Peter C.
Veteran
The only thing the old wired analog phones could do that smart phones can't is slamming the receiver down, but they probably have an app for that too. :-(
GH5 How interested are you in a GH6 anymore?
- Thread starter filmguy123
- Start date
There are no secrets to making either the consumer level cameras or the consumer level smartphones. And Olympus can easily accomplish what BMD or ZCam have done. If others let them.
Can't do this either.
BobKo
Well-known member
I shoot lots of different things, from concerts to news features to office videos to car maintenance videos to DIY home repair shoots. (One of my recent videos that has taken off nicely is how to install an Andersen storm door.) There is always a need to get closeups that the videographer (usually my wife) didn't get exactly the way I want it. I'm not saying that I would produce 8K videos, but I will definitely shoot in 8K and take advantage of the higher resolution. I use Adobe Premiere and probably zoom in on 40 percent of my clips. If I can do a single stand-up intro and scale it three or four times to make it look like multiple takes, that's a technique worth using. If I can shoot in 8K, scale up to 200 percent and still get a full-resolution 4K render, that is a benefit to me.
Peter C.
Veteran
LOL the good ole phone. I don't miss the rotary dial. That I'm fine living without.
We've really beat the GH6 topic to death. When the GH series was released it had a niche to fill because Canon and Sony were crippling themselves in one way or another. No flip screen, record time limits, not many lens options, af, 10 bit color, 60p, 4k, battery life, etc. Because Panasonic didn't have a cinema line to protect they could offer video centric mirrorless. But over the past few years full frame mirrorless have caught up these advantage now have evaporated. It's not a question of whether the GH5 is still a good camera. It is and will continue to be, but were are talking about the current marketplace that is highly competitive with better options at those price points. Even if we exclude the competition Panasonic itself has boxed itself into a corner where they have to be concerned with competing against it's own product lines. Take for example light sensitivity, if they released the GH6 with better light sensitivity that would compete against the GH5s specialty or the S5. They can't raise the price above the S5. The sales they would gain from the GH6 would come at the expense of their full frame cameras mainly the S5. I think in many respects they're prisoner of their own making. The GH6 fate was sealed when they started their full frame line, they don't want to say that and they can't say that, but that's the way it is.
We've really beat the GH6 topic to death. When the GH series was released it had a niche to fill because Canon and Sony were crippling themselves in one way or another. No flip screen, record time limits, not many lens options, af, 10 bit color, 60p, 4k, battery life, etc. Because Panasonic didn't have a cinema line to protect they could offer video centric mirrorless. But over the past few years full frame mirrorless have caught up these advantage now have evaporated. It's not a question of whether the GH5 is still a good camera. It is and will continue to be, but were are talking about the current marketplace that is highly competitive with better options at those price points. Even if we exclude the competition Panasonic itself has boxed itself into a corner where they have to be concerned with competing against it's own product lines. Take for example light sensitivity, if they released the GH6 with better light sensitivity that would compete against the GH5s specialty or the S5. They can't raise the price above the S5. The sales they would gain from the GH6 would come at the expense of their full frame cameras mainly the S5. I think in many respects they're prisoner of their own making. The GH6 fate was sealed when they started their full frame line, they don't want to say that and they can't say that, but that's the way it is.
Last edited:
But there's only one other hybrid mirrorless camera - the A7s3 that doesn't have the silly 30 minute time limit and a full size hdmi and that's 3 times the price of the GH5, hardly the same price point.
Last edited:
Peter C.
Veteran
All the competitors are releasing cameras with flip out screens, no time limits, IBIS and 10 bit color. Theses were the strengths of GH5 and once you consider the weakness it's complete rout. The only place the GH5 can compete on is price, but this thread is about the GH6. If they released it they'd face a pricing problem. What would be the point of spending all the r&d time and money to release a better camera that sells for less than what GH5 originally sold for $2k or for only a couple of hundred more than it's current price, that would only take sales away from their entry full frame camera the S5?
Last edited:
I think strengths and weakness have to be related to use. I have the GH5 and GH5S. Everything I do is on a tripod so I do not need IBIS or even image stabilizer for that matter. The cameras are fixed I do not touch them much when shooting. Only to reset exposure if it goes too far off. Always focus in manual though do use touch focus, which works well. Use Ninja V to get ProRes in 10bit 4:2:2 and a nice big screen to view. A new camera for me would be 8K as I have said before. Would be nice to get UHD60P internal 10 bit h265 and external as now to Ninja V but 8K would be more attractive. I am actually not interested in continuous auto focus or IBIS for my applications. For instance an 8k version of the BGH1 would be great for me.
Thomas Smet
Veteran
Panasonic did have a cinema line to protect. Varicam. They also had a huge broadcast presence and still do to this day. I would argue Panasonic is used a lot more in a pro broadcast and film world than Canon is. Sony has a massive presence in the broadcast world but not so much in the cinema world. The Cinealta (F900 used on Star Wars Attack of the Clones and the F950 used on Revenge of the Sith) had its moment but it was short lived. Red, Arri absolutely dwarf just about anybody else when it comes to cinema use. Varicam has made great inroads with scripted TV production with dual native ISO.
I think what Panasonic did was not fear competing but embrace it so every range of cameras from the GH5 up to the Varicam could be used on a production. No other company really has that except for maybe now BMD.
You didn't have to go through all that although you seemed to have edited your response loads of times so I'm not sure I'm even replying to your final thoughts...
My point in my other post was that other than the recent release of the A7s3, the gh5 (and S1H) are still the only true workhorse hybrid mirrorless cameras that you can film all day with and reliably connect a monitor to - micro hdmi is an accident waiting to happen every single time you use it. That reliability is worth more to some people than a slightly nicer image from a flakey overheating R5 for example and I would argue makes it a better main camera. Cause you can trust it. I wouldn't use an R5 as my only camera on a video production job but would have no qualms using just a gh5. Other cameras Catching up with some specs doesn't tell the whole picture, and there is still a market for this type of reliable workhorse camera
Peter C.
Veteran
After re-reading my post and re thinking what you said edited it down to a more concise post.
I will not argue that full HDMI isn't nice but even the S5 doesn't have one although you can get the more expensive model that does. If you want to put it all on a full HDMI connection the BM4k has full hdmi and uses M43 lenses. And if you want to say AF doesn't matter than that's an even stronger argument for the BM4k.
The point of this thread is the GH6, it's not to argue that you shouldn't use the GH5 or that it's not useful to your work flow. The sustainability of camera doesn't come down to one feature or one person's individual taste. There are people here who have said I don't care about auto focus, but that doesn't reflect the average buyer or what most people would expect out of a hybrid camera. Cameras don't exist on an island they are compared to other options. What you are describing is a very narrow audience that I think Panasonic will be struggling to sell enough cameras to make it worth their while. Just remember the lower the price the more cameras they have to sell.
Last edited:
markoconnell
Well-known member
"All the competitors are releasing cameras with flip out screens, no time limits, IBIS and 10 bit color. Theses were the strengths of GH5 and once you consider the weakness it's complete rout."
This is why I love this forum. Information that matters from people who know.
This is why I love this forum. Information that matters from people who know.
markoconnell
Well-known member
"Unless the GH6 has *both* internal eNDs *and* IBIS, then it won't find success being priced at US$3K"
Yet another oracle.
Yet another oracle.
Not really. Pro division vs. consumer. An $1800 Gh-5 vs. $6,500 EVA 1, with LT going for about $20,000 as a shooting package. Too big a gap.
Of course, Nikon, Olympus and Fuji had absolutely nothing to protect and still stayed from the low end cinema niche. Which BMD was more than happy to fill.
Samuel Dilworth
Well-known member
Which are these cameras with no time limits?
Panasonic’s own S5 has a time limit. Canon’s R6 has both the hard time limit and overheating limits. The Nikon Z6 and Z6 II have a time limit. Sony’s α7S III does not, but it costs way more than any GH-series camera ever did. (I’m sure some people cross-shop the α7S III with the GH5S, but not many. Any that do are a testament to the phenomenal value of the GH-series.) Meanwhile, the α7 III has, you guessed it, the half-hour time limit.
It’s easy to glibly say other cameras have caught up and surpassed the GH-series, but when you actually shop for one of these for your own use, as I’ve been doing recently, it’s harder to overlook the flaws of the full-framers.
That’s precisely the point. Neither does the α7 III, nor the Z6, nor the R6, nor even the $4k R5. The α7S III does, but at 2–3× the price of a GH camera.
It’s not just the full-size HDMI port that is missing. The GH cameras have a large number of video tools and features that these full-framers lack (though the S5 has inherited a lot of them and is an obvious stand-out for affordable full-frame video except for its sensor limitations: no OLPF and kinda slow readout).
Samuel Dilworth
Well-known member
Meanwhile, I have some unexpected good news to report: the GH6 is arriving next week!
You heard that right. Panasonic’s hand was forced by my buying a GH5S, finally putting my money where my mouth is.
Thank me next week.
You heard that right. Panasonic’s hand was forced by my buying a GH5S, finally putting my money where my mouth is.
Thank me next week.
Bassman2003
Veteran
Thanks for taking one for the team!
combatentropy
Veteran
I have a stupid question. Why is an HDMI port important, and why must it be a full-size one? (I guess that's two stupid questions.) Every thread I read, there is at least one post about HDMI, and make it full size. So everybody wants it, everybody gets it, but me.
I'm guessing it's because you want to attach an external recorder. But I thought 10-bit 4:2:2 was good enough and is now available internally.
Or maybe it's because you want a bigger screen. That's a shame. I personally think the ideal size is 4", but they keep making them with 3" screens. 5" is too big for my tastes. Still, I would rather have a 3" built-in screen than run around with a big ol' screen attached (your tastes may differ). If your reason is a bigger or better screen, tell me, what would you require to stop wanting one? A 5" screen is probably too big ever to fit on a camera this size. But maybe 4". Or maybe 3" or 3.5" would suffice for you if the resolution was good enough, or the focus-assistive instrumentation was good enough (peaking, etc.).
And again, what's the deal with everyone wanting the HDMI full size? Doesn't it take just a cable adapter to go from HDMI to micro-HDMI?
Anyway, as far as the ports of the future (the near future), I would rather have USB 4. It's replacing everything: old USB, Thunderbolt, power cords, HDMI, display port, etc. It's 40 Gbps!!!
ahalpert
Major Contributor
I dont enjoy rigging a 7" screen on my Ronin-S but it's necessary for 2 reasons - I can judge critical focus by it, and I can see it when I cant see the onboard monitor. I also enjoy eyeing the image. It's better for framing and I can read more details. I'm not sure I ever tangled with a lesser HDMI port on my cameras for regular use. But when I was an AC dealing with 5D etc, the mini HDMI cables broke constantly