How interested are you in a GH6 anymore?

[Matt Gottshalk]

Well THAT'S a first.

I've always been happy with the GH5's colors.

[stoneinapond]

Well THAT'S a first.

I've always been happy with the GH5's colors.

[Peter C.]

As far as colors many of these cameras have a sharpened, contrast, saturation look out of camera. So if you want a film look you need to get into grading and/or film with something like BMPK or C100-500 camera. Likewise most dsrl/mirrorless have trouble with DR and smooth gradations such as sky or even gradated light backgrounds, which is a function of compression, 8bit, and the in camera sharpening/contrast/saturation. These cameras are designed more for quick turn around, multi-purpose and are not a substitute for high end cinema cameras.

Independent of all that, I've found that the shooting conditions can either make or break a camera. Shoot in full sun, you will be unhappy with the DR. In low light, you'll be unhappy with the noise. Generally when you watch review videos or higher end pro work, they film in the optimal conditions and use lights or diffusion to help the DR/noise. If you film in unmodified conditions your camera won't perform like you want.

[Ron Evans]

having a flatter field curvature and good corner-to-corner performance would help.

anyway, cropping close shots from a wide is obviously a compromise. a hit in quality is to be expected. but if you end up with usable close shots of 2 or 3 actors across the entire stage with a single camera and op, that could be a win. a servo camera will only get one shot at a time and lose time reframing. you will easily miss stuff.

i'm not saying i'd necessarily go the 8k route, but it opens up intriguing possibilities.

It has worked good for me in the theatre with the GH5 full stage or a little wider and the GH5S framed in to center stage. This way I miss nothing. I can crop /pan or mild zoom smoother than I could achieve manually ( I used to use a servo zoom camera ) with absolutely precise timing. Most times the lens is at about F4 ( set mainly by lens ramping to get the stage framing I want from shooting location ) with the GH5S having the Panasonic 14-140 and the GH5 with the 12-60. I do still have my wife use an AX100 to get really close if needed just to be sure. Most of the time however the whole show is taken from the GH5 or GH5S depending on what is happening on stage. I record into Ninja V on both cameras V-Log UHD 60P. Shutter is fixed at 1/60 shutter priority auto gain with a gain limit of 16db. Manual focus with touch focus in the first show segment with checking on the Ninja's. Metering is peak limit since it was introduced with AE shift to get in the range I want. Again checked with false colour etc on the Ninja's now. Once set it pretty much just records the show. I edit with EDIUS mainly.

[Kevin Kelly]

I'm still interested in seeing what improvements the GH6 can make. In the meantime, the BGH1, and the Panasonic S5 have some possibilities. The BGH1 was what I was hoping for when the GH5s came out, and the S5 is nice because the color is a better match to the EVA1. To me, it doesn't matter how good a camera's autofocus is, if the lens breathes so much that it makes me nauseous.

[NorBro]

Most people don't use AF in a manner which draws attention to focus breathing. (A lot of stills glass is controlled well.)

And if one finds his or herself in a difficult situation in which a lens is breathing so much that it's causing nausea (unless you're speaking metaphorically) then a human is most likely going to have trouble pulling that focus manually successfully and you'll end up with more out of focus shots than you'd like, so then what's worse?

[DLD]

I'm still interested in seeing what improvements the GH6 can make...

In technical terms, they can make a C300MKIII with an MFT sensor and sell it for $999. And some day they might. But, right now no one is disturbing the Sony-Nikon-Panasonic-Fuji-Olympus coalition. Except Canon. Which doesn't buy that many sensors from Sony (outside of the 1") and isn't controlled as easily. Besides, Canon has by far the largest share of the photo-video market and doesn't have the need to be controlled by the lightweights. And it's releasing model after model while others are twiddling their thumbs. But, if Sony chooses to respond to Canon - and, off rumors, they feel they have no choice - then the entire industry has to pick up the momentum as well.

PS. Sony's anticipated response to R5 is something with 50 MPX and 8K for ~ $4,500-$5,000. And no overheating problems. FX-6 should be out shortly as well.

[Less_is_more]

In technical terms, they can make a C300MKIII with an MFT sensor and sell it for $999.

So while everyone is struggling to be profitable at all, you believe they can halve their prices – in a relatively price-inelastic market niche – and thrive? How would that work?

I think a GH6 can sell well if Panasonic gets the price and details right and includes at least one marquee feature that captures the imagination.

However, I’m amazed how many video shooters, like stills shooters, have a fixation on ‘full-frame’ sensors. In video this makes even less sense because the best video – cinema – has long been made with sensors smaller than that (and not meaningfully bigger than the GH5S sensor).

[DLD]

So while everyone is struggling to be profitable at all, you believe they can halve their prices – in a relatively price-inelastic market niche – and thrive? How would that work?...

The market is quite elastic or Pocket 4K/6K wouldn't be leading the top of the sales charts upon their releases. Pocket 4K is now $1,300. Could GH-6 be sold at that price and be profitable? I say, given the margins, absolutely. Could it skip on some features and be sold for $1,000? I say, obviously.

Sony's A6400 is $900 APS-C with great auto focus. Give it a 10-bit codec and it'll fly off the shelves. And the 10-bit codec is mostly in the software anyway.

[DLD]

BTW, price elasticity is the main reason for GH-4 and GH-5 being so popular to begin with. The two models offered a superior video value when FS-700 with the external Convergent Design Odyssey 7Q was around $10,000 combined (more, when the costs of the SSD's is taken into account). GH-4 was $1,700.

[Less_is_more]

Whether there’s much price elasticity depends on your perspective, I suppose. Compared to high-end cine gear: very elastic. Compared to compact stills cameras (where I’m coming from): not so much.

Good point about the Sony ɑ6400 price. The fact remains, for whatever reasons, that Panasonic isn’t making much money on cameras. Hence their willingness to take an enormous gamble on magical full-frame (which must have a negligible chance of success in the long run, since everyone else is also betting on magical full-frame. I think they should double down on Micro Four Thirds, including a GH6, and explain to customers why magical full-frame is another arbitrary size rather than, in fact, magical).

[NorBro]

Full-frame isn't magical anymore...once ARRI made the move it became the standard.

I think the other companies knew this was coming hence the push for it 2-3-4 years before them.

S35 will still have a place for several years, but the appeal and transition to a full-time full-frame future is undeniable.

[ahalpert]

Full-frame isn't magical anymore...once ARRI made the move it became the standard.

I think the other companies knew this was coming hence the push for it 2-3-4 years before them.

S35 will still have a place for several years, but the appeal and transition to a full-time full-frame future is undeniable.

BS. Full-frame and S35 will coexist

[NorBro]

Open up that noggin...again. lol

That's what the same kind of thinking thought about 16mm and 35mm film.

And HD and 4K TVs.

And 4:3 and 16:9.

___

Filming in S35 crop modes will coexist, but S35 sensors won't (or barely).

[filmguy123]

I agree with NorBro. If not for anything else, simplified supply chains and associated costs.

Every year we see a decrease in the barriers to FF sensors. The CPU processing and heat required to run them, required body sizes to accommodate such, etc. When there becomes virtually no downside to a larger sensor, and only upsides, and cost begins to stabilize, who would ever choose S35? S35 is sort of an awkward spot. It doesn't get you into smaller lenses like m43 does. It simply makes more sense to create FF sensors with an S35 crop mode to accommodate those who wish to work and think in such a way, or leverage certain specific lenses.

I am wondering if M43 has a longer term place in the market. It does seem to be an interesting spot between mobile and high end FF. I am not afraid to sell off all my M43 gear and abandon ship, that's not why I haven't. I actually REALLY hope it sticks around, especially after my last trip to Indonesia. I tell you, traveling small and light with a kit of M43 glass and a couple bodies all as carry on, and working in the field with such a lightweight lens system, and being able to achieve stabilized extreme telephoto in such a breezy handheld package... you just can't do that on the FF mirrorless bodies, not in the same way. M43 lens are just so much more compact.

If m43 disappears soon, it won't be for lack of utility, it will be for lack of profit due to a smaller niche market. Ironically, S35 is probably a bigger market... but I just think it lacks an utility vs FF/M43.