GH5 How interested are you in a GH6 anymore?

NorBro said:
... They kept doing similar stuff year-after-year and barely anyone noticed (it was just accepted) until you spend time on the forums and it's drilled into your mind.
Click to expand...
I was away from the consumer electronics business for a while at that time. Then one starts thinking, "if this was a competition, these companies would find it impossible to fit into each other product maps so neatly". You might remember, I once wrote something like, "if there are five features that a given price camera might have, the Japanese figured how to make sure that no given camera has more than two of them". Then I started looking at the new models and how they ignored the most popular features that all manufacturers should be jumping on - an example, A7S coming out about half a year after GH-4 and missing the internal 4K, despite being priced higher - and reading about their way of doing business and then remembering the German industrial cartels of the first half of the 20th century. And then one does some online search and finds a lot of quotes from the prominent businessmen, defending the system.

And then you see no one asking their reps and executives a single thing about it. And then looking at the phenomenal advancements of the mobile phone cameras and finally losing all sympathies for the industry that lost over ninety percent of its sales.
 
I know I am sick of the whole thing. I just want to participate in one more round of buying and then hopefully that is it. The industry is changing and soon nobody will care if you have a nice camera or create nice images. At least with regards to paying for them. It is more about the services you provide above a certain bar of acceptability. I believe that is why we are seeing great improvements recently. The makers see the cliff approaching...
 
Yesterday's wedding shoot was for a high end client. Filming without a 2nd shooter I needed 3 cameras and 2 audio recorders to insure full, unblocked coverage of the reveal, the ceremony, the toasts, and even then..

The bride and groom made videos for each other which I shot with the Pocket 6K and Canon 85mm f/1.4L portrait lens. Beautiful soft bokeh, gorgeous.

For the reveal, P6K lens change to 17-55, on sticks shooting a wide safety angle, GH5S on gimbal with 12-60. Both shots nice with no complication.

For the ceremony: From behind the audience I had prepositioned a GH5 on a very tall tripod, with a 40-150mm Olympus zoom aligned and focused using a medium stepladder before the reveal. When I came out from the reveal, the venue operator had moved the tripod and camera with only minutes to go, got this realigned with no time to spare. I set the P6K monopod on its feet, pointed at the groom to record his first reaction to the bride while I manned the GH5S on the gimbal. As the processional was underway, I saw that a bridesmaid had moved forward and was blocking the P6K on the groom. Quickly repositioned it, then continued with the gimbal, shooting the bride's walk up the aisle. Crowd rises to their feet, partially blocking the safety angle from even the tall tripod, but the other angles had coverage. Always a worry, but good shots from the gimbal came off without a hitch. Once the stage was set with bride and groom, set the gimbal on a tripod and moved to check/reset the other two angles. Good coverage of the vows from all angles. At the pouring of the sand, I picked up the gimbal and switched to 60p and moved in for close ups, and exchange of rings, first kiss, and recessional. You always have to anticipate surprises. The crowd rising to their feet can block any angle at a most inopportune moment. You have to have a safety angle and and always be manned on a camera, even picking up any tripod and following the couple if it's needed to secure the shot.

For the toasts, it is always dynamic and subject to change. You need one camera on the couple to get their reactions, a 2nd on the person giving the toast. The dad facing the couple had his back to the first camera the whole time and blocked the couple. Tables were jammed together but I squeezed in-between with the 2nd. The best man was next and he faced the floor the whole time, exact opposite of the dad. So relieved I used 2 cameras here.

None of my cameras can do everything, I just have to plan accordingly for the strengths of each one. I am hopeful a GH6 is not too distant, and that it improves upon the AF trust.
 
I could feel the stress and urgency while reading that breakdown.

Juggling tasks is all too familiar for many of us, and any camera for you will probably never be as useful as another person helping with the filming.
 
So true, but with stress comes the high pay, didn’t have to contend with mosquitos buzzing my shots. There was only one photographer as well.

Today’s wedding will be very different, low end pay, 2 videographers and 2 photographers, lower workload and I’m off at 9:00pm for some needed rest. Takes some bad to go with the good.
 
Etcetera..

I’d be remiss if I didn’t highlight Bassman’s point about service, because that’s the most significant differentiator between high-end and low-end. I had meetings, planning and conversations prior with the couple from last night. Tonight‘s wedding I’ll be meeting the couple for the first time. We haven’t even spoken nor texted. Shooting for complete strangers.
 
Video production has become very normal...so normal that I personally don't think it's even considered a skill anymore.

I feel like it's expected of everyone to produce high-end content at all times. Multi-camera shoots with slick camera movement and editing.

Drones, gimbals...all is included, for free.

Because everyone is so used to watching videos everyday, I think it's become more important to sell yourself than your services. I know that's always been the case because decisions have always been made in life based on people's opinions of others, but today there are so many choices it's like, "So who's it going to be?"..."Well, I like..."
 
Yes, going back in time, those of us who decided to make the investment and learn how to use pro cameras were able to charge more and the people had a certain respect for the trade. Meaning that it is a trade. Now, like Norbro pointed out, the familiarity has bread unrealistic expectations from a cost point of view. This makes me NOT want to invest very much more in my imaging business. I used to pour so much into improving capabilities to offer more and better services. I just do not see it that way anymore. To be fair, some times I see phone footage or still that make me wonder why I am trying to charge for this stuff. The tech has lifted all of the boats so to speak. But people still need and want the service. They just are purposefully ignorant about what the real stuff takes to pull off. So client vetting and protective payment measures along with clearly defined work boundaries are more important than ever.

I have been doing this long enough to not want any camera has stupid stuff programmed in like micro HDMI or 8bit crappy codecs or a lame viewfinder. Getting back the service comment - great tools allow you to focus on other things on a job because they just work. I am sure the GH6 will be a great tool as is the GH5.
 
Bassman2003 said:
.... I am sure the GH6 will be a great tool as is the GH5.
Click to expand...
Since no one knows GH-6's exact specs yet, I would have to agree. It'll be as great a tool as GH-5. But it may not be much better. Because the AF crippling has been a pattern. While other features get upgraded, the AF gets the same crappy treatment for everyone on Sony's half of the biz. Price and other features are negotiable but only Sony gets to keep its AF*.

*Fuji medium format seems to have a decent AF too (Sony sensors) but those are the above-the-market models. Its APS-C cameras are good for stills but not very good for professional video.
 
I agree. Do you think the cartel is not 'letting' Panasonic have great AF in this space or is Panasonic being stubborn for other reasons? I have faith that this company which is so engineering based is capable of great AF. Their video cameras have very good AF. Strange as it is shaping up to be their demise as the other makers catch up on the video specs Panasonic has lead on.
 
They are obviously being held back.

It's been 8 years since decent large-sensor AF was introduced...Panasonic Corporation could have had great AF if they wanted to. No one takes that long and sits back and observes all of the changes in the industry. That is an entire generation of new customers.

As far as their video cameras...IMO, the AF is still questionable, and the flaws are less noticeable with fingernail sensor sizes.
 
Bassman2003 said:
I agree. Do you think the cartel is not 'letting' Panasonic have great AF in this space or is Panasonic being stubborn for other reasons? I have faith that this company which is so engineering based is capable of great AF. Their video cameras have very good AF. Strange as it is shaping up to be their demise as the other makers catch up on the video specs Panasonic has lead on.
Click to expand...

I don't know if they're "held back" as much as choosing to minimize the manufacturing and the research and development costs in a shrinking market. I.e., since Sony does all of the R&D, they get to keep the spoils. Canon is the only other major player and, due to their market share, they can afford and feel better served to control their own R&D and their own feature set. Given what Canon has achieved with R5, they could easily come out with EOS R II for $1,700-$2,000 with a 30-36 MPX sensor, a high quality codec with Log, a DPAF AF and no crop. That would really send the Sony owned portion of the market (Panasonic, Nikon, Sigma, Fuji, Olympus and the remnant of Pentax) into a shell shock. And for $2,500, they could duplicate R5 without the 8K.

R3 might give us an inkling if Canon is looking to really upset the apple cart or whether their discord with the rest of the cartel was only temporary. I feel there's something major brewing. The old idea was to avoid global competition and price bidding amongst all the manufacturers but, now that Sony runs the roost, there's no reason for Canon to keep bowing to the challenger to the throne. Other manufacturers in the Sony group are essentially rendered impotent already.
 
There is no logical way to explain it, DLD.

If Apple and Microsoft and Google all made cameras like the Japanese, you would never, ever wait this long for one or two of the others to catch up on auto-focus.

When this was happening back in 2015, 2016 we were all patient and accepting that Panasonic is most likely working on it.

This is a huge company with major world product experience. Not some fundraising creation.

Auto-focus is a very important feature. It's unacceptable that they don't have something that even works half as well as Canon's or Sony's. These are red flags for any individual mindful of business and technology.
 
DLD said:
Since no one knows GH-6's exact specs yet, I would have to agree. It'll be as great a tool as GH-5. But it may not be much better. Because the AF crippling has been a pattern. While other features get upgraded, the AF gets the same crappy treatment for everyone on Sony's half of the biz. Price and other features are negotiable but only Sony gets to keep its AF*.

*Fuji medium format seems to have a decent AF too (Sony sensors) but those are the above-the-market models. Its APS-C cameras are good for stills but not very good for professional video.
Click to expand...

It would be kind of silly for a GH6 to not be much better than the GH5 2 considering both are new models actively sold by the company. The GH6 is going to have to justify not only its higher cost but its existence. I do agree that AF will likely impact the perception of some users of the camera but not for every user. AF is not a must for every user. Many os the users of the Gh5 did move to the P4k which has zero AF at all. Manual focus is still a reality for many users and not every production requires or should use AF. Take an interview for example. While DPAF can do well, if the subject isn't moving much or an insane narrow DOF is used it should probably stay manual focus. Same for a lot of narrative work.

I like DPAF but its not 100% perfect either. I find myself switching to manual 50% of the time because I don't shoot a talking head directly in the center of the frame. I tend to compose shots with layers that can still confuse DPAF. Just because I have DPAF doesn't mean it should stay on and be used for everything. Its a tool in my shed. I like it for gimbal work and chasing my 3 year old. Any planned professional shoot will still likely be 100% manual focus for me. Its more of the consumer like shooting of my family where I appreciate the DPAF a lot more.
 
Thomas Smet said:
I like DPAF but its not 100% perfect either. I find myself switching to manual 50% of the time because I don't shoot a talking head directly in the center of the frame. I tend to compose shots with layers that can still confuse DPAF. Just because I have DPAF doesn't mean it should stay on and be used for everything. Its a tool in my shed. I like it for gimbal work and chasing my 3 year old. Any planned professional shoot will still likely be 100% manual focus for me. Its more of the consumer like shooting of my family where I appreciate the DPAF a lot more.
Click to expand...

Sounds like you haven't tried the good stuff. Don't get me wrong - I wish video AF didn't exist. I used to be a 1st AC and I'm a good focus puller, thus I had a competitive advantage in an MF-only world. But what the A7SIII can do with a good lens is gobsmacking, and it will follow the subject you select around the frame.

I was going to say that about Tom Roper's wedding post as well - that the A7SIII AF helps me keep a camera angle usable. Both in that if I leave to check my other camera or audio recorder and the subject moves, it'll keep them in focus. But also in that if I need to reposition the camera during a toast or something, I can pick up my gimbal stand and move to my new position in a fluid movement with perfect focus and the shot is usable the whole time. Not usable like in a pinch if you really have to, just usable.

And the thing I really appreciate about it is that it doesn't buzz. All the shots I was getting manually but buzzing periodically are now buzz-free. The AF isn't perfect, but the more I learn about which settings work best in which scenarios, the less I switch to manual focus these days.

I guess I would argue that anyone buying a GH6 could benefit from AF. Even if you only shoot interviews, for one thing, even a shot with moderate DOF won't be totally sharp if the subject is shifting back and forth. And for another, you will probably be getting b-roll to go with it. Like the person walking down a hallway towards camera shot - one of the easiest shots for AF to handle
 
Thomas Smet said:
... It would be kind of silly for a GH6 to not be much better than the GH5 2 considering both are new models actively sold by the company. .
Click to expand...
The question - and let's admit, we're all guessing a bit - is whether the specs will be up on resolution, frame rate, codec, ISO, IBIS and what not but not on AF (even if it has some phase detect cross-points). That will make it a higher grade manual camera but it's likely to go against other manufacturers that perhaps will have lesser specs but a real good AF. And then a customer will have to project a few years forward and his loyalty to the mount and the brand.

Sony should announce A7IV by September, at which point, we will get a better glimpse at what a $2,000-$2,500 range looks like in 2021. One thing the cartel likes to do is to offer unique features, so not to have one model overlap another. Let's see how it works out.
 
Last edited:
Thomas Smet said:
.....The GH6 is going to have to justify not only its higher cost but its existence. I do agree that AF will likely impact the perception of some users of the camera but not for every user. AF is not a must for every user. ........ QUOTE]

Yes AF will be important but of no concern to me. Internal 10bit UHD at 60P recording or even RAW is more important. Lighting changes in the theatre are too extreme to use AF. Blackouts followed by bright light will make any AF video look like it was taken by an amateur. Likewise auto exposure for the same reason. Touch auto focus is important to me though to check. Also need deep depth of field too so full frame is also of no interest. Everyone has different needs I am not sure it is possible to make a camera that fits the needs of everyone.
Click to expand...
 
Had to talk myself off a ledge the other day. Almost bought a used Panasonic S5. Since I now have a Ninja V I was going to sell the Canon M6 and the P4k to have one camera to do it all. Then I was reminded how limited the lens choices are and how expensive they are. I Really would buy a S5 but its the lenses really holding me back. Darn good glass but way too much for me. I considered getting the EF adapter but read its not all that great.

When the heck is Panasonic going to make the cheap and slow zoom lenses for L mount? Optically I know they are not as good but its really asking a lot for someone to invest in a new camera system and not have more realistic points of entry for lenses.

I know a lot of Canon and Nikon users that got their start with the cheaper $200-300 zooms. Its ironic that Panasonic only targets the high end elite and yet the high end elites would likely never use Panasonic if they are going to spend that much. Both Canon and Nikon have a huge advantage there since they can perfectly adapt their older mirror lenses.

A GH6 will likely determine once and for all if I stay with Panasonic. I love their camera bodies but one of the key things that made Panasonic a realistic option for many was adapting lenses. We had a massive range of glass options which we can't really get.

If I want the Dual Native ISO of the GH5S and the larger stills and IBIS I may have no choice but to go with the S5. I kind of doubt the GH6 is going to pull off a miracle here. Its physically impossible to have a GH5S with larger stills resolution on m43.
 
L-mount was conceived as a premium format. The most affordable way to get its glass selection is via Sigma's E-to-L adapters.

Overall L-mount seems to have a very small share of Panasonic's business. E-to-L adapters will, at least, get you both into E and L, so if something should happen to L ...

PS. FotodioX makes EF-to-L and Metabones G-to-L. Quality varies but MetaB has a much better rep. Both are outgoing mounts but the supply should sufficient through this generation of the L-mount cameras. After that, it's anyone's guess.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top