Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Panasonic's GH4 Has Nothing to Fear  (Read 18628 times)
Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2962


« Reply #40 on: April 09, 2014, 02:18:22 PM »
ReplyReply

Let's wait till…

Let's have our fun, piling-on with instant opinion and speculation. It's not like anyone's going to come-back to these posts in a years time and audit them.

It's not like anyone's going to come-back in a years time and audit what Sony's pitch-man had to say about using the camera (Sony a7S interview with Kanta Yamamoto -- Newsshooter).
Logged
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5170


« Reply #41 on: April 09, 2014, 04:54:14 PM »
ReplyReply

It's not that we didn't reserve judgement because we can't; it's that we have so much more fun, piling-on with instant opinion and speculation than we would if we waited until there was a camera in our hands :-)
Some judgments require reviews or hands-on experience, but some limitations can be judged from specs alone. In the A7s vs GH4 comparison, some people can decide already how important it is to them
- to be able to record 4K video with just the camera and a lens (no add-on recorder), or
- to get the shallow DOF that large aperture 35mm format lens offer while Four Thirds lenses cannot, or
- to get the IQ advantage of a data rate of 100Mb/s or 200MB/s vs 50MB/s, or
- to be able to use 35mm still camera lenses without a heavy FOV crop, or
- to be able to use cine-camera lenses in formats like Super 35mm or smaller,
and so on.
Logged
KevinA
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 899


WWW
« Reply #42 on: April 09, 2014, 05:15:31 PM »
ReplyReply

I have a feeling the Sony will turn out to be very good, especially if the DR is as good as Sony hint at. One thing is for certain Canon might need to rethink the 1D C.
The solution for the 4K application Sony are promoting, is a screen and recorder mounted on the camera, expensive but looks a good idea and probably necessary for serious users. If you need 4k you probably are serious, so rigged up I believe it could be a little bit good. The low light on the promo video looks very good and will probably be the usp of this camera.
We can't write it off yet, it appeals to me more than the GH4, I don't know why but it does. It's also a camera that integrates into a range of cameras, if you have a A7r for stills the 7s makes sense.
I wonder what video camera Sony have in mind for the sensor, that could be the real choice for the videographer.
Logged

Kevin.
Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2962


« Reply #43 on: April 09, 2014, 05:34:28 PM »
ReplyReply

…but some limitations can be judged from specs alone.

The Sony camera I own turned out not to have one of the features prominently featured in the marketing specs ;-)
Logged
KevinA
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 899


WWW
« Reply #44 on: April 09, 2014, 05:49:55 PM »
ReplyReply

One other point. I've only got youtube to judge by on a Retina display, but I've liked the look of the Sony more than the GH4 so far.
Logged

Kevin.
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8349



WWW
« Reply #45 on: April 09, 2014, 07:11:35 PM »
ReplyReply

>now the A7s, apparently 3 years in the making, same sensor as the D4s, with 8 micron sensels and see-in-the-dark capability

What makes you think the a7s uses the sensor of the D4s?
- they have different resolutions,
- the sensor of the D4s is not a Sony design.

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2962


« Reply #46 on: April 09, 2014, 07:56:34 PM »
ReplyReply

Let me speculate too!

The work on a "video-oriented SLR with A-mount" that was mentioned last October was re-directed into Alpha 7s because E-mount is selling so much better than A-mount:

Quote
"At the press screening told Yoshiyuki Nogama to a video-oriented SLR with A-mount is going on. It will compete with the Canon Eos 5D Mark III and will have Ultra HD (4K). We guess that it is a further development of the Sony A99."

And 4k is external because they'd have an overheating problem in the small A7s body that they wouldn't have in the larger A-mount camera bodies.

That was fun!
« Last Edit: April 10, 2014, 11:13:42 AM by Isaac » Logged
hjulenissen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1706


« Reply #47 on: April 10, 2014, 04:03:54 AM »
ReplyReply

- to get the IQ advantage of a data rate of 100Mb/s or 200MB/s vs 50MB/s, or
Except IQ does not equal data rate, so a theoretical comparision of two cameras based on bitrate is extremely difficult.

A common measure of encoder "goodness" is that it will provide reasonable quality/bandwidth trade-offs. A less good encoder may have higher bandwidth but lower quality. An encoder might relax optimization on quality/bandwidth in order to increase battery life (don't use expensive options), to increase compability (use legacy codecs), to make the files easier to edit (e.g. intra-only) etc.

-h
Logged
MatthewCromer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 411


« Reply #48 on: April 10, 2014, 08:39:48 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
- to get the IQ advantage of a data rate of 100Mb/s or 200MB/s vs 50MB/s, or

A JPEG from a Nikon D800 is going to be better IQ than a RAW image from a Canon G16.
Logged
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5170


« Reply #49 on: April 10, 2014, 09:14:53 AM »
ReplyReply

On a 50Mb/s vs 200Mb/s limit: of course I was not suggesting that the bit rate alone measures image quality (any more than does MP alone, or the file size in MB sometimes used by stock agencies to very crudely set minimum quality standards), just that some people are likely to know that for some of their needs, 50Mb/s is an unacceptable limitation, leading to the need for some combination of excessive compression, reduced bit depth, lower frame rates, or whatever.  Like other single number measures, a sufficient bit rate can be in practice a necessary condition for adequate IQ in some use cases, but not a sufficient condition.

In the analogous case of pixel count: even though I have retired from the megapixel race at my current 16MP, I know that 8MP is not enough for some of my cropping needs, no matter how good the individual pixel quality is.
Logged
Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2962


« Reply #50 on: April 10, 2014, 11:09:28 AM »
ReplyReply

…8MP is not enough for some of my cropping needs, no matter how good the individual pixel quality is.

Is 12MP?
Logged
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5170


« Reply #51 on: April 10, 2014, 12:23:42 PM »
ReplyReply

Is 12MP?
I am not sure, since as with many things, there is an ambiguous zone between "clearly not enough" and clearly enough" where no unequivocal yes/no answer is possible.  Anyway, an answer would not relevant to the point I was making, which is that there is some threshold below which the results cannot meet a particular standard of quality, so some people could have eel established needs for more than 50Mb/s: particularly since the compression options and encodings available are also known.

Since the original numbers were a factor of four apart, 50Mb/s vs 200Mb/s, let me revise my analogy to say that I know I will sometimes benefit substantially from having more than 4MP, and so I have a distinct reason for preferring a higher resolution like 16MP.
Logged
Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2962


« Reply #52 on: April 10, 2014, 12:41:10 PM »
ReplyReply

Anyway, an answer would not relevant to the point I was making…

Understood. I was caught-up in my own concerns - is 12MP still from this camera enough for my cropping needs.
Logged
MatthewCromer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 411


« Reply #53 on: April 10, 2014, 01:11:44 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Since the original numbers were a factor of four apart, 50Mb/s vs 200Mb/s, let me revise my analogy to say that I know I will sometimes benefit substantially from having more than 4MP, and so I have a distinct reason for preferring a higher resolution like 16MP.

You need less bandwidth when your source image / video has less noise in it.

It seems likely that the A7s will have far less noise than the GH4.
Logged
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5170


« Reply #54 on: April 10, 2014, 01:58:24 PM »
ReplyReply

You need less bandwidth when your source image / video has less noise in it.

It seems likely that the A7s will have far less noise than the GH4.
As I have already said: only when you can use the A7s with apertures so large that the DOF is shallower than can be attained with the GH4; as soon as you use a DOF within reach if the GH4 and its lenses, the A7s require about twice the f-stop and so four times the ISO speed to get equal shutter speed, neutralizing any "big sensor low noise" advantage.
Logged
Vladimirovich
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1320


« Reply #55 on: April 11, 2014, 08:28:58 AM »
ReplyReply

As I have already said: only when you can use the A7s with apertures so large that the DOF is shallower than can be attained with the GH4; as soon as you use a DOF within reach if the GH4 and its lenses, the A7s require about twice the f-stop and so four times the ISO speed to get equal shutter speed, neutralizing any "big sensor low noise" advantage.
specifically if you use manual focus then GH4 can be used with wide converter and "2 stops" will go to just "1 stop"
Logged
Manoli
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 685


« Reply #56 on: April 11, 2014, 11:24:09 AM »
ReplyReply

Sony A7s: Low Light Demonstration (ISO 1600 to 409600)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=XgbUgNiHfXM

Logged
Michael Erlewine
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 91



WWW
« Reply #57 on: April 11, 2014, 11:42:06 AM »
ReplyReply

That video showing the low-light capabilities of the A7s is amazing.
Logged

Michael Erlewine
Founder: MacroStop.com, AMG - All-Movie Guide, All-Music Guide, All-Game Guide, Matrix Software, Classic Posters, ClassicPosters.com, SpiritGrooves.net, and other sites.
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2221


WWW
« Reply #58 on: April 12, 2014, 03:23:29 AM »
ReplyReply

Rolling Shitter not looking too good on the Sony.

Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
bcooter
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1190


Bang The Drum All Day


WWW
« Reply #59 on: April 14, 2014, 08:44:05 PM »
ReplyReply

These cameras are prosumer video and there is always going to be a glitch.  Either overheating, or lack lower iso, or heavy compression.

But the issue with the Sony is the UK prices equates to $4,100 U.S., probably another 2 to 3 for the 4k recorder so its a 7 grand camera, not that the gh4 is cheap by the time you get to 4k.

I haven't shot either the gh4 or the Sony, though I've had such great use and quality out of the gh3, the gh4 will be one of the few cameras I'l buy as soon as it hits the shelf.

The Sony,I'll give it a few more versions before I open my wallet and by then, there should be some more interesting equipment.

IMO

BC
Logged

Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad