Cameralabs GH4 Review Posted

[jnewell]

Here: http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Panasonic_Lumix_GH4/

Somewhat limited apparently by the inability to compare raw samples, but a thoughtful and thorough review.

 

[tosvus]

Thanks, I need to read the whole thing, but found it slightly odd that it got 89% after the author gushed it is a game-changer?

 

[b_rubenstein]

it is a game-changer?

It might be if you shoot high end video. Frame grabs from UHR have about the same resolution as stills. Very impressive stuff.

For stills, it's just another good µ4/3 camera.

 

[GFFPhoto]

Thanks, I need to read the whole thing, but found it slightly odd that it got 89% after the author gushed it is a game-changer?

Thats actually a really high score for him. As far as I know, its the highest he has ever rated a m43 camera. The EM1 got and 87%, The EM5 and GH3 scored 88%, and both of those really pushed m43 forward when they came out. I haven't looked at all his reviews, but the Fuji XT1 is the only other score that high I saw, and I didn't see a higher one.

 

[Turbofrog]

It might be if you shoot high end video. Frame grabs from UHR have about the same resolution as stills. Very impressive stuff.

For stills, it's just another good µ4/3 camera.

Yes, the 4K stills were what really blew my mind. Even if all you want to do is take stills, for action or wildlife photography, being able to take a few seconds of 4K video at key moments (tracked with C-AF and the excellent DFD, of course) and simply pick the best still from what is essentially an easy-to-track 30 fps burst...that sounds like a game changer to me. I'm sure people will argue that it's dumbing down the art of photography, or some other such nonsense, but the result is what matters.

 

[GFFPhoto]

Yes, the 4K stills were what really blew my mind. Even if all you want to do is take stills, for action or wildlife photography, being able to take a few seconds of 4K video at key moments (tracked with C-AF and the excellent DFD, of course) and simply pick the best still from what is essentially an easy-to-track 30 fps burst...that sounds like a game changer to me. I'm sure people will argue that it's dumbing down the art of photography, or some other such nonsense, but the result is what matters.

Its cool for sure, but you have to remember you are choosing from very good JPEGs, not RAW. Its a great feature, but it does have its limitations.

 

[Turbofrog]

Its cool for sure, but you have to remember you are choosing from very good JPEGs, not RAW. Its a great feature, but it does have its limitations.

Ah, an excellent point I had glossed over. Considering I only develop RAW files these days (I find it's critical to getting the most out of legacy lenses), a very valid one from my POV, too.

 

[GFFPhoto]

Ah, an excellent point I had glossed over. Considering I only develop RAW files these days (I find it's critical to getting the most out of legacy lenses), a very valid one from my POV, too.

You can still develop JPEGs, you just have a lot less latitude. Maybe I wouldn't use that feature for creative work, but there are still plenty of places where it would be awesome (events, parties, sports, your kid blowing out the candles on his cake, etc.)

 

[OzRay]

I think the GH4 would make an excellent sports photographer's camera (one that shot for news), as all you'd need to do is take bursts of video and then capture stills from the video. You'd be able to get action at its peak and of a quality that would be more than enough for a newspaper, even a double page spread in a tabloid paper.

 

[jurgen]

What's the guess on the next ACR release? Does Adobe typically do it in consistent intervals (i.e. every 3 months or whatever) or is it just, when we get it, we get it?

 

[val]

I was surprised by the honesty in his review.

 

[GFFPhoto]

What's the guess on the next ACR release? Does Adobe typically do it in consistent intervals (i.e. every 3 months or whatever) or is it just, when we get it, we get it?

I had a Mac update today that had camera profile, but did not include the GH4

 

[wildwildwes]

GREAT review and a hats off to Gordon for a thoroughly well done job! That's how a review should be written / presented!

 

[GFFPhoto]

Really made me laugh:

"Bad points
4k footage looks noisy at 800 ISO and above."

Edit: I just noticed he tested C-AF with the Oly 45 and the PL25, which doesn't have the faster focusing (is it 240hz sampling thats faster?), Really dropped the ball on that one. And he says the frame rate slows to 5 or 6 which makes me wonder what cards he was using. I haven't read that anywhere else.

 

[T N Args]

As posted above, completely idiotic decision to test the continuous AF with an Olympus lens only. Which disables the new DFD feature!!
rotest_emoticon:

What a berk!

 

[napilopez]

Its cool for sure, but you have to remember you are choosing from very good JPEGs, not RAW. Its a great feature, but it does have its limitations.

Ah, an excellent point I had glossed over. Considering I only develop RAW files these days (I find it's critical to getting the most out of legacy lenses), a very valid one from my POV, too.

One bit of a counterpoint here; I think applying edits to JPEGs is severely underrated. A difference of working with stills and video is that if you're already shooting video, chances are you'll have your exposure and whatnot set correctly in the first place; if you have a good enough starting point, you don't generally need all the latitude raw provides. These days I end up editing JPEGs as much as RAW files simply for the workflow speed and efficiency, particularly now that Adobe supports Olympus colors so that the files still look relatively consistent.

Really made me laugh:

"Bad points
4k footage looks noisy at 800 ISO and above."

Edit: I just noticed he tested C-AF with the Oly 45 and the PL25, which doesn't have the faster focusing (is it 240hz sampling thats faster?), Really dropped the ball on that one. And he says the frame rate slows to 5 or 6 which makes me wonder what cards he was using. I haven't read that anywhere else.

I actually note in my own first impressions thread (in one of the later pages) that both of those lenses slow down the camera's C-AF burst rate (S-AF burst is of course unaffected), and by my own guestimation is closer to about 4fp. Accuracy remains top-notch though, something which I didn't at all expect from my Olympus lenses. I may need to double check, but this slow down happens even with shutter release priority turned on, which only affects capturing the very first frame.

Furthermore, the Olympus 12-50mm bursts at 6-7 fps with great accuracy(though less than that of the 35-100), despite supposedly not being supported by DFD.

As posted above, completely idiotic decision to test the continuous AF with an Olympus lens only. Which disables the new DFD feature!!
rotest_emoticon:

What a berk!

Bit of a correction here: he did try it with the Panasonic 25mm F1.4 too... And yes, that lens slows the camera's C-AF burst. If I hadn't specifically remembered the 35-100's 240hz focus polling and requested one of those for my review, then I wouldn't have gotten the results I was hoping for in my own tests. Nowhere that I have seen does Panasonic specify that some of their lenses woulnd't be compatible with the quickest burst rate; I assumed that might be the case for the 20mm f1.7, for example, but definitely not the 25, so I can't blame Gordon for thinking performance wasn't what Panasonic quoted. It's one of Panasonic's most well known lenses, so it came as a surprise. I hope a firmware update can help speed up the 25mm f1.4 (240hz on the 35-100 was added in an early FW update), but I also don't really care about that for my personal use; accuracy is good, and I don't need more than 4fps for anything I can think of where I'd be using C-AF with the 25mm F1.4.

FWIW, I'm using a UHS Class I card, but that should have nothing to do with the 25 slowing down.

One other note is that the X-T1 does slow down its burst occasionally to get shots in focus, though not to the extent the Panasonic will do with slower lenses.

 

[GFFPhoto]

I actually note in my own first impressions thread (in one of the later pages) that both of those lenses slow down the camera's C-AF burst rate (S-AF burst is of course unaffected), and by my own guestimation is closer to about 4fp. Accuracy remains top-notch though, something which I didn't at all expect from my Olympus lenses. I may need to double check, but this slow down happens even with shutter release priority turned on, which only affects capturing the very first frame.

Thanks for that clarification. Does the burst rate slow down when using 240hz lenses, and do you know which lenses have the 240hz polling?

 

[napilopez]

The burst rate will occasionally slow down on the 35-100, but pretty much only if it loses its target and needs a bit of extra time to sort itself out. For the most part youre shooting at 7ish fps.

I have four M4/3 lenses on me at the moment. In my testing so far (I obviously can't test every single scenario) this seems to be the order of average AF-C bursts:

1) Panasonic 35-100 -- 6.5-7.5 fps
2) Olympus 12-50: 6-7 fps
3) Olympus 45mm: 3.5-4.5 fps
4) Panasonic 25mm: 3-4 fps

Note that I haven't timed these in any real scientific way, and these are estimates based on comparison with my E-M5s S-AF burst rates, which are consistent.

Still, the relative order of their speeds has been constant in all of my testing so far. But i'd also say the accuracy of the Panasonic lenses is higher. Slightly, but noticeably. I'm hoping to do testing in a more controlled manner once the weather clears up here.

The 12-35mm I also know operates at 240hz, as does the new 14-140(don't know about the old one). I'm pretty sure all of Panasonic's lenses since the two f2.8 zooms should support that frequency.

According to Panasonic's website the fastest AF speed of 0.07s is achieved with the 12-35 and the 14-140, so I assume those would also provide the quickest bursts.

 

[gsciorio]

You can still develop JPEGs, you just have a lot less latitude. Maybe I wouldn't use that feature for creative work, but there are still plenty of places where it would be awesome (events, parties, sports, your kid blowing out the candles on his cake, etc.)

There's a ton of options for processing JPEGs with Lumix cameras. Spending a good amount of time learning the system I now shoot the majority of my work as JPEGs with little to no adjustment afterwards. Like understanding RAW processing getting spectacular SOOC JPEGs is something that just needs practice.

That said I still shoot RAW but only for the occasional experimentation and when on assignment. In both cases it's JPEG + RAW.

G

 

[GFFPhoto]

There's a ton of options for processing JPEGs with Lumix cameras. Spending a good amount of time learning the system I now shoot the majority of my work as JPEGs with little to no adjustment afterwards. Like understanding RAW processing getting spectacular SOOC JPEGs is something that just needs practice.

That said I still shoot RAW but only for the occasional experimentation and when on assignment. In both cases it's JPEG + RAW.

G

We were talking about extracting the stills from 4k footage. Do you have the same JPEG preprocessing options with video as you do with the stills?