Leaderboard

Next month will mark four years since the GH5 was launched. Dovetailing into the other thread on here about the increasing cost of cameras, the GH5 with its launch price of $1999 was actually the camera launch that made me think prices were getting out of hand. I'd always viewed MFT cameras to be the smart, better value and more compact choice even against the DSLR APS-C let alone FF cameras and was epitomised for me by the likes of the GH2, LX100 and GX85. There is no doubt that the GH5 was and is still proving to be a great camera but, again from my own point of view, it had drifted too close in form and certainly in price to other formats and I felt at the time that they had left themselves a problem when it came to replacing it. If they launched a GH6 on the fourth anniversary of the launch of the GH5 then even giving it the benefit of the doubt that it would be at the same launch price of $1999 then it would be exactly the same price as their own full frame S5. Not only does the GH5 lose the value aspect in terms of imaging but it also loses the form factor and weight aspect as well. I don't know how they square that circle for a GH6 without cutting the price and form factor and adding in something particularly compelling on the imaging side. The latter is actually a pretty big challenge considering how much the GH5 already has. The GH6 would probably have to have some or all of the following to significantly add enough to the GH5 to get users to upgrade: Internal BRAW or ProResRAW Internal ND (electronic or switchable) PDAF 8K I'd love to see it but, realistically, I can't. There is an 8K MFT sensor out there, of course, because Sharp are actually going to release their camera this year but the fact that its pretty much a GX85 style stripped down body with an 8K sensor in it and is going to be $2K shows how much of a premium it would likely add on to an 8K GH6. Panasonic have been doing some very lacklustre upgrades of their camera models in recent years so it would be a surprise, though a welcome one, to see that pattern reversed with such significant upgrades in the successor to the GH5. I'm not saying there won't be a GH6 but its appeal will likely only be as an upgrade for existing GH5 owners and an incremental one at that. If its $2500 - and based on increasing prices over the lifetime of the GH5 it likely will be - then I can't see many people who haven't already got a reasonably significant stake in MFT buying it. Without some significant upgrades, it might also bring MFT users including GH5 owners to that fork in the road where they choose another route. It would be great to think that the GH6 will provide a re-invigoration of MFT and mark it has very much still having a future but my personal view is that if it is as lacklustre as recent Panasonic "upgrades" then it might actually mark the end of it. If the GH5 does prove to have been the high watermark of the GH series then its not a bad way to bow out.

Well the other part of the equation is that digital cameras last a long time for most consumers and semi-pro's. Unless you do timelapse with mechanical shutter beating your shutter to death, how many shots a year do you put on your camera ? 5K ? 10k ? with a shutter good for 150-200K releases you've got 15-25 years worth of life with that camera. Longer if you use it less. Couple that with minor improvements in resolution for mid to lower priced cameras, minor improvements in DR, those two big selling points just aren't . Most cameras are in the 20seomthing megapixel range and even the higher 36MP sensors aren't that much of a jump up for _most_ users when their current camera is perfectly good for their needs. Only 4K displays has pushed the res limitation a bit. Until we have mass market 6K (computer) or 8K screens will anyone feel any real need to push the pixel count up on the sensor. Current cameras produce really respectable DR and color for the most part. More than good enough for most people's needs now and for a while. Maybe the only real thing that might push someone to get a new camera body is better AF. We have most of that with phase detect and face recognition thats pretty good, again for most people's needs most of the time. with feature needs covered, the want to upgrade is low, esepecially when looking at the price of new cameras. Fuji has done well with good retro design in the bodies, great color that is their own, and kept pricing for the S35 cameras affordable enough what while its a decsion of thought to get a new one like a Xpro3, its not such a giant investment you really have to plan and think it out hard for a lot of people. indeed keeping it under $2k + APSC has proven a good combination.

It's hard to say it's gone wrong. It's so-called creative destruction. There's simply no need for a mass consumer camera market any more. Every home used to have a camera, be it a compact, a SLR, a Polaroid or whatever. No-one needs those any more because everybody (even the children) has a phone that will take better snaps with fewer skills, in a format that allows instant sharing.

New blog post here! https://www.eoshd.com/news/eoshd-podcast-episode-2-an-interview-with-michael-moores-producer-jeff-gibbs-and-their-new-film-michael-moores-planet-of-the-humans/ And new podcast can be streamed here: https://anchor.fm/eoshd/episodes/The-EOSHD-Podcast---Episode-2---Jeff-Gibbs--Director---Michael-Moores-Planet-Of-The-Humans-epsucf

At present I'm keeping my GH5 and GH5S for streaming and some 2 camera jobs along with the 12-35 2.8 and 35-100 2.8. I have already sold my Sigma 18-35. The Speedbooster and my Voigtlanders are on sale. I'm going to put the 10-25mm up for sale to. Really great kit but as I had to buy a Sony A7iii for client work I'm thinking about going all in on Sony. I love those Panasonics but I would need a really good reason to trust that m43 has a future. I'd suggest that someone tell Panasonic that they need a very clear GH6 announcement very soon before many others jump ship.

Yep, and that describes exactly what I did. When they released the S5 without PDAF I saw the writing on the wall. I simply want a camera with excellent AF regardless if I use it 90% of the time or 30% of the time...it's there when I need it. It's a shame really, Panasonic offers all these excellent features, great camera bodies that double as weapons, good menus, excellent features sets, great firmware updates, but the market demands good AF and they have been left behind.

Don't forget the articulating arm that gave it that extra flexibility and showcased my intricate gaffer taping work.

Here is a leaked photo of the EVF prototype, which employs an old Sigma loupe:

Yeah, this is the sort of solution I could imagine for it So it would lock into the side and bring all of the ports out and possibly convert them too so you can have full size HDMI as above but also mini XLR from the audio jack. There is even a convenient connection point for it for it of course and I'm fairly sure one of those pins carries power so it could be run without an external power source. The stork would then extend up the side to a tiltable EVF on the top like the Leica Visoflex 020 I still very much doubt it will happen though unfortunately.

There will be a difference in needs between those who work for a living with video and those who just do it for pleasure. In addition, the needs of those who do video professionally will differ depending on the work they do. TV and Movie production with a large team will have dedicated focus pullers. For videographers shooting events, AF becomes important. That said, I've been shooting such events with Panasonic and have coped. I'm also in favour of more cinema level features. This doesn't just apply to my professional work, but my own projects too. Top of my list for the GH6 is AF as it would be of huge benefit for gimbal shots and tracking movement. I would also love more edit friendly codecs, improved colour science, and a generally a camera that is more geared to video than photo. An 8K sensor would be useful for the odd photos I did take and for downsampled 4K. Plus I'm not adverse to trying some 8K video when the time comes. Though I'm more interested in HDR than more pixels at the moment. The GH6 has a tough task to convince people who have seen Panasonics shift to fullframe in recent years to convince them to continue their MFT investment. I've got loads of MFT lens, 2 GH4rs, a GH5s, a GH5 and Pocket 4K, so my gear is nearly exclusively MFT, but I'm looking to shift to S35 and fullframe if I can; purely as the industry seems to be going that way. I'm not yet sold on MF as a thing yet. Cost is too high for many users and there's still enough issues with fullframe video to improve on before MF becomes accepted.

Very very few FX9 owners could 100% replace their FX9 with a Sony a1, they're too drastically different.

People shouldn't be opposed to 8K cameras. As the R5 and now the A1 show, the best thing Panasonic could do to improve a MFT sized sensor image is to aim for 8K and use the extra resolution to downsample a superb 6K, 4K, and 2K image with less noise and more DR from cleaner shadows. Offer 8K open gate 4:3 anamorphic which no one is doing in mirrorless. But the single biggest thing Panasonic could do to sell their cameras is: Offer reliability Phase Detect AF with face and eye tracking. DfD is stigmatized no matter how much they improve it. FF mirrorless has really taken huge leap in performance in the past 2 years. I'm not sure MFT has a place anymore and I really loved my MFT cameras. I just don't know what they could make, besides a Sony A1 at 1/4 the cost, that would sell. As a MFT fanboy for many years, Panasonic would do better to focus entirely on FF and fix their AF and compete on their excellent feature while bringing in more cinema level features and color. It's the only way they will stay relevant in the shrinking market.

I don't think we'd only get 8K. Any 8K sensor would mean an update to the colour science, which Panasonic has definitely improved in other cameras since the GH5 and I think is one of the GH5s main weaknesses. 4K120 would be pretty good and would also be a bit headline grabbing which is cool too. Depending on the data rates and the imaging pipeline they put in there, I wonder if it could do 8K60? 8K downsampling would be cool. It also adds the possibility of a 6K mode that's also downsampled, which would be pretty newsworthy. I'm not sure how many of the 6K cameras are oversampling, and back in the day there was a significant IQ bump from oversampling rather than just doing a straight pixel readout. At this point I'm not sure what it would take to be revolutionary. If you take the R5 and A7S3 and imagine something that would blow them out of the water and having people coming back to MFT, then what would it have to be? Not only don't I think it's possible to deliver that, but I'm not even sure that if it did that it would connect with the market. Imagine that it had a ridiculous configuration like 16K, 8K60, 4K240, 2K600, internal RAW, triple native ISO, eyelash AF for people animals insects and amoeba, 12-bit h266 444, and 8 hour battery life... who would sell their R5 or A7S3? It's still MFT in a FF hype world, would people really be abandoning FF because "I need 16K" or "My clients require 4K240" or "I have to film at f11 at night under a new moon with no lights"? My inspiration for the GH6 was for it to be a solid upgrade but keep it's workhorse status. We're all about those specs here, but other GH5 forums I am part of online are much more focused on the work and how to get good results with it. Many shoot in 1080p (gasp!) because they never once had a client ask for 4K, etc etc. I suspect those people would think that FF was an advantage in the sensor size that was more valuable than 2K600 or whatever. Which I guess is a way of saying that beyond a certain point people don't care about specs when they're 'good enough' and I think that the pack is probably good enough for most, so going further doesn't really help much, and what people will pay for is an upgrade that is meaningful, which leads me to.... My logic for that thread was that now we're about to get a $6K medium format camera that is 'good enough' for most people (either internally or with the 4K Prores RAW) we can get a massive increase in sensor size, which is something more valuable to me than 4k120 or 8K. In a sense, my issues with the GH5 are minor enough that even if they fixed everything wrong with it the upgrade probably wouldn't be worth it for me. I've recently worked out that the difference between videographers and film-makers is that videographers are having to please many future clients who may demand 4K or request radical changes in post so the priority is to be as flexible as possible, thus buying a camera with high resolution and frame rates and sharp lenses. Film-makers only have to please one client at a time, and if there are particular requirements they can hire equipment without losing money, and if they have a good enough reputation or are independent then they only have to please themselves. As someone who only shoots my own projects, this means that my camera purchase only has to please me and I'm not interested in 'what-if' questions about pleasing others. I seriously doubt that anyone is buying the A7S3 because they have their own needs for 600Mbps 4K ALL-I or 4K120 422 10-bit. Rather I think they will be buying these cameras because they don't know what future projects require and want to cover their bases and never have to turn down work.

check out "How To Sell Video Production Services At Higher Rates" on Facebook. It has a lot of members and business related things is all they talk about.

Micro four thirds is in a much worse place than it was when the GH5 first came out. We all know how evolutionary, if not revolutionary, it was at launch: internal 10 bit 422 up to 4K30, 8 bit 420 at 4K60, IBIS, flip screen, etc. etc. We were willing to overlook its faults (AF mostly) because it was amazing in so many ways. The unfortunate truth is that other camera systems have completely caught up and overtaken the GH5. Even Panasonic's own full frame S5 presents a way better value proposition. As @newfoundmass highlighted above, the highly influential Youtube segment has largely stepped away from the GH5. I think it will take a complete showstopper camera in order to bring them back. My personal wishlist that I think will do the job: 6K30p and 4K120p 10bit 422 internally, ProRes Raw or BRAW externally, IBIS, Full V-Log, Dual native ISO, GREAT AF, similar build/ergonomics to GH5 but with better battery life. Additionally, I think they need a few tricks up their sleeves: webcam functionality through USB C, wireless monitor through mobile app, fancy flip screen from S1H.

Thats ARRI Alexa levels of rolling shutter and approaching ARRI Alexa levels of dynamic range as well. Seems to me, based off Gerald's hands on with it, that it is perhaps worth the price tag for people that don't want or need a flip screen and wants a hybrid camera that does it all, at least the best one so far. I wonder how FX9 owners are feeling now?

MUCH K!! MANY FOCUS!

The embargo for the a1 reviews ends today so if anyone needs me I'll be working on my thumbnail...

This scenario closely approximates the stresses of the rig that @herein2020 and I propose -- a tripod lightly leaning against the rail (or not at all), but with the added safety of earth and/or a tag line. In contrast, most of the clamping rigs presented in this thread are analogous to standing the drunk people on top of the rail -- precarious and generating stresses for which the rail was not designed. Also, anyone who shoves someone (drunk or not) toward a balcony railing is way too reckless to be rigging anything higher than one meter above the ground. Yes, but (using your scenario) if you clamp someone standing to the top of the rail, the rail could fail and/or the person could fall. I'd rather set a tripod on top of a balcony that is rated to hold 1000+ Kg, rather than clamp to a piece of glass that was designed to block people from moving laterally off of the balcony. Oh boy... I implore you never to rig anything above anyone's head. A tag line is not intended to "catch" the rig if it falls -- it is intended to keep it from moving laterally so it doesn't fall. Don't clamp anything to the rail that would create torsion or flex stress -- even if the CG is above the balcony (and especially if the rail is supported by a glass panel). A balcony rail is not a door. This "hook" is essentially 1/2 of a grip "trombone" or a Tota-mount. Even though those two grip items are exceedingly more secure than your "hook," I wouldn't use either of them on a balcony rail -- especially if it were supported by a glass panel. Furthermore, never use a single "hook" (such as the one pictured) with the CG above the "hook. Yeah... don't set up a rig that generates that kind of stress on a balcony rail above people. A light-weight Space Clamp with a small ball head would work on the rail shown in the above Bevo football photo, and the same rig would also work on balcony rails, but clamping to balcony rails is really not the best option. If you don't even know the names of the grip items, perhaps it would be best not to attempt a hazardous rig and just use a small, light tripod and a length of tag line. I have an inexpensive tripod that weighs 0.75 Kg with it's ball head, and it extends to a height of 1.43 meters. Another advantage of employing a tripod is that you can use it to get other steady shots during your travels. This is basically the creed of most professional grips and most professional set electricians. It prevents damage and injury and avoids liability. Non-professionals would do well to heed this fundamental guideline.

Perhaps it is time for the established camera companies to finally come up with something that resembles a 21th century camera body. One that resembles a smartphone, but with the bells and whistles of a proper camera. Sleek, pocketable, low-profile, a wide range of wireless functions like wireless charging, with new and smaller lenses.

6000$ is the new 2500$. Central Banking doing it's job.

The instant sharing part is a very important piece of the puzzle. When I am doing a photo shoot there are more pictures of the model on her Instagram page from her cell phone during the shoot than I am going to deliver for the whole session and the model spends more time trying to set up her phone for behind the scenes footage than she does listening to my directions. Also, I always say, thanks to cell phones the expectation is for quantity, not quality and an Instagram filter to fix it in 2s vs me spending hrs in Photoshop and Lightroom refining every detail. People don't care anymore if their heads are cut off, the composition is terrible, the camera is slanted, the WB is off, etc. The only thing they care about is if they are in the picture and if it got uploaded while it was happening; as if all of their "followers" will disappear if they don't get a constant stream of selfies from a model they have never met. Photography and Videography are a dying art and camera makers moving to the higher end to offset the lower sales was inevitable. These days reviews of a $6000 camera gets more views than the actual video and images taken with that camera.

Yes the morale is down. Some went in far too deep at too high price. Many did not know what they were doing and gambled just far too much money. However the real problem is the brokers preventing buys to protect their big clients and pals at the hedge funds. Sadly it wasn't just Robinhood. Almost the entire marketplace shut down the stock and blocked retail investors. That needs a massive legal enquiry. People wanting to go in with their $100 should be allowed to.

I learned how to use a cheap glide-cam rig a long time ago. I kind of love it. Works like a champ. Never easy, but 100% reliable. It's just metal, joints, hinges, and counter weights. You'd have to run it over with a car to destroy it. And you're right, for the few times I pull it and use it, it delivers the goods. Ain't that all you need from it? Also, there's an argument for having a piece of gear that will do something well, but is somewhat of a PITA to use; I find that it keeps you "honest" visually. Do I REALLY want/need a floaty shot here? Is that visually mission critical for the project? If yes, then lug out the heavy glide-cam rig. If not, then leave it alone. I have a colleague that spent thousands on gimball stuff.... guess what almost all his footage looks like now? It looks novel, granted...but I'm not sold on it. Feels like an lazy aesthetic style of this era....like bell bottom jeans; fun while they're around, but a little cringy looking back on it once everyone moves on from it.

Steadicam copies often don't as many ways to adjust your balance, haven't been a big fan of any of the ones I've used. If I buy another "steadicam" it will be from Steadicam. Of course you pay a premium for it. The other issue is steadicam's are made to be used with a lot of weight. The more the better really. Something like an XT3 is extremely light. You'll have a much easier time with a gimbal.

I think what people fail to realise here is that for most people using MF lenses (or any vintage lens) I'm sure has nothing to do with whether you can get other "equivalent" lenses to match or do an "equivalent" job... it's all about the things that aren't supposed to be there, the "mistakes" if you will that make the image interesting. It's like playing music, jazz as an example, the notes you don't play and the unexpected notes you do play make what you are doing interesting to some people. If you just played a super predictable structured melody I don't know many musicians personally who would be overly impressed... That being said not everyone may enjoy what you are doing (they never will in life) but if something has worth and merit to you don't let anyone tell you otherwise. I will give you the big secret, everything you do in your day to day life is pointless, in fact life is pointless. There's no plan waiting for you at the end, no one there to pat you on the back and tell you did life right. Just do what makes you happy and help others where you can .