getting a GH4...?

Westmill wrote:

jrg wrote:

What do you think about getting a GH4…? They’re still available, are half the price of a G9 and an even better bargain up against the GH5. And yeah, I know---no IS, no 4K. But the GH4 was really the one to set the standard in its day as a video tool.

Obviously money’s an issue with me. And also the fact that a camera’s a camera. It’s willing to take good pictures so long as you know how to use it properly. I’d love all the added features on an EM-1. II but if I shelled out money every time there’s an upgrade, well, we all know the score…

I was just curious if anybody else had considered the same idea.

I am also looking at the GH4 cameras at the moment. Things are a little different with me. I have a new D4s and D500 cameras, but they are for work. So I want something smaller as a walk around kit ect. I have always had a fondness for four thirds as my first ever digital camera was the Olympus E1. Which I loved big time Recently I inadvertently bought a Panasonic GH1. The GH1 has a number of drawbacks in use for me. 12 million pixel, seemingly very little DR, exposure compensation ect. The GH4 looks like I get a boost in every direction. A few extra pixels, a bit more dynamic range, dedicated buttons for ISO and exposure compensation, more rugged and bigger body. Small is nice but you can get too small Stronger faster shutter too !

Ive no interest in video, which is a waist of features I suppose lol. The Gh4 is starting to look like the perfect camera. I know the g9 is obviously the perfect camera for me but I just do not want to spend that kind of money at the moment.

As a four thirds basic note... I love the four thirds aspect ratio. Ive never been comfy with the very oblong orientation of APSC and FF. Except maybe for landscape work

Kind of brings my thoughts to a side note, while being on the subject of aspect ratio. I see lots of moaning going on in the four thirds forums. Most of which I do not understand lol. One that keeps cropping up is outdated 20 million pixel sensors ect. Again... I do not understand. Pixel pitch is the same or even greater on four thirds than an APSC camera. If you were to extend the length of the four thirds sensor to match the APSC ratio then I think they would be about the same lol

Anyway... back to the subject in hand.... Yup.... GH4 is looking good to me

If you're not into video you are paying for some stuff you won't use, although in addition to really excellent 4k video you also get one of the bigger batteries in the mirrorless World, meaning it shoots more like a DSLR (I don't think I ever worked through two batteries in a day and it was very rare to go through one if it was full to start).

It is quite big and heavy for the sensor size. This is partly to get enough cooling for the video modes.

The pixels are about 10% smaller than those in a 5Dsr. With the AA filter you get about the same per-pixel resolution.

GH5 (GH4) at ISO 200:
Read noise 3.3e (3.9e)
Pixel capacity 16,161e (19,236e - note bigger pixel area)
DR 12.3 stops (12.3 stops)
Panasonic sensor (Sony sensor - true for all ISO )
GH5 plusses vs GH4
Less rolling shutter (you don't care if shooting stills with the mechanical shutter)
No AA filter vs AA filter on GH4
GH5 has slightly better demosaicing, but only affects JPEGs.
9fps C-AF vs 7 on GH4 (but can be slowed by some lenses)
Bigger buffer - 100 vs 40
6k video is basically a super-fast burst shooting mode
No crop for video vs a crop for 4k or pixels skipped for 1080p, but the one sensor pixel per video pixel on the GH4 makes for very clean 4k video.
3.68M dot EVF vs 2.36M (both OLEDs)
Two UHS-II SD slots vs also two but only one is UHS-I
For stills some of the Olys might look good too...