Would the Panasonic GH4 be a suitable "B" camera for the Sony FS100?

Budgieboots

Well-known member
Hello everyone,

I shoot a lot of weddings with my Sony FS100, and I was thinking of finally investing in a "B" camera, so that I wouldn't have to keep renting additional equipment.

Would the Panasonic GH4 be a wise investment if I was looking for a simple "B" camera? Are any of you thinking of doing something similar?
I've been trying to find out if the Panasonic GH4 has approximately comparable high iso noise level and dynamic range performance with the Sony FS100, but haven't found any such direct examples.
All I've seen is comparisons to the previous model, the GH3.

Any thoughts are appreciated.
 
You'd have to pick up 1 or 2 suitable micro 4/3 lenses. I'm sure the colors between the two cameras are somewhat different. Ideally, you would need someone with both cameras (or at least a GH3) to give you first hand experience.
 
Last edited:
To be honest (im an FS100 owner) I think the FS would make a nice Bcam for the GH4
Hi Sam, I am new on the forum and I am about to buy my first real videocamera (FS100) after my Sony A7, which I love so much. After reading your comment and having look at your gorgeous website including http://www.sammorganmoore.com/kit/ I wonder what are the specific that you,a professional, think would make a GH4 a better A camera than the Sony FS100? You have not bought a GH4 either, though? I am very much interesed in the reaons you haven't jump to GH4?
Actualy, I meant my question more generic: what can make a camera with the formfactor/ergonomics/features of GH4 or A7S competitive vs a dedicated camcorder like FS100, FS700, FS7, C100, price excluded?
Thank You so much, Miki
 
Last edited:
My thoughts... We are in an age where people skilled in their craft can match just about any camera.

But, consideration needs to be made in regard to the amount of time one spends in post compared to the budget available.

I have shot multi-cam weddings, but I'm not a wedding videographer. If it were my primary job, I would likely pick matching cameras to cut down on the post time, given the available budgets.
 
Hi Sam, I am new on the forum and I am about to buy my first real videocamera (FS100) after my Sony A7, which I love so much. After reading your comment and having look at your gorgeous website including http://www.sammorganmoore.com/kit/ I wonder what are the specific that you,a professional, think would make a GH4 a better A camera than the Sony FS100? You have not bought a GH4 either, though? I am very much interesed in the reaons you haven't jump to GH4?
Actualy, I meant my question more generic: what can make a camera with the formfactor/ergonomics/features of GH4 or A7S competitive vs a dedicated camcorder like FS100, FS700, FS7, C100, price excluded?
Thank You so much, Miki

The FS100 and the GH4 are different things - one is a ready to shoot video camera (FS100) the second is an 'imaging head'

To me there is a huge difference between a camera with XLR sound, and not.

Today Id say the C100 is the most practical cheap 'cinematic' video camera.. it has XLR sound and ND filters onboard - which make it really fast to use. The ND filters in place on the C100 and missing from the FS100 have to some extent knocked the FS100 off its throne as best cheap 'cinema' camera.

The Gh4 is a different animal - in 4k the image is clearly sharper than either the FS100 or C100 but the Gh4 is missing ND, XLR and also has the horrid micro HDMI if you want to monitor your picture.

So you need to make a choice.. sharpest picture.. or practical shooting.. or spend a lot more and get both in one box (FS7?)

I think for wedding coverage the C100 and GH4 would make the best pair, the FS100/GH4 also a great pair.

S
 
Last edited:
To me there is a huge difference between a camera with XLR sound, and not.
Today Id say the C100 is the most practical cheap 'cinematic' video camera. it has XLR sound and ND filters onboard - which make it really fast to use.
Thank you for the reply! Actually, I am more interested in the A7S vs FS100, since I am an E-mount aficionado.
(1) With the Sony XLR kit (not cheap though) I can connect XLR microphones to an A7 camera either. What do you think with this solution?
(2) You mentioned Canon C100, the mark 2 is 4200 GBP (cvp.com) while the Sony FS700 is 4400 GBP; do you think the FS700 is as great/fine/ok as the C100? One of the reason I love Sony E-mount is Speed Booster, which gives near full-frame DoF/FoV to E-mount APS-C/S35 cameras. This is not possible with the Canon mount.
(3) My last question is about built-in vs lens-mounted ND filters: I guess you use ND filters attached on your camera, what limitations did you have with these (variable) ND filters?
Thank You so much, Miki
 
Well I dont really know the A7s.

I didnt realise the FS700 was so close in price to the C100 - Id prefer that.

Im guessing the image in the C100 is a little sweeter but the FS700 has the HFR and E-mount and ND - I hate canon mount too.

Offboard ND - I hate that too - or rather offboard ND seems to create problems with cameras that have a high base ISO (FS100, A7s etc) - offboard ND is fine with a 200ISO cam like the bmc 4k

Of course the C100,FS100andFS700 have quite thin codecs.. take a loan get an FS7 - the FS7 has a chunkier 10bit onboard codec -and use the FS100 as a Bcam - thats probably where Ill be soon.

S
 
Well I dont really know the A7s.

I didnt realise the FS700 was so close in price to the C100 - Id prefer that.

Im guessing the image in the C100 is a little sweeter but the FS700 has the HFR and E-mount and ND - I hate canon mount too.

Offboard ND - I hate that too - or rather offboard ND seems to create problems with cameras that have a high base ISO (FS100, A7s etc) - offboard ND is fine with a 200ISO cam like the bmc 4k

Of course the C100,FS100andFS700 have quite thin codecs.. take a loan get an FS7 - the FS7 has a chunkier 10bit onboard codec -and use the FS100 as a Bcam - thats probably where Ill be soon.

S

The C100 has ND built in as well.
 
Back
Top