Panasonic announcing a full frame camera on Sept. 25???

[mercer]

1 hour ago, Jimbo said:

I have to disagree! Panasonic have had an absolute hit with the GH line, culminating in the GH5. If they can bring their incredible video prowess to a full frame body where we get Panasonic video AND 42mp stills with 13+ stops of dynamic range, Varicam-esque colour science, and two card slots for the pros, then they will strike gold. It's basically two fingers up to Canon and Nikon, hence the countdown and 6 month early announcement. Damage them pre-orders... I just hope they excite with the lens lineup.

But have they? It seems that only 18 months after release, a lot of GH5 users are abandoning the camera for other brands. At $2000, it was very expensive for a m4/3 camera, no matter how much they gave you. And I still don’t really know if they have made any profit from the GH5? Instead, I see a FF Panasonic as a, me too, attempt to get into an increasingly competitive market and if the rumors are correct, it won’t be a cheap cover charge. And then this jump to higher MPs which I assume is for their silly desire to bring 8K video to market. A 12mp a7siii killer with IBIS and lowlight video would have been a way better foray into FF in my opinion.

As the rumors suggest, no IBIS, no PDAF, no retro fitted FF lenses (well maybe some Leica if they use that mount) and no existing Professional photographer user base and I just don’t understand what a high MP FF camera from Panasonic is supposed to accomplish. Now if it has internal Raw, it will have my attention. At $3000+ it may just be a double take though.

[Zak Forsman]

11 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Could the brown-muddiness be IR pollution, tried shooting them with an IR cut filter?
 

Ah whoops, I see someone else replied with exactly my same thoughts.

 

Yeah, the Hoya IR Cut cleaned things up under daylight with heaps of ND in play. But the muddiness was always present under tungsten light, IR Cut or not. Something else was going on there. Or maybe the Hoya IR Cut wasnt strong enough.

[Robert Collins]

7 hours ago, mercer said:

But have they? It seems that only 18 months after release, a lot of GH5 users are abandoning the camera for other brands. At $2000, it was very expensive for a m4/3 camera, no matter how much they gave you. And I still don’t really know if they have made any profit from the GH5? Instead, I see a FF Panasonic as a, me too, attempt to get into an increasingly competitive market and if the rumors are correct, it won’t be a cheap cover charge. And then this jump to higher MPs which I assume is for their silly desire to bring 8K video to market. A 12mp a7siii killer with IBIS and lowlight video would have been a way better foray into FF in my opinion.

As the rumors suggest, no IBIS, no PDAF, no retro fitted FF lenses (well maybe some Leica if they use that mount) and no existing Professional photographer user base and I just don’t understand what a high MP FF camera from Panasonic is supposed to accomplish. Now if it has internal Raw, it will have my attention. At $3000+ it may just be a double take though.

I think we will find that Panasonic's jump to say 50mp is mostly driven by a desire to maintain M43's backward compatibility with 4k video.

But I agree that a new Panasonic FF mount is going to be a really hard sell with a US$3k camera and no pdaf or ibis. Even if it is a really good camera - is the general consumer going to buy into this mount? Remember the NX1 - great camera - but there was little general confidence in the mount and it just didnt sell.

[IronFilm]

9 hours ago, mercer said:

But have they? It seems that only 18 months after release, a lot of GH5 users are abandoning the camera for other brands.

Outside the bubble of online camera forums, I don't know anybody who has "abandoned" the GH5 for other camera brands. In fact I still know of people who even today in 2018 are buying the GH5, because it is still an extremely relevant and well priced camera. 

 

9 hours ago, mercer said:

And then this jump to higher MPs which I assume is for their silly desire to bring 8K video to market.

Was being first with 4K in the GH4 also a "silly desire"? Maybe Panasonic should have stuck with HD for longer, so they didn't have to push the other brands to compete with them. 

 

 

[Dan Sherman]

25 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

Outside the bubble of online camera forums, I don't know anybody who has "abandoned" the GH5 for other camera brands. In fact I still know of people who even today in 2018 are buying the GH5, because it is still an extremely relevant and well priced camera. 

That's the one thing I think a lot of people fail to realize! for every person you here complaining in a forum there's probably ten thousand that are perfectly happy!

[ntblowz]

I know a few people got GH5 instead of A7III this year.. in fact there is still large number of people doesn't know about A7III at all! On some MV meeting I went to when they asked what camera i have they have a blank look when I told them I got A7III, but they respond when I said "and GH5s" with expression of oh I know that camera look.

[scotchtape]

I have GH5 and Sony A7III.  I want to use the Sony more but the IBIS is poop compared to GH5, and I wish the codec was better.

Still waiting for FF, video AF, good IBIS or OIS, good codec, 4K60p... I thought A7SIII would check all the boxes but after experiencing the Sony IBIS I highly doubt it will be much improved.  Maybe Nikon will save me!

In the mean time, GH5 is still no slouch for a lot of different shots, hard to beat the size of that 35-100mm!

[Mattias Burling]

2 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Was being first with 4K in the GH4 also a "silly desire"? Maybe Panasonic should have stuck with HD for longer, so they didn't have to push the other brands to compete with them. 

A little bit silly yes. 4K is still not even close to being a standard in acquisition (years away still) and plenty of cameras shoots a nicer HD than the GH5 shoots 4K. Also they weren't first. So it's a nice, not a need. And nice is a little silly, like Samsungs golf swing mode

[IronFilm]

First to put 4K in a stills camera is of course what I meant, as naturally they're not going to be first to 8K either! As RED is already there, and a few others as well.

[jonpais]

2 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Outside the bubble of online camera forums, I don't know anybody who has "abandoned" the GH5 for other camera brands. In fact I still know of people who even today in 2018 are buying the GH5, because it is still an extremely relevant and well priced camera. 

 

Was being first with 4K in the GH4 also a "silly desire"? Maybe Panasonic should have stuck with HD for longer, so they didn't have to push the other brands to compete with them. 

 

 

Not silly at all. Film is roughly 5K, so after debayering, even these Panasonics don’t begin to approach the resolution of film stock.

[nigelbb]

1 hour ago, jonpais said:

Not silly at all. Film is roughly 5K, so after debayering, even these Panasonics don’t begin to approach the resolution of film stock.

35mm still photos are usually quoted as being about 20MP i.e. 5K so cinema film at whatever ratio is going to be a fair bit less. Certainly no more than 4K.

[jonpais]

15 minutes ago, nigelbb said:

35mm still photos are usually quoted as being about 20MP i.e. 5K so cinema film at whatever ratio is going to be a fair bit less. Certainly no more than 4K.

debayering. At the same time, once a print has been struck and projected at your ordinary theater, resolution could easily drop below HD. 

[newfoundmass]

9 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Outside the bubble of online camera forums, I don't know anybody who has "abandoned" the GH5 for other camera brands. In fact I still know of people who even today in 2018 are buying the GH5, because it is still an extremely relevant and well priced camera. 

This. I don't know anyone that owns a GH5 that isn't satisfied overall. While I'm sure there are those that have switched, I think they're the minority. Those that have are generally people that always need to have the latest camera. 

I'd still buy the GH5 today over the A7iii, X-T3, Pocket 4K, etc. It's the best camera for my work and is still, in my opinion, the most versatile hybrid camera in its class. Friday I am going to be shooting about 6 hours total of interviews in a mulicamera set up, each running about 90 minutes. I won't have to worry about battery life (I'll have more than enough), recording limits, or anything like that. The GH5 is prefect for this. Could I do it with the other cameras listed? Yes, but I'd have to start and stop each interview up to 3 times to account for the 30 minute time limits, probably switch batteries too during each interview, re-synch video and audio multiple times for each interview in post, etc. 

[Kisaha]

I do not know anyone that sold his/hers GH5. 

All the people I know that bought A7iii are people that upgraded from previous A7 or a6xx cameras.

There are some that complaint about the photo side of the GH5 and I do see them changing sooner or later. 

In my point of view it is a videocentric camera, not a complete hybrid.

[mercer]

Hmm, I know about 10-15, or so, narrative filmmakers, of varying levels, and I think maybe one or two of them have a GH5.

10 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Was being first with 4K in the GH4 also a "silly desire"? Maybe Panasonic should have stuck with HD for longer, so they didn't have to push the other brands to compete with them.

Well, as Matthias already pointed out, Panasonic wasn’t the first with 4K. I believe Canon was the first to put 4K into a hybrid camera. And they were the first to do 4K 60p. But I digress, yes at the time, for a consumer/enthusiast camera, yes I think Panasonic was silly to put 4K into the GH4. And they will be not only silly but offensive if they try to push the market to 8K only 4 years later. IMO.

[Mattias Burling]

8 hours ago, IronFilm said:

First to put 4K in a stills camera is of course what I meant, as naturally they're not going to be first to 8K either! As RED is already there, and a few others as well.

They weren't first with a 4K stills camera

[IronFilm]

Oh yeah, the 1D C
A camera that was officially part of Canon's Cinema EOS series, so kinda half debatebly almost if it really was part of the pure stills line up?

And besides, at that point in time it was so very prohibitively expensive that it could just be ignore by most of us mere mortals. 

[jonpais]

I’m sorry, but these never-ending remarks about everyone dumping their GH5 cameras; speculating whether Panasonic is losing money on them; predicting that prices will plummet - is there some personal motive why someone’s been posting absurd comments like these week after week for as long as I can remember? 

[Dan Sherman]

1 hour ago, jonpais said:

I’m sorry, but these never-ending remarks about everyone dumping their GH5 cameras; speculating whether Panasonic is losing money on them; predicting that prices will plummet - is there some personal motive why someone’s been posting absurd comments like these week after week for as long as I can remember? 

Potentail reasons:

• Fanboyism for a different brand
• Fanboyism for a different format
• Feelings of inferiority about ones current gear
• Incorrect believe that they are being held back by gear that is not the absolute newest available
• Out of control GAS that needs justification for buying something new
• cantankerous personality by nature

[Mattias Burling]

3 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Oh yeah, the 1D C
A camera that was officially part of Canon's Cinema EOS series, so kinda half debatebly almost if it really was part of the pure stills line up?

And besides, at that point in time it was so very prohibitively expensive that it could just be ignore by most of us mere mortals. 

Its a 1DX with 4K and it was first. Lets just try to live with that instead of trying to reshape history with strange rules just to make a point

(Btw, I sold my A7sii and could buy a 1DC with money to spare.)