jurgen

Well this is a disappointment. Everything I was hopeful about - IBIS and improved ergonomics, mainly - seems to be lackluster. The jittery-ness of the stabilization is really noticeable. Thanks for the review, Andrew. Well done as always.

Great review Andrew! Question for you (and others who have handled this body): you touch on the build quality briefly, but I'm wondering - is it better feeling than the D610? I find my D610 to feel quite plasticky, especially on the front panel, which occasionally squeaks if I'm holding it awkwardly. I can see in the product images that the panel is redesigned on the 750, and I know the monocoque construction is new, but does it, for lack of a better way to put it, "inspire confidence"?

FWIW, the B&H spec listing on the LX100 lists it as both 30p and 24p for 4K.

In the B&H first look video, Panasonic's Matt Frazer says it shoots at 24p. Could have been a slip of the tongue, but if not, remember that the FZ1000 is getting a 24p bump in the next couple months, and the same could (is likely to?) happen with this camera. Looks to be a phenomenal stills camera as well.

Great review. The included video looks incredible. Thanks for being so comprehensive! Side note - how is the onboard mic? (by "onboard mic" standards, of course)

I couldn't disagree more emphatically. While it doesn't look "filmic," I think the "messiness" of the camera moves plays perfectly with the aesthetic of the video and of the song. I think that you're approaching it as someone who wants to have technical criticisms on a video forum. If you were just watching as a fan, or as an impartial observer who had never heard of a CMOS sensor, I think the first remark you'd have would be the outstanding cinematography. Video was beautifully shot and, my goodness, wonderfully directed. They really nailed it.

lol ... really dude?

But then aren't we propping up different sized sensors as sort of monolithic, uniform entities? Despite both of them being full frame, a D700 surely has worse high ISO performance than a D610, right?

It's an interesting notion. My impression - and I could be (and probably am) quite wrong - has always been that full frame is actually sort of a niche product when viewed in the context of "all cameras on the market," and that you really aren't sacrificing that much IQ wise by shooting with a crop body (I own a D600, and that is certainly my experience v. my GH4). I suppose a FF Lumix body would open it up to certain pro applications (high end commercial photography, large fine art prints, sports, etc.), but then, isn't a big reason why people like Getty pros shoot Nikon/Canon because of the Pro service? I think, with a camera as capable as the GH4, that that should be Panasonic's next endeavor - a Lumix version of Nikon/Canon pro services, with dedicated customer service people and a fast, reliable turnaround time. It is a "professional" level camera in every other sense of the word, why not this as well? I also guess that, from a practical sense, I don't see what most (even very serious, professional level) photographers stand to gain from a FF body vs. a smaller crop body like the GH4, EM1, XT1, etc. For certain very specific applications and certain performance heavy situations it makes sense, but otherwise, why burden yourself with all that gear for a practically insignificant bump in IQ? Many of the World Press Photo winners from last year were shot on crop bodies; many of the current Magnum shooters use M43 almost exclusively (Peter Van Agtmael, Moises Saman, Alex Majoli). They're way, way better than sufficient, so, aside from very specific circumstances, why bother with bigger bodies and bigger lenses?

Not to my eye, no. I've tried to provoke it a bunch of times and can't seem to recreate the issue. The first time I saw it, I was trying to save an actual photo shot at ISO 4000 by pushing it a bit. I've since gone back and looked through all my other high ISO photos and it isn't there (and isn't provokable).

edit

Is it ever. I held one for the first time this past weekend and I was stunned. I'm 6'7" so that may be part of it but I could cup it in the palm of my hand. Crazy small.

I completely agree. I honestly didn't notice the noise until I read the comment - not that I couldn't see it, it's just that the image overall was so lovely that I didn't really take notice of it. Quite pleasing, and if it every frustrates in the future it could probably be completely removed with NeatVideo. Side note: excellent review, Andrew! Well written, beautiful footage.

I'm excited about Samsung being in the enthusiast/low-end (price wise) pro camera market, if for no other reason than because they have loads of capital. They don't need to hit with every camera in the way that other companies do, and so I'm really okay with the mediocre offerings thus far. So long as they're building towards something, so long as they really care about getting it right for photographers and cinematographers (and not just being predatory in the consumer market a la Canon with their recycled parts entry-level SLRs), I'm happy to see them in the game.

... why would anyone want to do that, and then expect not to be criticized?

I'm of two minds about this, as least as it pertains to the review of the GH4. On the one hand, it's a beautiful piece, and really showcases the potential of the camera. On the other, you contrast it with some of the garbage being shot on the GH4 (

No, I've got a full release body, but it's certainly problematic. Hoping the replacement can alleviate some of these issues. -edit- Some more testing and I actually think this normal behavior. The aperture stops down on the lens once the shutter speed tops of at 1/8000. I think it's for the sake of the metering system once it gets too bright. Also, the menu quirks are on the GH3 as well. The crashes, I have no answer for ... that's why I'll test a replacement before keeping/perhaps warrantying one.

Back on (designated) topic ... I'm getting a strange "clattering" shooting stills with my Oly 25 1.8. It's like the rattlesnaking problem that some E-M5's had with the Pan/Leica 25, only it's not constant. Changing from very bright to very dark conditions (say, going from in your apartment to pointing the camera out the window), the aperture will close down and reopen very quickly causing a short flicker on screen. It's annoying, and sporadic. I've encountered a number of bugs on this particular body - multiple crashes being the worst of them - so I have a replacement coming early next week. I'll check for all these things when that one arrives.

As the only other person thus far who's listed quirks, I don't disagree. But much of what you've listed isn't a quirk or a problem - the 2.3x crop, for instance. That's just how the camera was designed. Perhaps this is a semantic disagreement, but if something is clearly listed in the spec sheet as being a certain way, I don't know why anyone would imply that it was unexpected or detrimental. Maybe in a "things I just don't like about the camera" thread, but then that's a different discussion entirely.

At 4K? Buy a different camera for ten to 30 times the price of a GH4. The fact that it maxes out at 30p 4K is neither a quirk nor a problem, much like the fact that it doesn't have a full frame sensor isn't a quirk or a problem. At some point you're just talking about design choices, and if what the GH4 is doesn't align with what you need, buy something else.

If you find the 12-35 IS to be unsatisfactory for this particular purpose, then you'll probably find the same to be true for the 14-140. For shooting from a car, you're going to want some sort of rig. Whether that's some sort of pistol grip/extra points of contact mini shoulder rig, suction cup mount, whatever, there are lots of relatively inexpensive options available.

Indeed. You can hear something in video mode if you turn your plugged in mic off and boost your gain and headphones to max volume, but then ... why would you do that? And why would you think that's a problem? I've tried to give a rundown of my experience on that dvxuser thread, but my account has been in a queue for activation since Saturday, so ... apparently they aren't too keen on any new users. Ah, well.

Third gen i7, 12GB RAM. For kicks, I just cracked open my mid-2012 stock standard MacBook Pro (i5, 4 gigs RAM, Mavericks) and opened a GH4K file in Premiere, scaled it up to 500%, moved the frame all around, scrubbed through the timeline, and linked the audio into Audition. It's absolutely chugging along - it takes a couple seconds to go from one frame to the next at full res - but it's not crashing. I've seen the error message you're referring to before, spontaneously, and rarely, on my desktop, editing GoPro footage. No such problems with the GH4 so far. Adobe offers a free, complete CC trial for a month without a credit card - maybe worth giving it a shot, if for no other reason than to cut out some of the variables?

+1 works great in CC.

As others have said, don't get so far ahead of yourself with gear purchases. Gear comes and goes. If you're - as you say - "just starting to enter the DSLR world," a GH4 with a full set of Voigtlanders might be more camera than you need or want. You say you're worried about shallow depth of field - have you any experience trying to hold focus on a subject shooting at 1.8? Or 2.8? Or 4.0? It's not as instantly simple as many of the films you're watching would have you believe! Don't fall into the trap of thinking you can't make films or shoot excellent photographs unless you have the newest, hottest camera and gear. People are and will continue to be making INCREDIBLE films on the GH1 and 2, using nothing more than the kit lens and a monopod. Buy what you can afford - if that's a GH4, so be it, but understand that it won't make better movies than will a GH3 (or any other camera, for that matter).