Jump to content

Why I feel Panasonic treats all but GH5 users as a second class


Amazeballs
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Amazeballs said:

Though I dont consider G85 a lower end camera in any way. It costed 900$ for me

That is still less than HALF the price of a GH5. 

And you got a lens for that $900 with the G85? 

Which the $2K GH5 doesn't come with. 

3 hours ago, Amazeballs said:

Anyway, my next camera probably will be G90 or GH6


If it follows the trends of GH3/G6 and GH4/G7 then the G90 will probably have a few little areas where it is better than the GH5 ;-)  (but not in all ways)

I know for me at least, I preferred the G6 over the GH3, and is one reason why I purchased the G6.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Amazeballs said:

After reading all the comments I want to proclaim that I take it back. I didnt know about sensor readout speed. Though I dont consider G85 a lower end camera in any way. It costed 900$ for me & I dont know where you lucky bastards get it for 500$. Its the second best mft video oriented camera that Panasonic makes after GH5 IMO. And I still wish they would show it some love in terms of firmware updates, adding some features from GH5. Anyway, my next camera probably will be G90 or GH6 and I will keep in mind that GH series get the best treatment, but I dont want to wait for too long for GH6 to arrive. Crossing fingers for PDAF in G90 on pair with Canon Dual Pixel. 

Even 900$ is a silly number. You had to pay double the money a couple of years ago for similar things, triple the money for much less 5 years ago, before that most things that it does weren't even possible. Canon's latest M cameras cost as much, or more doing much less (except Dual Pixel of course).

You have to put things in perspective. 

For some, GH4 is still the second best m43 video camera, with even 10bit capabilities.

GH5 is as new as you can get. There is a 2 month waiting list in my country, I do not see a GH6 possible for at least 2020, but I see a couple of more significant hardware updates in the next couple of years.

Firmware 2.0 it is just out by the way, and tell me what other camera does all those things for less than 1999$.

Only Sony is close to reach Dual Pixel, and all their latest cameras are nowhere near the Canon AF experience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Kisaha said:

Even 900$ is a silly number. You had to pay double the money a couple of years ago for similar things, triple the money for much less 5 years ago, before that most things that it does weren't even possible. Canon's latest M cameras cost as much, or more doing much less (except Dual Pixel of course).

 

Even five years ago, you could not buy for ANY AMOUNT OF MONEY a camera which did 4K + IBIS + such a small size. 

2 hours ago, Kisaha said:

GH5 is as new as you can get. There is a 2 month waiting list in my country, I do not see a GH6 possible for at least 2020, but I see a couple of more significant hardware updates in the next couple of years.

 

I'm slightly more hopefully, and expecting 2019?

But even 2020 would not surprise me!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, IronFilm said:

And you got a lens for that $900 with the G85? 

No, its body only price. 

 

4 hours ago, Kisaha said:

Even 900$ is a silly number. You had to pay double the money a couple of years ago for similar things, triple the money for much less 5 years ago, before that most things that it does weren't even possible. Canon's latest M cameras cost as much, or more doing much less (except Dual Pixel of course).

I dont think its a relevant argument. Technology is moving ahead fast. In some areas faster then in other. If you compare 5 year old GPU and current the difference in performance would be huge. But thats how it works, technology evolves really fast. And yes, Panasonic is at the cutting edge of it, which I do love them for. So comparing this camera with previous generations is not really fair, though I do agree that G85 or GH5 or GX85 are all very good value cameras.  Maybe thats a difference of your personal perspective, cos you do video for a longer time and can appreciate those leaps in cameras development. For me, G85 is my first camera on which I shoot video at all. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Amazeballs said:

No, its body only price. 

Ah, because currently on B&H it goes for $999 with a 12-60mm lens

 

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1280824-REG/panasonic_dmc_gm85mk_lumix_dmc_g85_mirrorless_micro.html

 

4 hours ago, Amazeballs said:

 For me, G85 is my first camera on which I shoot video at all. 

Lucky lucky!! For me the Panasonic GH1 was my first personal video camera (Nikon D50 was my first camera, unless you count my cell phones).

& before then I was using a borrowed Nikon D90 (from my GF) or a Canon T2i (from my sister) for my film school assignments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We were making "film" back in the day, not video!

My 3 years old phone has better video than my first video "camera" in the 90s!

@Amazeballs my posts just trying to put things in perspective. I understand your enthusiasm and need for better, and cheaper, equipment, but innovation and adaptation by the masses are not a given, and can't happen instantly. 

There are many reasons for this.

Majorities are basically conservative (that is why in democratic countries conservatives/right wing parties are the norm, and a few billions of people do not even have democratic/forward thinking political systems), and they do not adapt very well with new and ground breaking technologies, one of the reasons that Canon is still number one, and in most parts, Nikon is number two. Their products work, and do most basic things good, and photos and videos just look good to most; also they have a history that people can connect with.

Then, companies spend a lot of money on R&D, Canon probably spent a few good years, and put a lot of resources on their Dual Pixel AF, they had the pleasing colors, and they bet on AF second, and they won that bet. Now, they have to cash on, and make money, to turn some resources to something else (my guess is thermal management, GH5 is as big and as heavy as a dSLR to not overheat). They can't instantly sell for cheap, something that is putting them ahead of other competitors, that spent so many years and resources to make.

Panasonic worked a lot on codecs and thermals. Sony is working on sensors and cheap bodies. Fuji on a complete ecosystem (lenses)and trying to up their game in video. Nikon does nothing.

It is called evolution, it took billions of years and a chain of events for us to chat on this forum, just chill for a couple of years, try not to destroy the planet, and your next tools will be much better than the ones you have now; Or that is what the last dinosaurs were discussing before something fall from the sky.

[the new Star Trek Discovery looks promising, by the way]

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Kisaha said:

Majorities are basically conservative (that is why in democratic countries conservatives/right wing parties are the norm, and a few billions of people do not even have democratic/forward thinking political systems), and they do not adapt very well with new and ground breaking technologies, one of the reasons that Canon is still number one, and in most parts, Nikon is number two. Their products work, and do most basic things good, and photos and videos just look good to most; also they have a history that people can connect with.

What?!  I have never heard or seen any evidence of this.  First of all what qualifies as "right wing" varies from country to country.  Also who is in power often bears little relation to what the average guy on the street thinks.  For example in my country, the US, the Republican party, the local "right wing" party, has only won one popular vote in decades.

For reference go and look at gay marriage or marijuana legalization polling and then look at whatever screwball thing the Supreme Court is doing at any given moment.

And a lot of so called "democratic" countries do not have free and fair elections.  There is tons of vote rigging going on out there.  Also in much of the world high quality polling simply isn't available.  Things are so opaque I don't know of any political scientist who would feel comfortable assessing ALL the political leanings of every African country.  And in many countries voting is driven by factors other than your concept of "right wing" and "left wing".

I don't get how you would assume that because a country has an authoritarian government it somehow reflects the will of the people.

As far as Canon and Nikon are concerned they are kind of like the US government.  They are not representative of what the average person wants but because of an ossified system they are what we are stuck with.  I would love to jump to a more feature rich affordable system but I'm not going to dump several Canon lenses and accessories to hop onto what?  Samung NX1?  There are perfectly rational reasons for people sticking with Canon or Nikon.  Heck even when it was only those two camera brands people didn't switch back and forth between them.  In fact all the old pros advised strongly against it.  There were switching costs and at the end of the day if you couldn't make beautiful pictures with either system it wasn't the camera that had a problem.  I bought a BMPCC but I kept all my Canon photo gear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Damphousse Only in the 80's and early 90's we had a strong socialist (centrists, and with a tiny tiny amount of leftists in some cases) movement in Europe, since the beginning of the 20th century most governments were to the right, or far right, or fascists, or dictatorships.

People are "conservative" by nature, they afraid change, the different, the unknown. Have you seen the animation "Croods"? If you were leaving your cave, weren't very super careful, then you were possible food for a more advanced predator. That is written in our DNA, like a lot of our primeval fears.

Nothing wrong with Canon and Nikon, my favorite video cameras, are Canon C series and most of my photographer friends own Nikon.

I have 4 NX cameras and 8 lenses, I hope there is nothing wrong to that either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

@Damphousse Only in the 80's and early 90's we had a strong socialist (centrists, and with a tiny tiny amount of leftists in some cases) movement in Europe, since the beginning of the 20th century most governments were to the right, or far right, or fascists, or dictatorships.

Unfortunately you ignored my whole post...

1)  "Right wing" means entirely different things in different countries/societies.  Ex.  In the UK, and much of Europe, the term liberal means right wing.  The way that word is used in the US is odd.

2)  The government in power does not necessarily represent the opinions of the general population.  Ex.  The "right wing" party in the US has only won ONE popular vote in the presidential election in DECADES.  Supreme Court decisions frequently are totally the opposite of popular opinion.

3)  Many elections on the planet have nothing to do with right or left wing and the governments they produce do not fit neatly into any American box or spectrum.  A lot of my friends would be amused that you think their government is "right wing" or "left wing".  They simply don't think in those terms.

4)  I simply cannot understand how you can make a globe spanning assertion of the intentions of every person that lives under a dictatorship.  While in some instances a dictatorship rises with popular support they eventually go off the rails and do what ever they want without regard for the average person's wishes.

51 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

People are "conservative" by nature, they afraid change, the different, the unknown. Have you seen the animation "Croods"? If you were leaving your cave, weren't very super careful, then you were possible food for a more advanced predator. That is written in our DNA, like a lot of our primeval fears.

What does that have to do with "right wing" governments?  I live in the United States and our right wing government wants to change all kinds of things.  As with the word "liberal" it can have an infinite number of meanings.  I mean widely available abortion, legal weed, restrictive gun laws, not saying the pledge of allegiance, not singing the national anthem were all features of America until fairly recently.

58 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

Nothing wrong with Canon and Nikon, my favorite video cameras, are Canon C series and most of my photographer friends own Nikon.

I have 4 NX cameras and 8 lenses, I hope there is nothing wrong to that either.

Well if you have 8 Samsung lenses then you have no upgrade path that will utilize 100% of their features.  That has no impact on your work today but when it comes time to upgrade you are going to take a hit vs someone with EF lenses.  Not to mention lens rentals, accessories, repairs, support, etc.  The video that comes out of an NX1 is great but that is only one aspect of an overall system.  I don't think it is irrational for someone to choose an NX1 at the right price but I think the narrative that people choose Canon because they are "conservative" is a bit off the mark.  Sure there can be some people like that but there are tons of people that like the latest features that stick with Canon for tons of other reasons other than being "conservative".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@DamphousseSo, you do have a problem with my choices. You made a lot of assumptions about me just because I do not follow the EF mount. That says more about you than I need to know, but for the shake of it..

1) I lived in England for 5-6 years, the party that you call "Liberal", the Liberal Democrats, are dead center. The conservative party, is called Conservative and Unionist party and it is a centre - right political party. With Brexit, the rise of xenophobic parties in Europe, the rise of fascism and far right organizations and political parties, the centre right in Europe, is leaning more to the right (so to not loose a lot of voters from the further to the right parties).

2) the governments in power on a democracy do just that, represent the opinion of the general population.

3) I talk mostly about Europe, as you have noticed, and the Western world in general. All western world (and ex- eastern) influenced political parties have something to do with the left and the right.

4) that is very complicated to explain to you, it is not their fault, certainly, but there is cause and effect.

"when it is time to upgrade", ain't now, and I gain all kind of things (money on jobs, personal pleasure taking pictures and photos with friends and family, etc), so I am already on the plus side, while still there isn't a better Canon APS-C camera, while EF lenses are full frame, and EF-M is the Canon mirrorless system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everything is very relative, & is tricky to make broad statements across all countries.

 

For example, for the last few elections in America, Obama/Clinton were regarded as the most left wing candidates ever. Yet by my country's standards, even our most "far right" party in Parliament is in many ways to the *left* of Hillary/Barrack!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the way NZ manages to luckily make this "work" (our government spending as a % of the economy is worse than the USA, creeping close to Greek levels) is:

1) we're a pretty lucky country! Remotely located away from the troubles of the rest of the world (no wars to worry about, or illegal immigrants flooding over our boarders). We're not known for being "the country of milk and honey" for nothing! We have a great climate and country for agriculture. 

2) we had massive reforms in the 1980's / early 1990's which helped turn us around (we used to be known as "Fortress New Zealand", as we had such stringent controls. Possibly the worst of any country outside the Soviet Block!)

 

3) we live "Outside the Asylum" (for now! Though is getting worse): https://offsettingbehaviour.blogspot.com/search/label/fun 
https://offsettingbehaviour.blogspot.com/2017/09/the-outside-of-asylum.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Certainly Canada and New Zealand seem like the best places to be right now, NZ more so; and if I continue with my favorite habit of generalization, NZ will be the promise land of the 21 first century.

(DISCLAIMER: generalizations occur on a general discussion, we are talking about trends and everchanging "flows". Of course every country has its own history and path through the centuries, and something that happened in antiquity, or the middle ages affects the cultural and political existence of todays nations. Sorry if anyone felt that I did an unfair comment, I try to look things through historic perspective and above reality, but one can not avoid generalizations on such a broad a complicated matter as nation and/or countries identities. That is what we do in documentaries, don't we? Take a generalization and make it a valid point).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Canada is not a good place to be right now.....their PC oriented culture is tearing the place apart.....wouldn't want to be a male living in Canada right now....not too mention lack of effective national leadership etc.....and crazy immigration policies...I feel sorry for those once happy beer guzzling folks...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...