GH5 How interested are you in a GH6 anymore?

Ron Evans said:
For family video or even stills I just use my Sony AX53. Stabilizer is superb, 20 times zoom , ND's etc. I just shoot HD as a like 60P smooth video. Good match for all the others using their phones !
Click to expand...

I want to start shooting and viewing HDR on my 4k HDR TV so I'm really looking for at the very least 10bit log. Yes I have had friends and colleagues tell me I'm nuts to attempt HDR right now. Especially since most TVs including mine are only a subset of HDR capabilities right now. I'm not opposed to getting a new TV however when we eventually get 1500 nit consumer TVs. As odd as this sounds one can use their Ninja V with 1000 nits as a crude HDR grading monitor. Very tiny and far from optimal but it works to a certain degree. Since I'm not trying t deliver HDR I think its fine for now until our display technology gets better.
 
For me its a matter of convenience when family are around. The AX53 is simple point and shoot with good stabilizer face detection etc. HDR would be nice but I do not think anyone would care for the family shoots. I shoot Vlog on both GH5 and GH5S to Ninja V's for theatre shoots though in reality they end up on DVD's !!! At least the master is HDR based on scopes as I do not really have a HDR preview monitor to look at. This is just a very serious hobby after all. I have lately been playing with using Resolve Color Management and this seems to work really well so will do that if theatre shoots start again !! Actually have a couple lined up for the fall.

I got a new Sony 50" X90J which is really nice. Have transferred some of the HDR archives to USB drive and played back on it and they look great compared to an upscaled Blu ray. Nice improvement. But I think one needs to know what to look for as I feel the average viewer may not see much difference to the upscaling. Difference is detail in the shadows and specular highlights. Could also be the difference between compression of AVC for Bluray or h265 for the USB drive.
 
Btw doug jensen reports using AF and ISO 12800 for shooting wildlife with super telephotos. Of course, that doesn't mean that you couldn't get good results with m43, possibly at an equivalent exposure on a shorter focal length with a speedbooster. Although with a speedbooster you probably wouldn't get good AF even if the camera had it. (And here we're talking about 1200mm focal length, not 400mm.)

I'm just pointing out more scenarios where these "unprofessional" features prove useful, in particular in the context of wildlife shooting, where I agree that m43 has advantages.

it's also worth noting that he was using a mirrorless lens which seemed superior to older lens designs. And basically, you're not going to be able to speedboost the best stills lenses to m43 going forward. Both because of improvements in lens designs (thanks to computer-aided optical formulas, new coatings) and also just because of design advantages afforded by the shorter flange distance. Just saying. It seems to me, for example, that the new top of the line canon/nikon/sony 50mm soundly beat their DSLR counterparts
 
Last edited:
The godparents of my daughter just called and their son is getting married. They of course asked me to shoot photos for the wedding. Just when I thought I was done with that stuff forever. Hard to say no to them since they have done so much for my daughter.

Almost bought A used S5 and used sigma 24-70 this morning because of that. Then I thought about how good the M6 mk2 is for stills and I think I will just stick with what I have for now. Thanks to the APS-C sensor and 32MP I can still use my Tamron 17-50 f2.8 and G2 70-200 f2.8 as is and I know they work very well. I also have a native Sigma 30mm f1.4 for the normal stuff where I can move around and frame as needed. For portraits instead of buying a whole new FF system I can either get the Sigma 56mm f1.4 which is like a 85mm with the crop or get the Rokinon AF 85mm f1.4 which with the crop is like a 135mm. Both great portrait focal lengths on FF. The autofocus version of the Rokinon is reviewed and rated much higher than their old cine lenses were. Even wide open it looks pretty sharp. This way I'm only spending $500 and I should be pretty well covered. Might also pick up the sigma 16mm f1.4 for some wide interior establishment shots but that feels optional and kind of a special use lens for just a few shots. Might just use the Tamron 17mm f2.8 for that and hope I can get it bright enough.

The wedding is not until next year so I'm hoping the Gh6 is out by then. If it is and it kicks butt I will sell the M6 and get that and have every lens I could ever want.
 
Off various Rrrrrrrrumors, there'll be several announcements in September, including R3, Z9 and whatever Sony feels like announcing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zim
DLD said:
Off various Rrrrrrrrumors, there'll be several announcements in September, including R3, Z9 and whatever Sony feels like announcing.
Click to expand...

Yeah except the R3 might be around $6k and I have absolutely no desire to buy a Nikon or Sony camera. Its either a GH6, R6 or S5 for me in my future. Nothing else is even in the back of my mind or remotely even the slightest consideration.
 
Thomas Smet said:
Yeah except the R3 might be around $6k and I have absolutely no desire to buy a Nikon or Sony camera. Its either a GH6, R6 or S5 for me in my future. Nothing else is even in the back of my mind or remotely even the slightest consideration.
Click to expand...

R3 should be around $4,500, maybe even lower.

As to personal choices, that's what they are. Off the latest sales figures, Canon and Sony own about a third of the mirrorless market each. In the $2,000-$2,500 range, the cleanup hitter is expected to be A7IV.

PS. Sony has a problem with the A7SIII production. No reason was given. Like its faux competitors, Sony tends to release the higher end models and drop the older performers down in price slots. Maybe it's already ramping up the A7IV production on the same line as A7SIII. Who knows.
 
Actually kind of considering the S5 or R6 again. It seems to be a close race between those two cameras. As much of a m43 fan as I have always been I’m starting to also wonder if it’s time to move on to FF.

even considering getting the S5 with the 20-60 for now which seems to actually be a good general use lens. Not sure what I would do about the other lenses I need yet but the Sigma f2.8 seem like good options and I may not miss the OS as much since the S5 has really good IBIS. I can get the body and lens for $2,000 vs just the R6 body for $2,500. That leaves me $500 to at least get a 85mm f1.4 or 1.8 and adapt my Tamron 70-200 f2.8 and hope it works well until I can replace it with a native Sigma 70-200 f2.8.

as much as I love the Tamron f2.8 it’s a massive beast to shoot with and I’m kind of missing smaller and lighter lenses. Considering how much better FF is I may even go back to slower variable lenses.

im just getting tired having to use beasts of lenses on m43 to make it usable.
 
Scratch that. There is no Sigma 70-200. Only a 24-70. Oh well. I might just wait for the Panasonic 100-300 f4.5-f5.6. Lighter and more of the reach I prefer.

while the R6 is more EF lenses work great with it and they have more affordable RF lens options so I guess in the end I will spend about the same. It’s hard to give up raw video however which I can do with the S5 to my Ninja V. Plus it’s 6k 14 stop raw which is better than my P4k. ISO 6400 looks much cleaner than it ever did on my P4k as well.
 
The 20-60 looks pretty cool. I dunno about the quality, but that's a great range for close combat. The tamron 70-180 2.8 is lightweight and beautiful but I don't know if they'll make it for mounts besides sony. But they seem to be the king of compact now
 
Fuji's medium format is supposed to be announced on Sept, 2nd. 50MPX for about $4,000. Pretty much the opposite end of the GH-6 but it shows where the market is now.
 
DLD said:
Fuji's medium format is supposed to be announced on Sept, 2nd. 50MPX for about $4,000. Pretty much the opposite end of the GH-6 but it shows where the market is now.
Click to expand...

And on the opposite end the iPhone 13 gets even better. We seem to have two very different dramatic ends of the spectrum when it comes to camera wow these days. The iPhone will replace all film making cameras side and the hell, FF isn't even good enough anymore side lets go medium.

Whats that leave in the middle? Is there a middle left? m43 always was the middle and it kind of still is with those two extremes.

Watched a video where Canon will keep pushing the price of FF RF mount cameras lower like $700 or $800 soon. Interesting times.
 
Thomas Smet said:
Whats that leave in the middle? Is there a middle left? m43 always was the middle and it kind of still is with those two extremes....
Click to expand...

That's entire up to the Japanese manufacturers. They can make a great MFT camera but wouldn't want it to cannibalize sales of the full frame. Or even APS-C.

If one considers the new $700 Sony E-10 as the opening salvo of the next series of releases, then Sony's APS-C are taking the entry level niche and Fuji's the high end, with $1,000-$1,200 being the overlap. Canon will probably match E-10' specs - 24 MPX, 4K 8-bit 100 Mbps video - in full frame with RP II (or whatever it's called) but even that is likely a "let's have inexpensive cameras even we don't make much money off it" move. And that's because the median is hovering between $1,200 and $1,800, with higher priced units bringing in correspondingly higher margins but with fewer pieces moved.

The other problem is that the camera business also works on the best-laid-plans principle. One never knows which one will catch fire (and I don't mean R5 either).

PS. A $4,000 medium format camera should have 8K. But Sony is going to protect A1 and Fuji will abide by their conditions.
 
As the world economy tanks and inflation will destroy buying power I would think the Japanese will either make a half ass camera or go all out and delivery something really good at a lower price. Plus the iPhone market has to hurt them.
 
Live by the technology sword, die by the technology sword...they milked the tech for about 30 years until life forced them to make much better cameras.

If it was up to them, we'd still be paying $15,000 for 4K/30p instead of $4K for 8K RAW video in a stills camera.

The overheating isn't from the specs...it's from the hurt pride.
 
The murkiest part of the current market is judging any competitive spirit, if at all, between Sony and Canon. Both are picking up market share seemingly without much effort, with other participants simply falling by the wayside without much nudging. Even after the R5 and R6 successes, Sony hadn't put out a product in the same niches. Instead, they put out the "above the market" A1 and "below the market" E-10 without effecting either of Canon's major breadwinners. The very least they could have done was to price A7SIII more aggressively vs. R5 but that's one camera that offered no discounts since its release.* It may change with either A7IV, A7SIV or A7RV but those are still in the rumors stage. And, if there's no "competitive spirit", you'll see a very small and slow advancement in features and performance. And a further erosion of the business as a whole.

*Of course, Sony has recently announced that they're experiencing production delays with A7SIII, so it makes no sense to discount it now.

PS. Likewise, Sony could have easily priced A1 closer to R5 but there's a $2,600 gap between the two despite a significant similarity in performance.
 
DLD said:
The murkiest part of the current market is judging any competitive spirit, if at all, between Sony and Canon. Both are picking up market share seemingly without much effort, with other participants simply falling by the wayside without much nudging. Even after the R5 and R6 successes, Sony hadn't put out a product in the same niches. Instead, they put out the "above the market" A1 and "below the market" E-10 without effecting either of Canon's major breadwinners. The very least they could have done was to price A7SIII more aggressively vs. R5 but that's one camera that offered no discounts since its release.* It may change with either A7IV, A7SIV or A7RV but those are still in the rumors stage. And, if there's no "competitive spirit", you'll see a very small and slow advancement in features and performance. And a further erosion of the business as a whole.

*Of course, Sony has recently announced that they're experiencing production delays with A7SIII, so it makes no sense to discount it now.

PS. Likewise, Sony could have easily priced A1 closer to R5 but there's a $2,600 gap between the two despite a significant similarity in performance.
Click to expand...
I don't think the camera manufactures will ever change how they do business. That is to divide the marketplace into small feature niche hierarchy of cameras that don't directly compete against one another.

They didn't invent this strategy, in many industries the established companies prefer to maintain the status quo and avoid competing against each other on price, it's just more in your face with cameras.

I was watching a history of Atari and at one point they made a mistake by producing too much of game that was a flop. But rather than discount the game they took like a million copies dumped them in hole in the ground and poured concrete on top to prevent anyone from digging them up. Reminds me how camera manufactures rather discontinue a model that isn't selling well than offer it at discount. They do offer discounts but always for a very limited time to help retailers move their old inventory to make way for the new model.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top