Anyone here switch to the A7S from the GH4?

refocusedmedia

refocusedmedia

Veteran
I'm curious because this bug has been planted in my head and I'd love to hear other people's reasons and perspectives. Here's why:

I had roughly $3000 to spend on a camera and lenses/adapters. I found a great open-box deal on the GH4 for ~$1300 and jumped on it. I also found a EF-MFT Speedbooster for $100 off and jumped on it. So that's roughly $1800 in which leaves me with $1200 to spend on lenses, adapters, accessories. I currently plan to get the Sigma 18-35, Rokinon Cine 85, extra battery, LCD monitor, and a variable ND filter.

There are a few open-box deals on the A7S for ~$2000 or so. If I recouped my $1800ish GH4 investment (which I feel I easily could given the great deals I got), I'd be looking at roughly $1000 to spend on lenses, adapters, accessories. I don't really have any idea where I'd start with the Sony system in terms of lenses and adapters (are A-mount and E-mount backwards compatible?). I'm sure I'd have to get plenty of extra batteries, heh.

For reference, I'm coming from a Canon 60D and I primarily shoot handheld narrative (shoulder rig or monopod) and some doco/corp/reality type stuff every now and then. Photos are secondary, but they do happen.

Things that attracted me to the GH4 were the 4K capabilities (for higher quality 1080p, post flexibility, etc), the higher quality image even in normal 1080p compared to Canon, better internal audio preamps, wider DOF (not a fan of ultra shallow DOF), 1080p VFR modes, built-in timelapse, exceptional battery life, focus peaking. Things I don't like are the limited low light capabilities, extended crop factor in 4K makes wide angle more challenging, Speedbooster does not retain AF for photography.

Things that attract me to the A7S are the full sensor readout and lack of line skipping, unmatched low light / high ISO performance, even smaller size and weight, full frame sensor and mirrorless make adapting lenses easy with no need for a Speedbooster, many Canon adapters retain AF for photography, full frame makes wide angle easy, higher dynamic range. Things I don't like are the lack of internal 4K (won't have the money for an external recorder for awhile), lower quality LCD, clunky menus and ergonomics compared to the GH4, limited VFR modes compared to the GH4.

So, for those of you who switched to the A7S, I'd like to know what convinced you to do so. For those of you who took the time to read my situation, I'd love to hear your thoughts on it and especially what you'd spend that $1000 on if you were in my shoes.

Thanks for your time
 
I was fortunate enough to be able to pick up the gh4 the same time as picking up a shogun (I've had the a7s for a while) and after a week of shooting... i think the gh4 will be special-use cases and just a backup cam.

Granted, I simply set it to cine4 as I've read online, and outside of the last week, didn't have much experience at all with it, but overall I'm not happy with the image out of the GH4. I loved how its much smaller, especially to mount on the ronin... but the image does not match the a7s/shogun combo I was shooting with concurrently.

Not to really plug my site, but if you look through these 2 minute videos... the stuff with a yellow tint is all gh4, the rest is a7s (varied between shogun and 7Q+ as i was testing to see their differences). The super slomo stuff in Day 5 fs700/7q+ so you can disregard that. If I recall.. majority of day 1 is gh4... and since I wasn't happy, had my guys go with a7s the rest, aside from the gimbal shots.
http://scope.me/projects/inkas-armored-vehicles-idex-2015/
 
I added an A7S to the toolbox and kept the GH4. 4K (in camera) on the GH4 for green screen works great. It's also a bit lighter than the A7S with lens, so is easier for steadicam shots (12-35 F2.8 lens). For selfie style doc/interviews the GH4's flip out screen is much better than the A7S (tilt only- rarely use it). When there's enough light, the GH4 is more than suitable for just about any kind of shot. The GH4's screen, menus, viewfinder, and battery life are also better than the A7S.

The A7S along with the SEL18200 lens is a better run & gun set up due to really good IS, AF, incredible range, and of course low light performance. While the color can be trickier, it has decent flexibility in post. I purchased native lenses for the GH4 (Panasonic 12-35, 35-100 F2.8 and Voigtlander 25 F.95), for the A7S I use lenses I already had for the 5D3 and FS700. I have a Nanoflash for the FS700, but don't use it, so I won't likely purchase an external recorder again- prefer in-camera recording.

If you went with the A7S and only have $1k to spend on lenses, I'd get the SEL18200 lens, since you can do anything with it (except extreme shallow DOF), including stills with autofocus (not possible with adapters). For extreme shallow DOF get a $99 Commlite adapter and a Canon 50mm 1.8 ($100 or so new) or even the 1.4 (perhaps used). A sub $20 adapter for Nikon and Nikon manual 50mm (used) is also very popular. The Sony-Zeiss 55mm FE 1.8 is also very nice, but $1k by itself (would allow shooting stills with autofocus). The mirrorless cameras so far don't work so well as still cameras compared to DSLRs (5D3) due to weaker autofocus- so having a DLSR available for stills is handy.
 
Mirroring others' posts, I also came to the A7s from the GH4 and miss the great menus, flip out screen, custom buttons, touch focus, long battery life and 4K. And it looks like Panasonic's still continuing to update the camera via firmware updates while I haven't heard or seen anything for the A7s.
But..
I love shooting in SLog2 and the image quality and color I can get out of it. And I no longer have to worry about whether or not I have enough light when shooting indoors. Manual focus assist, while recording, is also great.
No regrets.
 
I wouldn't be able to get a Shogun or Odyssey for some time. If I switched, I'd be relegated to 1080p only. This isn't necessarily a bad thing as A) I've only been shooting 1080p anyway and B) the 1080p out of the a7s is apparently as good as you can get. But I was looking forward to working with 4K for the post flexibility and ability to offer myself up as an additional shooter on local 4K shoots.
 
I rented a GH4 for a project and at the end it convinced me that I didn't want to buy the camera. It came down to the fact that their focus peaking was pretty bad, and their picture profile had too much rec.709 gamma baked into it even with the picture profiles people were posting online as "THIS IS THE BEST!!". I wanted something full log so when I used film emulation luts I could control the highlight rolloff to be exactly what I want.

Autofocus in video wasn't worth a damn, even with the 12-35 2.8 lens designed specifically for that camera. A7s Autofocus works really great on all Sony lenses.

As a stills camera, i found myself cropping off most of the resolution the camera provided because the near 4:3 aspect ratio of the sensor wasn't creating the photos I wanted to make.

I rented an A7s on another weekend and found the low light abilities, and the ability to get background separation from your subject so much easier. I found that I was getting BETTER shots on the a7s because I didn't have to stand so damn close to people to get good background separation, and that in case allowed my subjects to be more natural. Combined with the APS-C crop I found I could punch in when I needed to for being very far away.

4K didn't mean much to me since I found that A7S shots looked better due to the dynamic range and it being in a log profile that you could control to your hearts content, compared to GH4 which had a very Rec.709 Video look baked in, even in the cinelike D profiles

I would rent the camera and see if it suits your needs more, but I could see a use for the GH4, but only as a rental and only for certain situations.
 
refocusedmedia said:
I gotta say, I *love* the idea of cranking ISO and stopping down so I can have a wide DOF in low light.
Click to expand...

That's how I'm using mine most of the time. I've only shot stills with it though.
This sort of images is a little bit harder to get on other cameras:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/corleypc/16538419022/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/corleypc/16364414098/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/corleypc/16396886470/
(If you look close, you can also see rolling shutter from the silent shutter mode interfering with discharge lights on the last two.)
 
Darren Levine said:
correct, they're comparing a $1500 camera to a $2500 camera ;)

different tools for different fools
Click to expand...
To get 4K out of the A7s it's a lot more than $2500.

I have both cameras and they both do things the other doesn't. Just like any camera will do something the camera next to it won't.
 
Oh, you had to go and say the 'B' word.
Now I'm hungry.
im supposed to be editing right now....but I actually do have some bacon in the kitchen at this joint...
 
To the OP - if you're going to shoot stills you're going to need one native lens for AF, right? There are tons of cheap M43 zooms floating around. Like others have said, there are decent APS-c E mount zooms that will cover a wide range, but just one FE lens will eat most/all of your lens budget. I wouldn't spend the extra cheddar for a FF cam and not have a decent FF lens. What's more important, low light capability or 4k, that's the major difference with your budget.

With a speedbooster you gain a stop of light, a few cheap legacy primes with EF adapters or something like the Sigma 15-35 will bring you into APS-c territory after all the equivalence crap works out. Battery life and ergonomics are better on the GH4. 1080p and shallow DOF is better on the A7s. I had both and they are capable of producing lovely images. I'd go with whatever option gets you the best lens lineup.

I got tired of the A7s' controls and spongy shutter. My grading skills are pretty basic, so I struggled with skin tones on both of them as well. I've moved to the camera that combines the best features of each IMO, the NX1. Good luck.
 
I actually picked up the shogun and A7s recently. I love the GH4 its a great camera. If it didn't have 4k internal recording the A7s would be better in every single way. I am currently filming my A7s VS Gh4 video. The A7s has 720p 120fps which looks better than the GH4's VFR 96fps due to line skipping and other issues. Not drastic but marginally. The lowlight is also a no contest. The A7s @ 102,400 ISO is the equivalent to the GH4 @ 6400 ISO in terms of noise. The A7s won't really produce much noise until its well north of 51,200. Very usable too. I loved the dynamic range of the GH4 until I used S-Log2. While using the Atoms on both cameras the A7s has more possibilities for wide shots as its full frame, the GH4 is a 2.0x crop but switches to 2.3x crop in 4k. That means buying super wide lenses. Even with the Metabones speedbooster a 24mm lens is pretty much a 38mm.

While I do love the GH4, and have used it extensively. The Sony A7s is just unbeatable. There is only really 2 clear things that it lacks, cheaper price, and 4k internal. Other than that the camera is full of WIN.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top