Gerbert Floor Posted April 10, 2016 Share Posted April 10, 2016 the one that works, also when its hot outside Philippe Orlando, Jimbo and Geoff CB 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philippe Orlando Posted April 10, 2016 Share Posted April 10, 2016 Good point! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PannySVHS Posted April 10, 2016 Share Posted April 10, 2016 13 hours ago, tdonovic said: I have my three zoom trinity that covers everything @ f2.8. I don't have to buy U3 cards to get the camera to actually record. Hey Eoshd fellow filmer:) What lenses are your zoom trinity?:) cheers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cinegain Posted April 10, 2016 Share Posted April 10, 2016 Yeah, that would be interesting to know. Is it Nikon 17-35mm, 28-70mm and 80-200mm f/2.8 D? Or Olympus PRO 7-14mm, 12-40 and 40-150mm f/2.8 perhaps? Or something completely different. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mercer Posted April 10, 2016 Share Posted April 10, 2016 5 hours ago, Philippe Orlando said: Yes, I understand what you're saying. I still don't believe it's as good as an Alexa, as Andy Lee said. That was my original point. Actually he said it has cleaner noise in the shadows than the Alexa. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdonovic Posted April 11, 2016 Share Posted April 11, 2016 7 hours ago, PannySVHS said: Hey Eoshd fellow filmer:) What lenses are your zoom trinity?:) cheers I shoot with native m4/3 glass, the oly 7-14 pro, oly 12-40 pro and the pana 35-100 f2.8. I also shoot photos, so I need the AF. I am looking to move to the oly 45-150 pro, but its too much more expensive than the pana to make it worth it, just for the pumpy focus ring. I would love to shoot with nikon speedboosted glass, but I honestly don't need the extra cost of a speedbooster (aud$1100), the weight of full frame lenses, or the extra shallow DOF. Cinegain 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philippe Orlando Posted April 11, 2016 Share Posted April 11, 2016 Mercer, that's not what I read here: "Yes buy one g7 recording internal is in my opinion as good as in places better than / comparable to red and Alexa , its that good ,g7 is great for stills too , this is the best Panasonic camera so far ...in my opinion ."" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cinegain Posted April 11, 2016 Share Posted April 11, 2016 I guess you're missing the point where it's not a general concensus or fact, but a person with an opinion. He's pretty spot on what Panasonic image quality concerned. Is it the most ideal camera or does it equal or beat stuff like the Alexa... wouldn't share that opinion. And that's ok too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eduardo Granadsztejn Posted April 11, 2016 Author Share Posted April 11, 2016 Hi guys! finally i´ve decided to wait until de gh5 or the A7 mark 3 and see what´s better, or then (when the gh5 going to come out)), buy a new cheap gh4 Thanks!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
funkyou86 Posted April 12, 2016 Share Posted April 12, 2016 On 4/11/2016 at 6:49 AM, Eduardo Granadsztejn said: Hi guys! finally i´ve decided to wait until de gh5 or the A7 mark 3 and see what´s better, or then (when the gh5 going to come out)), buy a new cheap gh4 Thanks!! This was mine dilemma as well, but I ended up with GH4, because I really needed a better camera performance for a project than my t3i's. We'll see what the GH5 can do, but to be honest, the GH4 performance is solid, the 100/200mbit codec is great, the 4K's nice, anamorphic shooting is now a thing, the battery last long enough and there is no overheating. Yep, there are downsides as well, but you'll always have to sacrifice some specs. So far, so good, I'm hyped for the GH5, but I'm really fine with the GH4's performance. kidzrevil, Eduardo Granadsztejn, Xavier Plagaro Mussard and 1 other 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philippe Orlando Posted April 13, 2016 Share Posted April 13, 2016 CInegain, I have no idea what you are trying to say? Differences between facts and opinions are not trivial! I can have the opinion that vaccines are dangerous and not vaccines my child, doesn't make me right. I can believe all I want that the G7 is better, in anyway, than an Alexa and so what? I'm sure you have people who have the opinion that reincarnation is real and that Trump would be the best president? How does this translate into facts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cinegain Posted April 13, 2016 Share Posted April 13, 2016 You know exactly what I'm trying to say, come on now. What if I told you that in my opinion the Mazda CX-3 is the car to get rather than the McLaren 675LT Spider? Is it really a fact that the McLaren is the actual better car? Doesn't it depend on your own personal criteria of what makes a great car? So the 675LT Spider goes faster, well the Mazda has the better mileage, etc. How's it different when you talk cameras? You might have different criteria, hence different opinions. Non of the opinions are good as facts (albeit some opinions might be more reasonable than others) unless you make your conclusions quantifiable and post proof comparing results. He didn't present a fact, he even said it's his opinion... twice for crying out loud (based on his personal critera). He doesn't have to provide proof as he claimed it's his opinion. Just let the man have his opinion, already. Geez. If you want to go against it... sure. Ask him about his actual criteria. Then you can come up with measurable results and compare it, proving you're right. But even then there's a question of taste. How do you quantify something that 'looks good' to you? That's different from one person to the next. Not sure why you need everyone with the same opinion here. It's a forum. I value people that share their experience and opinions. Rinad Amir and ade towell 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tweak Posted April 13, 2016 Share Posted April 13, 2016 If you want to shoot moving things outside (in the heat) then I wouldn't recommend a6300. GH4 is the most versatile 4K shooter with options, but as others have said G7 may also fill your needs and costs even less. I'm also waiting to see what GH5 has instore. Eduardo Granadsztejn 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philippe Orlando Posted April 14, 2016 Share Posted April 14, 2016 Cinegain opinions are worthless! Opinions are the modified stuff of faith. I don't care. In his case he's shooting a film and he's talking about image quality as relevant to narrative work, which means in his "opinion" the G7 produces an image comparable to an Alexa for narrative work. Now, I'm the one to say "Come on!" I'm not saying the G7 doesn't produce a very good image. Actually I do believe it does! I just don't think it's on par with what comes out of an Alexa, not even close as far as acquisition quality, dynamic range and what it allows you to do as far a color grading. Now, go back to the footage provided on this thread by Lee and tell me if ALL the skin tones on all the shots look fine to you? They don't to me! Look again, I'm watching this on a calibrated NEC and I do NOT think the skin tones on those images are decent. Why is that? And also, why is that that you believe they might be fine. Please, please, please, before you say something go again and look at the skin tones in this thread. It has nothing to do with compression. How do I know? Netflix and Hulu compression are as bad and the skin tone I see in many series, that I watch on my computers, are fine, of course not filmed by a G7. Please, before you jump on me, compare those skin tones with the ones seen in your favorite series, I bet filmed with an Alexa! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff CB Posted April 16, 2016 Share Posted April 16, 2016 A6300 has 3 dealbreakers for me: 1) Shut downs due to heat, even in moderate temps is unacceptable for professional work unless you have a second camera to use as a backup 2)Horrific, worse than any other camera ever rolling shutter.(http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?303559-Measuring-rolling-shutter-put-a-number-on-this-issue!) 3) Horrid battery life. Get a used GH4 and a speed booster for your canon glass, you won't be disappointed. Philippe Orlando and Eduardo Granadsztejn 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elgabogomez Posted April 16, 2016 Share Posted April 16, 2016 You can get an external battery and solve 2 of the deal breakers (overheating and battery life) the rolling shutter is admittedly bad, but also depends on the scene. And there are some post process options to minimize it. I have not used the a6300 but I've made a Cannes selected short with a gh4 and an award winning feature film on a nex5n and an a3000. The "professional" job you made depends more on you, the blocking, the lighting, the composition, working for your story. Shoot with whatever you can get your hands on and the director you work with likes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff CB Posted April 16, 2016 Share Posted April 16, 2016 8 hours ago, elgabogomez said: You can get an external battery and solve 2 of the deal breakers (overheating and battery life) the rolling shutter is admittedly bad, but also depends on the scene. And there are some post process options to minimize it. I have not used the a6300 but I've made a Cannes selected short with a gh4 and an award winning feature film on a nex5n and an a3000. The "professional" job you made depends more on you, the blocking, the lighting, the composition, working for your story. Shoot with whatever you can get your hands on and the director you work with likes. In his original post "and I need versatility (as far as possible) for all types of work and durability" A6300 might be okay for Narrative work, but live event coverage? elgabogomez 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elgabogomez Posted April 17, 2016 Share Posted April 17, 2016 My bad... As it always happens in forum fashion I was thinking in what I do. My point was that both cameras can do great. I would not use either as an event camera. The gh4 needs precision in exposure as it can (in my opinion) overexpose and burn highlights easily and I wouldn't go beyond iso 800 either, things that I need when in an event. The a6300 could mean losing the job altogether due to the overheating. As a second camera both would be fine or if it's not a paid job. For events an fs100 or an af100 are better. All of it my experience if it helps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Members Mattias Burling Posted April 17, 2016 Super Members Share Posted April 17, 2016 Dont you have the same iso issue with the AF100? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elgabogomez Posted April 17, 2016 Share Posted April 17, 2016 I could be wrong but as i recall, the af100 had a base iso of 500 or so, and I used it at 1600 or 1200, and the footage was fine. The camera belonged to the film school I was in and was used for all academic events and cultural events of the city... Some of the footage went to local tv. The few times I used it, it didn't won me over and I liked the gh2 image better. I was giving Panasonic the same treatment as Sony to be less of a fan boy (the fs100 can easily be used at 8000 iso) and to make the point that for "events" I would use "video cameras" for its long battery and recording times, xlrs... That might be the Achilles heel of cheap mirror less cameras, the event recording, for everything else, they are my first choice for its adaptability, size, weight, lens options, etc. 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.