Panasonic GH4 vs Sony A7s Review – 4k vs ISO
There are plenty of new A7s tests and reviews and here is the roundup of all of them:
A Sony a7S in the field: Al Jazeera’s Miguel Toran tries it out for broadcast TV (Newsshooter).
Sony Alpha A7S Digital Camera Review at Cameras.Reviewed.
Sony a7S Astrophotography Review (LonelySpeck).
Sony Alpha A7S (ILCE-7S) Review at ePhotozine.
Sony A7s Rolling Shutter Compared to Competitors (Planet5D).
Castle. A Sony A7S Pic Pro + Film Convert Film. Saturation and Skin Tone Test Film by Ed David.
The Sony A7S, X70 and Atomos Shogun at Pinewood Studios (EosHD).
Polish A7s review at Optyczne.
Carl Miller: “I recently published a couple videos on the Sony a7S. Thought they might be interesting for your readers!
Overall thoughts on a7S: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DiIigSdWHWE
120fps fun short: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCZKLGHTIkI”
Josh: “Here is my latest Blog entry about why I bought a Sony A7s. http://joshmcleodphotography.com/2014/07/29/life-without-a-mirror-continued/”
Sony A7s store links:
Sony A7s preorder in USA/CA at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, Sony USA, Sony Canada.
Sony A7s EU pages: Sony DE, UK, ES, FR, IT, NL, BE, AT, CH, SE, NO, FI, PL. And Wex UK.
A7s Gariz leather case in [shoplink 27569 ebay]Black (Click here)[/shoplink], [shoplink 27570 ebay]Brown (Click here)[/shoplink], [shoplink 27571 ebay]Red (Click here)[/shoplink] and [shoplink 27572 ebay]Orange (Click here)[/shoplink].
0 Responses
He conveniently omits existence of A to E mount adaptors… biased as hell.
cut that crap…GH4 is m43 sensor, A7s is FF…big difference if you shoot mini movies, MTV like videos…A7s is very great in low light.
Agree what a rediculous comparison
Marketing has your balls, son. It’s not crap.
I keep a compact kit. I don’t want/need/have to have any unnecessary add-ons to my kit when I work (journalism) and if shooting 4K in a compact kit is involved, then the Panasonic GH4 is the one to go for. Simple.
This is not solely about image quality (which both cameras produce excellently)
While there are going to be thousands of people who would not care to have an Atomos recorder with them, others, like me, would prefer the internal 4K recording of the GH4 to avoid that extra contraption. A FF sensor can’t compensate for that.
Also, the use of S-log at ISO 3200 and above is a major cripple (that I didn’t know) since grading is important for me (and it is for a lot of filmmakers) and I don’t want to dwell in carrying ND filters just because I need to use a profile.
The A7s is not a bad camera, but its compact design is back-stabbed by the need of an external recorder to shoot 4K video.
the GH4 is not compact..
a compact means pocketable ..
you want a pocketable ..truly jeans able camera ? ..get the xperia z2 for a fraction of that price .
Compact does not mean pocketable. These comments today are insane.
yea it does .. compact cameras are all pocketable . thats the meaning of the term after all ..being able to stuff it into your pocket.
sure i can go with baggy pants and in that case i can also carry a small enough bridge camera or a DSLR one ..
gh4 is not pocketable either with or without lens .i had the GH2 so i can attest to that .
Well, you do have a point, but he does too. We are comparing those cameras just because they shoot 4K. Overall, the a7s plus the Atomos is hardly a huge kit, especially disassembled, and you do get the bigger sensor and bigger screen.
Volume wise, A7s with the Atomos is not a huge kit, I know. I am placing emphasis in the add-on requirement to record 4K. To have an extra thing on you, that is not practically designed to be attached organically like a grip, for example, hampers the size advantage. The camera becomes either wider, or taller, or deeper. If you are using shoulder rigs, or using tripods, then this not something to worry about. For run and gun set ups, to keep kit to a minimal, GH4 wins it.
Again, this only matters if you need 4K – if you don’t, then you can obviously choose the Sony unless you also need fast (i.e. 2.8) stabilized zooms.
Whether it has amazing high ISO, a FF sensor and what not, the practical handheld-ability of the A7s (a major point since the compact size is one of its USPs) is diminished because you need to have that extra protuberance.
Agreed.
Keep in mind that S-Log is not intended for everyday use, but occasional shots with extreme dynamic range. Normally, you would be shooting in one of the Cine profiles, which are actually more like the Cine-Like profiles on the GH4. What he offered was a comparison between a feature on the GH4 and a related but not feature on the a7S.
There is no question that if you need to stay compact and shoot 4k right now, the GH4 is the right choice, though. Every a7S solution involves external recorders that can get pretty big.
The difference between M43 & FF, huge.
The GH4 is barely usable at 6400, 3200 is just OK.
For 4K recording, ISO 1000 is probably a realistic limit for the GH4. There is no point recording at 4K if it looks like a VHS tape.
That looks legitimately out of focus. I watched the video. Why didn’t he offer base iso example?
Alright I see the difference. But huge- not sure about that one.
The difference is not insignificant. As always, it’s always a good idea to buy the tool that is the best fit for the job that you’re doing. These are two good cameras. Imperfect, but both will find users. And deservedly so.
My thinking, though, is that Sony will have a mirrorless 4K APS-C camera at Photokina at around the same pricepoint as the GH4.
The difference is – one is capable of 1080p “look” at ISO6400, while another is 240p “look” at ISO6400. I don’t know about you, but to me that is a big difference. Click on a picture. Don’t just look at a thumbnail.
Big difference = difference is not insignificant. A matter of phrasing.
its a big difference . and this is only a screen shot..a human eye will certainly “feel” the blurriness and lack of details on that area of low light..the lack of sharpness and the duller colors .
The difference is massive, open the file up to full screen and look at the candle (point of focus), the detail on the glass is much better on the A7s. It’s almost an unfair comparison. The GH4 looks like a VHS tape at this ISO.
i think that picture says it all
The GH4 shot is out of focus. I asked the author of the video and he suspects he accidentally left on the continous autofocus feature (see comment on youtube). And sorry to say: if you can’t spot the difference between noisy footage and out-of-focus footage you should maybe not comment on the relative merits of different sensor sizes. In this case it is not the camera that is the limiting factor (it rarely is these days anyway). NB: I dont shoot mft but Sony APS-C.
Out of focus doesn’t explain all of this though.There’s some serious artifacting happening that looks like built-in noise reduction trying to kick in (it’s clearer in the video). Not good at all.
does the GH4 ..a stills camera has better video options ( not through HDMI ) ..
yea..
but only “not so smart” people would pay 1700$ on a still camera for that .
if you want 4k ability you can also get an xperia z2 for less than a third of that price – excellent smartphone btw.
we are not even covering the low light ability .
the GH4 boasts 10 bit videos compared to “normal” 8bit..that means potentially 4 times the data..which is good . if you actually need it / see it ..and you dont..this is a very controversial subject at best .
anyway ..1700$ for 4k ability ..it will be mainstream anyway in about 3 years only anyway .why pay premium for something relevant only in that time .
of course people will do that ..good for them ..there must always be people like that that pave with their pockets the price of advancement
There is a huge difference between 8-bit video and 10-bit video. What are you even thinking?
there is an “on paper ” difference of 4 times the data the can be captures otherwise .
i say on paper cause no one can actually use it now ( well unless you are in a holywood studio ) . and even the actual uses are debated in pro articles ..same as it was with the Raw issue.
anyway ..you cant create what you dont get so low light ? ..resolving power ? .auto focus ..and so on . you can have 12 bits and it wont change a thing
You’re going to get a much smoother colour gradation and avoid banding. What’s not to love about introducing more information into your frame? I feel it can often be more important than simple resolution.
I don’t understand your argument at all. Anything we can do to get closer to the beautifully smooth gradation of film emulsion tones is worth the effort. It’s the largest hurdle that is holding digital video cameras back from even approaching the richness of film.
Take a look at the video on this page. http://nofilmschool.com/2012/10/why-dslrs-are-no-match-for-blackmagic-cinema-camera/
like i said..take a look at the post below me to get what my point is
you can have all the info in the world but you cant recreate what is not there in the first place.
in the poster below you will see blurriness dullness of colors and overall crappy image . you cant out do that . it may not bother you but for me the golden time to do video is always in the low light times of the day .
Are you saying that 10-bit is making the GH4 image look bad at 1600iso? Are you insane?
“if you want 4k ability you can also get an xperia z2 for less than a third of that price – excellent smartphone btw.”
Forget about this. Five (5!) minutes with the xperia Z2 in 4k-mode and the thing is overheating. You can read about that in some forums and tests… won’t be much fun!
yea ..but 5 min is 2 gigs of info .
besides you are not gonna film a feature movie with the GH4 when you cant even use its higher functions on HDMI connection .
main point is .the GH4 is not a truly pocketable camera while the Z2 is .
i wont even get into the low light subject
I like LonelySpeck. I didin’t expect the XT1 to be so close to the A7s for his comparison, although, of course, it maxes out at ISO6400. Another cam which really performs great at higher ISO is the Nikon DF. But I don’t know whether a live-preview of the Milky-Way would be possible with it. Nevertheless, very nice review.
The DF doesn’t do video.
True, but I’m only interested in stills. 😉
lol… if you observed this fella how many time he is grabbing on the GH4 during his presentation
When can we expect an RX10 Mkii? Hoping Sony includes Slog2 with it.
LoL. Whta a great comparison :DD and sony fanboys crying.. juts lol
GH4 for the win.
Careful, now. Fire coming your way.
Nah. Not worth the fight.
Two different cameras – there is nothing to compare. Next.
(All IMHO of course) I dislike the design of the GH4 (DSLR). While I like the Sony better, I still would prefer a left corner EVF design, better for street awareness and fast moving. 8bit vs 10bit is huge. I tend to shoot ISO 200 to 800 90% of the time. The A7s even does ISO100, win for Sony, less ND needed. There is zero timecode workflow option for the Sony, as the Atomos Shogun doesn’t have LTC timecode input and who knows if Convergent Design will ever get around to developing the firmware in time. Although the accessory for the GH4 with timecode is expensive, at least it is there and a timecode job generally means a well paying job, so expense is justifiable. In-body 4K recording with GH4 is icing on the cake, but I wouldn’t totally discount a camera that required an external recorder. I have to agree with the reviewer, the GH4 looks like the better option right now, and that doesn’t even take into account price. With Photokina right around the corner, waiting to see what happens before buying into either body for the time being, hoping for a 2K / 4K GX8 with audio line input and improved EVF.
So we have a camera that on the one hand is:
A) the size of a consumer DSLR
B) Doesn’t perform any better than a consumer DSLR
C) costs $1700
But on the other it is a camera with:
A) Consumer grade 4K video support, something that will come to pretty much every consumer device in the next 12 months.
And this is worth getting all hot a steamy about? Yeah that is a system I totally want to buy in to. It really is the cutting edge of consumer grade, soon to be yesterday’s junk.
True, this 4K technology is still very new as applied to what would normally be considered a still camera. As the technology matures (perhaps a generation of two) the performance, will greatly improve. It’s a bit early to buy in unless you have an urgent need for this capability.
well .there will always be those people who just cant wait to spend their money ,
god bless them ..they pave the way for technological advancement 🙂
Slightly better than consumer grade, as the GH4 doesn’t just shoot UHD, but also industry resolution 4K (true 4K standard, whereas A7S only does UHD).
Erm there is no ‘industry resolution’ 4K the only standard thus far is UHD. Not that it makes a lick of difference in the real world.
Yes, cinema 4K is 4096×2160 and UHD is 3840×2160.
The A7S will output UHD (a consumer standard). And the GH4 will record 4K (an industry-wide acquisition standard).
Just as 2K and 1080p are slightly different standards.
Do your research. You’re wrong about this one. http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/01/09/ces-4k-and-ultra-hd-whats-the-difference
Can’t wait for all the GH4 cat videos coming to a cinema near you in glorious 4K.
Have you ever projected any content say ever? If you have you will be able to recognise that there is ZERO difference between 2K and 1080p or 4K and UHD OTHER than aspect ratio, which is hardly resolution dependent.
At any rate, I still don’t understand why you think shooting 4K is any more professional than UHD? The likelihood of either these cameras being used for cinema production vs TV production is minimal at best. The paltry 2K Alexa is still more likely to be used the the toy GH4.
I don’t know what you think I’m trying to argue. UHD and 4K are slightly different formats. One is in consumer cameras and televisions. And the other is in professional cinema cameras. There’s not a huge difference, but they ARE different standards.
Just as 2K has a slightly higher resolution than 1080p. Not a big difference, but they ARE different standards. In my experience, I have only ever used 2K for scanning 16mm film.
And yes, I have projected and screened work in theatres and in front of audiences. What does this have to do with anything?
And I believe the Alexa currently shoots 2880xWhatever (depending on model). That’s higher resolution than 2K.
No need to be angry or abrasive because you’re wrong. Just learn something. I’m not presenting any opinions here, just researched facts.
Because you make out like UHD is ‘consumer’ because it is the TV standard… Uhm, professionals make broadcast content too if you are not aware? What you mean to say is that the GH4 produces DCI standard output (at least in resolution) – see the difference? one is not professional standard and the other consumer standard.
So the Alexa shoots a non standard, well I guess nobody is going to shoot with it now as it isn’t DCI standard!? Seriously mate, your claims have no legs whatsoever.
Well if you have then you will know that the difference is nil in a theatre, so other than bragging rights what advantage does a consumer camera with consumer output at ‘professional’ standard resolutions have to do with anything? If you think that because it shoots at DCI standard that makes it instantly a more professionals choice camera then you are absolutely kidding yourself.
I was only insinuating that the Alexa is higher resolution than what you had stated. Not that it’s non-professional.
And you seem like you have some psychological block fed my your angry ego. This will be the last time I message you because you keep misquoting me and/or purposefully misinterpreting what I’m saying.
I just appreciate that the GH4 employs a cinema standard. And I want to point out that the A7S does not. The GH4 is better for shooting 1.85:1, and no one finishes a movie in 16×9 (like the A7s). I know it’s negligible, but it is still a concrete difference. You can’t gloss over this stuff because you don’t care.
Having the extra bit of resolution (however negligible) is still a positive. How is it not? Don’t answer that.
He’s right, DCI standards for digital projection delivery for cinema is what it is, if not to the standard, will not get accepted for projection… not to say that there aren’t post options for scaling UHD to Cinema 4K, but all things equal, would be better for the acquisition to be at least DCI compliant to begin with.
Well there is no 16:9 for DCI. It is DCI compliant for vertical resolution but slightly lower for horizontal compared to 3996×2160. Lo and behold the difference is because of the aspect ratio, so if you are shooting 16:9 (for TV) then there is always going to be black borders unless as you say you do scaling in post (which will lose or stretch some of the original content). Shooting for DCI formats will, alternatively, lose some data in the conversion to 16:9 or the downscaling to less than 2160p (with horizontal bars). So shooting for both is not really possible. Still doesn’t prove that it is a more ‘pro’ format.
I don’t have the GH4 or A7s but i saw the video, Panasonic did make a great job with the GH4.
those who compare 4k in the a7s to 4k in the gh4 are idiots. actually no, i take that back. those who have (seriously) inclined to compare the a7s to the gh4, are retarded.
This guy not only doesn’t seem to understand the Sony lens line-up or picture profiles (does he know about the Cine profiles?); he doesn’t seem to quite have a grasp on basic photography and cinematography concepts. Why are the profiles, exposures, and color temperatures so different in his comparisons? Why does he suddenly get so confused when talking about depth of field?
Regardless, this is a strange conversation to be having. The a7S and GH4 are very different cameras for very different audiences. One is intended for professionals only, while one is primarily a prosumer and hobbyist machine that has picked up some trade attention for doing cinema resolution 4k so inexpensively. They are both great cameras and incredible values, but his perspective was a lot less relevant than I expected it to be.