I lost my GH5! - Please help answer this!

[Inazuma]

The Sony A7 has abysmal video quality. Worse than any Canon even. Stay away. 

[darrellcraig]

17 minutes ago, Inazuma said:

The Sony A7 has abysmal video quality. Worse than any Canon even. Stay away. 

Absolutely agree, horrible. I'm a rank amateur and just about every camera is better at video than I am. But A7 is horrible, worse than I am. So is A7II. Buy an A7S instead if you need Sony. At this price level I'd look elsewhere.

[Dustin]

If I had to go Sony for that price I’d look at either a used 63/6500 or I’ve even seen A7S go around 7-800 I think...

 

[Mattias Burling]

58 minutes ago, Inazuma said:

The Sony A7 has abysmal video quality. Worse than any Canon even. Stay away. 

Any links to the footage you shot?

Could be interesting to analyze why your results are so bad when so many get good results.

[Robin Billingham]

Im not a video pro but i made this for my band using a a7ii (same video spec really). Some bad moire but otherwise fine.

All the colour shots were available light. Using canon fd 24mm f2 and 50mm f1.8 only. Hand held.

[Dustin]

@Robin Billingham some solid camerawork indeed sir!

[Kisaha]

@Robin Billingham Good job, and nice song. Well done.

P.S a6300+18-105 or anything, with a couple of FD lenses in front.

[Charlie]

3 hours ago, Inazuma said:

The Sony A7 has abysmal video quality. Worse than any Canon even. Stay away. 

You obviously did not watch the example video i provided. Ridiculous comment!!!

[Charlie]

2 hours ago, Robin Billingham said:

Im not a video pro but i made this for my band using a a7ii (same video spec really). Some bad moire but otherwise fine.

All the colour shots were available light. Using canon fd 24mm f2 and 50mm f1.8 only. Hand held.

Thanks very much for that Robin, great video!!

As I understand it the main difference between the A7 and A7II is the image stabilisation. The vast majority of specs are the same.

I assume you used the internal stabilisation on this video??

 

 

 

14 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

@Robin Billingham Good job, and nice song. Well done.

P.S a6300+18-105 or anything, with a couple of FD lenses in front.

The A6300 would definitely be a camera I'd consider but I live in Spain and that thing overheats in the Arctic!!!............plus that ROLLING SHUTTER......Yikes its worse than any camera, ever!!!

[EthanAlexander]

I'd definitely try to find an S that fits your budget.

Over the A7, the A7S will have a bunch of extras like 50Mbps XAVC-S, 4K out over hdmi, 120fps @720p (1.5x crop), and of course the god-like ISO performance. It really is one of the cleanest images at base ISO anywhere. I may never sell mine.

[IronFilm]

13 hours ago, Charlie said:

It's been a while, anyway I lost my GH5 and all my lenses like an idiot (dont ask how!)

 

I'm desperate to ask..... HOW? :-o 

 

13 hours ago, Charlie said:

Any reason you wouldnt get the A7 if you were on a budget?? (ive wanted to go full frame for a while anyway)

 

Why? A Panasonic G80/G85 would probably be cheaper, and surely would be better for filming with. 

 

12 hours ago, Charlie said:

There is no other full frame camera I can get for £600.00.......sure there are great cameras like the Pany G7 etc but if im honest, the low light thing has ALWAYS bugged me about micro four thirds. That and crop factors, having to add speed boosters etc etc.

Sure the A7 is no A7SII.......but then im not a pro, I dont get paid for my work unfortunately!!!!!.......and money is tight now.

Lowlight with the Panasonic cameras is getting better with every generation. The G7 is better than the GH4 in lowlight.  And now we have the GH5S! The new "king of lowlight"

Plus with focal reducers or a T0.95 lens then you've nothing to worry about (as for "crop factors", ignore the F.U.D. from the competition! This is a total non issue)

Here is that old GH2 again:
 

 

And if you're a non-pro I reckon it is even more important to maximise your bang for buck if you're feeling the budget is tight. So that means secondhand Panasonic G7, or G80/G85

12 hours ago, Charlie said:

Now which lens should I get???? hahahahha

I can only afford one for now

If you can only buy ONE lens then I'd say your budget is either way too low, or badly missallocated and you should shift some of the camera body budget over to the lens budget. (or look at cheaper lenses)

 

11 hours ago, PannySVHS said:

Or you can get a Lumix G6 for really cheap, having a nice gradeable codec and beautiful HD. If you did so great with the GH2, you will love the G6.

This! Own a G6 myself, and the only thing the G6 loses is no live HDMI out :-/

https://www.eoshd.com/2013/07/panasonic-g6-review-the-gh2-redux/

 

 

 

10 hours ago, Charlie said:

I want the full frame,

So called "full frame" (i.e. 135 format) doesn't automatically mean better lowlight. 

I'd rather use a BMPCC with a 1" / S16 sensor in lowlight than a "full frame" 5DmkII!

 

[Robin Billingham]

5 hours ago, Charlie said:

Thanks very much for that Robin, great video!!

As I understand it the main difference between the A7 and A7II is the image stabilisation. The vast majority of specs are the same.

I assume you used the internal stabilisation on this video??

 

 

 

The A6300 would definitely be a camera I'd consider but I live in Spain and that thing overheats in the Arctic!!!............plus that ROLLING SHUTTER......Yikes its worse than any camera, ever!!!

Thanks for the nice comments folk

Yes I was using the ibis so I could shoot handheld and not draw attention in public places. 

Personally i try not to to be tech obsessed about filming, ill use whatever is to hand, even a phone if i have to. The a7ii was my stills camera at the time so i used it.

I have a gh5 now but miss the full frame (mostly for stills but also video), mainly because i loved shooting wide with the fd 24mm for still and video, i used it lots and loved it. But for some reason using the equivalent 12mm slr magic on the gh5 just isnt the same, infact i almost never use it now.

Don't worry about not having a big cam budget, ill tell you something ... The otherday i was playing some random vids of my son to his grandad, who actually commented that some of the clips look like movies, and did i shoot them on one of my movie cameras (he knows i shoot shorts).. So I asked him which clips he liked best. It was all bmpcc and gh2 and some a7ii. Gh5 was his least favorite. This interested me so I tested my wife on gh2 vs gh5 by filming my kid around the house.... She picked gh2 almost everytime.

It was a nice reminder for me that the overall image aesthetic is way more important than the spec to people and I will choose cameras with that in mind in the future.

While i was wincing at the low dynamic range i was missing the fact that it was still a prettier image in the most part.

So sorry for the long post, but spend little money and feel good. Get the A7 for lovely full frameness or bmpcc or gh1/2 or fuji xt20 for sweet colours and just film pretty pictures

[IronFilm]

10 hours ago, Charlie said:

no more a 24mm is actually a 48mm field of view

So what? So long as you've got the right selection of lenses to match the field of views you choose for the shots you want, then it does not matter at all. 

 

10 hours ago, Charlie said:

I dont care about 4k, IBIS, V-LOG or any of that........I care about the art of filmmaking and those functions will not make a shit filmmaker good!!! hahahahha

I think you might be lying to yourself.... because on one hand you say "I don't care about specs" but then immediately in the same breath you place the importance of ONE spec above all others! ("full frame", or 135 format)

There is an awfully mighty big contradiction right there!

So do specs matter, or do they not?

If specs don't matter, just go browse B&H, filter by your budget. Then throw a dart at the top 24 as your way to select your next camera! (you'll probably get a Canon

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/buy/Digital-Cameras/ci/9811/N/4288586282

10 hours ago, Kisaha said:

The lens is 4f but incredibly stabilized for such a cheap lens, and adequate for most things, being video or photography.

Am quite a fan of the lens! Own one myself. 

Only bad thing I can say about the Sony 18-105m f4 (other than it being f4, but  you can't expect faster with this price/size and still having a 6x zoom!) is it doesn't play nicely with FS raw from the FS700 (lacks image correction)

[webrunner5]

The actual Sony A7 footage is really not that bad, it is it lacks just about everything that is nice to have to shoot video with. But for the money I would get the A7 mkII with the IBIS if you could swing the extra money. The body is better also. You can do a lot worse.

[Mattias Burling]

40 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

The actual Sony A7 footage is really not that bad, it is it lacks just about everything that is nice to have to shoot video with. But for the money I would get the A7 mkII with the IBIS if you could swing the extra money. The body is better also. You can do a lot worse.

What exactly is missing? It has zebras, peaking, mic input, tilt screen, big evf, etc.

I always advice against the A7ii because I dont feel the ibis is good enough to sacrifice the ergonomics. But ergonomics is of course subjective.

The price difference is of course also something to consider.

 

[Yannick Willox]

If you liked the gh2 and gh5, why not go for a gx80 plus 12-60 kit lens, can be found for 650-700 in the eu.

4k does not interest you, but you can still misuse it to have really good full HD.

[Robin Billingham]

25 minutes ago, Mattias Burling said:

 

I always advice against the A7ii because I dont feel the ibis is good enough to sacrifice the ergonomics. But ergonomics is of course subjective.

 

Just to comment on the ibis incase the OP is considering the a7ii. In walking shots i found it made no difference, its not very strong at all.. However while standing still but handheld it takes away the micro jitters and small fast shakes so it has a benifit there.

[Mattias Burling]

4 minutes ago, Robin Billingham said:

Just to comment on the ibis incase the OP is considering the a7ii. In walking shots i found it made no difference, its not very strong at all.. However while standing still but handheld it takes away the micro jitters and small fast shakes so it has a benifit there.

There of course is a benefit when static, no ibis is good enough for walking. I was just saying that for me personally its not worth sacrificing the ergonomics for it. If it would have been really strong I might have reconsidered and kept the A7ii.

[Robin Billingham]

5 minutes ago, Mattias Burling said:

There of course is a benefit when static, no ibis is good enough for walking. I was just saying that for me personally its not worth sacrificing the ergonomics for it. If it would have been really strong I might have reconsidered and kept the A7ii.

Ok i understand. I have not used the original a7 so cannot comment on the ergonomics. I wouldnt pay much more money for the a7ii over the a7 based on ibis alone though.

[Charlie]

Ok folks, thanks again for all the comments!!!!......this is the best forum for filmmakers inmho!!

In the end I decided against the A7 (shock horror!)

I bought the Sony A6000!!....reason being, it's a great 1080 camera, its dirt cheap and I can upgrade to and A7S or whatever later when I have the money!!

There are some amazing videos on youtube shot with this camera, I was surprised how good!