Gh5ii?
- Thread starter Zim
- Start date
Thomas Smet
Veteran
To be fair when the GH5 first came out it started at $2,000. So $1,700 is a much low price point. Plus the list price for the GH5 wasn't all that much lower. It may seem high now compared to the sale prices of the GH5 and the used market but its not really that high. Its also comparable to the high end Fuji camera prices. Sure those are APS-C but many still preferred the GH5 over the Fuji cameras. Thats why I think they are still compatible price/capability wise. Each has pros and cons.
I'm pretty sure the GH6 will be about $2,500. First of it it needs to be for the GH5 II to make sense. If they are the same price I see little reason for anyone to bother buying the GH5 II. I also think the GH6 are goign to push the limits of m43 and provide some really cool stuff. It kind of has to if it wants to survive in this market. I think thats also why we got a GH5 II. Still a good camera overall but it needed a bit of new hardware.
$2,500 may seem high but if it competes with many $2,500 FF cameras I'm not entirely sure it could be considered over priced. Sensor size alone should not indicate price. If it has 24 MP to match many FF cameras and good m43 glass allows detailed 24 MP photos it will compete well with 24 MP FF. A lot of photographers shoot in good light, use a flash or have other methods to get cleaner shots. Video is a more difficult situation but many of us have managed with m43 sensors for a long time now. Plus we have focal reducers to get us half way there to FF. Sure it adds to the cost when you look at FF cameras that offer the same video and IBIS capabilities as the GH series then you are no longer at $2,500 either. The Canon R6 is the same price but its IBIS isn't as good and it overheats very easily. Also has a 30 minute record limit. Not a big deal to some but those that record stage performances, long wedding ceremonies, seminars or whatever it really sucks. The R5 has some impressive video for the first time ever on a Canon camera but it has some of those same issues and its almost $4,000. Even an older GH5 still has some video advantages over a R5 and 1/3 the cost.
I am considering a Canon R6 but the over heating and record is really freaking me out. I would like to use it for professional work but honestly its likely mostly going to be a stills camera and family/vacation video. I would prefer a GH6 for the same cost if it delivers but I know for a fact its sensitivity will not be as good as the R6. Doesn't mean it should cost less however. Just means I need to decide if I want unlimited video or the ability to shoot in the dark when my daughter does cool stuff at home with minimal lighting.
Zim
Veteran
With inflation and the cost of shipping it might be higher than $2500 by the times it comes out. I retired for my "real" job after 33 years, and now will only do my R.A.Z. Films stuff and only plan on doing films, short films and docs. So I go back and forth on getting the GHII or not. It has a lot of great features and does improve on the GH5. I can work around AF etc. Now that I'm retired I have to watch my spending but I want a good camera to replace my GH3.. The Gh6 might be nice but the cost, and when it will even comes out, or if they even bother to change the AF.
But I can wait awhile and see if we get more news on the GH6.
When my kids were little I had a RCA full size VHS camcorder, then a Sony Hi-8. Whatever you get these days will be nice. My advice is to print out pictures for photo albums and multiple digital files.
Last edited:
Thomas Smet
Veteran
I'm also in a situation where I don't do as much video as I used to. I'm not retired but I'm a software developer now. The pay is much better and I don't have to worry about clients and regular paychecks. I now have returned to doing video and photos for fun and love it more than ever. Doesn't mean I want to sacrifice quality.
My main use of video now is for my daughter. She was born as I was turning 40 and at 3.5 years old pretty fun to capture moments as she gets into sports and little performances. I do occasionally do some corporate projects when I can integrate UX design and website or mobile app development as a package. Using video to help the company promote the mobile app or web services. Every now and then a close friend will get married or at my age have a kid getting married and I will shoot some photos and video for them as a gift. Just to keep the skills sharp and have some fun.
I'm also in a position where I can no longer really justify $5k or $6k for a new setup which is why I avoided the Panasonic S series. It was the glass I just couldn't justify. I'm actually getting a lot more into stills these days for quick little projects like some senior photos for a friend or co-worker. I can shoot them in two hours and in some cases deliver that same day. Kind of beats video that was also a rather extensive process. I can touchup raw photos on my M1 MBA and deliver quickly.
I want t stick with m43 because I'm invested in it and I'm hoping the GH6 delivers the goods. I'm willing to spend $2,500 on a m43 camera vs a FF camera just because its a body I can buy and not need to buy anything else. The S5 is a killer camera body but I would need to invest at the vest least $4k in glass to make it even close to as usable as what I can now do with m43 right now.
I don't really mind what the G9 and GH5 can do but given my needs are now following a hyper full of energy and life 3.2 year old girl I do want something that works well in low light, has good IBIS and good AF for times when I just cannot keep up with her. Almost anything I can keep up with when manually focusing but her and the dogs are a bit more of a challenge for my old eyes. If Panasonic could manage DPAF I would be willing to sacrifice low light. If a GH5S type camera could manage IBIS I would be willing to sacrifice low light. Right now unfortunately Panasonic sacrifices two of the needs and not just one.
I bought a Canon M6 mk2 as an experiment and to be honest I'm very impressed with it. It absolutely smokes the GH5 for low light video and actually looks clean at ISO 3200 thanks to the 2x pixel binning. It sacrifices fine details because of that but its very clean in much darker situations. The 4k video DPAF is rock solid. Only thing missing is IBIS but at least thats only sacrificing one thing. Its also missing log but I discovered picture profiles can be installed on the Canon cameras. I purchased a clog3 profile and grabbed a few more mild attempts closer to clog 1 which work much better with the internal 8bit codec. Not as good as true log but it gives me options. I do wish the 4k video was more detailed. It is pretty soft compared to other 4k cameras but if I'm shootign family stuff with it I'm trying hard to accept it as my one hybrid camera to do it all.
I hate that I don't have many lenses for it however. Lucky I have a Tamron 17-50 f2.8 APS-C and a Tamron G2 70-200 f2.8 set of lenses that I adapted. It at least covers me for most situations. Bought a Sigma 30mm f1.4 for a walk around kind of do everything normal FOV lens. Thats it. I have to buy a bunch of others lenses if I want to match what I have for m43.
If the GH6 is awesome I have no problem selling the M6 and lens and adapter. If the Gh6 manages DPAF I'm sold for sure. I would want the sensitivity of the GH5S but thats just not going to happen. At least when it comes to that I can use lights which are 1000x easier to use than a gimbal or manual focus.
Zim
Veteran
They dropped it $200 for a Holiday savings. https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/prod..._lumix_gh5_ii_mirrorless.html?sts=pi-ps&pim=Y
ahalpert
Major Contributor
This is sort of a funny sentiment to me because it's like...what are you lighting? If you're lighting a talking head, then sure it's easy to use lights. But what if the background of the talking head is a really wide area, like a night exterior of a building or a landscape? Sure, cranking the gain in-camera isn't the same as lighting it up, it's different. But lighting that exterior is no mean feat. What if you're in a documentary situation and can't use lights? What if you're elaborately lighting a set for a commercial or scripted drama? Sure, you won't want to simply turn up the gain on whatever the ambient lighting is, but I wouldn't call the lighting set-up easy. Usually it involves $10K's of dollars of gear and lots of manpower and time.
I actually think using a gimbal is easy, at least easier than transporting, positioning, and powering lights. It's just one piece of gear, the batteries in my units last all day, and it's small enough to carry with me constantly. Readjustments are minimal. Some aspects cost time, such as changing lenses with very different weights and centers of gravity, but it's not a large amount of time nor is it difficult. It's not as easy as simply relying on IBIS, but you gain a great deal of functionality that isn't provided by IBIS alone.
And to really quibble about semantics, I think that manual focus is "easy" to do, just not easy to execute perfectly.
At any rate, it would surely be ideal from my perspective to get a camera with all of the aforementioned capabilities: PDAF, IBIS, dual native ISO. And I agree that we're basically in a "choose what to lose" situation with every manufacturer. (I mean, Sony has "IBIS," but not on par with Panasonic)
EDIT: actually, even the simple talking heads set-ups I shoot against seamless backdrops require a couple hours of set-up (granted that that's not all time spent lighting)
the only way I can reckon calling lighting "easy" is if we're talking about an on-camera light. in which case it's, like a gimbal, a single piece of equipment you can run all day on a battery or two, requires minimal readjustments, and you carry with you and don't need to constantly reposition around the location. (though I wouldn't call it "1000x easier" than using a gimbal). but in that case you're only ever going to get one (bland) look from the instrument, so i don't see how you're necessarily better off than being able to gain up and craft an infinity of looks from available light sources. also, if you're lighting your subject to ISO 800 but the background is lit to ISO 12800 or 25600, then you're going to have a hell of a fall-off on the background. I'd rather have both dual native ISO and lighting at my disposal, which I'd prefer not to be on-camera light. In the wedding business, the best photographers I work with use full-time lighting assistants to reposition and boom out lights from a variety of angles. And when I see those cameramen using frontal fill, it's always boomed out and coming from a couple feet above camera and never from camera itself or inches above the lens
Last edited:
ahalpert
Major Contributor
yeah but the gh5mk2 is practically brand new
NorBro
Major Contributor
Sometimes it gets even weirder...I have seen new releases that are in the preorder stage and have an instant savings of $50 or $100.
I have no idea if it's a mistake or a decision based on projections, but I have 100% seen it multiple times.
It's almost like B&H didn't agree with the MSRP, ha.
I have no idea if it's a mistake or a decision based on projections, but I have 100% seen it multiple times.
It's almost like B&H didn't agree with the MSRP, ha.
Most of these deals are not from the retailer per se but from the manufacturer. In other words, Panasonic isn't just giving a permission for a $200 discount, the manufacturer is giving the $200 rebate to the retailer on the back end. Because it has to move some inventory pronto.
*A typical rebate has an expiration date, so the discounted deals are completed in the desired window. After that, the retailers would have to file a special approval form because it's a bad customer policy to quit with the price breaks right on the dot.
And many Armenian fans switched from supporting Ararat Yerevan to rooting for the Steelers. (Ararat was a big team in the USSR, a national champion in 1973)
Seriously, a lot depends on the production run. I doubt the Panasonic executives expected large numbers from GH-5II, so it shouldn't be too difficult to empty the shelves.
Side note - post-Soviet open air markets were loaded with fake brand names. By 2011, the quality of cloth and stitching became more important than an ADIDOS, a Ribok or a Niki.
Seriously, a lot depends on the production run. I doubt the Panasonic executives expected large numbers from GH-5II, so it shouldn't be too difficult to empty the shelves.
Side note - post-Soviet open air markets were loaded with fake brand names. By 2011, the quality of cloth and stitching became more important than an ADIDOS, a Ribok or a Niki.