Brian Williams

I don't see how the G7 realistically "competes" with the GH5 in any way, really. Maybe you could make the argument that its sequel, the G80, does in a few ways, but the G7? I'm not knocking the camera, I know it was a good deal when it first came out (and probably still is), but its a generation-old camera at this point, doesn't offer any of the bit-rate or other video-specific features of the GH5, and (most importantly to me) doesn't offer any stabilization that either the GH5 or its equally-priced sequel, the G80, offers. Just seems a bit arbitrary to mention that camera, of all cameras. And how are Olympus cameras too "cute" for you?? I think my E-M1ii is pretty ugly, honestly. My X-T2 was gorgeous on the other hand. Both are weather-sealed, take rapid fire photos and have equally nice 4k.

Well, while maybe not a huge addition, it has the top screen, like many DSLR's, which is nice, especially for a camera that costs less. It also has the bigger and better EVF. Can't really think of any ergonomic advantages the E-m1 II has.

As someone who just last week bought a used E-M1mark2 (yes, I knew this was coming and went for it anyway), I'm having a little bit of buyer's remorse now. I don't understand the comments claiming that this thing will flop- Its cheaper than a new E-M1mark2, it has pretty much the same feature set as that camera (minus Pro Capture I guess), better ergonomics, and better video specs (4k/60p at least). I'm guessing the phase detection of the Olympus will still win out in the AF department, but supposedly its a smaller gap now. I owned a G85 as well, but I don't see the comparison between the two, the speed of this thing dwarf's the cheaper model. Better video, way better stills capability as far as speed, and a much better sensor.

Who the f#@ can afford a Lecia SL?? That should not be included in this list, you're just bragging now!

Maybe, but it was missing from the D750 and that really sucked.

I liked my D750 a lot, but the second you turned on live view, the AF went to absolute shit. It's better on this camera? Also, is it true what I'm hearing here, no focus peaking in 4k?

Shot this yesterday with G85, kit lens. Still not sure how I feel about it, I like many aspects, but frustrated by others. (And yeah, I know my color treatment here could use some work, did this very quickly. Also did this before I bought Andrew's Pro Color LUT yesterday). The stabilization is really great. My choice now is to whether keep this and sell my A6300 and my Gimbal, or return. Did some low light tests between the two last night in my living room at ISO 1600 and 3200, A6300 defitinitely won, the noise was much more grainlike than G85, but the G85 did better than I expected, it wasn't a huge difference. But man, Panasonic's focus tracking sucks. I used to never care about things like this, because I used to focus manually for everything. But once I got A6300 and saw how awesome it was at tracking while shooting video, I got lazy and started using it quite a bit. Now, trying to on the Panasonic, its hard, its probably the biggest thing holding me back from ditching the Sony, besides the IQ difference, which again is close enough. The Contrast detection is just so wishy washy- even when it does seem to track decently, even once I've stopped moving, it will, all of a sudden, rack focus before coming back, and nothing in the scene changed. Also did some extreme panning to test the rolling shutter; when done to an extreme level, the two cameras show a similar amount. But with just typical panning, what you would actually do in real life, way less on the Panasonic, which of course is expected, its the worse part of the Sony. Its just frustrating- the best part about this camera (compared to A6300) is the stabilization and lack of RS, worst part is focus; the best part of the A6300 (compared to G85) is awesome focus, but worst is lack of stabilization and god-awful RS. If only the two could make a Pany-Sony baby.

All good points, thanks. It's showing up tomorrow from Amazon so I'll get to do a real comparison between the two, see which one gets to stay.

I own an A6300 (replaced my GX85 with it) but I think I want to try out the G80/85... but, when I look at the comparison between my A6300 and the G80 over at DXOMarks, the Sony's sensor blows it away in their opinion. Does everyone think this is total BS? I loved the stabilization of the GX85, but have to agree that I think SLOG2 is a nicer image. Yes the RS on the A6300 sucks, but I try not to move around so much. Never had it overheat. Do people not see a difference, in things like say DR, between the two? Would love to hear from other A6300 owners or former owners who also have or had the GX85 or G80, trying to convince myself that going to a G80 would be a step up.

I'm biased, because I love my Sony cameras, but I don't know if the RX100v should be in the same "embarrassing" class as these other two... you kind of trash the other two for their crappy qualities, while just point out that the new Sony doesn't really bring that much to the table vs it's previous version. More of a letdown than an embarrassment, considering how good it still is in general.

Sure, and I have both bought and sold plenty of cameras over the years (including an X-Pro2 that I picked up for $1400 used a few months back), but a 30% loss after just eight months of a release is pretty drastic I think, especially since we are talking mint-condition cameras, not heavily used ones. But my main point is that the camera was worth a bit more the day before the surprise announcement of the A6500. I guess it just depends on the camera too- the X-Pro2 for example, you'll see A LOT of used ones for sale, seems like a lot of people weren't happy with it or decided to go with the X-T2 instead.

Great for you. On the FredMiranda forum there are a bunch for sale at the moment, I don't think I could get more than $700USD for the body at this point, very quick depreciation.

And even more of DigitalRev's war on Sony- http://www.digitalrev.com/article/sony-a6500-leaves-most-a6300-issues-such-as-rolling-shutter-unresolved] Maybe not time to sell my A6300 already? Or maybe it is, but not for the A6500

http://www.43rumors.com/ft5-first-images-new-panasonic-gh5-full-specs/ Like the articles says, not sure what 6k 'photo' mode is, but pretty sure it doesn't equate to video as we tend to think of it, maybe just a few seconds worth?

I'd guess it was about 80°F and no, no cover; I did have the screen articulated out for the tests. I just got the camera around the time that the newest firmware came out a few weeks ago, and though the firmware notes only mention fixing overheating in still photos, I saw a bunch of people on a DPReview forum claiming to see improvement in video recording (while some claimed to see none). So I decided to do a test myself, though I have no experience with the previous firmwares so I can't really say if there is an improvement or not, but both tests gave me right around 30minutes, which like I said, for me, is more than I'll probably ever need.

As someone who preordered the X-T2 the minute preorders opened, and then cancelled that same preorder in order to buy a used A6300, I have to say I think you're way too hard on the A6300. Yes, the ergonomics are weak compared to the beauty that Fuji is, but it's still a pretty amazing camera, one of the best Sony has made, including its FE line. The X-T2's omission of 120fps and the A6300's inclusion of it was a big factor in my change of plans, as was the fact that it was half the price. From my tests I get 30minutes of 4k before overheating happens, and I've never in my life records for that long in one sitting; I know tons of people do, but I don't and probably never will. And from what I've read from reviews, rolling shutter is the same between both cameras. Not trying to knock the X-T2 in any way, I wish I could have both, but to say the A6300 is anything less than great is hard to swallow.

Though I doubt very seriously that they left it off just for kicks - I'm sure there must be a reason for its exclusion, like the macro blocking that others have suggested.

My bet is on this as well.

Here's Gordon Laing- "I have confirmed that F log will only be on the HDMI output, NOT for in camera recording. A shame since it would be nice to have a flat profile for internal recording even at 4:2:0. Thanks for the tip!" Such a bummer.

I agree, for the price, I'm still loving my GX85 (GX80)

Well that blows, I think I may seriously cancel my preorder now, I want log! Damnit, and I just sold my D750 for this, this gear acquisition syndrome is a bitch.

ouch. But the thing is, it's not really "the same in photo"- shooting still photography is a whole other beast than shooting video, in many ways. AF is great for stills because it's one static image. AF for video is irractic, having to choose 24 times a second what to focus on. I'm sure it will at some point get good enough, but there's a reason why focus pullers still exist, why AF isn't used for movies or television show.

In terms of subject isolation, the lens would, in fact, still be a f1.2 FF equivalent, no? Well the GH4 was $1700 when it came out, so assuming the GH5 will be the same, it is significantly more. And if you're like me and could care less about 4k60, don't want something as big as the GH4, its definitely worth the savings. Thats like saying, "Why buy that Toyota? For a little more than double the money you could get the Lexus". Having already bought the GX85, I'm not waiting (with my D750 in tow- another reason I can't spend $1700+ on a second camera). You should be shooting your video in manual. AF for video is for grandparents shooting clips of their grandkids on their iPhones.

He said he would do a follow up to cover image quality. The IQ is easily as good as the GH4.

Great article. Great camera (Got mine last week). So glad to, once again, have a camera that gets me this excited to shoot with.