GH4 5d3 Raw to GH4

Gentleman...got the GH4 today...now need lens advice.


1. I own Samyang 85mm 1.4, Canon 50mm 1.8, Tamron ASPC 17-50 2.8
2. Should I get a SpeedBooster for these (will the speed booster work for both FF and ASPC Canon lenses?)
3. Should I get 12-35 Lumix
4. Other options?
 
JasonMillard81, that greatly depends on what you want to shoot. If you are into narrative type work, the speed booster option with those lenses will do an amazing job. For run and gun, a stabilizer and a wide fast prime like the 15mm f/1.7 and a couple other fast primes will serve you extremely well.

I have a bunch of Olympus OM lenses and picked up the Speedbooster for those. It is simply an amazing image that it creates. My OM 50mm f/1.4 is equivalent to a 125mm f/1 in 4k UHD mode. Stunning is the only way to describe the image it can create.

First thing I'd do is get some ND's and see what that 17-50 will do with just a simple adaptor for $25. If it's the non-VC version, it could be a very nice lens on the GH4. From there I really think you'll want a native wide lens like the Olympus 12mm f/2, Panasonic 15mm f/1.7 or Olympus 17mm f/1.8 (which I have and really like). Your current lenses will do wonders on the portrait and tele side for most work already. A speedbooster will just make them that much more useful.

Play first cost effectively with what you have then narrow down what you are really missing. Don't listen to that voice in the back of your head that says to buy now. Learn what your really need and then make some moves.

Cheers,
Pete
 
For what it's worth, the 12-35 Lumix should be paired on every Gh4. Especially if you plan on using the camera for any stills work.
 
I am going to research a bit more regarding all this... the 12-35 seems like a must have considering all the recommendations.

I have to investigate the speed booster since it would delay me having to purchase other lenses outside the already expensive 12-35...then I can assess needs after.

I will primarily take photos on 5d3 but would like to see how well the gh4 holds up. I intend to take a few of the same photos with both cameras and print them at a store and compare....if the GH4 can achieve the same quality and DOF as the 5d3 then I may sell the 5d3 at some point.

For video, image stabilization would be great as hand held is the optimal position for run and gun.

Any notable quality differences between lumix lenses and speed booster + canon/sigma? I know the gh4 can be almost "too" sharp and wonder if a canon lens on a speed booster may produce great cinematic looks

Whats everyone's thoughts on SLR anamorphic...some good videos on vimeo but they don't look nearly as cinematic as other anamorphic adapters etc. i've seen.
 
I think you will enjoy the extra latitude of the GH4 compared with the 5d3. Canon colors are great, but they are falling far, far behind in dynamic range.
 
JasonMillard81 said:
I will primarily take photos on 5d3 but would like to see how well the gh4 holds up. I intend to take a few of the same photos with both cameras and print them at a store and compare....if the GH4 can achieve the same quality and DOF as the 5d3 then I may sell the 5d3 at some point.
Click to expand...
Same DOF is simply not going to happen. Your CoC is drastically different due to the sensor size, which affects DOF.

At ISO 1600 and lower, you might be surprised at what the GH4 can do.
 
JasonMillard81 said:
I intend to take a few of the same photos with both cameras and print them at a store and compare....if the GH4 can achieve the same quality and DOF as the 5d3 then I may sell the 5d3 at some point.
Click to expand...

OK, let's get this straight.

• The GH4 cannot match the 5DIII for DOF using the same focal length and aperture, it just can't be done, just like the 5D3 can't match medium format for the same reasons.

• The 'quality' is not going to be the 'same' if you are comparing pixel for pixel, even on a print, but when you stand back and look at the 'picture' then the differences are much harder to spot.

• If someone only ever saw the GH4 version would they even think to complain?

The search for technical perfection has over taken the enjoyment of the art for far too many people and that's sad.

If you take an identical shot, same framing, same aperture, the GH4 is going to have more in focus (greater DOF), end of story. Many people claim two stops worth more (f2.8 = f5.6) and by my own testing that's really not that far out, at least for close up subjects. For more distant subjects it's not so obvious. Many people just love the shallow DOF on the 5D3 and can't see past that, even when they are over doing it and all they are producing is mush. The idea of shallow DOF is to guide the viewers eye to where you want it to be, but I see so many people putting out video/films where it's so shallow and OOF that my eye doesn't know where to look at all. There is a myth that this is the Hollywood look. 16mm (e.g. The Hurt Locker) and 35mm (take your pick) Hollywood films are never that shallow. It's been a case of many internet amateurs getting carried away with things they don't quite understand, 'because they can'.

The GH4 cannot match the clean output of the 5D3 at higher ISO, when ISO's are equal, i.e. both shooting at ISO6400, the 5D3 will look significantly cleaner. The GH may clean up well, but it will never quite have that clean plastic look from the 5D3, there will always either be grain (or you cleaned it too much with loss of detail).

However, that's not the whole story.

I was testing the 5D3 and GH4 side by side on a shoot on friday evening. It was dark(ish), so the 5D3 should win every time. I was having to shoot at f4 @ ISO6400 on the 5D3 to get enough DOF but could shoot at f1.7 on the GH4 so could also shoot ISO 1250 - 1600. The differences are no longer that big. What the 5D3 does give me is slightly more pixels for stills, but the GH4 gives me more in video (4K) and certainly (for stills) gave me enough for everything I'll need (including a 16"x24"), so you have to ask yourself the question:

• Am I looking for perfection and only perfection will do? (in which case even the 5D3 fails!)
--or--
• Am I happy with 'good'? When is 'good' actually 'good enough'?

Everything is going to be a compromise. Not everything about the GH4 is going to be as good or better than the 5D3, just like the 5D3 is only 22mp instead of 36mp from the D810 or Sony A7r (not even bringing MF digital backs in to it). The GH4 high ISO isn't as good as the 5D3, just the the 5D3 isn't anywhere near as clean as a Sony A7s.

What the 5D3 gives you is:

• Cleaner image SOOC

• Ability to get higher ISO while keeping it clean

• Ability to get shallow(er) DOF provided you have the right glass - if you don't then it won't

• Ability to shoot raw using magic lantern - if you're OK with that workflow

• Can use lots of Canon & third party glass without adapters

What the GH4 gives you:

• Smaller, lighter, easier to carry around

• Access to amazing glass, including the Leica 42.5 f1.2 and Vöigtlander f0.95 lenses, but also just about all other glass with adapters

• Articulating Screen (I really hate not having this on the 5D3)

• EVF for video allows you to shoot hand held while looking through the view finder - gives you another point of contact - I really miss this on the 5D3

• EVF for photos has actually increased my keeper rate when needing to apply exposure comp because I can see live histograms etc 'before' I shoot

• 4K, let's not forget this one. It's a big deal for some, not for others. I only shoot in UHD now unless I need slo-mo

• Slo-Mo! 60 / 96fps in 1080p. 60fps is sharp, 96fps less sharp but usable.

• Built in timelapse

The GH4 is not for everyone. 4K is not for everyone, many people are quite happy shooting in 1080p for delivery in 1080p or 720p or even still on DVD and never need slo-mo.

Small and light is not for everyone, some people don't mind lugging large & heavy gear around because they think they look 'professional', whereas many pros would swap that heavy gear in a heartbeat for something smaller, lighter, more discreet, provided of course they could still get the results they want/need.

That is where the rubber really hits the road. What exactly do you want/need? If the GH4 won't give you that then smile and walk on by. If it does then will it make sense to run dual systems (GH4/5D3) for a while just to check, or jump head first, and hope you don't regret it?

If you have absolutely no intention of buying in to micro four thirds glass then frankly all the talk about light weight won't make a bit of difference because you'll still be carrying around all that large heavy glass. If you're using adapters then you'll also be stuck without AF (as far as I know the adapters don't AF), though some like the metabones will give you IS. If you want shallow DOF then you can use the metabones to get one one more stop, but it will still never quite match full frame. For some that's a big deal, for others not so big.

As for high ISO, for some this is a major requirement (shooting low light) for others it's a non event. I remember not so long ago loving to shoot with Fuji Velvia at ISO 50 and never shot film above ISO 1600 (it was too grainy!). People are all too often saying "I'm an available light shooter", partly because cameras have got so good at high ISO and partly because they are too lazy / impatient to learn how to use lighting properly, like we used to do in the old days. "Available" is nice, but sometimes it's just not going to give you what you want, so you bring along lights which now are 'available' to use.

OK, I'll stop rambling now.... got some work to do!
 
Exact said:
• The GH4 cannot match the 5DIII for DOF using the same focal length and aperture, it just can't be done, just like the 5D3 can't match medium format for the same reasons.
Click to expand...

There is a 2 F-Stop difference in the DOF between these cameras, so the GH4 may need significantly faster lenses to match DOF.

Exact said:
• The 'quality' is not going to be the 'same' if you are comparing pixel for pixel, even on a print, but when you stand back and look at the 'picture' then the differences are much harder to spot.
Click to expand...

If ultimate quality is an essential requirement then look to a Nikon D810 FF camera or medium format digital camera. For many photo shoots 16 Mpx is sufficient resolution to produce professional results.

Exact said:
The search for technical perfection has over taken the enjoyment of the art for far too many people and that's sad.
Click to expand...

Total agreement. It's what you do with your gear that matters, not the gear itself.

Exact said:
If you take an identical shot, same framing, same aperture, the GH4 is going to have more in focus (greater DOF), end of story.
Click to expand...

Which can be a handy feature when you want the additional DOF, otherwise you're going to have to use faster glass on the GH4 than you would on a FF camera.

Exact said:
The GH4 cannot match the clean output of the 5D3 at higher ISO, when ISO's are equal, i.e. both shooting at ISO6400, the 5D3 will look significantly cleaner. The GH may clean up well, but it will never quite have that clean plastic look from the 5D3, there will always either be grain (or you cleaned it too much with loss of detail).
Click to expand...

Total agreement. So buying a Sony AS7 camera is probably the best move to make if low-light shooting (or wider DR in a DSLR) is an essential part of your work.
 
JasonMillard81 said:
I am going to research a bit more regarding all this... the 12-35 seems like a must have considering all the recommendations.

I have to investigate the speed booster since it would delay me having to purchase other lenses outside the already expensive 12-35...then I can assess needs after.

I will primarily take photos on 5d3 but would like to see how well the gh4 holds up. I intend to take a few of the same photos with both cameras and print them at a store and compare....if the GH4 can achieve the same quality and DOF as the 5d3 then I may sell the 5d3 at some point.

For video, image stabilization would be great as hand held is the optimal position for run and gun.

Any notable quality differences between lumix lenses and speed booster + canon/sigma? I know the gh4 can be almost "too" sharp and wonder if a canon lens on a speed booster may produce great cinematic looks

Whats everyone's thoughts on SLR anamorphic...some good videos on vimeo but they don't look nearly as cinematic as other anamorphic adapters etc. i've seen.
Click to expand...

Hand held is never an optimal position for run and gun even with stabilization. If you care about quality then you will always want some form of support. I see a lot of video out there skimp on the support and it shows. I'm not saying it needs to be rock steady in a run and gun environment but it needs to at least make an effort to be sturdy.

With that said the optical stabilization does help a lot. Be aware however that not every lens has it. Even some of the Panasonic primes don't have stabilization. In fact the only Panasonic lens I own that does have stabilization is my first generation 14-140. None of my Olympus lenses have it and my top lens the Leica 25mm f1.4 doesn't have it either. The lens I had before that which was the 20mm f1.7 also doesn't have stabilization. I have gotten much better at just assuming I will not have it and shoot accordingly. I have a good tripod, monopod and shoulder support system that all share the same quick release plate system. This allows me to use the right support tool for the job, even for run and gun situations.
 
Any advice on SD cards?

Also still stuck...I wonder if it makes more sense to order the Canon speed booster for the GH4 and use my lenses (50 1.8 and 85 1.4, along with tamron 17-50 aspc) and see how the image looks etc. and then order other lenses...or just order another lens off the bat?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top