getting a GH4...?

jrg wrote:

4K. I stand pleasantly corrected! Is this 4K different in some way? I misread the side-by-side specs. Is MPEG-4 4K?

It has a 2.3 crop in video as opposed to the ordinary 2x in stills

Dr_Jon wrote:

I've had GH3, GH4 and GH5 and I think the first two have some issues compared to IBIS cameras, plus the 1080p in both skips a lot of pixels and so suffers from moire and aliasing. The GH4 4k is excellent though, and shoots great video in Cinelike-D (avoid VLog-L as that can fall apart on an 8-bit camera and the GH4 uses less than 8-bits for it (okay, dug out a calculator, 7.3 bits)...

Interesting. Especially since you’ve had all three models. Since I’m video-illiterate I sadly can’t appreciate some of the merits you’re describing RE the GH4. Not that I don’t want to learn about them. I still use my G3 when shooting video because it seems more instinctive than my EM-1.

RE the G80, I played with it side by side with a demo GH3. I think they had both just come out at the same time? I like the G80 but when you handle it and then any GH model you see how much better built they are. Still, as far as bang for bucks go, the G80 is a worthy tool. Why Panasonic insists on bundling so many of its cameras with kit lenses I can’t figure out. You may be lucky in the UK but kit lenses are the norm in both Norway and the States. But I've already ranted enough about this. Sorry.

Any case your post about the GH4 was inspiring.

jrg wrote:

Dr_Jon wrote:

I've had GH3, GH4 and GH5 and I think the first two have some issues compared to IBIS cameras, plus the 1080p in both skips a lot of pixels and so suffers from moire and aliasing. The GH4 4k is excellent though, and shoots great video in Cinelike-D (avoid VLog-L as that can fall apart on an 8-bit camera and the GH4 uses less than 8-bits for it (okay, dug out a calculator, 7.3 bits)...

Interesting. Especially since you’ve had all three models. Since I’m video-illiterate I sadly can’t appreciate some of the merits you’re describing RE the GH4. Not that I don’t want to learn about them. I still use my G3 when shooting video because it seems more instinctive than my EM-1.

RE the G80, I played with it side by side with a demo GH3. I think they had both just come out at the same time? I like the G80 but when you handle it and then any GH model you see how much better built they are. Still, as far as bang for bucks go, the G80 is a worthy tool. Why Panasonic insists on bundling so many of its cameras with kit lenses I can’t figure out. You may be lucky in the UK but kit lenses are the norm in both Norway and the States. But I've already ranted enough about this. Sorry.

Any case your post about the GH4 was inspiring.

The G80/85 was launched in Sept 2016, the GH3 exactly four years earlier in 2012.
I was very happy with my GH4 and only changed to the GH5 as a great deal was available, plus the IBIS is very useful.

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

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...

Dr_Jon wrote:

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...

Thanks for the input. Interesting !

I prefer the GH4 for its bigger body and ergonomics.

In essence... im a good candidate for the EM1X

jrg wrote:

4K. I stand pleasantly corrected! Is this 4K different in some way? I misread the side-by-side specs. Is MPEG-4 4K?

Prior to the GH5 the GH4 was one of thee most popular movie and stills cameras. If I recall correctly it was also the first to offer full 4k (24p, 25p & 30p). It has advanced video functionality included a separate V-log to be installed by the user. Some of the most talented video and movie makers in the industry used the GH4 and still today. Reason is the fixed sensor. The web & YouTube is packed with awesome information on this amazing camera.

At the day it came fitted with a dual processor config. It produces some of the cleanest 4K still today.....

I have one and will probably never sell it. If your interest is video and advanced video training then there are no better option, especially with the info available on the web....

They sell generally in mint condition for 500$, V-log is another 99$ directly from Panasonic....

amipal wrote:

The GH4 was one of my favourite cameras to use, and only got replaced by the G9 because a bonus helpfully arrived in April 2018. If it weren't for that, I'd happily still be shooting with it!

A little retrospective on my time with the GH4.

Cheers,
Paul

Hi Paul

Love your website and your work...... excellent images on display....

Best

Siegfried

jrg wrote:

amipal wrote:

The GH4 was one of my favourite cameras to use, and only got replaced by the G9 because a bonus helpfully arrived in April 2018. If it weren't for that, I'd happily still be shooting with it!

A little retrospective on my time with the GH4.

Cheers,
Paul

Thanks for the added info link. Nice pics, too. Thanks!

No problem! As a stills camera, it just works. I still have it as a "backup" camera, can't bear to part with it despite owning the G9 for 9 months. It worked well for taking wider-angle shots at an airshow last year.

Cheers,
Paul

VideoPic wrote:

amipal wrote:

The GH4 was one of my favourite cameras to use, and only got replaced by the G9 because a bonus helpfully arrived in April 2018. If it weren't for that, I'd happily still be shooting with it!

A little retrospective on my time with the GH4.

Cheers,
Paul

Hi Paul

Love your website and your work...... excellent images on display....

Best

Siegfried

Many thanks, Siegried. I must try to keep the blog updated more often!

Cheers,
Paul