GH3 Does investing in M4/3 Gear make you nervous?

I will add my own experience and why I think the MFT format is a good one. I don't want it to go away and I don't think it will because it keeps getting better and other cameras are finding ways to utilize the mount.
Now I don't think of my GH3 as "the" camera for my video productions. It's my B or extra camera and it does an amazing job every time I use it. I got a lot of use from my AF-100 in the two years I had it. Love that camera!
I just did a shoot yesterday and put my GH3 with the 7-14 on a jib for a direct overhead shot. It looked amazing and the producer loved it. Brought the footage into the edit bay and showed them the shots and they could care less that it was the GH3 they just liked the shot.
My main cameras are the Canon C300 and C100. I'm constantly including the GH3. It's size and native lenses I have (Lumix 7-14, 12-35, 35-100) are a powerful combination. Size and weight are huge when your looking to do things you just cant or it would make it harder to achieve with a larger camera. The camera delivers great image quality. No need to pixel peep. Shoot cool creative shots and it doesn't matter what camera you use. I've had GH3 footage air on local broadcast many times.
I prefer the s35 format digital cinema cameras right now because they are to me a better and more complete video camera. I need a real video camera for my work. No audio recorders and work arounds, but I also could be swayed away just as easily if a camera that comes out in MFT was better than what I'm using now, and I'm ready because I wont be selling off my Lumix lenses anytime soon.
Stills are great as well and again the size is just great. Never leave home without it in a nice small and light Think Tank Photo Retrospective 7 bag.
 
Last edited:
I think that there's good points and reasons for all of this. I have about 5 micro 4/3 lenses and I love them all and I've had them now for almost 3 years. I think December will be 3 years so I feel like I've gotten so much value out of them, and I plan on getting the BMC pocket and possibly another Gh3. I think there's a good long life left for this platform and if you or I decide to switch then I bet I'll get about 75 percent of my investment back... Not too shabby.

So, with that being said, I wouldn't hesitate to invest in micro four thirds if you are going to have it for a few years like I have.... I am now though really only considering buying fullframe glass as I rent the FS700 from time to time and using a few other cameras here and there. I think that investing wisely in glass is much better than really investing in cameras. I am over doing that and realize that things come and go, but there things to invest in longterm are:

Lenses,
camera support,
lighting and
audio

All of this really doesn't change very much. I'm using a 10 year old arri kit all the time, I have some old moles that are easily 30 years old and my LAVs are like 10 years old. Invest in things that will be around for a while! For example, I made a good amount of money with my P2 camera but man I took a horrible bath when I sold that thing....
 
I'm have a hard time believing a direct AF100 replacement would be S35. It honestly wouldn't make any sense for them to do that. If they release a new camera in the AF100 price range ($4k-$8k) that's S35, then how do they mount it? Sony and Canon are S35 because they already had S35 glass from their still lens lines. Panasonic doesn't. They'd have to either license an existing lens mount from a competitor, design one from scratch, or put a PL mount on it. If they license one from a competitor... well, they're sending money to a competitor (both directly and in lens sales) and cannibalizing their own lens sales. If they design one from scratch, then they need to design a whole family of lenses to go with it. I have a hard time seeing how that makes sense to them financially for one camera that's in a relatively niche market. And most folks in this price bracket aren't using PL glass.

Yes, the new Varicam is going to be S35... but it makes perfect sense. Most folks in that price bracket are going to want PL glass anyways. Put a PL mount on it and they don't have to worry about lenses. That can't be said of the folks buying a $4,500 camera. Lord knows I can't afford PL glass. So if Panasonic is going to make me go out and buy all new Canon, Sony, or Nikon glass... why don't I just buy the cameras that glass was made for?

As far as using the same sensor... they already manufacture a ton of m4/3 sensors. Applying lessons learned in the new S35 to their existing m4/3 sensors is probably cheaper than doing S35 across the board and sending lens sales (and licensing fees) to a competitor, inventing a whole new lens line, or sacrifincing their lens sales by going PL.
 
I just don't see a new version of a HD AF-100 being relevant in 2015. Sony has already shown us that they are producing lower cost 4K cameras.
I think this is the same as HDV was to HD. MFT has to mature the same way s35 has in order to survive.
Most people that post in the AF-100 forum dont use MFT lenses they prefer Nikon and Canon mounts anyway. The New Lumix lenses that are pretty new came out to late. I love them but I didn't get to use them as much with the AF-100 but boy do I LOVE them on my GH3!
 
Last edited:
Mike Harvey said:
I'm have a hard time believing a direct AF100 replacement would be S35. It honestly wouldn't make any sense for them to do that. If they release a new camera in the AF100 price range ($4k-$8k) that's S35, then how do they mount it? Sony and Canon are S35 because they already had S35 glass from their still lens lines. Panasonic doesn't.
Click to expand...
It's a good point, but I think it's a case of damned if they do, damned if they don't. Amongst those clamouring for this "AF200", half actively want it to be s35, half want 4/3. In the meantime, with nothing even rumoured on the horizon, people wanting to purchase now are either deserting Panasonic for other makes or going the GH route.

Your point about lens mounts is - whilst a good one - a double edged sword though. I'd suggest that if Panasonic did go the way of adopting something like EF, then whilst the downside to them may be that users may not then have to buy Panasonic lenses, the upside is that it becomes more attractive to users who already have such. Isn't it better to sell camera bodies, even if the buyers go elsewhere for lenses, than sell nothing at all?
As far as using the same sensor... they already manufacture a ton of m4/3 sensors.
Click to expand...
Yes, but they are sensors designed for stills cameras. They can be used in a video mode - but it will never be as good as if the sensor was designed for video from the outset due to many reasons - pixel count, OLPF etc etc. The video mode in such is good enough in a camera in the GH price bracket - but not when up against designed-for-video competitors. Whether 4/3 or s35, to successfully compete, they'll need a purpose designed sensor in a next generation camera.

And I feel the issue is not technology, more economic viability. You can roughly split the market into 3:

GHx and DSLR - stills and budget large sensor video
Low end dedicated large format video
High end dedicated large format video

Now at the two ends, it's roughly well defined - s35 rules supreme at the top end, 4/3 and other (DSLR) formats each commanding a healthy share, each with their own devotees, at the other end.

It's in the middle it gets interesting, the C100, FS100, AF100 bit of the market. Sony and Canon, even now Black Magic with their latest camera, have all gone the s35 route. To develop a sensor, the costs are mainly in the initial design and setting up the production line, less so the actual production. It follows that to even get the money back, they have to either sell in large volumes - or sell at a high unit price. I doubt we'd be seeing the C100 or FS100 if Canon and Sony had to make their sensors specifically for those cameras, as it is they are able to use silicon primarily developed for higher end cameras - the C300, F5/55 etc. It's economies of scale.

So where does this leave Panasonic? For the AF100 they used GH2 sensors with slight modifications. Easy, since the R&D was largely recouped through high volume GH1/2 sales. But *IF* they did go the 4/3 route for the AF200, then the entire R&D costs have to be recouped solely through AF200 sales - such a sensor is no use for a stills camera, and they've already said where their future higher end market camera will go - and that's s35. I'm sure a good few 4/3 AF200s would get sold, but with the competition now in the marketplace I think it would have to be priced uncompetitively high to be viable.

But make the "AF200" s35 and the economies of scale work. The R&D of the chip gets spread between the 4K Varicam sales (few, but high value) and such an "AF200". And likewise, the performance will easily be on a par with such as the C100 and FS100/700. That may not please everybody - especially if you've got those 4/3 lenses and are looking to the AF100 successor, but as I said before, I think there's an element of damned if you do, damned if you don't.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top