I totally understand your perspective there, David. With the rate of tech progress, and pricing, that is pretty much how it is now. stuff doesn't last.... stuff gets replaced with newer, better. I'm just cheesed that things now are at the point that a consumer camera could easily shoot as good as quality as a Red or Alexa (to the common viewing audience) NOW giving me the option to film stories myself that were previously completely out of reach due to cost of quality.
GH4 LOVIN' the GH4!
- Thread starter wwjd
- Start date
I totally understand your perspective there, David. With the rate of tech progress, and pricing, that is pretty much how it is now. stuff doesn't last.... stuff gets replaced with newer, better. I'm just cheesed that things now are at the point that a consumer camera could easily shoot as good as quality as a Red or Alexa (to the common viewing audience) NOW giving me the option to film stories myself that were previously completely out of reach due to cost of quality.
David W. Jones
Veteran
I understand completely.
Small form factor 4K camera for $1700
Small form factor 4K camera for $1700
Jaime Valles
Veteran
The entire GH4 weighs about as much as the BATTERY for the RED ONE. Even though the R1 shoots in RAW and the GH4 in 4:2:0 H.264 I'm still able to get better results more easily from my GH4.
If someone isn't able to get amazing images from a GH4, then the problem is with the shooter, not the camera.
Second that last sentence. Waited a long time to acquire a camera all the while technology moved along then exploded with so much to choose. Looked at the GH2 back in the day keeping all the specs even now. But when the net lit up with the GH4 I knew I just had to get one. A really great menu IMO and the real time tools promote a better understanding how your imaging is turning out. What a superb advancement in features and technology at a price many can afford
renegadewill
Well-known member
ReelWorksMedia
Well-known member
Thanks....I deleted my post because I searched for the answer online. My original question was pertaining to the DR of the GH4 and how it compares to the 5D3. Thanks for answering that aldolega. I appreciate that.
Wow...is that true? The DR of the GH4 os more on par with the 5D3raw? Thats great news.
Wow...is that true? The DR of the GH4 os more on par with the 5D3raw? Thats great news.
pyproductions
New member
I saw this thread and threw a couple shots together from projects I have been able to shoot with the GH4. I am going to echo the over all mode of this thread, I love the GH4. I have been on the Micro 4/3 system since the GH1 and every iteration of the line is a big step forward in quality and features.
Yes, when the camera is properly tuned. ( i.e. You shot with the right settings )
Oh, come on, the GH4 is old hat. Aren't we all waiting for the GH5 
rogar-BigGrin(DBG)? But seriously, there's always the next new camera that's better, but we've already seen whole features shot on the GH1 and GH2, so those were good enough, and GH3 was an improvement, and now we have the GH4. At what point do you say "good enough" and "I don't care if the next one is 'better' in some sense, this one does all I want". I mean, is the GH4 there for you, so if tomorrow a GH5 came out, you'd ignore it? What if the GH5 takes care of some GH4 weaknesses (as some see it), namely low light performance and noise at higher ISO? I'm not talking a7s levels of low light performance, but at least a couple of stops better with better cleaner DR at higher ISO. Or are you set with the GH4 forever?
rogar-BigGrin(DBG)? But seriously, there's always the next new camera that's better, but we've already seen whole features shot on the GH1 and GH2, so those were good enough, and GH3 was an improvement, and now we have the GH4. At what point do you say "good enough" and "I don't care if the next one is 'better' in some sense, this one does all I want". I mean, is the GH4 there for you, so if tomorrow a GH5 came out, you'd ignore it? What if the GH5 takes care of some GH4 weaknesses (as some see it), namely low light performance and noise at higher ISO? I'm not talking a7s levels of low light performance, but at least a couple of stops better with better cleaner DR at higher ISO. Or are you set with the GH4 forever?
R Hudson
Well-known member
The start of your video skips on playback. HA! kidding.
I have a Canon T3i - moving to GH, I FINALLY get REAL HD if I need it. Not to mention almost full 4K!! Looks and feels way more professional to me.
Lots of great validation in this thread.
I have yet to move to the GH4. I went with a G6 for now and moved there from a t3i myself. Going from a t3i to even a G6 was monumental in terms of IQ. I mean, I was blown away. I loved the controls of the t3i and I like Canon color but the difference in detail between the t3i and the G6 was unbelievable. The GH4 is even better so even more progress. I'm not a hater but I am done with Canon for "affordable" video.
Cosimo Bullo
Veteran
G6 is a great little cam.
CustomerGH4
Well-known member
Fly like a G6.
I'm at that point now, yes. More than good enough. I've witnessed first hand my T3i production projected on the big screen, and with more crew and budget, one COULD film a feature with the T3i and project in 2K and it would look EPIC. Now, GH4 4K brings me detail greater than what they were shooting very famous and successful digital movies on a few years back.... I've got no more excuses, and don't even need more than 2K to film a feature - as long as the story is great, no one will care about which camera it is on.
The T3i was NOT good enough to capture real HD, and I had to have better.
Ready (and starting!) to rock!
Hollywood has lived forever without shooting tons of low light footage, I can live without an A7S. I own lights
Cosimo Bullo
Veteran
I love this camera too, took me 2 months every single day testing and filming to find the settings I love (no I am not a slow learner...just fussy) it takes time to get these things right.
No problems with extreme contrast scenes (I live in Australia...bright sun, clear skies and dark shadows) yes I use iDynamic in certain scenes and its amazing when there is enough light.
I have no problems at 1600 ISO either provided there is sufficient light, the first footage I shot that I really liked...was indoors with slightly low light and it was shot at 1600 ISO (no noise that I could see)
Lately I just LOVE the 4K photo mode and now mainly shoot in that in Standard or Natural, the results just blow me away...definitely more so than when I first got the camera.
Over time I have really grown to love this camera!! I would still be happy if it was 3 times the price...well maybe double the price LOL!!
No problems with extreme contrast scenes (I live in Australia...bright sun, clear skies and dark shadows) yes I use iDynamic in certain scenes and its amazing when there is enough light.
I have no problems at 1600 ISO either provided there is sufficient light, the first footage I shot that I really liked...was indoors with slightly low light and it was shot at 1600 ISO (no noise that I could see)
Lately I just LOVE the 4K photo mode and now mainly shoot in that in Standard or Natural, the results just blow me away...definitely more so than when I first got the camera.
Over time I have really grown to love this camera!! I would still be happy if it was 3 times the price...well maybe double the price LOL!!
Hi wwjd
Just a bit of personal background first, I am not a DP like many on this forum are, I am a lifelong artist (Airbrush...murals etc..) and a professional 3d artist for a living (build 3d worlds, cities etc...), also a musician and composer.
So I have had to rely on an artistic eye throughout my life, I simply go on what pleases my eye best,and that applies to vids straight out of the camera...even before post work, which I have done a lot of over time...mainly in AE.
So what I like...others may not and taking that all into consideration, here is what I have discovered using the 4K photo mode.
I first got interested in shooting vids in the 4K photo mode after reading a post in Personal View (Cant remember exactly where it was) the guy was saying what he liked about it, and it sounded like he knew what he was talking about,
so I decided to have a look at it and not dismiss it as a photo grabbing gimmick for stills only. Like you...I have no real interest in pulling stills in the camera (nice feature...but not one I need right now)
So what do I like?
First what I dont really like...Cine-D and Cine V, as I mentioned before Cine-D especially with the contrast wound out...to my eyes is pretty washed out (I understand that people want a flat image...but for me it doesnt work) and when you put the pop back in post, it generally does not look all that great...to my eyes.
However Cine-D with minimal adjustments (Positive or negative) to the Sharpness, Hue, Noise etc...it can look pretty good and I kinda like it.
Cine-V I simply find too contrasty, too much differentiation between the highlights and shadows, too extreme for me.
So eventually I ended up gravitating to the Natural and Standard profiles in 4K movie mode (actually Ultra HD), because they (for me) provide the best and most balanced looking image direct from the camera and grade nicely.
Then I started using the 4K photo mode...I prefer that over every other mode, using the natural profile...or standard.
Now just today I did a side by side test in UHD Movie movie mode in the Standard Profile and using exactly the same settings (everything identical...AP/ISO/WB and all the main photo settings sharpness, hue etc.....I switched to 4K photo mode and shot exactly the same scene on a still tripod and using the same exact point of focus.
I did this with 5 different scenes, complex leafy trees, wide open scenes, ground scenes and ornamental close ups.
Every single time the 4K photo mode looked better, somehow more detailed, and more dimension with slightly more robust colors, overall it's clearer (not sharper...just more detailed)...of course its probably not, what I think is going on is they have got the contrast right,and boosted the colors a little its what Cine-V tries to be without the exaggerated contrast that kinda looks ugly to me.
In other words is more like what you eye would see, in fact...its very very close, compared to the 4K photo mode the scenes I shot with the same everything in 4K movie mode looked a bit thin and washed out...and this is in Natural, if you used the Cine-D settings the difference would be vast...believe me...even with exactly the same -1-1 -3 +1 +1 photo settings.
This is not not a little thing, I casually played a recent test I did to my wife using the Cine-D profile and the same settings in Natural in 4K photo mode and the difference was A LOT!!
I cant remember her exact comments...something like that one (4K photo/Nat) looks miles better.
The other thing I really like about the GH4 is I can use a much faster shutter with great results in bright scenes when I need to,I could never really do that on a hacked GH2, I only used 24p/50 shutter on the GH2
So there you have it...I have my settings I am happy with, and I am a fussy bastard LOL!!!
Others opinions may vary tho....but I am a very happy camper. When I first read about firmware 2.0 and the 4K photo mode...I thought booooring!! but now I am so glad they added that feature.
I'll be interested to hear what your views are after trying it, of course I realize you may not agree, but I have definitely found what I like in the GH4.
Cheers
Just a bit of personal background first, I am not a DP like many on this forum are, I am a lifelong artist (Airbrush...murals etc..) and a professional 3d artist for a living (build 3d worlds, cities etc...), also a musician and composer.
So I have had to rely on an artistic eye throughout my life, I simply go on what pleases my eye best,and that applies to vids straight out of the camera...even before post work, which I have done a lot of over time...mainly in AE.
So what I like...others may not and taking that all into consideration, here is what I have discovered using the 4K photo mode.
I first got interested in shooting vids in the 4K photo mode after reading a post in Personal View (Cant remember exactly where it was) the guy was saying what he liked about it, and it sounded like he knew what he was talking about,
so I decided to have a look at it and not dismiss it as a photo grabbing gimmick for stills only. Like you...I have no real interest in pulling stills in the camera (nice feature...but not one I need right now)
So what do I like?
First what I dont really like...Cine-D and Cine V, as I mentioned before Cine-D especially with the contrast wound out...to my eyes is pretty washed out (I understand that people want a flat image...but for me it doesnt work) and when you put the pop back in post, it generally does not look all that great...to my eyes.
However Cine-D with minimal adjustments (Positive or negative) to the Sharpness, Hue, Noise etc...it can look pretty good and I kinda like it.
Cine-V I simply find too contrasty, too much differentiation between the highlights and shadows, too extreme for me.
So eventually I ended up gravitating to the Natural and Standard profiles in 4K movie mode (actually Ultra HD), because they (for me) provide the best and most balanced looking image direct from the camera and grade nicely.
Then I started using the 4K photo mode...I prefer that over every other mode, using the natural profile...or standard.
Now just today I did a side by side test in UHD Movie movie mode in the Standard Profile and using exactly the same settings (everything identical...AP/ISO/WB and all the main photo settings sharpness, hue etc.....I switched to 4K photo mode and shot exactly the same scene on a still tripod and using the same exact point of focus.
I did this with 5 different scenes, complex leafy trees, wide open scenes, ground scenes and ornamental close ups.
Every single time the 4K photo mode looked better, somehow more detailed, and more dimension with slightly more robust colors, overall it's clearer (not sharper...just more detailed)...of course its probably not, what I think is going on is they have got the contrast right,and boosted the colors a little its what Cine-V tries to be without the exaggerated contrast that kinda looks ugly to me.
In other words is more like what you eye would see, in fact...its very very close, compared to the 4K photo mode the scenes I shot with the same everything in 4K movie mode looked a bit thin and washed out...and this is in Natural, if you used the Cine-D settings the difference would be vast...believe me...even with exactly the same -1-1 -3 +1 +1 photo settings.
This is not not a little thing, I casually played a recent test I did to my wife using the Cine-D profile and the same settings in Natural in 4K photo mode and the difference was A LOT!!
I cant remember her exact comments...something like that one (4K photo/Nat) looks miles better.
The other thing I really like about the GH4 is I can use a much faster shutter with great results in bright scenes when I need to,I could never really do that on a hacked GH2, I only used 24p/50 shutter on the GH2
So there you have it...I have my settings I am happy with, and I am a fussy bastard LOL!!!
Others opinions may vary tho....but I am a very happy camper. When I first read about firmware 2.0 and the 4K photo mode...I thought booooring!! but now I am so glad they added that feature.
I'll be interested to hear what your views are after trying it, of course I realize you may not agree, but I have definitely found what I like in the GH4.
Cheers
Last edited: