GH4 GH4 vs A6300 vs BMCC

S

sgttom

Well-known member
So I decided on the GH4 a while back and have had mine for a couple months now. I've been very happy with. However I happened upon the Sony A6300 and was impressed by its low light abilities and close to full frame sensor(with a speed booster). So I went ahead and purchased one with the intention to sell my GH4 if I liked the Sony better.

I am really undecided a this point. I've just found out about the bad effects rolling shutter can have. The GH4 in 4k mode rates about 20ms while the A6300 rates around 39ms, almost two times worse. While I personally don't find rolling shutter to be a problem in most cases I know a lot of people hate it and maybe it would look bad for professional work. I could just always do slow controlled pans. There is also the option of using a warp stabilizer in post, does anyone know how well these work?

One thing that seems promising on the GH4 is the ability to use atomos ninja assassin giving me 4k at 10bit 4:2:2 not sure what bitrate it records at though. Probably won't get it anytime soon though.

The attractive thing about the A6300 again is the low light abilities. 3200 iso looks really clean where as 1600 is already looking grainy on a GH4. The other plus is that the Sony has a bit more dynamic range supposedly 14 stops vs the GH4's 12 stops, 13 with an external recorder. Lastly the A6300 is shooting downsampled 6k to 4k. Which from a few quick tests is a good deal sharper then the Panasonics 4k.

The other plus about the GH4 is the 200mbps 1080p, which has really minimal rolling shutter, probably the best on the market unless you include really high end cinema cameras. I could potentially switch to 1080p recording when doing a fast pan or whatever without having to worry about color differences in post.

I mostly do short films by the way with though I plan to do an occasional Music video/interviews.

I am not sure what to do.
 
Last edited:
Videographers/cinematographers experience this everyday...there is never a perfect camera. One is always missing something the other one has.

Where does the BMCC come into play?
 
NorBro said:
Videographers/cinematographers experience this everyday...there is never a perfect camera. One is always missing something the other one has.

Where does the BMCC come into play?
Click to expand...
Very true. Its perplexing. Just looking for opinions.

I was going to include the BMCC into the mix. Selling both my cameras and getting that. However I decided not as it can't do slow motion and the dynamic range is about the same as the GH4 to begin with. I forgot to take it out of the title. oops
 
Personally...

I used the GH4 a few times. I was never happy with the image quality it produced. I may not have given it enough time so I won't comment any further on it.

I used the BMCC for a while. Many shoots. IMO, it's the most cinematic camera out of the bunch with a really pleasant image. Internal RAW is cool and I love the simple menu (as with all BM cameras). At the end of the day, although I was able to get past the camera's quirks, rigging, audio, etc...I could never get past the lack of 60p (like you mentioned) and eventually sold it.

The A6300 is the newest camera in my kit. As you may know, it has overheating issues with internal recording. I always use it with a Ninja Flame and a dummy battery and have avoided overheating so far. I shoot a lot of images that are locked off, so I have also avoided the rolling shutter. If I had to run-and-gun or move around a lot, I wouldn't own the camera as the RS makes it unusable IMO.

Besides those 2 major flaws that I'm avoiding, I like the camera a lot. The 4K image is super nice, the functionality/programming of the buttons is ideal, the audio is very usable (for me) with a mic plugged straight into the camera...and I have the 60p and 120p (although ironically I haven't been using those framerates much with this camera).

Those are just some brief thoughts that are popping into my head as I write this. Everyone will tell you something different, but in the end you'll have to make a decision based on your overall experience with the cameras...and you may end up owning multiple cameras.

If anything, I recommend waiting a month or two...some new announcements are probably right around the corner.
 
Thanks man, that is exactly the input I was looking for. Someone whos had experience with multiple cameras. Makes me a bit more confident in keeping the A6300. I'll probably be shooting internally but I never do long takes so I don't think it should be a huge problem.

NorBro said:
If anything, I recommend waiting a month or two...some new announcements are probably right around the corner.
Click to expand...
In regards to new cameras being released?
 
For sure...end of August/September, solid rumors and/or new cameras will most likely be announced from various companies.

Two big ones people are hoping for (on the DSLR/mirrorless side) are the Canon 5D Mark IV and the GH5.

But even then, there's always something else brewing...it never ends!
 
NorBro said:
For sure...end of August/September, solid rumors and/or new cameras will most likely be announced from various companies.

Two big ones people are hoping for (on the DSLR/mirrorless side) are the Canon 5D Mark IV and the GH5.

But even then, there's always something else brewing...it never ends!
Click to expand...
Yeah I was trying to think about a camera long term but its crazy all the constant advancements that happen even in a year. Its funny reading threads from even a couple years ago.
 
I would classify your jobs as "production work", meaning you have control over the scene, action and most importantly - lighting.

Don't worry about low light capability.
 
NorBro said:
Videographers/cinematographers experience this everyday...there is never a perfect camera. One is always missing something the other one has....
Click to expand...
No matter what you are looking for, the one you really want is always double the price.
 
David W. Jones said:
Sounds like you need one of each. :evil:
Click to expand...
I wish!

Jim Simon said:
I would classify your jobs as "production work", meaning you have control over the scene, action and most importantly - lighting.

Don't worry about low light capability.
Click to expand...
True, though all my projects are really shoe string budget at this point, so having having lower light capabilities can help save me time/money depending on the situation.

dcloud said:
Bmcc outclasses these cameras in terms of image quality. Where it falls is high speed and 4k.
Click to expand...
True, while I think 2.5k is good enough. The lack of 60fps is a killer for me though.

DLD said:
No matter what you are looking for, the one you really want is always double the price.
Click to expand...
too true.. :(


Only other thing maybe to mention is autofocus capabilities. While I like to try to focus manually sometimes auto focus comes in handy if I trying to a tricky steadicam shot and don't have anyone to pull focus. Can't really test this out as I have no autofocus lenses at this point. Too many things to consider.

I though the A6300 had better dynamic range but I am not finding it only has about 11 stops same as the GH4. According to Cinema5d
https://www.cinema5d.com/sony-a6300-vs-sony-a7s-ii-how-good-is-it-really/
 
Last edited:
I've found that max iso really depends on the scene and profile you're shooting in. I have used iso 2250 with success when the whole scene is lit and you can use it to get the histogram to bump to the right of center. If your scene is very dark and the histogram is all to the left of center, 400 iso is max.

On a secondary note, cineV profile helps a lot with super dark scenes. If the subject is lit but the bulk of the scene is dark, it will crush to black all the dark area and allocate most of the cams resources to the well lit part of the scene. I use cineV, iso 1600 1/30th of a second shutter and a lens with an f/1.4 or f/1.7 aperture all the time in dark scenes with great results.

Thirdly, the GH4 requires super fast lenses when shooting in 4K mode to get shallow enough depth of field. It has a heavy 2.49x crop in 4K UHD mode and for my taste it requires a max aperture of f/1.7 to get separation and what I consider a pleasing cinematic image. I pretty much shoot everything with three lenses now a days. The 15mm f/1.7 on a stabilizer and for wide shots. The 42.5mm f/1.7 for portrait head shot type work and a 100-300 to bring in the wildlife action I most often shoot.

Just some of my thoughts on how to get the best out of the GH4

Cheers,
Pete
 
sgttom said:
What have you found to be the cut off ISO in your uses?
Click to expand...

Have you considered buying a good light kit and not worrying about low light as much? If you are doing more scripted type of productions you really should be using lights anyway. At that point the whole low light thing becomes not as necessary of a feature and the GH4 moves way ahead to the front of the pack. The price of the a6300 can buy a pretty decent light kit.

Some cinema cameras are actually horrible in low light even though they may have a super 35mm sensor. RED for example is not all that great compared to a GH4.

Low light is of course important for certain types of projects but no amount of sensor sensitivity can make up for good lighting to give a scene depth and make the colors and contrast pop. Honestly I would take a GH4 with a solid professional light kit over a a6300 with no lights any day for productions where you have the ability and time to light. Run&gun is a different story but even then as others have pointed out the rolling shutter is so bad on the a6300 that you may not want to use it for that type of work anyway.

weddings (indoor with no chance to use lights)- a6300
weddings (outdoor or using an on-camera light) - GH4
documentaries (heavy candid location based) - a6300
documentaries (interview based) - GH4
Cinematic productions - GH4
Corporate videos - GH4
Lectures, seminars - a6300 (because a slower zoom lens will benefit from the faster sensor. Zooms are where the GH4 suffers)

Basically my rule of thumb is if you can shoot with just primes and use lights then the GH4 all the way. If you can't help but use zooms and have restrictions of not being able to use lights then a larger sensor camera could handle the situation a bit better. I'm not talking just choosing not to use lights but a real restriction from the client or location to not be able to use lights. I have even used lights in a bar to shoot a band. The only time I cringe using a GH4 is for a lecture type video from the back of a room where I have to use a super zoom lens. That is where the GH4 really hurts.
 
It depends on the glass used, but if I'm using the Sigma 18-35 with speedbooster, I max out at ISO 1600 with V-Log and a low key scene. Using portrait, I can go up to ISO 2000.
 
Thomas Smet said:
The only time I cringe using a GH4 is for a lecture type video from the back of a room where I have to use a super zoom lens. That is where the GH4 really hurts.
Click to expand...

I've shot this with a Metabones Speedbooster and a Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8 ( separate zoom control ) lens and the results were great. I shot it in 4K and my editor was able to punch in quite effectively with minimal grain in most shots.
 
sgttom said:
all my projects are really shoe string budget at this point, so having having lower light capabilities can help save me time/money depending on the situation.
Click to expand...

Considering the price difference between the GH4 and the Sony, you could also afford some fast lenses, or some new lighting. So I'm still thinking low light capability should probably not be a factor for your type of work.

Where you need that most is event work, where you have no control over lighting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top