GH5s? New low light monster?

[joe 1008]

Indeed micro 4/3 is a very versatile format that can be geared both ways: Toward big AND small sensor look. It's compact and what Panasonic has done with its GH-series in recent years is more than astounding.

I just hope they are consequent with this video-geared camera and replace the mechanical shutter with an ND filter. If this sensor has such an insanely fast readout, in most situations you won't even need a mechanical shutter for photography. But a ND filter for video is essential. Small form factor, ND filter, 5 axis stabilization and superb low light would combine to the ultimate run and gun camera.

What else could I wish for? Ah, yes: A perfect, Canon-like autofocus ... there's always something left on the wish list I'm afraid ... ;-)

 

[roxics]

If super16mm can be taken seriously as a frame size, there is absolutely no reason m43 or even 1" can't be as well. Let's be honest, if ARRI made a camera with an m43 sensor and PL mount, no one would not take it seriously.

I'm actually a little surprised there aren't lenses with speedboosters built in at this point. Maybe Panasonic and Olympus are still trying to focus on the smaller size as a selling point for m43.

 

[Bassman2003]

Seems like small is very important to the m4/3rds community. Coming from a broadcast camera and a FF stills background it seems overdone to me but that is how it is. I would rather have more image choices than a tiny camera but the selling points are important to the makers.

 

[Gweilo66]

Bassman,
I think Joe 1008's points suggest the format has inherent flexibility, image-wise.

 

[roxics]

Seems like small is very important to the m4/3rds community.

Definitely among the m43 photographers. They seem to be very hardcore about small bodies and lenses. Personally I don't mind a bigger camera and was happy to see the GH4 and then GH5 get a little bigger. The ergonomics are better in my hands, which is one of the reasons I don't care for the Sony A7 series. I wouldn't mind them going even a little bigger. A GH6 about the same size as a 5D would be alright with me. So long as there is a purpose. Maybe throw in a slightly bigger EVF with a 60+ degree tilt on it, plus a bigger battery. That would be a welcome addition to me. I wouldn't mind one of those top LCD screens like the G9 has either. Build some bigger mechanical focus lenses to match.

I have no issues with the m43 sensor size, but my draw to those cameras is not the sensor or smaller camera/lens size, it's the video quality and options Panasonic gives at an affordable price. There really isn't anything else in the ballpark at the moment.

 

[NorBro]

The size difference is only relevant when considering lenses because average bodies from all companies are very similar across the board. Even a 1DX Mark II (or something similar) is not so much more massive than a GH4/5. The Sony full-frame mirrorless' are actually smaller than the Panasonics.

There is no doubt that the m43 universe has come a long way (and the GH5 is an amazing camera), but the bottom line is that all arguments start and end with SpeedBoosters.

If these devices did not exist - which I personally never use hence my bias - I'm not sure the community would be as vocal, especially if Panasonic didn't offer as much as they did with the GH5.

 

[TheDingo]

it simply comes down to one fact: larger formats just look different

I think it's a lot more than this...

- Using different lenses with the SAME camera creates different looks.
- Using different LUTs and color correction systems with the SAME footage looks different.
- Using different camera profiles will look different.
- How you expose your footage and how you process it in post creates different looks.
- Different lights create different looks. ( softness, color-balance, etc... )

- Many shooters don't know how to select and use specific lenses to get a similar look from different cameras.
- Many shooters don't know how to create and use noise-reduction profiles in post to get a similar look from different cameras.

Some of my OMB shooter friends send me client samples from a new project they are working on, and I see color casts all over the place. ( especially when they are shooting outside )

Lots of people think that all these differences are because of the camera they are using, when it might be everything but the camera they are using.

 

[rob norton]

The size difference is only relevant when considering lenses because average bodies from all companies are very similar across the board. Even a 1DX Mark II (or something similar) is not so much more massive than a GH4/5. The Sony full-frame mirrorless' are actually smaller than the Panasonics.
View attachment 128177

This isn't true. The GH5's built in EVF is reason enough for some people to not use Canon DSLRs.

 

[NorBro]

It's 100% true.

Built-in EVF? How long has photography been around?

I've been on every sideline/stadium on the east coast and everyone is looking into a Canon or Nikon so they must not mind. Period.

 

[NorBro]

And if you're talking about video...well, the day I worry about a built-in EVF on a micro four-thirds stills hybrid camera for my video work is the day I quit everything because it's not where I want to be in life.

 

[rob norton]

And if you're talking about video...well, the day I worry about a built-in EVF on a micro four-thirds stills hybrid camera for my video work is the day I quit everything because it's not where I want to be in life.

I assume we're only talking about video here. I just mean the size differences are not just in lenses alone. Adding a loupe or VF to a camera that doesn't have a built in EVF makes it considerably larger.

 

[jb.]

Even a 1DX Mark II (or something similar) is not so much more massive than a GH4/5.

Uh... yeah, it is....

The GH5 is like half the size of a 1DX Mark II... and weighs less than half of what the 1DX Mark II does (725g vs. 1530g).

Yes... a GH5 is closer to the size and weight of a 1DX Mark II than the 1DX Mark II is to the size of a shoulder-mount ENG rig... but the difference is still pretty massive. It's even more massive for the GH4.



I can get a GH5 and three large M34 zooms (Oly 7-14, 12-40 and 40-150 f/2.8 trio) and four small primes (Oly 12/2, 17/1.8, 25/1.8, 45/1.8) in a Think Tank Citywalker 10 with some space to spare... which is a pretty small shoulder bag. That same bag can carry a 5D Mark IV and 2-3 lenses if I stuff it full. The difference in kit size is real.

 

[NorBro]

The GH5 is like half the size of a 1DX Mark II... and weighs less than half of what the 1DX Mark II does (725g vs. 1530g).

Yes... a GH5 is closer to the size and weight of a 1DX Mark II than the 1DX Mark II is to the size of a shoulder-mount ENG rig... but the difference is still pretty massive. It's even more massive for the GH4.

I can get a GH5 and three large M34 zooms (Oly 7-14, 12-40 and 40-150 f/2.8 trio) and four small primes (Oly 12/2, 17/1.8, 25/1.8, 45/1.8) in a Think Tank Citywalker 10 with some space to spare... which is a pretty small shoulder bag. That same bag can carry a 5D Mark IV and 2-3 lenses if I stuff it full. The difference in kit size is real.

That is not a massive difference. You can literally hold both in your hands like a bowl of cereal.

A massive difference is a 32lb ARRI rig that may run 3-4 feet vs. a 7lb GH5 rig that may max out at a foot.

In what world would a few mms and grams make a difference to a professional filmmaker or photographer? When real money is on the line, that is the last thing anyone is worried about. As far as filmmaking is concerned, it's brought up when you have to stick a camera under a car or outside of a plane, etc.

If someone is worrying about their kit size then I'm sorry to say they are probably not where they want to be in their career either.

If you're by yourself then you make it work. You'll have your GH5 with a Think Tank on one shoulder. And I'll have my 1DX Mark II with one Think Tank on each shoulder. What's the problem?

Maybe I'm in the minority but I think as a generation we've become a little soft. People had it much more difficult in the past.

IMO, when one is worried about how many grams or millimeters they might save on their still camera for their video work...priorities need to change.

 

[rob norton]

That is not a massive difference. You can literally hold both in your hands like a bowl of cereal.

A massive difference is a 32lb ARRI rig that may run 3-4 feet vs. a 7lb GH5 rig that may max out at a foot.

In what world would a few mms and grams make a difference to a professional filmmaker or photographer? When real money is on the line, that is the last thing anyone is worried about. As far as filmmaking is concerned, it's brought up when you have to stick a camera under a car or outside of a plane, etc.

If someone is worrying about their kit size then I'm sorry to say they are probably not where they want to be in their career either.

If you're by yourself then you make it work. You'll have your GH5 with a Think Tank on one shoulder. And I'll have my 1DX Mark II with one Think Tank on each shoulder. What's the problem?

Maybe I'm in the minority but I think as a generation we've become a little soft. People had it much more difficult in the past.

IMO, when one is worried about how many grams or millimeters they might save on their still camera for their video work...priorities need to change.

Who is actually where they want to be in their career?

Anyway there's no point discussing bodies alone, the differences like you say aren't as obvious. The measurement has to be the total size of a complete system ready for shooting. It can be the difference between fitting in a small carry on, one less type of battery to worry about, or even smaller support set ups. It all depends on the type of production - the 32lb Arri can be a terrible choice. Similarly, going with m43 can the wrong choice too. While not being as extreme a decision to make, a 1dx m ii/two think tank bags vs one think tank bag, again depending on the project, could be a huge burden. Once I used a gh4 for its tiny package which meant ease (speed) of shooting. Image quality was nearly my least important criterion.

At the end of the day, you have to let the m43 crowd keep their size argument!

 

[NorBro]

Initially, I was just talking about physical dimensions of the stills bodies alone and nothing else. Once we start talking about lenses, additional accessories or change factors based on circumstances, it's all out the window.

P.S. I don't have anything against MFT (I was a hardcore BM pocket/BMCC shooter at one point in my life).

 

[jb.]

Spoken like someone who’s never had to hoof gear up a trail or ride with it up a ski lift. I’ll take every pound of savings I can get for a chunk of my shooting.

My buddy shoots for a ton of outdoor (hunting) programs. He’s not gonna carry a 1DX and a full compliment of lenses if he can help it. A GH5, a couple of light primes and speed booster gets him the same look in a third of the weight... and he can plop it on a gimbal if needed too. When he needs distance or shallow DOF look isn’t required, he can use the native m43 zooms he carries.

Panasonic has a 100-400mm m43 lens. That’s a 200-800mm equivalent FOV. Imagine what it’d take to carry that for a 1DX. Just not practical for outdoors stuff.

Not everyone’s shooting with a 15 person crew and a full compliment of gear sherpas.

Not to mention shooting with a GH5 and 12-40/2.8 is a heck of a lot more discreet than a 1DXII and a 24-70/2.8.

And yes, all DSLRs are tiny compared to a 32 lb ARRI kit... but that’s silly. They’re also tiny compared to an IMAX rig. Or a Volkswagen Beetle. Or a space shuttle. The 1DX weighs over twice what a GH5 does and one that’s kitted out with a lens is going to be even heavier. That’s a big difference when weight and size matter.

The point is, a m43 body has significant size/weight advantages... and it’s not just “softness” that makes those advantages desirable.

 

[NorBro]

I cannot relate, but I hear you.

Nevertheless, I'm interested to see what December 15th brings.

 

[Vesku]

If the GH5s will be even more video centric camera than GH5 I hope it can show exposure information (A,SS, iso) in all video modes.

 

[TheTrickster]

If the GH5s will be even more video centric camera than GH5 I hope it can show exposure information (A,SS, iso) in all video modes.

And take a few of the new things on the G9 also, like the ability to lock all the dials using an Fn button.

 

[NorBro]

I feel pretty happy with my career, and kit size is important to me. National Geographic photographers who travel the world telling stories solo are many people's dream careers... (until they hear about the modern day low pay!). But I don't see how being in a well paying career position where you're doing a lot of work where size/weight matters (plane hoppers, puddle jumpers, vans up mountain roads, hikes into remote areas, small jungle boats in tribal villages, staying discreet to acquire natural shots, etc.) is somehow less than.

IMO, as tech advances, the benefits of small/light will become increasingly clear and desirable to all... for me it's about creative freedom. I definitely experience that more when my gear becomes more and more invisible. I recognize that for large production teams, this is non issue, but I think there's an awful lot of awesome work and satisfying career to be found in cinema outside of that context.

Plenty of PAs out there ready to help...