JordanWright Posted August 13, 2017 Share Posted August 13, 2017 I currently use a Sony a7s ii with native Sony glass ( Loxia 50/2 and Sony 28/2). I am considering switching systems on the GH5. I have a few questions about the system. 1) Lenses? which to go for... Native or speedbooster. how well does the IBIS work with adapted lenses, do you have to dial in the focal length each time you change lens? 2) Lowlight - I often shoot upto 1600, sometimes at 3200.. is the footage usable at these ISOs 3) Dynamic Range - If I switch I plan to use VLOG.. how much difference in DR is there between the a7sii's Slog and the Gh5s VLog. Has anyone else made the switch and do they miss it? 4) Colour - I have been using EOSHD on the Sony cameras with really nice skintones. How are the skintones on VLOG? Thanks in advance.. if anyone else has made the switch from the Sonys to the GH5 any advice would be appretiated! and is there anything ill miss from the sonys? Grégory LEROY 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonpais Posted August 14, 2017 Share Posted August 14, 2017 I don't own the GH5 (yet!), but I can answer numbers 1 and 2. (1) I'd go with fast native primes - your back will thank you for it! I've been preaching this for a while now, but in fact, I've seen some remarkable work done with cheap slow kit zooms and pancakes. If you plan on doing a lot of manual focusing and have deep pockets, the Veydra Mini Primes look like the way to go, and in fact, I'm looking into a set myself at the moment. As far as photography lenses go, the Voigtlander Nokton 17.5mm f/.095 and 25mm f//0.95 could replace your current focal lengths, and they are unique in that they are the best built lenses in the micro four thirds system. At the same time, the Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8, when paired with a focal reducer, is an incredibly beautiful instrument. If you're on a tight budget, you might consider the Nikkor AI(S) lenses and a cheap Chinese adapter. @Cinegain has also contributed a ton of suggestions for vintage optics in the Lenses thread. As far as premium m4/3 AF lenses go, they are pricey as heck, the fly-by-wire manual focusing mechanism is pretty awful (though several Olympus lenses have a manual focus clutch, it is still fly-by-wire), and some say they have an overly clinical look as a result of optical abberations being corrected in firmware, though the overwhelming majority of owners are extremely satisfied with such lenses, the Leica 12-60mm f/2.8-4, for example. The Panasonic lenses have a different color rendition to the Leicas, with most preferring the latter. When mounting a passive lens on the body, the camera will prompt you to enter a focal length. IBIS will work fine with adapted lenses. (2) Even the most conservative GH5 owners claim ISO 1600 is usable, while others will tell you ISO 3200 is perfectly acceptable, so this is highly subjective. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonpais Posted August 14, 2017 Share Posted August 14, 2017 Here's a skin tone and high ISO test by our own @Fredrik Lyhne Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shirozina Posted August 14, 2017 Share Posted August 14, 2017 Looks pretty nasty in the highlights. deezid 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonpais Posted August 14, 2017 Share Posted August 14, 2017 17 minutes ago, Shirozina said: Looks pretty nasty in the highlights. At all settings? Is there any other way to express your thoughts without being rude to another forum member? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shirozina Posted August 14, 2017 Share Posted August 14, 2017 I was expressing my honest opinion about the technical quality of the footage which was posted as an example of the technical capability of a camera - how is this rude? If you want a more refined opinion it has a nasty highlight rolloff possibly caused by clipping in the red channel. deezid 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonpais Posted August 14, 2017 Share Posted August 14, 2017 21 minutes ago, Shirozina said: I was expressing my honest opinion about the technical quality of the footage which was posted as an example of the technical capability of a camera - how is this rude? If you want a more refined opinion it has a nasty highlight rolloff possibly caused by clipping in the red channel. I don't know, Shirozina, but if you went to a lot of trouble to upload a test of a camera you obviously loved, would it bother you in the slightest if someone called your footage 'garbage', 'nasty', or whatever? But hey, this is the internet, anything goes! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JordanWright Posted August 14, 2017 Author Share Posted August 14, 2017 Thanks for the test, it holds colour quite nicely at high isos jonpais 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shirozina Posted August 14, 2017 Share Posted August 14, 2017 1 hour ago, jonpais said: I don't know, Shirozina, but if you went to a lot of trouble to upload a test of a camera you obviously loved, would it bother you in the slightest if someone called your footage 'garbage', 'nasty', or whatever? But hey, this is the internet, anything goes! If you post a purely technical test then it's open to comment - I'm not criticising the person. If anyone 'loves' their camera and is hurt by comments on it's technical abilities then maybe they need the kind of help that I or anyone else on this forum can't give...... TwoScoops and EthanAlexander 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonpais Posted August 14, 2017 Share Posted August 14, 2017 13 minutes ago, Shirozina said: If you post a purely technical test then it's open to comment - I'm not criticising the person. If anyone 'loves' their camera and is hurt by comments on it's technical abilities then maybe they need the kind of help that I or anyone else on this forum can't give...... Nasty is a pejorative term and does not describe anything other than your personal feelings about the image. So it's not really constructive at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ki Rin Posted August 14, 2017 Share Posted August 14, 2017 If he said the highlights looked bad would that be ok? Yes its a personal opinion, but what's wrong with that? Its not like it was a personal attack or directed at anyone. He's talking about the technical quality of the image. deezid and EthanAlexander 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonpais Posted August 14, 2017 Share Posted August 14, 2017 26 minutes ago, Ki Rin said: If he said the highlights looked bad would that be ok? Yes its a personal opinion, but what's wrong with that? Its not like it was a personal attack or directed at anyone. He's talking about the technical quality of the image. I'll tell you why - because in the five or so years that I've been uploading videos to my YouTube channel - over two hundred videos to date - not a single person has ever made a remark like that. They may say they think the soundtrack is too loud or inappropriate for the content; the contrast too high or the colors too red; the editing too fast or too slow; or, they may disagree with my judgement in a lens comparison: but nobody, and this is on YT, mind you - nobody, to the best of my recollection has just flat out said anything was nasty. They almost always articulate the reasons why they don't like something, like grownups do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmcindie Posted August 14, 2017 Share Posted August 14, 2017 Funny thing here is that there really are no blown highlights either. So what is this nasty highlight shit? Harsh lighting yeah but... nasty highlight roll-off? What in the ffff.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shirozina Posted August 14, 2017 Share Posted August 14, 2017 1 hour ago, hmcindie said: Funny thing here is that there really are no blown highlights either. So what is this nasty highlight shit? Harsh lighting yeah but... nasty highlight roll-off? What in the ffff.... No need to be nasty.......... markr041 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deezid Posted August 14, 2017 Share Posted August 14, 2017 Highlights look terrible indeed. Red channel clips, footage is overexposed (which makes it look cleaner). Case closed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grégory LEROY Posted February 4, 2018 Share Posted February 4, 2018 I'd like to go back to the original question. How does the GH5 IBIS behave with adapted lens (once the correct focal length entered). Is it comparable to native 4/3 primes? With sony for example, I'v read that the 5 axis stabilization only operate with native electronically connected lens. Adapted lens only have xy axis stabilization. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonpais Posted February 4, 2018 Share Posted February 4, 2018 IBIS works great with adapted lenses. I’ve shot with Sigma ART 50mm f/1.4 and even Veydra 85mm with ETC enabled (over 200mm equiv.!) with no issues. These were all shot handheld. Keep in mind, I shake a lot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JordanWright Posted February 4, 2018 Author Share Posted February 4, 2018 No issues with IBIS with adapted lenses (Sigma 18-35+ Speedbooster) I actually prefer it too the duel IS of the native lenses... I did however only use the cheap kit lenses but it seemed to stabilise it too much. Maybe its something you need to get used to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mmmbeats Posted February 4, 2018 Share Posted February 4, 2018 1 hour ago, JordanWright said: No issues with IBIS with adapted lenses (Sigma 18-35+ Speedbooster) I actually prefer it too the duel IS of the native lenses... Why so? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonpais Posted February 4, 2018 Share Posted February 4, 2018 bcs it works too well ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.