I'm not the type of person that likes switching brands. I've been with Nikon from day one, but my needs are changing, and Panasonic seems to have made my dream camera. I know this may sound crazy, but I may soon be selling the majority of my Nikon gear and buying six Panasonic GH5 cameras.
Let me first start by saying that if I was still shooting weddings regularly, I wouldn't even consider switching. I love the image quality and ergonomics of the Nikon line for shooting stills. The problem is that I am shooting mostly video these days. Yes, Nikon DSLRs can shoot video, and we've made it work for us for seven years now, but there are a few issues most DSLRs have that make them pretty inconvenient to shoot video with.
Many times I've considered upgrading our video gear to something like a Canon C300 or a Sony F7, but the idea of lugging around a giant camera was never exciting to me; especially when we usually travel with six cameras. Plus, I like having a video camera and a still camera in one body. I love the idea of having one camera that can do everything, and although I haven't tested one yet, I'm hoping the GH5 is that camera.
In this post, I'm going to quickly touch on a few of the features that are getting me excited enough to make the switch. Keep in mind that many of these features have been available in "professional" video cameras for years, but never have they been available in such a small package; and we have shot 100% of our videos on Nikon DSLRs, so to us these will be massive upgrades.
Better Video Quality
This is probably what most people are excited about, but the video quality is actually the least important feature to me. I know that what we do most of the time doesn't require insane bit rates or flat color profiles – and most of our stuff is wildly compressed and will be viewed on Youtube – but these stats are still important. This camera can shoot 4k 30fps 10-bit 4:2:2 at 100 Mbps. In the past, 10-bit video recording has been a feature of high-end, extremely expensive cameras. Not any more.
Better Slow Motion
Frame rate is far more important to me than bit depth, and the GH5 can shoot at 4k at 60fps or 1080p at 180 fps. This camera will be fantastic for slow-mo shooting.
Better Stabilization
Most of the lenses we use on our Nikon bodies have internal stabilization. This feature does a great job of smoothing out footage, especially when the cameras are handheld. The GH5 has in-body five-axis stabilization that can be combined with a stabilized lens to produce five stops of stabilization. This means that if you can safely take a picture at 1/60th of a second without stabilization, with this feature engaged you can take the same image at 1/2 of a second without blur. That's insane. Still photographers will certainly love this feature, but I have no interest in using it to take pictures. I want this kind of stabilization so that I can leave my tripod at home when I'm shooting videos.
Better Sound
Nikon DSLRs are notorious for recording poor sound via the audio input jack. We use Sennheiser lav mics plugged directly into the side of our D750s. Although the sound is acceptable, it's missing the highs and lows found when using the same mic with and external recorder. From what I've read, the audio input on Panasonic cameras is superior to Nikon's; plus you will be able to buy the DMW-XLR1 to add two powered XLR inputs to the GH5.
Simplified Time-Lapses
We shoot time-lapses at lot, and they can be extremely hard on both your camera and your hard drive while being time consuming to build and render. Panasonic cameras (even their cheaper models) have made the process of shooting time-lapses a breeze. Simply choose your camera settings, choose the amount of images you want to take, and click "Go." Because these cameras are mirrorless, they will silently shoot images without wearing down the mechanical shutter found in DSLRs. When you're done, the camera will give you the option to build a 4k time-lapse video on the spot from the images taken. We no longer import thousands of pictures onto our computer; we only transfer over finished 4k time-lapses.
A Smaller Camera System
The main reason why I haven't upgraded our cameras to "professional" models was simply because they were too big. If I was shooting a job with one camera, I probably wouldn't care about the size, but when we are traveling and shooting with up to six cameras at once, the last thing I want to deal with is more size and weight.
The GH5 is significantly smaller than a Nikon DSLR, and because it's a micro four thirds camera, the lenses will be significantly smaller as well.
Unlimited Shooting Times
This is this most important feature to me and, if you shoot video, probably will be for you as well.
If you don't shoot video, you may not know that most DSLRs limit the length of video clips to 20 minutes. It's pretty amazing that we have been able to film many of our tutorials (some being over 20 hours in length) by stopping and starting the cameras every 20 minutes. It's annoying, but it's all we have ever known. In fact, our first Nikon cameras could only shoot a maximum of five minutes.
I've been waiting patiently for seven years to use a video camera that can continue to record until the battery dies or the card fills up. The GH5 will be the first video camera I will have ever used that has this feature.
We Still Need To Test This Camera
Keep in mind I haven't tested this camera yet. Once we get our hands on a unit, we could find that the GH5 may not actually be the perfect video camera. I'm nervous that it will not perform well in low light. Maybe the battery life will be worse than what I am accustomed to. Perhaps I will miss the super shallow depth of field my full-frame cameras can produce. I'm also going to assume that as a still camera, it's not going to be able to compete with my Nikon cameras, meaning that I will have to keep at least some of my Nikon gear to shoot stills. This isn't ideal, but if the GH5 is as good as I hope it will be, I'll be happy to deal with both systems.
To learn more about the GH5 you can read more specs here.
With that said. Keep in mind that it's still a micro four thirds sensor. Which means that despite whatever incremental low light improvements Panasonic claims, overall low light performance will still suck. (But still better than a production camera, which is what I'll be treating this as) Just something to consider because you shoot a lot of tutorials in not so favorable lighting conditions like in some of the places you shot with Elia locardi. Might want to hang on to one of your full frame cameras for such conditions.
Nikon users are about to make your life very interesting... 😛
Interestingly, nobody in the comments so far has said "stick with Nikon, it's great for video". 😁
Your choice, Lee - I had a Panasonic with a 4/3 sensor and ditched it, when I found the image quality was poorer than my wife's point & shoot. Heaps of people love Panasonic though.
Some of my photographer friends tried to talk me into going with "another manufacturer" at the time - but when I went past "review" to chat groups, I found alarming stories about poor or variable quality control, so I chucked that idea in the dustbin. The apple of their eye was a mirrorless, and the reason for digging further was that I didn't think much of one aspect of the design, from an engineering point of view.
I guess it's like our mothers taught us - whatever you do, be careful. We all know there's no such thing as "the perfect camera" or "one size fits all".
I feel the obsession over iQ of µ43 cameras is overblown.
Yes, they do fall short of FF sensors but in real world applications they are startlingly competent.
I shoot primarily FF Canon for architectural and commercial jobs. However, I started experimenting with Pansonic GX-7s with weddings back when I was still doing them. They offered complete silence, fast lenses, and decent ISO performance coupled with very low weight.
My clients loved their images and never questioned the gear. No, I could not get the ultimate shallow DOF that is so fashionable but in truth only the fewest images ever are made using this tired cliche.
I no longer do weddings but I do use a Panasonic FZ-1000 for event work for its stunning zoom range, silence and its leaf shutter that allows me to sync in full sun with a Speedlight at 1/4 power.
Again, these are tools used in ways that play to their strengths.
Carrying a butt-load of gear all day so you can stare at files at 400% (something a client will never do)or post process for days on end to no useful effect for the client is a waste of resources.
6 cameras running simultaneously? For photography tutorials? That's just silly.
This is just another spec trap. Even with those expensive little prime lenses I've never thought my GH4 picture was close to the C100 look. I'm sure the GH5 will be even better but the LUMIX/GH gear just doesn't feel solid enough to be confident it can take a bump or fall. The 4K/10 bit and AF is great but if you "get it right" in the camera what's the point unless it has to be published in 4k?
What about audio? I wonder if you can see the tiny buttons and GH controls when the hot shoe audio unit is attached with receivers, cables and headphones. You'll probably need that battery grip too. The whole system just looks like a big mess to me.
We need to do a test side by side with all our gear. I'd love to setup a D750, C100, Lumix point and shoot, and this GH5 and do a test side by side with similar lenses. The quality out of the Nikon just isn't as good as what we've seen from the Lumix point and shoots so far and who knows how tiny those sensors are.
As for 6 cameras running, it's just a different way of shooting. Imagine someone like Joey Wright where we had 2 cameras on him to allow us to cut back and forth and one camera on the model he was shooting to show how the lighting looks through "Joey's camera". That's 3 cameras min right there. Add one or two other cameras clicking timelapse for b roll and you are easily up to 5 cameras rolling. I won't even mention the camera on the slider :)
When you gotta teach a lesson in a 2 hour window from sunset to dusk, you don't have time to plan out 6 shots with 1 camera.
You helped us with the iPhone Bikini Shoot, don't you remember we had at least 3-4 cameras rolling for that shoot?
Yep. I can see you guys using multiple cameras. It just seems to make sense to have at least 2-3 that are made for video and audio.
We literally just shot a tutorial with Clay Cook and we were filming in 2 rooms at once with Clay in one and his retoucher in the other. 3 cameras running in each room.
Can't wait to see that!!!
Why don't you just shoot with the canon c100 or 300 series?
See above article.
C100s would make too much sense.
He doesn't have six cameras running at once per say, but the videos to require lots of coverage. I image one it's closer to 3-4 while some cameras are out catching b roll or shooting timelapses. It's a totally reasonable set up.
And you're just wrong about the build quality. Those cameras are built like tanks. I've dropped by gh4 on a solid wood floor and had I not been there I'd have never been he wiser. It works just fine still.
And while image quality is a subjective taste, I beg to differ with your analysis. With the right lenses, these cameras are way more than capable of holding their one against cameras that cost five, ten times as much.
Again, we don't want to have to travel with 6 huge DSLR cameras anymore. We are about to go back out with Elia all over the world. I won't even mention dealing with customs in places like South America....but if it's just Lee and I hand carrying everything by ourselves, at most I want 1 roller bag, 1 backpack, and 1 luggage with clothes. The C100 would not make that possible.
Ha! I was about to comment that based on this article clearly you're off out on the road with Elia again!
Here is another question. How much would it cost to buy/rent 6 C100's what ever about the size and weight?
Having a simpler and synchronized video camera makes complete sense to me. Upgrading your image quality, workflow, or ease of use makes complete sense to me. Having 6 video cameras makes zero sense to me. How do you manage the extra staff & time to operate, synch, and edit 6 cameras? What massive benefit to you find from this system vs a traditional 2 camera video system?
Tutorials require lots of coverage. My company also uses a ton of cameras. We have 8. Why? Because if we're shooting an interview with a 3 cam set up. Someone can go out and grab some b roll and someone else can go shoot timelapses. It's a great way to save time.
Just because he has 6 cameras doesn't mean all of them are rolling all at once on the same subject.
I explained why we use 4 -6 cameras above in Keith's post. For many of our projects, especially photography tutorials, Lee and I have PERSONALLY run those 3-6 cameras all by ourselves. It's not hard. You simply hit record on them all, sync them, and then monitor them all. It makes more sense when you have your subject standing still since we aren't filming footage that needs constant refocusing or movement.
But yes, many times all 6 are rolling at the same time in some form. 3 cameras on the instructor and subject, 2 running completely different timelapses, and the final camera could be on a jib or slider to get a hero movement shot.
That makes more sense when you have 3+ camera ops. As a Director, I find in my productions that more than 3 cameras often leads to less care in shooting and more confusion in editing.
The stabilization, unlimited record time, and timelapses are very cool features. Best of luck with your testing and evaluation.
We are probably just filming different things. If you have a script then yes, film with one or two cameras max. We are filming live events where we can't reproduce the scene the next day. It's more like a reality show in execution.
I've actually considering the same thing too, especially with the new G85 and its in-body stabilization, and battery grip. The 35-100 f2.8 seems like an awesome lens, and is way smaller than the 70-200.
Interesting thoughts Lee. I shoot video travel guides and the thought of this much quality in such a small package is really tempting.
I just have to ask though, why not Sony? With the A7R2 you get a full frame chip, class leading photo quality, excellent video quality and built in stabilisation. Is it the thought of the heavy full frame lenses?
Does the Sony do the built in timelapse in 4K? That's really the main feature that is pushing us away from DSLRs. With Elia Locardi's project, we shot probably 30,000 jpegs that we had to then build out in premiere and it was a nightmare. I think we were traveling with a 6TB synology NAS and over the course of 3 months I'd say 70% of the data used was from timelapse images. We couldn't even shoot RAW because it was so much data.
The other horrible thing about Sony is those batteries die super fast. We did a big review with the A7RII and between the battery life and the 4k overheating issue, we would never invest in that camera.
It does in camera timelapse through an app for the camera which can be bought. I haven't used it so I can't comment on its usability. As for the overheating, I totally get that one. Working in hot places like Australia and Singapore, the camera overheated every 10 minutes, even after the update.
"The other horrible thing about Sony is those batteries die super fast. We did a big review with the A7RII and between the battery life and the 4k overheating issue, we would never invest in that camera."
...clearly it was not a full review. Otherwise you would be aware that you can connect a professional battery that prolongs the battery life of any RII. There are so many ways to connect that camera and get more juice from it.
Anyway the GH series is a great choice for anyone looking for great video.
Oh come on! We reviewed the A7RII with the included battery along with the included batteries offered by Nikon and Canon. Nikon offers a dummy battery pack that allows you to plug the camera into AC but that's not the point.
?
Battery life isn't an issue, unless your using the small ones provided by the brand. Just like any other Mirrorless camera the batteries are weak when shooting video and even stills (compared to DSLR's).
"Come on"?! If you want a stable setup you should use external power. I was not the one who comment on battery life Patrick.
The Panasonic batteries 7.2V, 1860mAh easily beat the weak 7.7V, 1080mAh on the Sony's. But why would you use them in Video recording when you can add an external one without any real disadvantage?
Jonathan just pointed to an obvious alternative when buying an hybrid, the Sony's are a best seller both in stills and video just like the Panasonic's.
They are so different that I don't think you can even compare both though, they serve different needs.
The Panasonic GH's series is a great system choice for anyone looking for a crop format.
Regards.
Ever think about something like a Sony RX10 III? 4K, great image quality, great lens, all in one package. Seems way more practical.
I don't believe that camera has audio in and audio monitoring. That wouldn't work for interviews.
"Optional audio from internal stereo microphone on top deck, external 3.5mm stereo jack, or Multi Interface Shoe mic / XLR adaptor kits
3.5mm stereo headphone jack available for levels monitoring
Headphone jack can sync to live view display, or play audio in near-real time
Automatic or 32-step manual audio level control
Stereo VU (audio levels) display with peak hold is available before or during recording, and during levels adjustment"
But it's a different ecosystem and format. A great tool by no means.
Hmmm, wasn't there a very sensible article on here a little while ago about not jumping camera systems every time something comes out with some advantages you like, because your system will eventually get it too? Well, I can't find it, but here is a much more recent one (hahaha): https://fstoppers.com/originals/why-it-generally-insane-arbitrarily-swit...
I would at least wait to see what the next incarnation of the D750 is going to bring . . .
That said, I think you will have a hard time living with the "stills" image quality after using the D750. I went the other way - GH3 to D750, and the image quality increase was substantial. The GH4 (and likely GH5) had a negligible increase in IQ, so be prepared to kiss your dynamic range, and smooth images goodbye and get prepared for grainy, noisy images that will make you cry every time you go to boost the shadows or pull down the highlights in post.
I too wish there was a true all-in-one camera (Sony A7IIR is probably the closest thing), but I know I would regret giving up my D750 the minute I went to take a picture instead of a video.
Fstoppers put out an enormous amount of video content and top marks to them for doing it with Nikon gear, it would have been so much easier for them to switch but they stuck with what they had. If Fstoppers continue as they are they will have to upgrade their video kit and it looks like the GH5 could just be the camera for them. I just hope that Lee Morris stops dong those close up " oh I have just woke and its 3am" shots. Those big ass lips are scary on a 55 inch TV..................... Thanks for putting out all the vids though.
ps. I hope you will thank me for pointing out that you are morphing into a sort of Will and Grace of the photography world. Ep7 (where art meets Architecture) 5:48 mins could be considered as the worlds mildest gay porn on the net to date.
Don't worry, I will make sure to film my own 3am wake up calls on our next outing. Man I hate mornings!
Hey Lee! What would you say is your interest in the GH5 over the Sony A7sii? Seems like all those features you love have been available for over a year now? Correct?
The Sony is close but has horrible battery life and it overheats.
Fair enough. I guess at this point, the only way to know if GH5 is better in those areas is for some hands on time. Can't wait to hear what you think!
If you're shooting video on Nikon, Panasonic is going to blow your mind. You're switching from the worst overall video system to the best.
This is true but Fstoppers youtube vids are some of the best out there. Maybe when they shoot with the best video system 'they' will blow our minds? My Mrs is a Pro-togger, using nothing more than a d7200/24-70 & 70-200 combo!. Shes fully booked for 6 months and winning awards, not always the tools that produce a good job.
That's the irony in all of this. Content is king and truth be told, the editing is what makes something entertaining and exciting more than the actual quality of the video.
I have a friend here in Charleston who won an Emmy a few years ago for some animal travel show on ABC. The other day he told me that the entire thing was shot on a Canon 60D and overall the footage looked crappy. But because he was a great editor, DP, and was out in Africa shooting wild animals, he won a freaking Emmy!
I'm SUPER excited to start shooting footage that looks way better than what we have done so far, BUT at the same time, I'm more excited to produce better ideas, better concepts, funnier material, and more interesting/entertaining content in general. Much like Photoshop is to the still image, 4K can open a lot of doors in the editing world and I'm excited to wet my feet a bit more even though we will still likely export to 1080.
Exporting to 1080. There is some real nice 1080 out there which can look as good as 4K. All this 4K talk is giving me a headache, people are obsessed, scaled down to (nice) 1080 is still the way to go unless you're creating a Hollywood blockbuster. I suppose the question is......... Will software be able to cope with the advances in technology? LR & Prem Pro still crash using D700 and GoPro files!! You could buy a 16K workstation but software writers still need to up their game for all this to come together as we want. Looking forward to new content from you guys, and once again, thanks for all the stuff you have already put out there.
And that is exactly what I did. I got my first Nikon F (not an FTN) in the late 60's, earned with money shooting as a stringer for the local paper. But my very favorite camera was my Leica M2R, which I got in 1973 and (like a fool) sold a few years later. My most recent Nikon was a D800E, with a whole bunch of glass.
But it was enormous and the lenses are enormous and Nikon isn't supporting local repair shops. So even thought I regularly blow stuff up big (I am finally replacing my Epson 9600 and have switched to Canon, but that's a different story), I decided to switch to the Olympus Pen-F. I still blow stuff up big (80 Mpix RAW in high res mode!).
The reason? I was hiking Hadrian's Wall, built by the Romans to keep the Scots out of their empire, and the thought of lugging the D800E and the big lenses just pushed me over the edge.
I *LOVE* the M43 format now and the Olympus incredible vibration reduction. On this last Solstice I shot the sun rising through the stones at Stonehenge handheld at 1/8 of a second and it is as sharp as a tack at 24x36. The Nikon could NEVER do that.
I've also got a bunch of waterfall photos from the Lake District that are handheld at 1/8 and 1/15 that I have blown up. A big vertical pano of Hadrian's wall that is 17x44. Et cetera.
You won't regret the switch.
Heresy!
A lot of resistance to this switch... perhaps because the elephant in the room is that many of the mainstream photographers will have to offer video in order to compete and stay relevant and this freaks them out.
I don't think some people are reading the article and so are missing your point. You want to shoot and travel light, then a C100 or Red (?) etc. willl be too big and heavy. The GH5 looks (on paper) to be an ideal system. As a still photographer I am looking at branching out into video, so a GH4 looks like a great starter camera. If things take off then I would go for a GH5 as well as keeping the GH4.
Why everybody started to talk about GH5 for last two days ? All at the same day ?
Maybe because it was finally announced yesterday....
I have to agree with you on this, the new GH5's are pretty amazing, especially with the size, stabilization, and slo mo at 4k, as well as the codecs and in camera recording abilities compared to the GH4. I'm still a bit saddened that Canon couldn't have done something similar for the 5D MK IV, considering how incredibly long they waited before replacing the III series.
I knew there would be a
"Let me first start by saying that if I was still shooting weddings regularly, I wouldn't even consider switching. I love the image quality and ergonomics of the Nikon line for shooting stills. The problem is..."
...somewhere in there. Thank you Lee for making this caveat! As a full-time wedding shooter, I just *laugh* when folks brag to me about how they switched to a 2x crop or even 2.7x crop sensor and are loving it, never looking back, etc. etc... HAVE FUN WITH THAT!!!
Still, it is very important that we spread the word about how many hobbyists and casual photographers have "too much camera" for their everyday needs. I've lost count of how many times I've seen dads at DISNEYLAND with gripped 5D 3's, a 24-70 2.8 or Sigma Art prime, and maybe even a 600EX. Seriously, dude? You're never going to view your images any larger than what a Sony RX100, or heck even just an iPhone, could do justice for.
On the one hand, I understand that some folks just enjoy the hobby of photography, and part of that hobby is the "fun" of lugging around an enormous piece of gear, for certain folks. We all have weird things we do to entertain ourselves, I'm a glutton for pain in other ways, such as hiking through the wilderness with ~3 cameras in my pack.
On the other hand, I have never been a big fan of the truly excessive levels of wastefulness and "compensating for something" that have been increasingly noticeable in society these days.
TLDR; if I stopped shooting weddings tomorrow, I too would consider "dumping" my big full-frame DSLRs for 90% of what I do, and spending most of my time traveling with a Sony RX10 and RX100. DONE. (...Or maybe a Panasonic, now that I know it can create 4K timelapse clips in-camera!)