One Decade

[fuzzynormal]

The GH5 has been my workhorse for almost a decade now.  For whatever reason, the need to move on from it has never been necessary, so I've stuck with it.  For instance, AF is not an issue.  Manual focus is how lenses get used by me.  Slow-mo is a thing to do less of, not more of, imo.

A full 10 years on, what does a different camera offer; like really offer?  An extra stop of exposure?  An extra bit of DR?  

Looking at a GH7 the thought is, "MMM, pretty nice."  But then what?  A big difference in ... what ... gets captured?  Maybe the market has matured TOO much for me?

[Aussie Ash]

You probably deserve a medal fuzzy, for being satisfied with what you've got for ten years and not being seduced by camera "lust".

[fuzzynormal]

25 minutes ago, Aussie Ash said:

You probably deserve a medal fuzzy, for being satisfied with what you've got for ten years and not being seduced by camera "lust".

Well, I've other gear for specific jobs.  For instance I have a Fuji X-T5 that came along for a special birds-in-flight thing -- that fit a special lens, but it just sits on the shelf since that gig finished. 

The way the IBIS works in that camera bugs the hell out of me.

Anyone want to buy a used X-T5?  How about a fuji 150-600mm?  Got a 2x extender as well. 

[kye]

9 hours ago, fuzzynormal said:

The GH5 has been my workhorse for almost a decade now.  For whatever reason, the need to move on from it has never been necessary, so I've stuck with it.  For instance, AF is not an issue.  Manual focus is how lenses get used by me.  Slow-mo is a thing to do less of, not more of, imo.

A full 10 years on, what does a different camera offer; like really offer?  An extra stop of exposure?  An extra bit of DR?  

Looking at a GH7 the thought is, "MMM, pretty nice."  But then what?  A big difference in ... what ... gets captured?  Maybe the market has matured TOO much for me?

Looking at my notes when I was upgrading from the GH5 to GH7, the main benefits of the GH7 over the GH5 were:

• PDAF
• Real V-Log (not V-Log-L or light or whatever it was) (*)
• Prores and Prores RAW internal
• Improved DR (*)
• Improved latitude - due to having real V-Log as well as the improved DR (*)
• Improved low-light (*)

and the cons were:

• Size / weight
• Cost (not only the body, but potentially the media and new batteries etc)
• Loss of modes between 1080p and UHD (3.3K 4:3 mode)

The items with the (*) are the ones that motivated me to take the plunge.  Obviously the size / weight / price also factored into things!

My take on your situation is that if upgrading doesn't offer you tangible improvements that will be worth the (considerable) hassle of upgrading, why change?

Modern cameras are improving all kinds of things that aren't needed / used in every situation (including many features that are actually incredibly niche), so if you happen to shoot in only situations where your existing kit is enough, then the upgrades are just cons/costs.

[kye]

9 hours ago, fuzzynormal said:

Maybe the market has matured TOO much for me?

Just a thought about that last statement..  if you're taking a practical approach to considering upgrades then I'd say it's the other way around....

...you've matured TOO much for the market 😉 

[MrSMW]

Not the GH5, but I am also at 'peak camera' with Lumix.

If I ever made any changes in the future now...and none planned, it would not be based on need, - the gear I have just does what I need it to do.

There's still a lens that does not exist for me and one day if it comes along, I'll pick it up, but otherwise, never really been that interested in the gear, despite waffling about it for over 2 decades. It was always a means to an end.

[fuzzynormal]

17 hours ago, kye said:

• Real V-Log (not V-Log-L or light or whatever it was) (*)
• Improved DR (*)
• Improved latitude - due to having real V-Log as well as the improved DR (*)
• Improved low-light (*)

Yeah.  Fair.

And I'm actually to the point where I'm like, "Do I even want the extra DR"?  The modern look of digital imaging seems almost too pristine to me anymore.  So I guess my reticence is actually morphing into a stylistic choice; which is a place I never thought I'd be when using consumer gear, honestly.  After all, we usually think "more is more" right?

Maybe it's just me being a stick in the mud because of my age.  However, when I watch old movies I'm always left thinking, "Well, I have more imaging power than they had.  What am I really chasing with this modern camera in my bag?"

[kye]

5 hours ago, fuzzynormal said:

Yeah.  Fair.

And I'm actually to the point where I'm like, "Do I even want the extra DR"?  The modern look of digital imaging seems almost too pristine to me anymore.  So I guess my reticence is actually morphing into a stylistic choice; which is a place I never thought I'd be when using consumer gear, honestly.  After all, we usually think "more is more" right?

Maybe it's just me being a stick in the mud because of my age.  However, when I watch old movies I'm always left thinking, "Well, I have more imaging power than they had.  What am I really chasing with this modern camera in my bag?"

When it comes to things like the extra DR, I think about practicalities.

Back in the day they had a certain amount of DR, so they filmed what they fit into that DR, modified scenes with too much DR where they could, simply didn't film other scenes with too much DR, or accepted sub-optimal results.  They often had far more budget and leeway for lighting etc than you or I have.  They also didn't tell some of the stories that you or I might want to tell.

You and I are filming things they might or might not have filmed, we are doing so with far less resources than they would have had (*), and are doing so for an audience that is far far far more discerning than audiences used to be.

(A note on resources..  Anyone who shot film automatically had a pretty large budget as just the line-items for negative film, development, and printing were absolutely huge compared to the entire project costs for what you and I are doing.  As such, for them the cost to add a light here or modify something there was drastically less percentage of their production.  I also suspect that back in the day the simple fact that someone was shooting on film gave them a sort-of legitimacy that would have meant they could get away with a more invasive shooting environment (adding lights etc) whereas now that level of legitimacy doesn't really come unless you're getting official permission.)

I think of extra DR as being the thing that lets me bridge a gap between the worse conditions I shoot in, the lack of ability to control or modify the scenes I'm shooting, and the far greater expectations of myself and anyone else watching.

Another note on DR, this is the curve from 250D:

This has easily more stops than the GH5 has, potentially more than the GH7 has, and is likely to respond to high-DR scenes in a more pleasing way as well.

Of course, the print stocks had far lower DR, like 2383 which only had 5-6 stops:

But they were still capturing the greater range and depending on how fancy they wanted to get in the darkroom (or if they had a DI to play with) they could definitely print the 5-6 stops of DR they wanted from the negative (essentially adjusting exposure in post) or they could extend the DR by printing different areas of the image differently, using graduated filters and all kinds of other tricks.

I sort-of feel like comparing film-making now to back in the day is a apples-vs-oranges kind of thing, so comparing the specs directly without acknowledging the situations were vastly different doesn't really make much sense.

However, to return to your situation in the present, I look at several factors to assess if equipment is good enough:

• Does it allow you to shoot what you want to shoot?
• Does it provide the speed / efficiency / convenience you need to create the work in the budget / schedule limitations you have?
• Does it provide a pleasant-enough experience while using it?
• Does it create the quality of results you are looking for?

If these things are all true, then why change?