GH5 How interested are you in a GH6 anymore?

Another factor for Panasonic to consider is that, due to its rather unimpressive DFD auto focus system, it is competing against the independents like AMD and Z Cam, who also largely depend on someone willing to work in a manual mode. And then they're going against $1,300-$1,500 MFT cameras that can record ProRes internally and ProRes Raw externally. And all AMD pieces come with a free DaVinci Resolve. And Z Cam offer a very nice and inexpensive MFT-to-EF booster that also has ND filters built-in.

So, what would GH-6 have to have to sell enough units at, say, $1,800? Well, it's going to have to beat S1 on specs. And there's no reason for Panasonic to do that.

My take again is that GH-6 would have to come in for under $1,300, likely at around $1,000, and be the king of budget video cams a la the six year old G7. Otherwise, Pocket4K and Z Cam E2 M4 are better buys.
 
So, what would GH-6 have to have to sell enough units at, say, $1,800? Well, it's going to have to beat S1 on specs. And there's no reason for Panasonic to do that.

Panasonic beat the S1 when they released the S5 (except for the EVF). Why did they do that?

Size.

And the comparative pricing argument only goes so far. There are other factors that can make the price sit higher and still sell. Loyalty, emotion, size, image.
 
Another factor for Panasonic to consider is that, due to its rather unimpressive DFD auto focus system, it is competing against the independents like AMD and Z Cam, who also largely depend on someone willing to work in a manual mode. And then they're going against $1,300-$1,500 MFT cameras that can record ProRes internally and ProRes Raw externally. And all AMD pieces come with a free DaVinci Resolve. And Z Cam offer a very nice and inexpensive MFT-to-EF booster that also has ND filters built-in.

So, what would GH-6 have to have to sell enough units at, say, $1,800? Well, it's going to have to beat S1 on specs. And there's no reason for Panasonic to do that.

My take again is that GH-6 would have to come in for under $1,300, likely at around $1,000, and be the king of budget video cams a la the six year old G7. Otherwise, Pocket4K and Z Cam E2 M4 are better buys.

It can still have solid IBIS and better AF and a flip screen and better battery life and lower-quality recording formats.

Maybe it wouldn't be as cinematic, but who cares; it'd be a very useful tool with just those five features both cameras above could not match up with.
 
They can absolutely beat the S1H on features, because the S1H is full frame. They've stated that has been their strategy before, too - to offer features that beat the larger sensor cameras in a smaller sensor size.

And, as image quality and features starts to reach a sort of plateau for many use cases - and let's be realistic, it's already happening and as technology keeps churning, only more so - there is actually no reason a $2500 GHx M43 camera couldn't compete against a $2500 FF camera. Yeah, I said it.

Why? Because with further sensor advances, once we're cruising with great lowlight and over 14-15 stops of DR and high res, high framerate internal codecs and a ton of features... there are actually reasons why, once a certain level of IQ/feature parity is reached, a user would want m43 *over* full frame.

I would know, I'm one of them. I have an S1H and an EVA1 and a robust set of full frame glass and a bunch of accessories. Yet I would pay the price for a GH6 if it delivers what I am looking for what because there are use cases where m43 is hands down better. I'm a OMB and I travel. The weight and size really do matter. I will put up with shooting FF and the drawbacks of larger gear etc. because right now, the juice is worth the squeeze - the extra IQ and DR are worth it. But is the juice worth the squeeze if I can get 95% of the way to what I need?

The difference between 10 stops and 14 stops DR is night and day. If m43 in the future hits 14 stops though, and LF/FF in the future hit 18 stops... well, that same difference isn't night and day. I just don't need that much DR for what I am doing. It's nice, but not, lug around a ton of FF gear to Nepal as a OMB nice.

The real question is how far will the GH6 go in closing the IQ gap? I need a more organic look out of what comes next, more DR. I don't really need better lowlight than the GH5s, maybe a smidge more would be nice. And if the GH6 delivers and puts out a great image with great internal codes and the res/frame rates I am looking for, my S1H will actually sit on the shelf more because small and light cameras are a dream to work with.
 
Panasonic beat the S1 when they released the S5 (except for the EVF). Why did they do that?

Size...
S1 and S5 are from the same stable. There's no negative effect on Panasonic there.

It can still have solid IBIS and better AF and a flip screen and better battery life and lower-quality recording formats.

Maybe it wouldn't be as cinematic, but who cares; it'd be a very useful tool with just those five features both cameras above could not match up with.
It could have all that but will that set GH-6 that far apart from Pocket 4K and Z Cam E2M4 and M6?

Panasonic can go high MPX for stills but it doesn't look like they're gonna. It's just really hard to find a unique niche for them in a reasonable price bracket. But, if they decide to go as low as $1,000, they might sell a boatload of them. Just not to the pros.
 
Of course, because as mentioned the other two cameras don't have any of those features. So for some people it would be an instant buy, especially if the picture quality improved. Just because one camera has RAW or ProRes, etc. doesn't mean it's an instant buy for everyone.

Any minor price differences are mostly insignificant when you need to spend more money on accessories for the other two cameras, including a screen for one.
 
As I already own a GH5s, so I don't see owning a GH6 or GH5 Mark II as a huge jump up, so I'd probably invest in an S1 as an upgrade. Though I will be watching the GH6/GH5 Mark II very closely.
 
I think they absolutely need to come as close to matching or beating the S-series (taking advantage of the smaller sensor) in some areas. Why? Because having a weak link does not spur on purchases in 2021. Things need to be full tilt in this space as the holding back of features has caught up to the camera industries. This is what I have said for the past year or two and it largely was demonstrated with the latest round of FF camera models. Canon actually providing 10bit sharp video! There will be no GH7 so they better make the GH6 count imho. They have had 5 years to develop this camera. It better be worth the long wait or people will pass.

I agree with Filmguy. Both systems can live side by side. I would be an S-series owner if the lenses turned the Canon direction and/or Sigma was a little more active in lens creation for the L mount. Their EF adapter is largely mediocre and it appears they are yielding the floor to Panasonic to make most of the zooms for the mount. A FF shooter might still want a smaller, video centric camera with more DOF IF it was a lateral move in terms of image quality. I see it as a family of cameras that need to be equal so one can switch between. Otherwise, if one like the image of an S-series but the GH6 is not as good, why would you consider it? The pricing is all fairly close for every brand or format.
 
Of course, because as mentioned the other two cameras don't have any of those features. So for some people it would be an instant buy, especially if the picture quality improved. Just because one camera has RAW or ProRes, etc. doesn't mean it's an instant buy for everyone...
True again but ... just add up all the $1,500-2,500 cameras (with or without Ninja V), from Fuji APS-C to Canon FF to Sony 8-bit to Panasonic DFD's to the Nikon line-skippers to Z Cam boxes to Pocket 4K/6K. It's an extremely crowded field that didn't exist when GH-4 and even GH-5 came out. It's like walking into the best singles bar in Miami and seeing Brad Pitt, Leonardo DiCaprio and Alex Rodriguez already in there, with Tiger Woods stepping out of his Maybach ten feet outside. At some point, you cut your losses and head over to Applebee's.
 
Oh, yeah - for sure.

I expect 100 sales max, ha.

At this point, it's just a hobby for them to sustain a certain image. It has to be.
 
There is a misconception that users only use m43 because of cost and size and thats absolutely not true at all. Seasoned and veteran nature photographers have been moving away from FF to m43 for one main reason and thats reach. No matter how hard FF tries it will forever be at a telephoto disadvantage per cost. I can use a Tamron 70-200 f2.8 that was $1,000 and optically a stunning lens wide open and get closer to a 400mm reach when used on a m43 camera. If adding a focal reducer its still 300mm. Yes FF has cheap longer lenses but optically they tend to be much lower quality. 400mm with a cheap f5.6 FF lens is likely not as good as a well made 200mm f2.8 on m43 which reaches 400mm. Plus while FF may be able to push ISO harder f2.8 is f2.8. I prefer to get enough light without touching ISO. Which brings up the other m43 advantage and thats turning any f2.8 lens into a f2.0 lens. FF will likely never be able to have a 300mm f2.0 zoom lens. Yet on my P4k I can do exactly that. Plus once you add a Metabones you are now only one stop behind FF so its not like FF has a massive difference anymore.

400mm f2.8 on a zoom is not only almost impossible on FF but insanely expensive. Sigma does have one of the few 300mm zoom lenses at f2.8 and its $3,600 and a huge beast to use. There is a 200-500mm f2.8 lens but its $26,000 and a massive tank to use. Mirrorless FF currently only goes up to 200mm and the most affordable is a Nikon for $2,400.

No matter what FF does, m43 will always have a telephoto advantage. Especially once factoring in adapted mirrored lenses.

So yes a GH6 priced around the same price as other cameras could still sell. While Panasonic may not have really perfected auto focus they are the best when it comes to video features that make sense, 10bit 4:2:2 quality and IBIS. All features that make the S5 a stunning camera. The S5 is still a FF camera however and suffers from insanely over priced lenses and not a great diverse selection of lenses. Its FF and telephoto is either not going to be great or cost an arm and a leg.

Plus there are a ton of m43 glass owners out there. Not something that will be easy to just walk away from and not that many would want to. Just because there is a cool new camera of the day out there doesn't mean one will get rid of their beloved lens collection they spent years building up. I really struggled with this when I moved to a Canon M6 mk2 instead of a G9 from my GH4. I'm still not 100% I will not go back to a GH6 when it comes out due to my lens collection. The thing that ended up swaying my decision is I recently bought two Tamron EF lenses. A 17-50 f2.8 and a 70-200 f2.8. They work flawlessly on the M6 and the 70-200 G2 is very well supported by Metabones on my P4k. So I'm starting to make the transition to EF lenses gradually. The other factor is the amazing Sigma f1.4 primes for the EF-M mount that are very affordable. There are 3 primes for around $1,200 total that pretty much replaces the main m43 primes of wide, normal and short telephoto.
 
Oh, yeah - for sure.

At this point, it's just a hobby for them to sustain a certain image. It has to be.

Funny you said that, because I think that's exactly what this is - trying not to lose face. They promised they'd stay in MFT land, and by releasing a GH5 II and/or a GH6 they can claim they did just that.

But does anyone here really think it will go past that? Does anyone think Panasonic is already working on the GH7 because they're sure the GH5 II/GH6 is going to be a hit? No. Are new lenses for the format (particularly for wide/fast/affordable lenses) coming from Panasonic? Nope.

It's also very hard to imagine Panasonic will release anything in the MFT range to hurt either their already weak full frame sales, or their not terribly popular with film makers professional lineup. So no "organic" sensor, no global sensor, no 15 stop sensor, nothing other than perhaps better color science and better internal recording at 10 bit.

Again, decisions made 4 years ago are coming to roost, and those decisions were very bad. Having 2 camera lineups with virtually no difference between them other than ease of getting shallow DoF makes very little sense, either artistically or economically....

...unless you're trying to save face.
 
If they do dual gain, IBIS and high frame rates with acceptable codecs, they can get $1,300'ish for it and still move a decent number of units.

As to 8K, the camera may actually have enough pixels in 3:2 but won't have them in 16:9 and will only read RGB 4K. Which should make for a pretty awesome 4K and a much improved stills camera. There are MFT 8K sensors out there already.

PS. Reach - or lack thereof- can be mitigated by the upres features on many an editing suit.
 
If they do dual gain, IBIS and high frame rates with acceptable codecs, they can get $1,300'ish for it and still move a decent number of units.

As to 8K, the camera may actually have enough pixels in 3:2 but won't have them in 16:9 and will only read RGB 4K. Which should make for a pretty awesome 4K and a much improved stills camera. There are MFT 8K sensors out there already.

PS. Reach - or lack thereof- can be mitigated by the upres features on many an editing suit.

I'm not entirely sure a denser m43 sensor can do dual native ISO. Perhaps a more expensive GH6S model could get rid of the multi aspect sensor and add IBIS but I just don't think its physically possible right now to do a 20MP m43 sensor with dual native ISO. Especially for that price.

I also don't think its very accurate to consider a GH6 in the same price class as the P4k. Yes the Pocket has raw and dual native ISO for that cost but it has no auto focus at all, no IBIS and absolutely sucks for stills. Its strictly a video camera and not a hybrid camera. Even the five year old GH5 offers significant value over the P4k to those that need capabilities the P4k cannot do. Plus what you are describing we kind of already have with the GH5S. I do feel the GH5S is over priced since it kind of sucks as a stills camera. Almost everyone that buys it is strictly for video.
 
The GH5 is at that price right now after instant rebate. Not buying your predictions (see what I did there?) :2vrolijk_08:

Bada Bing!

Side note - when GH-4 came out, the demand was so high, Panasonic had to open up a second assembly line. The first one was tapped out at 5,000 units monthly. I figure there are somewhere around 300,000 GH-4's out there. But, with the sub-$3,000 4K market so saturated with competition, I doubt any unit can move this many.

I'm not entirely sure a denser m43 sensor can do dual native ISO. Perhaps a more expensive GH6S model could get rid of the multi aspect sensor and add IBIS but I just don't think its physically possible right now to do a 20MP m43 sensor with dual native ISO. Especially for that price...
Multi-aspect is no big deal. It's all in software. The rest is obviously unknown and depends not only on engineering but on the marketing as well. When GH-4 came out, its 4K competition was FS-700 w/Convergent Design Odyssey for about $10,000 combined and 1D C for $12,000. That made GH-4 a tremendous value for what it was. It's a different ballgame now. And the ILC sales are around half of what they were back in 2014. They're rebounding off the Covid lows but still trending downward.
 
Multi Aspect is not in the software for GH5S the sensor is bigger than the MFT circle. The GH5S sensor is physically bigger than the MFT lens circle so that all but square aspect choices reach the limit of the MFT lens circle gaining the maximum sensor area in each case. If the sensor , like the GH5 is completely within the MFT image circle then various aspect ratios are cropped so not using all the available sensor . Yes in the case of GH5 it is software but not the GH5S. The GH5 needs smaller pixels to get the needed number for video at 4K with the crops . Works for a hybrid camera just fine. Main difference between the GH5 and the GH5S with less pixels that are larger than GH5 accounts for the performance difference especially in low light.

This discussion continues mixing video and still needs as well as hand held or film objective image quality. Does everyone want something that does everything for just over $1000. I would have to ask what have you been smoking !! Not going to happen.

I got my first GH5 because I wanted the lowest cost way of shooting UHD at 60P and only competition to the GH5 at the time was a Sony camcorder that cost as much as 3 GH5's. Had absolutely no interest in its still capability and still am not interested. Got the GH5S when it came out too for similar reasons. Today my choice would be a Pocket 6K Pro. My projects are always on a tripod, manual focus and only video. I would like 8K because I have taken to cropping into the image and I like that way of working now. Camera is fixed does not move I do that in editing. 8K or 12K would be great. Issue then is cost of lenses that have the resolution! I would like to shoot in RAW as in the theatre with LED lights WB changes all the time as well as exposure . So for me RAW with the audio equivalent of 32bit float would be the goal. Don't expect either of these so will probably not be interested and will happily stay with the GH5 and GH5S I have and maybe add a 6K Pro !!
 
There is a misconception that users only use m43 because of cost and size and thats absolutely not true at all. Seasoned and veteran nature photographers have been moving away from FF to m43 for one main reason and thats reach. No matter how hard FF tries it will forever be at a telephoto disadvantage per cost. I can use a Tamron 70-200 f2.8 that was $1,000 and optically a stunning lens wide open and get closer to a 400mm reach when used on a m43 camera. If adding a focal reducer its still 300mm. Yes FF has cheap longer lenses but optically they tend to be much lower quality. 400mm with a cheap f5.6 FF lens is likely not as good as a well made 200mm f2.8 on m43 which reaches 400mm. Plus while FF may be able to push ISO harder f2.8 is f2.8. I prefer to get enough light without touching ISO. Which brings up the other m43 advantage and thats turning any f2.8 lens into a f2.0 lens. FF will likely never be able to have a 300mm f2.0 zoom lens. Yet on my P4k I can do exactly that. Plus once you add a Metabones you are now only one stop behind FF so its not like FF has a massive difference anymore.

400mm f2.8 on a zoom is not only almost impossible on FF but insanely expensive. Sigma does have one of the few 300mm zoom lenses at f2.8 and its $3,600 and a huge beast to use. There is a 200-500mm f2.8 lens but its $26,000 and a massive tank to use. Mirrorless FF currently only goes up to 200mm and the most affordable is a Nikon for $2,400.

No matter what FF does, m43 will always have a telephoto advantage. Especially once factoring in adapted mirrored lenses.

So yes a GH6 priced around the same price as other cameras could still sell. While Panasonic may not have really perfected auto focus they are the best when it comes to video features that make sense, 10bit 4:2:2 quality and IBIS. All features that make the S5 a stunning camera. The S5 is still a FF camera however and suffers from insanely over priced lenses and not a great diverse selection of lenses. Its FF and telephoto is either not going to be great or cost an arm and a leg.

Plus there are a ton of m43 glass owners out there. Not something that will be easy to just walk away from and not that many would want to. Just because there is a cool new camera of the day out there doesn't mean one will get rid of their beloved lens collection they spent years building up. I really struggled with this when I moved to a Canon M6 mk2 instead of a G9 from my GH4. I'm still not 100% I will not go back to a GH6 when it comes out due to my lens collection. The thing that ended up swaying my decision is I recently bought two Tamron EF lenses. A 17-50 f2.8 and a 70-200 f2.8. They work flawlessly on the M6 and the 70-200 G2 is very well supported by Metabones on my P4k. So I'm starting to make the transition to EF lenses gradually. The other factor is the amazing Sigma f1.4 primes for the EF-M mount that are very affordable. There are 3 primes for around $1,200 total that pretty much replaces the main m43 primes of wide, normal and short telephoto.

Shot this with a Oly 75-300 on my GH5. Could have never afforded the equipment in FF equivalent.

 
Back
Top