GH4 $1,700 to spend: GH4 or AC90?

D

dslr_sc

Active member
So I've been thinking about buying a Panasonic AG-AC90 camcorder and currently the price is around $1,700 USD, about the same as a GH4. Now I'm having trouble deciding which to get. I know the AC90 is great for run and gun quick shooting and is probably easier to use and has better audio, but the GH4 is 4K and will probably produce nicer looking video and can also take high quality stills.

Which would you buy and why?

I wasn't sure about posting this here in the GH4 forum or over in the AC90 forum; I'm hoping people who are familiar with both cameras or maybe went through the same decision making process as I am will chime in here.

And I know many of you will ask how I plan to use the camera and suggest that this should be the deciding factor in a purchase. I think whatever camera I buy could be used for anything from filming documentaries and short films to doing weddings and corporate and business videos (all with audio). In short, I'd like the flexibility to use it for just about whatever I want. So as I said, I'd be interested in hearing from people who struggled with this same choice to see what you did. Or did you go in another direction with that $1,700?
 
I would not recommend the AG-AC90. Brought one to work alongside a GH3 once and the camera sucked. At 24p the image is really mushy and in low light brings in a lot of noise.
 
They are very different ways of working. I prefer ENG style camcorders for live events where a long zoom that holds focus can be very handy to have. I still use a Panasonic X900 handycam when I want to grab quick hand-held shots that rely on the 5-axis in-camera stabilization to smooth things out, and I can live with having virtually everything in focus most of the time.

I use DSLR/Mirrorless cameras for planned out and often larger shoots, where I am going to bring lighting and audio gear, and likely will be working with a few people. I also use DSLR/Mirrorless cameras for one-on-one interviews because I can blow out the background and the image quality is higher than most prosumer ENG cameras. With the GH4 shooting 4K you've also got the ability to reframe things in post if you're delivering in 1080p format. Also keep in mind that you have to buy lenses for the GH4, something you won't have to do with the AC90.

I agree that a lot will depend on what you want to shoot and the look of the finished work you are after.
 
dslr_sc said:
And I know many of you will ask how I plan to use the camera and suggest that this should be the deciding factor in a purchase. I think whatever camera I buy could be used for anything from filming documentaries and short films to doing weddings and corporate and business videos (all with audio). In short, I'd like the flexibility to use it for just about whatever I want.
Click to expand...

This is great in theory, but in practice it's a whole other story. I own both the AF100 and HMC150, and there are most certainly certain things I will not do with certain cameras. That isn't to say I couldn't do everything with either camera, but it would be a struggle as they each excel in certain areas where the other doesn't.

Also, bear in mind the $1,700 for the GH4 is for the body only. The 14-140mm lens is either $400 or $650 on B&H (depending on version). And while a decent all around lens, it's not by any stretch close to being the best. The 12-35 X and 35-100 X lenses... which are fantastic... will set you back nearly $2,500 for the pair. And remember image quality is only as good as the glass in front of it.
 
I own both

They are two completely different animals

Depends what you are shooting.

I have used the AG-AC90 for lots of things but it primarily gets used for shooting live sporting events where lots of panning and zooming are a must. For this purpose it will handily outperform a GH4 (better rolling shutter performance, easier to focus, better focal range, lanc controllable zoom etc....etc....). I have found the AG-AC90 noise suppression to be very good but it's not a low light monster but neither is the GH4

The GH4 has advantages like 4K, better 1080 codecs, 10 bit raw output, changeable lenses....etc..

It all depends what you are shooting. Feel free to ask any further questions
 
Whoops... I forgot about the lens for the GH4!! Sorry about that. I guess my comparison isn't really relevant. Its still interesting to read the comments though so thanks!
 
I think the two would compliment each other well- the ac90 for run and gun. It's all auto mode and stabilizer make it particularly good when you need to concentrate on getting the shots and not on camera and lens adjustments. The GH4 for interviews and controlled shots. Getting both is probably not affordable though. I have the AF100 and AC130a- a similar pairing, and most of my money is made by the ac130. Depth of field and raw resolution isn't needed so much for corporate and industrial work. Again, it depends on what you need it for.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top