GH4 GH5 VS Sony A7Sii My Verdict and Winner

lol, i wouldn't exactly trust one unscientific test as some sort of factual opinion on the matter, so hopefully not much popcorn...

I will say this is something I was wondering about regarding effective DR before the camera released. It's one thing for a sensor to technically squeeze another stop out or so (A7 series), but a 10-bit 4:2:2 internal codec where you can push and pull data better makes a big difference. I was wondering if it may be sort of a wash between the two.

Except, too bad via the new FHD 10-bit firmware update they, for some dumbfounding reason have included 10-bit FHD 60p timebase but no VFR mode up to 60fps for 24p timebase. Which makes vlog in FHD very dissapointing, as 36/48fps are locked off. The reasoning for this is beyond me, and unless something was lost in translation emailing customer service indicated this wouldn't be changed. WTH, Panasonic. If you have ability, please send them a note requesting the obvious enabling of VFR up to 60p in FHD 10-bit (it's already enabled as a 60p timebase, so I see no reason why they wouldn't turn this on).
 
Last edited:
filmguy123 said:
lol, i wouldn't exactly trust one unscientific test as some sort of factual opinion on the matter, so hopefully not much popcorn...

I will say this is something I was wondering about regarding effective DR before the camera released. It's one thing for a sensor to technically squeeze another stop out or so (A7 series), but a 10-bit 4:2:2 internal codec where you can push and pull data better makes a big difference. I was wondering if it may be sort of a wash between the two.

Except, too bad via the new FHD 10-bit firmware update they, for some dumbfounding reason have included 10-bit FHD 60p timebase but no VFR mode up to 60fps for 24p timebase. Which makes vlog in FHD very dissapointing, as 36/48fps are locked off. The reasoning for this is beyond me, and unless something was lost in translation emailing customer service indicated this wouldn't be changed. WTH, Panasonic. If you have ability, please send them a note requesting the obvious enabling of VFR up to 60p in FHD 10-bit (it's already enabled as a 60p timebase, so I see no reason why they wouldn't turn this on).
Click to expand...

May not be scientific but it is a real world test vs somebody making up their own attempt at scientific testing. Dynamic range isn't just about winning test charts but how a camera performs when real people actually use it in the real world. The big take away here is that at the end of the day most of the dynamic range concerns are unfounded between DSLR cameras and it is really just obsessing over specs. Even if some would consider the GH5 to not beat the A7S it is important to realize that they are much closer than we think they are. I watched the original test footage from this persons observations and log from both cameras were exceptionally close and at no time did either camera stand out as inferior. That is pretty significant between a m43 sensor and a FF sensor.

It is also important to keep in mind this was a test between two log formats. The A7S is far from perfect when it comes to log. Shooting a standard profile on both cameras would likely have different results.

Log really comes down to how one grades, what a user considers an acceptable noise floor/deals with that noise and how they expose for log.
 
Of course real world is important! Scientific testing needn't imply clinical test charts, just a method to properly evaluate and compare. What I was stating was positive on the GH5. From the start I've assumed/wondered (in multiple posts) how much the robust GH5 codec would help it out and bring it up to bat with cameras claiming more raw DR. Just because the A7S claims more or shows more DR from a raw sensor read out doesn't mean the GH5 won't effectively compete with it as the whole pipeline is important to the final, actual effective (or perceived) results. I do think that having better detail and data in the shadows via the strong codec and processing is going to help GH5 here, and as a GH5 owner, hopefully it helps a great deal!

I'm merely stating that one subjective, real world test in which we have very little info or very little thoroughness/diversity is hardly sufficient to validate that... It's interesting, but I certainly hope we don't have to break out popcorn boxes over it!
 
DR is DR.
real world or scientific, its less subjective than color where theres a dichotomy of hatred towards sony's colorimetry.
I can definitely see less DR for GH5. its a great cam, but lets not kid ourselves that it has better DR.
 
I don't think anybody here pretends the GH5 has better DR in every situation. This test was this test and the person found in these shooting conditions the DR held up very well if not did slightly better than the A7S. They never said it would always be better just that it was better in their particular tests.

My entire point is we tend to make a much bigger deal about DR than we should. We becomes obsessed worrying about it when it isn't all that bad. Perhaps shooting with the GH5 in the standard profiles it falls short but using V-log changes that a lot. Unless you are all shooting V-log then you are not seeing the camera at its full potential.

Without a doubt the A7S will beat the GH5 when it comes to low light and DR but those are two aspects that don't affect every shoot. In a majority of cases the GH5 will do just as well. The A7S is great if one finds their shooting styles to always fall in the category of needing more DR and more light. Personally I don't find myself in those situations very much.

I just happen to find DR and light those two things that I can deal with with techniques and gear.

So no I don't think anybody is kidding themselves. I think some people are just realizing that it isn't as bad as the sensor size fanatics would make it seem and is completely usable when using V-log.
 
Tom, I couldn't agree more. When we have a DR difference of 1 to 1 1/2 stops of DR, I don't particularly think that's earth shattering. In fact, in most instances, it will never even be noticed. Beyond DR differences of this 'magnitude', I think there are more important considerations when choosing a camera. YMMV.
 
Ken7 said:
Tom, I couldn't agree more. When we have a DR difference of 1 to 1 1/2 stops of DR, I don't particularly think that's earth shattering.
Click to expand...
1.5 stop additional dynamic range is already quite a lot, that means such a camera can handle light that is 2.8 times more intense than the other camera's maximum.
 
Good luck convincing anyone a GH5 has more DR than an A7S2 based on actual evidence. If it was even close perhaps there would be a way to help out the GH5 a bit. And yeah sure DR doesn't matter as long as you never shoot day interiors or day exteriors, and low light sensitivity doesn't matter if you never shoot night exteriors. So for your project that is only night interiors and/or in a studio with extra lighting budget to spare, maybe the GH5 is a good choice. For everything else there's the A7S2.
 
nyvz said:
Good luck convincing anyone a GH5 has more DR than an A7S2 based on actual evidence. If it was even close perhaps there would be a way to help out the GH5 a bit. And yeah sure DR doesn't matter as long as you never shoot day interiors or day exteriors, and low light sensitivity doesn't matter if you never shoot night exteriors. So for your project that is only night interiors and/or in a studio with extra lighting budget to spare, maybe the GH5 is a good choice. For everything else there's the A7S2.
Click to expand...

If you can only shoot in those environments with the A7S then you are doing something wrong. You are completely missing the point here.
 
Cary Knoop said:
1.5 stop additional dynamic range is already quite a lot, that means such a camera can handle light that is 2.8 times more intense than the other camera's maximum.
Click to expand...

You snipped out the other part of my response which read "In fact, in most instances, it will never even be noticed. Beyond DR differences of this 'magnitude', I think there are more important considerations when choosing a camera. YMMV."

So yes, if you are intent on shooting outdoors at night and the low light is a prime consideration in your choosing of a camera, than the A7Sii is a good choice. However, in most other shooting scenarios, the extra light gathering means little. I also think in most instances the extra DR will mean little to most people. Obviously there are situations where it may be beneficial, but I for one, based on the many other GH5 features, would not make that DR difference the prime consideration.

To some the color science of the GH5 & 4K60p may supersede the DR advantage. It does for me.
 
nyvz said:
So for your project that is only night interiors and/or in a studio with extra lighting budget to spare, maybe the GH5 is a good choice. For everything else there's the A7S2.
Click to expand...

Or you want 10-bit. Or a camera that never overheats. Or a camera that battery doesn't need constant changing. Or reduced rolling shutter. Or lacks garish Rec.709 gammas.

The Grand Tour could choose any camera they want, but use Amiras, & GH4s (which I imagine will get upgraded to GH5s).

http://www.definitionmagazine.com/journal/2017/3/7/the-grand-tour-the-small-camera-story
 
Last edited:
Getting ridiculous in here. I wonder what some of you would have done in the imaging field a decade or so ago if film (especially positive film) were your only choice? But then again, if you're under 30, my dollar is on the bet you've never worked professionally withwith film. But somehow are capable of arguing over camera cameras with maybe a stop difference in dynamic range (a term you probably learned about from Philip Bloom back in the canon 5d mk2 era).

Plenty of lowlight work here to be seen. Didn't seem to be a hassle for him.
https://youtu.be/OY6rmb47Ggw
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top