Move out of full frame system?

[stokstad]

I would look out for the Nikon D7200 announcement if you are looking for a good hybrid. It will most likely have a much smaller feature-set than GH4 for video but instead be a better stills camera and have great lowlight capable 1080/60P like the D5300. One could hope that it packs a aperture lever, larger buffer and a 7fps raw frame-rate. 

[yiomo]

Thank you for your input. Ok, so after a lot of reading, and balancing things out, it seems to me right to sell my 5d with the 24-105 a dozen cards, batteries etc.

 

Trying to pinpoint what I am looking for, I came to the conclusion that up to now -for my budget- nothing compares with the bmpcc image quality. As much as I would like to have one single body to do all- i.e. the GH4, i doubt, from the reviews and technical info I read, that it will match the cinematic quality and 13 stops of dynamic range of the bmpcc.

 

As I am also interested in still photos and shooting video in a more flexible way it makes sense for me to move to a m43 system.  That is, to purchase GH4 as well and interchange lenses with the bmpcc. 

 

So as far as the question of the thread goes, I reached my conclusion. I have already put a local add and hopefully I will complete the sale soon. If I can get a good price on the 5d + lens and add another $1500, I can buy the GH4 and three good primes and later on the bmpcc or the other way around. 

 

I still do have one question though and I am interested to hear your thoughts but basically I would prefer if they could be backed up with data/facts. 

 

Do you believe after reading  the GH4 reviews and specs that there is any chance that the GH4 will have the same dynamic range as bmpcc and therefore the same cinematic quality? Although I do think that the new lumix looks like a great allaround hybrid, I can personally see a huge difference between the lumix color gammut /resolution ( don't know how to put it) which looks more videoy/plasticky, and the bmpcc, which comes closer to film gradation.

 

My technical knowledge is limited, so I am not sure if this is the result of the 13 stops of dynamic range or because of the 422 10 bit, which would consequently mean that with a good flat profile the GH4 can reach the same iq (even with 1-2 stops less DR) and therefore I would only need one camera to buy.

[andy lee]

you are talking about the color profile the GH4 shoots on - there are many to shoot on and Im sure you will find one you like on it, so take that into account when looking at gh4 footage - you dont know always what color profile they shot it on .

The new Panasonic cameras have great rich color profiles more like canon camera (gh2 was always a bit flat in color ) Panasonic have now solved that and the g6 gx7 have great color now so dont let that put you off

 

BMPCC is a odd crop factor so you will need super wide lenses for it.

 

also Panasonic cameras have fully variable Kelvin from 2500 - 10,000 Kelvin

 

so you dial in each scene from way cold cool blue 2500 k to warm rich orange 10,000k and anything in between

BMPCC just has presets daylight , cloudy , tungsten etc you cannot do that on it

 

The fully variable Kelvin on the Pansonic is invaluable I could not work without it.

for instance I shoot interiors with Practicals at 4000k this warms up the skin tones and makes them rich and very cinematic ....in camera.

[yiomo]

Perhaps I didn't explain myself correctly. I am talking about the opposite thing:

 

i am wondering If the "cinelike d" profile will be flat "enough" to be used as a log-like profile for grading, dimilarly to the bmpcc flat profile which is ideal for grading. What follows from this question is if there is really a chance to get a 13 stop dynamic range that would come closer to the organic film like look of bmpcc. 

 

I don't think I am being subjective when I say that lumix footage is too crisp and too video-y. The bmpcc iq which I find fantastic, I think is a result of a combination of the 13 stops, of the 422 10 bit, and possibly of some of secret blackmagic ingredients? Just hoping that GH4 could recreate this. Otherwise will have to buy both...  :wacko:

[andy lee]

you can dial out the color on Pansonic cameras easily to make a very flat profile  ,  Lumix doesnt look video to me quite the opposite its much more cinematic than most other camers I use , its all about the lenses you use and how you use them.

[yiomo]

you can dial out the color on Pansonic cameras easily to make a very flat profile  ,  Lumix doesnt look video to me quite the opposite its much more cinematic than most other camers I use , its all about the lenses you use and how you use them.

You mean you don't see any difference at all between the image quality of the Lumix videos and the bmpcc videos ?

No doubt, a good dop and good lenses help and are greatly important but so does real life technology (13 stops, 422 10bit).

[andy lee]

content is king , its all about how you use it

 

this is my Blackmagic rig , Im very familiar with BlackMagic

http://www.eoshd.com/comments/gallery/image/180-tecnoir-blackmagic-anamorphic-cinema-rig-lores/

[yiomo]

content is king , its all about how you use it

 

this is my Blackmagic rig , Im very familiar with BlackMagic

http://www.eoshd.com/comments/gallery/image/180-tecnoir-blackmagic-anamorphic-cinema-rig-lores/

 

i thought you were shooting m43 ?

 

My point is illustrated in this old video 

although gh3 is definitely more sharp, I find the bmpcc has more character. Now, perhaps it is my ignorance speaking and perhaps this (the over- sharpness) is something that can be "fixed" with different lenses. It is just that the majority of the videos online coming from lumix have this sharpness, while the majority of the bmpcc footage has a more gradient, more organic film-like look.

 

I am not denying that content is king. It is true. However when panasonic did the revolution with the dvx100 24p we thought we had it all..

Its the same thing now.. Personally, I have said it earlier, I couldn't care less about 4k, but this organic look is nice to have.

[fuzzynormal]

I'll say this:  If you think the camera is what's limiting your creativity and productivity in photography, videography, and/or cinematography, you're not doing it right to begin with.

 

...So much more important things to worry about than the camera.  

[yiomo]

I'll say this:  If you think the camera is what's limiting your creativity and productivity in photography, videography, and/or cinematography, you're not doing it right to begin with.

 

...So much more important things to worry about than the camera.  

 

Wow. This is the second time in this thread someone talks about  "content". Thank you very much. I am well aware of this.  :)

 

Do you really find it that unusual that someone wants to analyse all the options before he invests his money into a new camera? Or you just want to write something just for the sake of writing something? As I, myself said, yes, content is king, but if we were only interested in content and not in technology, we would be still shooting with the DVX100 or perhaps even film. Not a bad thing per se, just saying.

 

I don't understand what makes you think that making a comparison between 2 competing products is only for people who don't worry about the.."so much more important things.."

 

I happen to have a feature documentary at various festivals and although I shot it with a 5d, with the lowest budget possible, I wish the camera could give me a couple more stops DR to play with. 

 

Thank you for your comment but please try to understand what my already expressed concern is.

[etidona]

From what I've seen in the net the BM looks to have more DR. I't also smaller and lighter. However the m43 solution have less DOF, more wide angle options, smaller file size, 50, 60 and 96p, very good low light performance, better usability and of course, if you consider to use it in the future, 4k. Good luck with the choice! ;)

[andy lee]

m4/3 for me is great to use its small light and I have a load of lenses to work with , plus the Panasonics have amazing EVFs and O LED screens - built in - I dont need a massive rig to cart around with my Cinefoid EVF attached to it

I dont need the V lock Battery attached to my BMCC rig and to carry V lock spares batteries and charger (have you seen the size of these)

 

The work flow is alot quicker and the media cheaper to 32gb Sandick 45mb/s card gives me 2.5 hours recording time

I can delete unused shots in camera and I have fully variable Kelvin and alot more control in camera of the image .

 

I can work longer faster and quicker on m4/3 thay why I use it as my main first choise camera , BMCC and Canon are for some jobs if needed.

[Quirky]

In brief: the question is if it is a good idea to sell my 5dmk2 + 24-105 and buy a gh4(body).

 

Nope. Because...

 

 

because my 5d works fine and also because I have no money to spare. 

 

That's good enough a reason, isn't it.

 

Other than that, yes, it probably is a good idea to sell the 5Dm2. 

As long as the video side of things is concerned, it would make sense to sell the 5mk2 soon, as long as you still might get decent money off it. That won't last for too long now, though. 

 

To which system to jump into, if changing to another one in the first place, is another matter. I believe that right now, of all times, before NAB, before Photokina, before a number of anticipated new releases, one may not want to be in a hurry. Unless you really need a new camera.

 

If that's the case, none of this speculation really matter. You need a new camera and you want a new camera - two very different things.

 

 

 

does it make sense to invest in full frame glass? Will it be obsolete - for my needs?

 

It sort of depends, but in general yes. So called full frame glass will work with full frame, APS-C/S35, mFT, 1-inch and S16. It doesn't quite work the other way around. The full frame glass is less likely to go obsolete, for that reason. Even though you can get along without it, too.

Other than that, it's a matter of taste and your personal preferences. What you like, what you're willing to carry around and so on.

So whatever fancies you but please...

 

The only advantage at the moment, as I see it, that the 5d has (and any full frame for that matter), is the shallow depth of field. I am not interested in entering a debate as many mirrorless evangelists do, who have created blogs about "why shallow depth of field is not so important" and "if you care about the shallowness of the dof it means that your vision is shallow" !!! , etc.

 

Please, it's 2014, stop propagating the silly idea that mirrorless equals micro four thirds. 

That is simply not the case, and the smaller size of the gear is just one part of the whole point in going for mirrorless systems. There are several other reasons as well. On the video side, more than on the stills side, the mirrorless system has obvious benefits over the traditional dSLR design, regardless of the sensor size. Even Canon have been moving towards mirrorless systems within the higher end video segment, hence the C-series.

 

There are already mirrorless systems from S16 to full frame, so the shallow depth of field vs. mirrorless is a moot point. The Sony A7r, whilst perhaps not the best candidate for video, is just the first full frame mirrorless body. More are on the way quite soon, and probably not only from Sony. Same goes for APS-C size, they're getting better, too. There are three trade shows coming within the next six months, and I bet that until March 2015, the palette available for us is even wider. With compelling options in several different sensor sizes. So not much point in digging oneself into outdated trenches.

 

FWIW, I for one have come to the conclusion that if you want to have the best of the both worlds, stills and video, buy two different cameras. A hybrid to do both will always be a compromise. At least within a reasonable budget.

 

So all in all, I'd say if you fancy the GH4 just go for it, but if you're not in a hurry, well, then don't be.

Your desires, your wallet, your decision.

[andy lee]

two systems is the way to go

 

I use my Canon for stills with the 24-105mm - that combination just works

and Micro 4/3 for video

 

done.... it works

[fuzzynormal]

Do you really find it that unusual that someone wants to analyze all the options before he invests his money into a new camera? Or you just want to write something just for the sake of writing something? I don't understand what makes you think that making a comparison between 2 competing products is only for people who don't worry about the.."so much more important things.."

 

I happen to have a feature documentary at various festivals and although I shot it with a 5d, with the lowest budget possible, I wish the camera could give me a couple more stops DR to play with.

 

As a person that's also made 5DII-shot documentaries in film festivals (and that matters not) --I'm just saying so many people focus their concerns in directions that ultimately may not be as important as they think.  

 

If 2 stops of dynamic range prevents you from telling a good story, well, that's odd isn't it?  Still, I do know why you'd want that capability.  It's nice, but if you're strapped for cash don't worry about it.  

 

As it happens, I also just wrote that stuff above just for the sake of writing it.  Maybe it's contrarian on a blog that's about gear, but that's my POV.  I'm pretty sure point-of-view is what the entire global internet runs on.  Hubris, opinion, and comatose humans radiating body heat for our alien overloads inside another dimension of reality.

 

You've already said what you have is working and and right now you have no money.  So it seems you're fishing for an affirmation to buy something new?

 

Ultimately, do what you want, but do check out Andy Lee's advice.  I'd say that's spot on.

[Bioskop.Inc]

The first & probably only thing i would say/suggest is before doing anything:

 

Try Magic Lantern out on your 5D2 - RAW video or Bit Rate hack & much much more.

There's also that filter that gets rid of moire etc...

 

As far as re-sale value goes, you've got one hell of a photography camera & you'll always be able to sell it.

Also, you can't buy the GH4 yet & there is NAB coming.

[Hans Punk]

The first & probably only thing i would say/suggest is before doing anything:

Try Magic Lantern out on your 5D2 - RAW video or Bit Rate hack & much much more.
There's also that filter that gets rid of moire etc...

As far as re-sale value goes, you've got one hell of a photography camera & you'll always be able to sell it.
Also, you can't buy the GH4 yet & there is NAB coming.

Totally agree with Bioskop.inc on this.

Would it not make sense to try Magic Lantern Firmware on a camera you already own?

The full frame raw video from Mk2 or Mk3 is pretty darn stunning and is still yet to be matched by any other camera on the planet (pre NAB announcements). If I were you, I'd give it a try and if you like the results you could use some of the money you would save on buying a new camera to get a high speed CF card to start with - all you need to purchase to try ML the most cost effective way is to grab a Komputerbay 64Gb 1000x CF card. If you want to stick with 5D2 raw then maybe buy an SSD drive (or two) to add or replace your current ones if your current system is a few years old. Raw processing can be taxing on computer drives, in terms of storage and transfer speed, but all the short term pain in getting it up and running is well worth the effort in my opinion.


Cameras can loose value fairly quickly(always been the case for video), although your 5D2 is a great stills camera...and will remain a great stills camera for a few more years. Now (for video) there is a new lease of life to that camera via ML raw...effectively giving your canon DSLR a totally free 'sensor upgrade' for its video output.

I suspect that a lot of people are going to miss the full frame look when they jump on these crop sensor 4k bandwagons.

[maxotics]

A lot of people are going to miss the full frame look when they jump on these crop sensor 4k bandwagons.

 

And dynamic range.  The 4K image will decrease moire and increase sharpness, but it won't save the shadows.  And only the shadow knows :)

[fuzzynormal]

A lot of people are going to miss the full frame look when they jump on these crop sensor 4k bandwagons.

 

I'm not enamored with it to be honest, even though I employed it for a specific purpose in one of my recent doc-shorts.  That insane DOF is just not a visual I'm used to as a guy growing up on American cinema.  

 

However, it's handy for talking head interview shots.  That low-light ability and deep DOF makes those types of compositions a bit easier.

 

Even so, the M43 does impressive DOF too if you want it.

[Hans Punk]

Agreed, full frame is not for everything, and for many applications a real pain to focus pull...but I guess if the original poster was worried about loosing the 'look' he was accustomed to with photography and video from the 5D2 - I would be worried to suggest a crop sensor such as the GH4, especially in 4k mode. Ah shucks... I've fallen into my own nightmare - actually debating what camera etc.

Truth be told, there has never been so much affordable choice and logical reason to not be making creative work right now. I'm a believer in grabbing what you can afford to buy or rent at the time, try not to chase 'unicorn' cameras, spend your money in front of the lens because nobody will give a crap what you shot it on in 6 months time (unless it's film!)