IBIS… is a moron. 🙂
there is more to videography and cameras then doing low-light tests. We all know the Sony is made for low light and the GH4 is not, I think reviewers have to move on from low-light shoot-outs and compare these two in other conditions.
From my experience, the GH4 is an absolute joy to use, the A7s not so much.
We also filmed our impressions with the A7s which I’m in the process of editing. I didn’t want to draw any comparisons in this video so people could make their own judgements based on the footage presented but I do actually prefer the GH4 over the A7s for a multitude of reasons.
I am not sure I understand the low light test. GH4 at 6400 ISO vs Sony 6400 ISO. One of them is not doing the correct exposure. if all settings are same (ISO, Apeture, Shutter Speed) we should see same exposure but more noise on gh4 vs Sony. Why is there exposure difference? Can anyone explain ?
I think the Sony might have been using a faster lens there? underexposing is terrible for noise.
there are rumors that the real iso value of each manufactures can be vary. For example there are test that fuji in iso 1600 have the half shutter speed of the sony a7 using the same iso value and apperture in the same controlled condition which hypothetically the fuji is actually using 3200 instead 1600.
Wide open zoom + speed booster compared to a stopped down prime? If the intent was to prove apples are different that oranges then job done.
(Though always impressed by A7 low light capability!)
I am really glad to see another test that highlights the big difference between Olympus IBIS and Panasonic OIS in video shooting. No argument. Frederik’s video is more credible than irresponsible liars who pretend OIS being as good as IBIS.
Wake me up when videographers and pros Chose Olympus and it’s ibis over Panasonic and it’s WAY BETTER video quality.
I swear, the way you fan boys go about praying ibis, is like you’re elderly with arthritis or something.
MAN! -I starting to feel sorry about all the pros who shot cameras without ibis. Oh woe is me.
Next time I order a burger, I’m gonna ask for a side of ibis with that.