Leaderboard

I had one of those deals in France. It was just too good to pass up in November of 2022. When you wait and buy, you usually don't end up losing that much when you sell it back. However, what happens when you love the look of the camera? With the GH7, it looks as though Panasonic has addressed EVERY problem there was with the GH6 with the exception of a chunky body, but many people like that too. The image is 98% of the image of the S5ii (with the right lens), but you have that screen which is so much better than the flip-out only screen on the S5ii- it's a major usability issue. Also, there's the high frame rates. I currently have the Olympus 17mm f/1.2, a prefect lens for that body... we'll see in November. I will probably dump the idea though if a M43 small camera comes along because I'm still a believer in keeping the format relatively small and that is not the GH7.

I just had a look at my GH6 footage that I took before selling it and I must say it looked great! It has a super organic feel to it and loved the colors in just Standard profile. I also tried shooting in Vlog quite a bit, but Standard really did it for me. I took it to the French Alps last summer and it performed so well for photos and video. Sure, it didn't have PDAF, but when you learn to work around it, it's really no big deal. Honestly, I hope to have a similar opportunity with the GH7.

Obviously, I must take the blame for this since it was my comment that started this off topic discussion. But my original comment wasn't meant to say that smaller sensors were inferior, just that larger sensors have some advantages. Sometimes those advantages can make comparisons slightly unfair. As I have already stated, my original comment was intended to give the GH7 some leeway in a video where it didn't fare so well. Everything I stated after that was probably an exercise in futility where I didn't speak eloquently enough or I was full of shit... Probably a little of both. But there's still a medium format look.

I know some of us have been harsh on the S9 regarding the recording limits, but it's important to remember that a 15 minute limit in 6k open-gate is still nothing to sneeze at. That would be the equivalent of a 1500 foot reel at 24fps, something unheard of even in the 1990s. Also, you'd need a minimum of 2-5 minutes to change the reel. Can a 15 minute recording limit get the job done? Yes. You'd probably be fine with 5 minutes or a 400 foot reel. By the way, the dynamic range, detail, and workflow would also be way better. We're spoiled.

Oh yeah, please no one listen to me if you're doing event shooting. All of my experience is shooting narrative with a script, rehearsals, etc. No, I wouldn't say that. If you use a color managed workflow, you can absolutely change the white balance in post when shooting ProRes Raw or HQ--within reason. If you seriously mess up your white balance (shot at 150 Kelvin and need it to be 6500) it might not go well. But shooting 3000 and changing to 6000 usually looks fine, as mentioned in another comment. Do some tests to see whether it works for you. Note that it depends on a color managed workflow, because WB changes should be performed in linear gamma. Creative picture profiles typically don't have accurate transformations so they are less useful for changing WB in post. Common log formats typically have LUTs (or, even better, mathematical transformations) to change between gamuts and gammas. Small WB changes might look okay without being in linear space, but the larger the change, the more you'll wish it was done accurately.

Funny the way you ended your post... LOL ; ) Just a matter to give names to the things. I took sides because one doesn't invalidate the other :- )

FWIW, I've been arguing exactly the opposite of that. There is no special look intrinsic to larger sensors. 😃

I hadn't noticed of it yet such a loss... Just some minutes ago when I had the chance to search about him and received the shock of the sad news... : ( https://variety.com/2023/film/obituaries-people-news/john-bailey-dead-academy-president-cinematographer-1235787930/ https://theasc.com/news/in-memoriam-john-bailey-asc-1942-2023 https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0007037/ Got the unique chance to meet him along a workshop made at the Lisbon Film School about a quarter of century ago when his presence and his lovely wife and E.T.'s editor Carol Littleton brought a singular experience with this passionate couple of the world of movies and filmmaking. For a few days, we had the chance to hear them to talk about their work in two respective distinct workshops as Lisbon Film School's visiting guest lecturers throughout their personal experiences of their own, the way they met in the old continent they simply loved and their first meeting IIRC in Vienna, Austria. Ordinary People (1980), directed by Robert Redford in his feature directorial debut, The Big Chill (1983), Silverado (1985), The Accidental Tourist (1988), made with his partner in crime Lawrence Kasdan, Groundhog Day (1993) or Mishima: A Life in Four Chapters (1985), produced by Francis Ford Coppola and George Lucas, directed by Paul Schrader with whom he also helped to make American Gigolo (1980)... https://theasc.com/videos/lighting-tech-tips-household-lightbulb-russell-carpenter-asc-1/john-bailey-asc-the-stylization-of-mishima Among a few of the case studies in those memorable days I really miss his input in that week from the bottom of the heart. Long farewell dear John, it was great to have had the happiness to know a bit more of your presence among us. Never forget the humble character typical of yours expressed in the way you addressed to each one of us, your workshop attendees whether classmates or the other film school instructors, you added no distinct treatment as used in those customary elitist circles more often than it should. Your vivid enthusiasm in that close personal and direct communication face to face stands in our memories, as well your helpful advices to bless our careers, always plenty of generosity, love and endless good faith, a big thanks! < 3 - EAG

Then why spend tens of thousands of dollars, and hours, on a format that doesn't offer any advantage, if it doesn't exist? Anyway, the GH7 seems like a very capable camera. One thing I learned from that video, in the comments section, is that Panasonic changed their color science recently, is that true? It does make sense, when I used the GH6, it did seem to lean toward green a bit but then the S5iiX definitely had more of a magenta look to it and it seems that the magenta has carried over to the GH7. So the LogC profile could possibly work better with the GH6 since the Alexa is known to have a green bias straight out of camera.

B&H had a remarkable deal on Open Box GH6 starting last spring and it lasted until late this winter. I bought one last spring for $1299 and it was brand new. B&H does that some times... I guess they're clearing out inventory. Stupid me, I returned it. I was going to buy it again if it dropped to $1099. Over the holidays it went down to $1199 but I didn't bite. I really liked the CineLikeD and the monochrome profiles. VLOG was good, but I was trying to lean on the DR Boost which created some pretty harsh chroma noise in the shadows. At first, I hadn't noticed it until @BTM_Pixpointed it out to me and then I couldn't unsee it. I was so stoked about the DR Boost concept of the camera that I stupidly got annoyed with the cam as a whole. Now I am regretting it big time because although the GH7 is vastly better, I don't really want to pay the extra money for it. BTM also recommended the cheap Meike 25mm lens and it was a treat to use with that cam and I've always wanted to test out the Pan/Leica 15mm 1.7. If I can find a deal on a GH6, I may bite. Great camera otherwise! If not, I'll wait to see if the GH7 drops a little by the holidays.

To add, in this instance, the GH7, a smaller sensor camera, has a few major advantages over any larger sensor camera in its price range... internal ProRes Raw and ProRes HQ, 32bit float audio, a LogC curve, probably the best IBIS, and the best tilting/articulating LCD mechanism that I have ever used.

So... the GH7... yeah... a pretty cool camera...

Granted the title of the thread is "Panasonic GH7". However, invariably with any camera release that is not full frame, the discussion goes only to sensor size and how inferior the sensor is because it's not FF. It's quite ludicrous. This might sound crazy, but usually have better discussion about aesthetics, creativity and productivity with ChatGPT. Sure, it can be predictable sometimes, but I seem to always learn something and it can point me in the right direction. When talking to humans, it would seem there are always games being played: Trolling, Sock Puppetry, Brigading, Flame Wars, Sealioning, Astroturfing, Gaslighting, Spamming, Doxxing, Dogpiling, Shitposting, and Griefing. With ChatGPT, you never have the feeling you might lose something and true discussion can actually happen. I know, it's a sad state of affairs, but that's life on the internet. Fortunately, there are people don't do any of those things.

I must admit, this thread really makes me laugh. No wonder there are no creative or aesthetic discussions here - not only do people not want to talk about it but they refuse to believe these things even exist, and if they don't believe in it then they will shout down anyone that even mentions it. I've been spending my time more and more elsewhere and I can tell you, there are places where people discuss aesthetics, creativity, productivity, and try and help each other out and encourage each other.

This paragraph! It would be so magical if I only understood what you meant. Sometimes you make my head feel heavy, very heavy!😂 @Emanuel I hope you don't mind me whimsically smiling with a tear of joy in my eye.:)

Please look through this thread and show me where this was stated.

Some times, some things, have a certain kind of magic. You can’t always quite determine or define why, but it exists. It’s usually a sum of it’s parts that combines to more than something else/less. If you can see it and feel it, even if those around you do not, it exists. Anyway, GH7 colour science… It does look quite different to the GH6. If…IF, I was to move back to M4/3 for video, I was thinking to help keep the costs down, to pair a GH6 (because they are fairly ‘affordable’ used now) with a GH7 but nah, could not be bothered dealing with that difference. Though possibly could tweak the hue & sat in camera to make them match and then, SOOC, they would be as close as you would not notice.

Things don't need to be uncontroversial to not be or become "imaginary"... : D Other than that, well, who can deny it? Imaginary stuff is what pictures are made of, isn't it? LOL : ) EDIT -- haha @mercer we both didn't let slide... The like button had already been triggered this time anyway ;- )

All part of the look. Can you prove it doesn't exist? Perhaps your style of photography doesn't lend to the look, so you haven't been able to adequately capture it? Valid point.

100 megapixels is more than 61 megapixels. That's an advantage. The 110/2 is my favorite portrait lens for any system. In fact, every lens made for the GF system is excellent. Also, because I like the ergonomics and I like any number of other things about the system. It's possible to like a thing without inventing imaginary characteristics to apply to it. With film, I like my large format gear especially because I enjoy the contemplative experience of shooting with it. I like using gear that by its very nature demands slow and deliberative composition/shooting. It's a great contrast to gear that invites me to shoot hundreds of photos and end up with only a handful of keepers. If you mean the word "magical," that was my embellishment. As far as people applying various inconsistent and fanciful attributes such as "you can walk right into the image," various people in the thread have done exactly that. With a given focal length and aperture combination, for a given field of view, a larger sensor will obviously provide shallower depth of field. This is not controversial. But there is more than one lens in the world so it would be silly to limit oneself to just those variables, especially when it's simply math to determine which combination will provide nearly identical results on a different format. It is also not controversial that with large film formats, one can achieve a depth of field that is shallower than is possible with any lens ever made for a smaller format. As I said before, a 450mm f/5.6 lens on 8x20 inch film yields ridiculously shallow DOF (unusably so, even). However, that is not traditionally why anybody shot larger formats - in fact, photographers like Adams used to stop down to tiny apertures in order to regain depth of field with large format cameras - to the point where their club was called "f/64." If the medium or large format look is defined by shallow depth of field, it is certainly ironic that history's most famous users of those formats did everything in their power to not have that look, including using camera movements to increase depth of field (one of the reasons I brought up Scheimpflug earlier). Later in his career, Adams also frequently preferred to use a 6x6cm Hasselblad to his 8x10 field camera and even sometimes shot on 35mm film. Guess he must have just grown sick to death of feeling able to walk right into his images.

I really struggle to understand why you insist to not see the fallacy of that... : ) You are accurate on your point. Nobody can deny. No jokes for this paragraph. Magical "medium format look". OK, who has here call it like that? The only point you take your chance to call ignorants to other people and write from a superior position where you don't lose a single opportunity to intend such place for yourself, is the one everyone agrees, yes Master! : D Half way now ; ) So, a larger sensor size introduces zero add-ons when the other variables stand. Right : X

Andre Bazin, the film critic/theorist? Yes, I am familiar. Why? Is he relevant to medium format film? It does mean that I'm not talking out of my ass. I've likely taken far more images on medium and large format film than anybody else in this discussion which, I feel, is a pretty decent qualification for talking about what those formats look like. I've also built several medium and large format cameras over the years. What are your qualifications in discussing the look of medium and/or large format film? FWIW, I also have spent a lot of time with others who shoot medium and large format film. Wanna guess which phrase they never use? "Medium format look." The discussions tend to be a lot more around what specific lenses look like/do, whether those lenses will cover a certain format, and lately, how much film costs. A box of 8x20 is just about enough to send a person to the poorhouse.

In my ideal world, that is how I would work as would pretty much any pro. For my line of work, mainly weddings, and shooting hybrid 100% of jobs, I don’t because it’s not practical, so I have a ‘go to’ instead. 5600 outdoors and indoors in very well lit (natural light) rooms and 4000 indoors less well lit rooms or after dark. I’m chasing one thing and one thing only and that is consistency. I’ve tried auto WB a couple of times and nah, it can change multiple times within the same scene and can be even more of a disaster than having the wrong WB. Consistency, for me anyway, that is the thing.

@lsquareif you want a scratch mic with your DWM-XLR2 to get decent-ish ambient audio, then get the Deity SMic3S if on a very low budget, or the Sanken CSM1 if on a medium budget. https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1830582-REG/deity_microphones_dtm0304d11_s_mic_3s_short_shotgun.html https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1404643-REG/sanken_cs_m1_super_cardioid_short.html Unless they're specifically doing 360VR videos, or maybe some other niche usage (I dunno, creating audio library with lots of different format options??) then usually ambisonics is not a good idea for ambient recordings.

For Colour Management, I recommend biting the bullet and learning it once and learning it properly. That video is just over an hour, but it's worth it. The alternate approach is what I did, which was to watch shorter videos that give you random puzzle pieces in random order and basically just confuse the absolute crap out of you. I was really bad at colour grading for years until I started watching the professionals give thorough explanations of things, and the confusion lifted and I was able to get things setup and start getting the results I wanted. You know how professionals make things look easy, and can do great stuff with a few clicks? It's because they know how things really work.

it’s a trick to understand optics and basic math? jesus fucking christ man if any of you gave as much shit about making, or working on interesting art on here and sharing it instead of jacking off your lil dingdongs over new gear, resolutions, different starting point looks of shitty fucking sensors, or being mentally insane about 24 fps this place could actually have interesting discussions. I fucking hate gear. i fucking hate lenses, cameras, shitty lights, cables, rigs etc. Sadly its necessary to understand at least some of it, as it is a means to an end to create what i actually want to create. i suggest others to view it same way. Or learn color grading, like kye said. That has generated a bit of income for me from time to time.

This is original 8mm film transferred to digital nowadays in this decade: The native acquisition resolution then is not the most crucial premise with the tools we have today.

I have some Dvds which look fantastic on my HD TV, not too far off from Bluray, even though Blurays offer 5 times as many pixels as Dvds. 8K TVs offer the same pixel number in height / y-axis as the Gh7 in 5.7K open gate mode btw.:) Width is 1.32 of the GH7 pixel count.

Now a tip for fitting your 8K display... Buy some lower resolution camera other than 8K but with open gate and add anamorphic glass. Don't squeeze it vertically but extend your pixels, making them wider to correct the aspect ratio and... voilà, you'll be there, your device fulfils the standard ;- )

I think you're discrediting the French. They were probably expecting a message from Nikon over Minitel, not fax.

If you're shooting raw at anything less than the full resolution, then of course there will be a crop! This will be true for any camera. Could be Panasonic, ARRI, RED, Nikon, Canon, whoever! It's a law of physics / maths / the universe. Want to shoot at a low resolution but with the full sensor? Then choose anything else but raw.

It's not a question of quality, but purpose. Is a car better than a truck? Is a TV better than a tablet? Are headphones better than loudspeakers?