Photographers Just Don't Understand.

Status
Not open for further replies.

humzai

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Apr 17, 2012
Messages
410
I thin most mu43 members would choose the E-M1 if they were getting a free camera without the ability to sell it. It seems that most people think the E-M1 is the most significant m4/3 camera release of the past year. I disagree. Even if I prefer my E-M1 over the GH4 I cannot understate it's significance. 4k is no joke and the GH4 is amazing. it is far from perfect. The EVF really should have been on par with E-M1 but while the E-m1 is an iterative improvement over the E-M5 the same cannot be said of the Gh4 over the GH3. The GH4 is revolutionary much like the GH2 but more so. The GH2 Hacked was amazing but the stock GH4 is revolutionary.

DFD is an incredible improvement in mirrorless tech. Panny has undersold it significantly. I truly believe it is better then the pdaf of the E-M1 and will be able to confirm in a week or so hopefully. The 1.4 firmware update was the best so far so I am not sure atm but I'll try to update soon.

I am too tired to continue atm. I'll write more in the next few days ins.
 

val

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Dec 19, 2013
Messages
548
Location
Australia
Real Name
William
different strokes for different folks, my preference isn't wrong and neither is yours, such is the beauty of choice. I would love the GH4 btw.

enjoy your camera and shrug off people who tell you otherwise because you bought the camera for you and not for them and we all don't have the same requirements.
 

orfeo

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Sep 27, 2013
Messages
673
Location
FR
Well said Val, lets enjoy what we have, no need to listen to nay sayers!

I'm eagerly waiting for lightroom 6? supporting GH4 raws!
 

humzai

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Apr 17, 2012
Messages
410
different strokes for different folks, my preference isn't wrong and neither is yours, such is the beauty of choice. I would love the GH4 btw.

enjoy your camera and shrug off people who tell you otherwise because you bought the camera for you and not for them and we all don't have the same requirements.
It's not that at all. I actually have both cameras. I love them equally. They both are very different despite the similarities. It's just I find it odd how little discussion the GH4 has had compared to the E-M1. I don't mean overall, I mean just prior to and after release. The disparity is astounding to me. I think one of the major reasons is that people think 4k is a gimmick like 3d.
 

hazwing

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Nov 25, 2012
Messages
2,140
Location
Australia
+1 with val . different strokes for different folks.

If someone gave me either camera for free I'd be happy (who'd turn down a free camera?). If I had to buy it, I'd scrutinize cost vs my needs/wants. With the GH4, I do admit the DFD and improve CAF does interest me. However the lack of stabilisation, larger size, lack of auto ISO in Manual mode, higher price are negatives for me. I'm hopefully awaiting a EM6, which may or may not come...

On the whole there's probably less interest in the GH4 on these forums because there's more people here who are into photography as opposed to videos. While the GH4 is probably excellent for photos as well, the additional cost might make it less attractive.
 

OzRay

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Jan 29, 2010
Messages
4,991
Location
South Gippsland, Australia
Real Name
Ray, not Oz
About as well as the 4K video works on the EM1 !


Like William said....diferent strokes for different folks. I happen to like doing a wee bit of video work on the odd occasion hence why a lovely new GX7 is on route to partner up with my EM1. Gotta love it :)
That's exactly what I'm talking about.

As I don't do a lot of video (at least yet) the E-M1 is sufficient for my needs and doesn't do all that badly, especially in really awkward handling situations.
 

napilopez

Contributing Editor
Joined
Feb 21, 2012
Messages
826
Location
NYC Area
Real Name
Napier Lopez
I thin most mu43 members would choose the E-M1 if they were getting a free camera without the ability to sell it. It seems that most people think the E-M1 is the most significant m4/3 camera release of the past year. I disagree. Even if I prefer my E-M1 over the GH4 I cannot understate it's significance. 4k is no joke and the GH4 is amazing. it is far from perfect. The EVF really should have been on par with E-M1 but while the E-m1 is an iterative improvement over the E-M5 the same cannot be said of the Gh4 over the GH3. The GH4 is revolutionary much like the GH2 but more so. The GH2 Hacked was amazing but the stock GH4 is revolutionary.

DFD is an incredible improvement in mirrorless tech. Panny has undersold it significantly. I truly believe it is better then the pdaf of the E-M1 and will be able to confirm in a week or so hopefully. The 1.4 firmware update was the best so far so I am not sure atm but I'll try to update soon.

I am too tired to continue atm. I'll write more in the next few days ins.
It's funny because as I work on my final GH4 review, I wrote nearly the exactly the same thing about DFD. So many times companies will oversell a fancy marketing buzzword feature, but time Panasonic actually undersold, especially as it relates to using non-Panasonic lenses.

I also very much agree with you overall. I've only "played" with the E-M1, but from what I can tell, it's a camera with a different personality, one that I probably prefer personally, but like you, I think the GH4 is the more important and probably better camera. It's pretty amazing what Panasonic has been able to do as a relatively recent camera manufaturer.

How well does IBIS and 4/3 lenses work on the GH4? ;)
I think OP's point here is less about saying it's better than the E-M1 than that the GH4 deserves more attention than it's gotten, even just as a stills camera.

Thing is, the lack of IBIS is pretty much the only thing you can really faulty it against the E-M1. Everything else is really just preferential, and the GH4 has plenty to prefer as well. It honestly think it's pretty much the best overall camera on the market right now, DSLR or not, all aspects considered. Doesn't mean it's the best camera at everything, or even my personal favorite camera, but as an overall package? Spectacular.
 

OzRay

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Jan 29, 2010
Messages
4,991
Location
South Gippsland, Australia
Real Name
Ray, not Oz
I think OP's point here is less about saying it's better than the E-M1 than that the GH4 deserves more attention than it's gotten, even just as a stills camera.

Thing is, the lack of IBIS is pretty much the only thing you can really faulty it against the E-M1. Everything else is really just preferential, and the GH4 has plenty to prefer as well. It honestly think it's pretty much the best overall camera on the market right now, DSLR or not, all aspects considered. Doesn't mean it's the best camera at everything, or even my personal favorite camera, but as an overall package? Spectacular.
I'm not sure why people seem to think that I'm bagging the GH4. I'm not.

My response was a tongue in cheek reply to the OP as to why 'some' photographers do understand and, for them, the E-M1 is the most significant m4/3 camera release in the past year. It's all due to personal preference and needs. My needs are IBIS and especially the ability to use 4/3 lenses flawlessly. YMMV. ;)
 

Livnius

Super Moderator
Joined
Jul 7, 2011
Messages
2,256
Location
Melbourne. Australia
Real Name
Joe
Ideally, I'd like to see both Panasonic and Olympus continue to work on their strengths but also on their weaknesses as well....and the signs are good, at least from Panasonic anyway with the GX7 being the first Pana body to have IBIS....a huge play IMO. Hopefully Olympus can follow this lead and improve the video quality of their future cameras. I wouldn't expect Olympus to try play catch-up with Panasonic in the video department since Panasonic are absolutely cutting edge in this regard and to try catch-up would be costly...but, it would be great to see future Olympus bodies with at least GH2/GX7 grade video capabilities....in much the same way it would awesome to see Panasonic continue to improve and implement IBIS in their other lines of cameras.

I agree with the OP in that 4K video being done 'in-body'...(unlike the Sony A7 which needs a $2000 attachment to achieve this) is absolutely huge. A mate of mine bought a TV and was told by several of the more honest salesmen at JB HiFi..."if you can hold out for a year then wait.....4K TV i coming".....add this to the fact that the BBC will this year broadcast several World Cup soccer games in 4K and the message is clear....Panasonic is ahead of the curve in this regard, and wow, it's one of our humble little small censored m43 cameras that is at the forefront ! Exciting times....now bring me more sub f1.4 lenses ;)
 

OzRay

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Jan 29, 2010
Messages
4,991
Location
South Gippsland, Australia
Real Name
Ray, not Oz
I think that one thing people need to understand is, that while the GH4 is an amazing video camera, especially since it can provide 4K natively, producing video is not the same as producing still photography. No videographer is going to go out and just attach a lens and start doing commercial work, it requires many more accessories that start adding to the overall cost of ownership. The extra attachment required for the Sony to do 4K isn't a big deal for videographers, if the other aspects of the Sony are significant for required performance.

And while the GX7 provides more frame rate options than the E-M1, but otherwise the same when it comes to video, it has no IBIS in video mode; which is a pretty significant issue for the average shooter. IBIS in video mode makes quite a difference to overall performance and quality. So every time that we start comparing, we are talking chalk and cheese.
 

TheRenaissanceMan

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Oct 11, 2013
Messages
84
I think that one thing people need to understand is, that while the GH4 is an amazing video camera, especially since it can provide 4K natively, producing video is not the same as producing still photography. No videographer is going to go out and just attach a lens and start doing commercial work, it requires many more accessories that start adding to the overall cost of ownership. The extra attachment required for the Sony to do 4K isn't a big deal for videographers, if the other aspects of the Sony are significant for required performance.

And while the GX7 provides more frame rate options than the E-M1, but otherwise the same when it comes to video, it has no IBIS in video mode; which is a pretty significant issue for the average shooter. IBIS in video mode makes quite a difference to overall performance and quality. So every time that we start comparing, we are talking chalk and cheese.
Couple things.

In terms of accessories, many people would do fine with no more than a tripod/monopod for video, with maybe a video mic on the hotshoe. That's not a lot of bulk, and minimal in terms of cost. An external recorder, on the other hand, has to dangle or be supported somewhere on the rig itself. For people who do handheld/shoulder rig work, like event videographers, it's just not practical. Furthermore, the bigger issue is cost. You say "the extra attachment required for the Sony to do 4K isn't a big deal to videographers," but $4500 is a hell of a price jump for 4K vs the GH4's $1700. There's also the fact that, for videographers in a studio/high quality production environment, the GH4's 10-bit HDMI out and the YAGH box's ability to add HD-SDI and XLR inputs puts it head and shoulders above the A7S from a functionality standpoint. That's to say nothing of potential issues with rolling shutter (as rumored), overheating (a recurring problem with Sony's mirrorless cameras), and aliasing/moire (much more likely considering the A7S' giant pixels), which may arise once review copies start shipping out in earnest.

Second, there's much more to the GX7's video advantages than just "frame rate options." There's the much higher bitrate, less issues with aliasing/moire, less breakup with moving subjects and detailed shots, more gradable color in post, more reliable video AF (for those who use it), the lack of PDAF stripes showing up in spectral highlights (as documented by Andrew Reid on EOSHD), etc. And considering most "average shooters" will buy the GX7 with its stabilized kit zoom, I don't see much of a problem with their home movies being unacceptably shaky.

Do you actually shoot much video?
 

Livnius

Super Moderator
Joined
Jul 7, 2011
Messages
2,256
Location
Melbourne. Australia
Real Name
Joe
I think that one thing people need to understand is, that while the GH4 is an amazing video camera, especially since it can provide 4K natively, producing video is not the same as producing still photography. No videographer is going to go out and just attach a lens and start doing commercial work, it requires many more accessories that start adding to the overall cost of ownership. The extra attachment required for the Sony to do 4K isn't a big deal for videographers, if the other aspects of the Sony are significant for required performance.

And while the GX7 provides more frame rate options than the E-M1, but otherwise the same when it comes to video, it has no IBIS in video mode; which is a pretty significant issue for the average shooter. IBIS in video mode makes quite a difference to overall performance and quality. So every time that we start comparing, we are talking chalk and cheese.

I shot a fair bit of video on my EM5 last Melbourne Cup long weekend up at Falls Creek, just casual stuff of mates fishing and just being guys, the kind of amateur stuff I've been shooting on my EM5 for almost 2 years now......and whilst the footage was really smooth thanks to the IBIS the video was just awful, the codec literally just crumbled.....especially if there was any movement, any bushland at middle and far distances just turned to poop. My work around was to get a GX7 and a stabilised lens...now I have the best of both worlds. Each person will make his own compromise...mine was to use the marginally less effective OIS in order to get the significantly better video.

On your first point...commercial or pro videographers will do what pro's do and spend whatever it takes, especially if the budget isn't theirs....but the kinda big deal here is that the GH4 gives the keen or even ambitious amateur native 4K for about $1700....and I'm willing to bet there a plenty of videographers, in particular from the enthusiast/ambitious enthusiast categories who would certainly find the $2000 attachment required for the Sony to do 4K a very "big deal"....and you can count the huge number of indy film makers out there in this group. See the thing is this, and this is where Panasonic has undersold itself and what many are yet to understand....the GH4 is giving every level of photographer/videographer the opportunity to have own an amazing stills camera and an amazing video camera in one neat and relatively affordable package.....I recall the recent TCS review where I think it was Jordan, or perhaps it was Chris who stated that this amazing stills camera with groundbreaking C-AF for a mirror less camera was also giving the shooter a video camera only rivalled by machines costing 10K......talk about having your cake and eating it too.
 

TheRenaissanceMan

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Oct 11, 2013
Messages
84
I still remember a video shot with the E-M5 with a guy suffering from Parkinson's disease of his pet cat & without the 5 axis IBIS it was quite shaky & with was remarkably smooth. So a video capable DSLR/CSC needs a good IBIS (or OIS) for normal use to be nice instead of going to the large DSLR frame measures if not needed for carrying accessories etc. as well.

So let's examine your logic. A guy with Parkinsons made a video of his cat that was improved by IBIS; ergo, all video cameras must have IBIS in order to be good? Someone call Arri! You suck, Arri!

OIS is perfectly good for handheld video, on top of which the GH4's resolution allows for a ton of stabilization in post. Besides, most serious videographers shoot 90+ percent of their work on a tripod, or at the very least with a monopod/shoulder rig.
 

OzRay

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Jan 29, 2010
Messages
4,991
Location
South Gippsland, Australia
Real Name
Ray, not Oz
Panasonic is aiming the GH4 at professional, indie etc videographers, not the mums and dads wishing to video Little Johnny running around on the soccer field. To do professional level videography requires far more additional gear than what is being suggested here in order to do 'professional' level work. Yes, the GH4 rivals cameras costing 10x the entry price, but that's just for the body, you need way more than that to become a professional videographer, and depending on your field of endeavour, the accessories etc could out price your camera by 10x again.

Some of you guys are talking like someone who wants to buy themselves a race car and then think they can enter a professional race, but forget that there are a few additional costs like support crews, spares, testing requirements and a myriad of other things required to become a professional race driver.
 

Livnius

Super Moderator
Joined
Jul 7, 2011
Messages
2,256
Location
Melbourne. Australia
Real Name
Joe
Panasonic is aiming the GH4 at professional, indie etc videographers, not the mums and dads wishing to video Little Johnny running around on the soccer field.
...and this is precisely it and precisely where you have completely missed the point. Panasonic is offering your average amateur, keen enthusiast, ambitious indy filmmaker and yes, soccer mum and dad videographer a product that with a bit of learning can give them something close to pro grade or broadcast grade results...the fact that Panasonic that has delivered this in a $1700 body tells me that they are indeed targeting this market...by design and not by default.
 

OzRay

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Jan 29, 2010
Messages
4,991
Location
South Gippsland, Australia
Real Name
Ray, not Oz
...and this is precisely it and precisely where you have completely missed the point. Panasonic is offering your average amateur, keen enthusiast, ambitious indy filmmaker and yes, soccer mum and dad videographer a product that with a bit of learning can give them something close to pro grade or broadcast grade results...the fact that Panasonic that has delivered this in a $1700 body tells me that they are indeed targeting this market...by design and not by default.
I doubt that I've missed the point. The average soccer mum etc is happy with mobile phone video, 1080p from a P&S is a wonder for them, or what they shot with a camcorder. Most wouldn't have a clue what 4K even means. And a bit of learning? That's like saying that buying a 5D and taking professional photographs takes even less than a 'bit of learning'.
 

piggsy

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Jun 2, 2014
Messages
1,502
Location
Brisbane, Australia
I dunno, there are a lot of very cheap 4k tvs appearing this year at very low prices (like $1000-2000). And not a lot of 4k content to go with them yet. So - maybe not soccer mum, but certainly even cursorily involved a/v club mum/dad looking for something to actually display on their 4k tv and future proof (ha ha :p) home movies of their kids. Pity panasonic isn't better placed to take advantage of that with their TVs, their 4k LCDs cost a fortune still and if they're known for anything much there lately it's for abandoning plasma.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2009-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom