I'd also like to hear about this too. I'm on the fence between the GH4 and A7s for 4K work I have coming up. I'm leaning towards the GH4 as a body simply because of in camera 4K recording rather than needing the external recorder for the Sony. OTOH I'm not ready to invest in lots of M43 glass and have lots of Canon glass for the C100 I'd love to be able to use, including the Samyang manual lenses.

The Atomos Shogun looks incredible Dave, couldn't fault you for going the A7S route either with the low light performance that camera provides. Have you considered a Metabones speedbooster to use your Canon lenses with the Micro 4/3 mount though? I've seen Philip Bloom using them to great effect:

Metabones® (http://www.metabones.com/products/details/MB_SPFD-m43-BM1)

Might be a little pricey, but it would enable you (as far as I understand) to use your Canon lenses with your GH4! Of course you'd need to consider the crop factor and how that would affect the focal length of your lenses.

I just received the GH4 earlier this month and it's a stunning camera... I think for the price, it's an easy buy in comparison to the A7S... unless you're able to afford both easily and low light performance is important (as it is in the wedding world). It's easy for me to jump to the GH4 as I'm heavily invested with Micro 4/3 glass, but even without that investment, it would be a close call.

Whichever you choose, I'm sure that you'll love it! I would really love the low light performance of the A7S though. It would be a massive factor for me if I was able to choose either camera with no consequences.

The Atomos Shogun looks incredible Dave, couldn't fault you for going the A7S route either with the low light performance that camera provides.

Fortunately, outside of weddings low light is not quite so important. I'm often able to setup and use lighting when ever needed for the corporate and charity shoots I do.

As far as I can see, the GH4 doesn't suffer the same moiré & aliasing issues the A7s has, which is hugely important to me. I understand it's a 1:1 4K (more cropped too), so pixel binning is not longer an issue.

Can you confirm this with the GH4?

Also, how far are you willing to push the GH4 in low light before it gets too much (I realise this is subjective), especially when downscaling to 1080p for final output (which should help noise anyway).

Good point, Dave, though to take it one step further.... even just having the GH4 do *better* than, say, the Canon 5d Mark iii, or at least as good, would be pretty nice. I guess we're just unfairly comparing everything to that A7s now, but in reality, just having a pretty clean image at ISO 6400 allows even f/2.8 in most situations, nevermind faster lenses.

When you downscale 4K from the gh4 on a 1080p timeline 6400 iso looks clean to my eye on a big screen, I constantly shoot with f1.4, f1.8 and f2.0 lenses wide open with a manageable dof to get your focus right. Since I can shoot brighter then what I can see with my own eyes that is all I need to shoot candlelit dinner parties as I want to show it like everyone saw it that moment. The GH4 is just fine to shoot at dark receptions, you only won't turn night into day like the a7s can but why would you do that anyway?

I think a nice thing with having super high iso is you then have control over depth of field so you're not always having to use 1.4 aperture - it gives you more choices

Also the A7s exhibits no moire or aliaising in full frame mode, only aps-c

I think a nice thing with having super high iso is you then have control over depth of field so you're not always having to use 1.4 aperture - it gives you more choices

That's the beauty of M4/3, you don't need to do that to get a manageable dof and still shoot wide open with fast lenses, otoh, you can't ofcourse get the super shallow dof full frame can give you.

yes but the a7s gives you more choices - and you can stop down to use lenses at their sharpest.
I've been a m43 user for many years and low light was always a struggle - the a7s has given me more freedom - i no longer worry about the iso and instead use whichever aperture the shot requires

In any case, I think the gh4 should not be compared to the A7s but rather to the 5DIII (and it's raw shooting capability) since both are in the same pricecategory and have a full frame sensor and more likely it's successor, the 5D4 which very likely will shoot 4k as well. The gh4 has a much smaller sensor and is about 3000 dollar cheaper then the A7s with a 4K recorder if you want to shoot 4K.

I think If I had to choose between a A7s with a shogun 4K recorder which together should be around 4,5k or a c100 which is about the same price I even would consider the c100 as it's a more complete camera and still has a very robust image.

yes they each have their own strengths and weaknesses, was merely responding to where the thread was at.....
| wouldn't have only a dslr or mirrorless as my main camera anyway - I have the c100, and the gh3 and now Sony a7s are nice b cams that i also use for stills and for fun away from work

Can anyone sum up the difference between the A7/A7R/A7S?

As far as I can see the A7s has the lowest resolution sensor making it more sensitive in low light (a good thing) but lacks the hybrid phase/contrast detection of the A7 (a bad thing)

I'm seriously considering the A7 as a replacement for my 5D and with the metabones smart adapter can keep using my Canon glass but it's expensive so I don't want to make a mistake here :/

Pete

Fortunately, outside of weddings low light is not quite so important. I'm often able to setup and use lighting when ever needed for the corporate and charity shoots I do.

As far as I can see, the GH4 doesn't suffer the same moiré & aliasing issues the A7s has, which is hugely important to me. I understand it's a 1:1 4K (more cropped too), so pixel binning is not longer an issue.

Can you confirm this with the GH4?

Also, how far are you willing to push the GH4 in low light before it gets too much (I realise this is subjective), especially when downscaling to 1080p for final output (which should help noise anyway).

Information about 4K with the GH4 from B&H:

Professional 4K Video Recording
The DMC-GH4 brings the GH-line into the 4K age by offering both 16:9 UHD 4K 3840x2160 video at 23.98p, 24p or 29.97p, and 17:9 DCI (Digital Cinema Initiatives) 4K 4096x2160 videos at 24p. 4K resolutions can be recorded as MOV or MP4 files in high bitrate 100 Mbps IPB codec. When recording at 100 Mbps, you will need an SDHC/SDXC memory card capable of handling the transfer speed.

Please note: For better quality, 4K recording modes use a 1:1 pixel map of the sensor. This yields a slight crop of the sensor, resulting in approximately a full-frame crop factor of approximately 2.3x when shooting DCI 4K resolution.

It's true that many professional testings show that when shooting in 4K, moiré & aliasing are unnoticeable. However, in 1080p, it is still a 'problem'. Watching Vimeo clips, such as these will help you to understand more about the 4K capabilities, as well as checking out Philip Bloom's review (NOW WITH VIDEO REVIEW! The no longer evolving GH4 review! | Philip Bloom (http://philipbloom.net/2014/06/30/gh4/))

Caleb Pike's Review: Panasonic GH4 Video Review on Vimeo (Moire test at 19:18)
Philip Bloom's Review: Video review of the Panasonic GH4 on Vimeo
Joe Simon's Budapest video (shot with the GH4): Budapest Cityscape on Vimeo

Joe Simon's synopsis:
Pros –
- Beautiful 4K image, rivals the look of Canon C100, 1DC, Black Magic 4K
- Great resolution, sharpness and image texture
- Small and light
- Great DR
- Lots of fine tuning profile adjustments
- 100/200 mbit codec
- Did not have banding issues with blue skies or gradients
- No aliasing or moiré in 4k
- AF function is quick, has face detection
- Built in timelapse function
- HDR function that combines photos

Cons -
- 1080 is soft and resolves little detail
- 96fps is soft, but works well in MED/CU scenes
- Micro 4/3 sensor, hard to get shallow DOF, extreme wide lenses, bad in low light
- Low light is terrible, anything over 1600 iso is unusable, too noisy and blocky
- LCD screen isn’t too sharp, hard to manual focus

---

Ultimately, this is where I think Joe has forgotten the cost of the GH4, because:

- 1080 is equal to the GH4, but with better low light - personally love the image the GH3 provides.
- 96fps is awesome and Philip Bloom's duck video is amazing (GH4 Tests: The Duck Whisperer @ 96fps on Vimeo)
- Micro 4/3 sensor is great for getting more depth of field and there are fast lenses to get shallow enough.
- Low light is an improvement (especially in 4K mode when downsizing to 1080p) over the GH3. I'd personally shoot 3200 in 1080p and would be tempted to push 6400 when shooting 4K.
- LCD screen is double the resolution of the GH3s - looks great - and manual focus has hugely improved over the GH3 with the help of peaking.

So, it's completely up to the person with the camera. Hope this helps.

Can anyone sum up the difference between the A7/A7R/A7S?

As far as I can see the A7s has the lowest resolution sensor making it more sensitive in low light (a good thing) but lacks the hybrid phase/contrast detection of the A7 (a bad thing)

I'm seriously considering the A7 as a replacement for my 5D and with the metabones smart adapter can keep using my Canon glass but it's expensive so I don't want to make a mistake here :/

Pete

Hmmm Pete, I think the differences have been summed up well here: sony a7s review // sony a7s vs a7r - Washington DC Wedding Photographer Sam Hurd (http://www.samhurdphotography.com/2014/gear-reviews/sony-a7s-review-sony-a7s-vs-a7r) (there's a table a short way down the page between the three different bodies). Maybe others will be able to provide you with more information though!

- Low light is terrible, anything over 1600 iso is unusable, too noisy and blocky

Ah common, what a load of crap :) Probably my expectations are a lot lower then Joe when it comes to imagequality but I have been shooting several times at 6400 iso the last 2 weddings and with a f2.0 lens the image is brighter then what I can see with my own eyes, sure there is noise but the noise gets much smaller when you downscale from 4K to 1080p and then you hardly notice it, side by side with my gh3 the difference is noticeable eventhough both camera have about the same sensitivity.

Ah common, what a load of crap :) Probably my expectations are a lot lower then Joe when it comes to imagequality but I have been shooting several times at 6400 iso the last 2 weddings and with a f2.0 lens the image is brighter then what I can see with my own eyes, sure there is noise but the noise gets much smaller when you downscale from 4K to 1080p and then you hardly notice it, side by side with my gh3 the difference is noticeable eventhough both camera have about the same sensitivity.

Haha I thought the same when I read it... I guess he's highly critical and this is his first M4/3 camera... if it is, then it's understandable that he might have unrealistic expectations, but if he's owned or used one before, then it's a bit too critical in my opinion, especially considering his pros for what is in effect, a camera shooting way above its price point.

I agree, although I'll admit to only having seen footage online, as I've been far too busy to really get out and shoot. However, I really messed up the pre-wedding video I made for my first wedding video - the father of the groom made a speech and I:

- had the wrong white balance
- had the wrong exposure
- changed the exposure midway through the speech

After colour correction and outputting to DVD, I realised that although the image wasn't perfect, it was far from awful and rendered well on a HDTV... sometimes, our expectations are unforgiving and the reality isn't as bad as we first think.

Can't wait to take my camera out at the weekend!!! So far, I've only shot inside my home.

Here is a quick and dirty comparison I made between the gh3 and 4 with a f2.0 lens at 6400 iso at the last venue I was with the camera pointed to a part where there was no light, only candle's on the table, look at the pink wall in the back to see the difference. (I blurred all faces as I don't have permission to place this online)
The noise levels are comparable between the gh3 and 4 but when you downscale from 4K to 1080p the noise becomes very fine grain, with the gh3 you can see the noise dancing around on the walls, with the gh4 you don't. The downscaling makes the image appear cleaner. the part of the image I show is a bit soft because the focus was on a person in front outside the frame, but it does show the difference, next wedding I"ll try to do a better test.

Here is a quick and dirty comparison I made between the gh3 and 4 with a f2.0 lens at 6400 iso at the last venue I was with the camera pointed to a part where there was no light, only candle's on the table, look at the pink wall in the back to see the difference. (I blurred all faces as I don't have permission to place this online)
The noise levels are comparable between the gh3 and 4 but when you downscale from 4K to 1080p the noise becomes very fine grain, with the gh3 you can see the noise dancing around on the walls, with the gh4 you don't. The downscaling makes the image appear cleaner. the part of the image I show is a bit soft because the focus was on a person in front outside the frame, but it does show the difference, next wedding I"ll try to do a better test.

There's a noticeable difference between the two... either way, if wedding videos sold ten years ago, the low light performance of the GH4 is easily going to produce footage that sells well today.

I agree with your earlier comment of shooting 'how it is' and keeping the blacks black etc.

That said, I'd obviously jump at the opportunity to own an A7S as well, but I can't see myself opting for the A7S or its successor over the GH line because I'm well-invested in the M4/3 lens line up.

By the way, responded to your email and thanks for the reply!

Interesting dynamic range test between Arri Amera, A7s, gh4, 5dmk3 & C300

Dynamic Range – Sony A7S vs. the others « cinema5D (http://www.cinema5d.com/dynamic-range-sony-a7s-vs-arri-amira-canon-c300-5d-mark-iii-1dc-panasonic-gh4/)

A7s has 14.1 stops - close to the Arri 14.5 which is amazing for a camera at this price

The gh4 comes out lowest at 10.9 although from seeing some files I thought it looked a lot closer to my c100 (c300 came out at 11.4)

Obviously dynamic range isnt the be all & end all but the A7s is definitely showing some serious high end qualities

Game of Thrones isn't shot in 4K. Why are we so concerned with 4K for our weddings?

I know why: consumerism is huge in this industry. Wedding videographers are some of these company's best customers, so the need to make us feel that our current gear is inferior is a tactic. But in all honesty, our work is seen on VIMEO in 720p, usually on a laptop inside of an embed (not full screen). Why on earth is 4K so necessary at this point?

I'm fine with my C100s for now. Lol. Maybe in 10 years when the majority of home televisions and computer monitors are 4K I'll start worrying about that.

Clive did you receive your A7s? I'm still thinking that this might be a better alternative than using my 5D for ease of focussing but I have a big investment in Canon glass so need to know of any pitfalls in using EF lenses with this camera.

Cheers

Pete

Hi peter, sorry - i was on holiday - I've got some reading to do!

But I'll start by addressing your point! My A7S came within three days, from HONG KONG! I was shocked!

It is the universal 'world camera' version.

I love it.

I'm not sure I will use SLog though - not for weddings. the 3200 base ISO is just too tricky to have to deal with on the fly.

The metabones adaptor is fine in areas apart from autofocus in picture taking.

It seems to hunt like bad video cameras would. Over reaching, under reach, over reaching again and EVENTUALLY finding focus. But I'm not going to be taking stills with it.

Why are we so concerned with 4K for our weddings?

I know why: consumerism is huge in this industry. Wedding videographers are some of these company's best customers, so the need to make us feel that our current gear is inferior is a tactic. But in all honesty, our work is seen on VIMEO in 720p, usually on a laptop inside of an embed (not full screen). Why on earth is 4K so necessary at this point.

Not for the output yet but it does have one big advantage and that is the fact you can zoom in considerably and reframe without any visual quality loss and 4K downscaled to 1080p holds much more detail then any 1080p camera can deliver. It's also looks cleaner at high iso as the noise gets smaller as well when you downscale. Currently the biggest advantages are when you edit it on a 1080p timeline. The crop factor alone was for me as a solo shooter enough reason to invest in it now. Have you even looked at some ax100 videos, either on vimeo or youtube in 1080p? I at least have not seen any 1080p camera yet that can output that amount of fine detail.

For me it makes a difference shooting in 4K and editing on a 1080p timeline, I can correct all framing mistakes made on my unmanned camera, I can choose a wideangle or medium closeup and make it look like I used 2 camera's. It gives me extra possibilities which I did not have before.

There are two kinds of videographers...

Those who have shot 4K themselves, and won't turn back...

And those who are trying to convince themselves they should not touch a 4K camera, even though prices are now becoming reasonable.

Really the "jump" to 4K was far less expensive and mostly painless compared to SD to HD. The image quality jump is still significant, and the advantages are there. Calling it "marketing hype" or whatever won't change what is happening. It IS "bleeding edge", so there are "good" reasons to wait, but also many good reasons to be on top of the coming wave, while producing better HD in the process!

But I'll start by addressing your point! My A7S came within three days, from HONG KONG! I was shocked!

It is the universal 'world camera' version.

I love it.


I'm just about sold on this camera but I'm loathe to order from Hong Kong as I'm in the middle of trying to get a Samyang lens repaired under warranty from Onestopdigital (Hong Kong based), and it's proving a bit of a nightmare! Does this mean the EU version of the A7s will be locked down to 29.9 seconds as per the 5d?

Clive can you confirm the camera has zoom focus assist while recording?

Cheers

Pete

Game of Thrones isn't shot in 4K. Why are we so concerned with 4K for our weddings?

You could argue lots of things based on what other people do or do not do / need.

You could also argue that since Game of Thrones isn't filmed in low light we shouldn't be filming weddings in low light and should be lighting the scene appropriately. Hmmm....

While few (if any) of us are delivering weddings in 4K today, having the flexibility to shoot wide and crop in post on an unrepeatable event means added flexibility later on in post.

I highly doubt Game of Thrones is shot entirely in single takes so if the camera move screws up they can re-take it. Try doing that at a wedding ceremony.

Just because we don't 'need' something doesn't mean no one should think about using it.

We don't need sliders. Poeple use them to great effect. We don't need steady cam, but lots of people make awesome footage with them. We don't need 4K, but it's yet another tool in the box we can use to great advantage.

There are lots of people resisting it. That's fine. I know a pair of wedding video people still shooting in 4x3 SD and still getting bookings. So should any of us even be shooting HD today? Just saying :)

I'm just about sold on this camera but I'm loathe to order from Hong Kong as I'm in the middle of trying to get a Samyang lens repaired under warranty from Onestopdigital (Hong Kong based), and it's proving a bit of a nightmare! Does this mean the EU version of the A7s will be locked down to 29.9 seconds as per the 5d?

Clive can you confirm the camera has zoom focus assist while recording?

Cheers

Pete

Yep, I hadn't realised until a friend of mine who owns an A6000 showed me. Its a super feature along with the focus peaking and zebras.

The 5D mk4 may turn out to have 4k, but will it have a better codec, improved dynamic range, zero moire and aliasing, focus peaking, zebras etc etc...?

I don't think its worth waiting around for Canon if anyones debating it. At the very least, they have dropped the ball in being so far behind the competition even if it emerges the 5D4 will have 4k which isn't a certainty.

I don't think its worth waiting around for Canon if anyones debating it. At the very least, they have dropped the ball in being so far behind the competition even if it emerges the 5D4 will have 4k which isn't a certainty.

I agree, although Photokina will be interesting with the 7D2. However, I think I'm going to pick up a GH4. I don't need the low light performance as much nowadays for corporates (only have 2 more weddings booked - yay!) and someone offered me £1380 for one of my 5D3s (only 1635 shutter accusations!), so it's more or a less a straight swap by the time I've bought an extra battery or two. Of course glass is another matter....

I agree, although Photokina will be interesting with the 7D2

Why is everyone so psyched about the 7D2? The 7D sucks! Canon isn't in the business of producing quality DSLRs for video. What gives people the idea that the 7D2 will be better if the 5D3 which is a higher model also sucks for video? My prediction is the 7D2 will be nothing special.

Why is everyone so psyched about the 7D2? The 7D sucks! Canon isn't in the business of producing quality DSLRs for video. What gives people the idea that the 7D2 will be better if the 5D3 which is a higher model also sucks for video? My prediction is the 7D2 will be nothing special.

I'm not psyched up at all. The 7D2 should show the direction Canon is heading in terms of video and it's also the closest we have to the S35 frame size.

The 7D sucks because relatively speaking, because it's so old now. When it was released it was considered by many be to a really serious wedding video camera (audio limitations aside). We used one for a couple of years from the back of the isle to take advantage of the crop factor. It's easy to forget where we all were just 2 or 3 years ago.

If the 7D2 has 4K and is a 1:1 pixel ration then it means that Canon has got serious again. If it's 4K and not 1:1 pixel mapping then think it will be time to drop Canon completely. That is why I think the 7D2 will be a very interesting body to watch. Add to that, we should see how Canon have (or have not) developed new sensor technology etc.

Also, if the 7D2 includes / excludes video features such as focus peaking and zebras that will also tell us a lot. Canon are very aware of the market place but have so far chosen to take us down the cinema line route. Will they continue that way and be willing to sacrifice the low end 4K video DSLR market, which they once owned, to the likes of Sony and Panasonic? I think yes in terms of serious users, but I also think the Rebel line will get 4K soon for the soccer moms!

Having a larger sensor means the 7D2 in 4K mode could easily be better than the GH4 in low light. Would that be so terrible?

My gut tells me that the 7D2 won't get all these goodies because it would have a major impact on the (now ageing) 1Dc, but I'm going to look on with interest regardless.

What we all need is competition in the market place so that which ever way we choose to go, the technology is constantly being pushed forward. When one company owns the market things stagnate.

Having a larger sensor means the 7D2 in 4K mode could easily be better than the GH4 in low light. Would that be so terrible?

Just wait until the GH5 comes out, I bet it will be even better then the a7s in low light and you probably will regret not to have waited for that one. There always will be something better at the horizon, I still remember from not that long ago shooting at 6db of gain and getting frustrated about all the noise in my xh-a1 footage, I still see the annoyed expressions on the guests faces when I close my eyes because of my on camera light that was blinding their view.

If I would have been given a GH4 or a AX100 back then I thought I had died and gone to heaven, we all have become very spoiled there days. :)

If the 7D2 has 4K and is a 1:1 pixel ration then it means that Canon has got serious again. If it's 4K and not 1:1 pixel mapping then think it will be time to drop Canon completely.

Well, it's not going to have that so you might as well start preparing.

I still feel very much that the 4k lovers are getting swept along on the excitement tide. I won't pretend that the benefits aren't very noticeable, but you have to be honest with yourself and your needs.

For me, before the announcement of the GH4 or A7s, if I was asked where I wanted improvement, my answer would have been low light, codec, moire, focus peaking, dynamic range, all before I would have said 'I wish my footage from the 6D was sharper.

So, knowing my needs it was an easy decision for me.

I still feel the GH4 is 4k rushed into a setup which cuts corners. 4k is 4k which is great, but I'm glad Sony opted to push the boundaries of codec, low light, dynamic range rather than capitalising on the consumer frenzy of 4k.

Sure, soon enough there will be a product that ticks all the boxes, but the A7s gives me all I need right now IMO.

From what I see, the main appeal would be the low light of the A7s, because, while I don't need ISO 150,000 or whatever, a clean ISO 6400 or 12,800 would be great to have. I also would like an aisle camera at 4K so I can shoot Wider than usual, but use the one camera and be able to crop down to a medium shot with no loss.

However, knowing it will only record 4K to an external recorder really means, why bother with that for now? I can buy a 2nd camera for cheaper than I can a Shogun.

And the low light isn't necessary for me, yet.

So, while I'm tempted by the GH4 and more by the Sony A7s, I'm fine waiting another year and seeing how things shake out so I can get full value when I make the change, and whether that change is just to 4K capable, or if I'll be leaving Canon entirely.

Meantime, I can save some extra cash to be ready.

I still feel very much that the 4k lovers are getting swept along on the excitement tide. I won't pretend that the benefits aren't very noticeable, but you have to be honest with yourself and your needs.

I see more of these kind of reactions from people that don't shoot with a 4k camera and they all seem to feel the need to justify their 1080p camera which they either have or just bought and I don't understand why that is.

I think Panasonic did not cut any corners, they made a smart decision reusing the gh3 body and making it a better camera while keeping production cost down, for existing gh users that meant being able to re-use all of your accessories. I shoot weddings every week all through the season in often demanding situations and since I can shoot and show candlelit dinnerparties in the same way I can see it with my own eyes that is all I need. Would I like to have some better low light capabilities? ofcourse, but since the camera can cope with any situation I have run into now it works for my particular needs.

The cropping factor of 4K however is an addition that, as long as I can edit in a 1080p timeline which I expect to be another few years, gives me a hugh advantage as solo shooter, I need a camera that will give me the opportunity to crop out framing mistakes or give me extra angles that I can choose as I please without any visual quality loss, the a7s can do that to with a appropriate recorder but at almost 3 times the cost of a gh4 also adding to the size of the camera as you need to attach that recorder somewhere.

So that you know, I didn't get 4K camera's because I love the 4K logo on the camera only, though it looks cool, and I didn't buy a second 4K camera out of excitement. My money is hard earned and I need to be sure every cent spend is a worthwhile investment. For me at least "4K" isn't just a status symbol, 4K just made my work better as I"m able to correct framing errors and get extra cameraangles on unmanned camera's as a solo shooter and that all in post.

I'd love to have a low light full frame cam like the a7s but it won't improve my work, it will only make shooting in very dark venues much easier but not up to a point that there will be a significant difference with my gh4 as I want to expose in a way I can see with my own eyes and that is what the gh4 and also the ax100 currently can do for me.

Sorry if I missed this along the way, but as I understand it the European G4s are time limited to 29.59. Are the GH4s sold in the USA time limited or not?

Is it based on the frame rates or locations of sale?

Same here regarding the EU time limit for the A7s - anyone have the answer?

According to this review it's still crippled: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/53911011

Pete

As far as I know all dslr's sold in the eu have that limit build in, it needs to be a videocamera, like the ax100 to have that removed. Those timelimits are a big pain in the *** when shooting ceremonies.

Now I'm confused as this report states that all A7s regardless of region are crippled to 29 minute recording!

http://www.newsshooter.com/2014/06/25/the-sony-a7s-a-world-camera/

Apparently EU tax if DSLRs were classified as camcorders rather than still cameras is 5.4% which would mean about an extra £100 for the A7s - I'd be happy to pay that much more for unlimited recording

Having said that I wouldn't be using it for ceremonies/speeches so it may be no biggie :)

Pete

Is this suspiciously cheap at £1339.50? It states full UK warranty but the low price suggests to me Hong Kong

Panamoz Sony ILCE-7s Alpha 7s A7s Full Frame CMOS Digital Camera (Body Only) (http://panamoz.com/index.php/sony-ilce-7s-alpha-7s-a7s-full-frame-cmos-digital-camera-body-only.html)

Pete

I have the GH4 and I love it. It's obviously not as awesome in lowlight as the A7S, but I have nothing but good things to say about the GH4. 4k is so fun to work with. I shot the video below this weekend. (Just a sneak peek so that's why there's no audio from the event. That will come later.)

At the 0:49 second mark the next sequence is all using one shot. Being able to crop is great.

Boston Wedding at the Colonnade Hotel on Vimeo

Now I'm confused as this report states that all A7s regardless of region are crippled to 29 minute recording

Yeah, but it can shoot high iso, that is all you will ever need, right. :) Seriously, I don't understand why it is not possible to just up the prizes a bit for all dslr's and give unlimited recording for all camera's, or at least give you the choice and offer locked and unlocked versions at different prizes. I have been trying to shoot a ceremony recently using 2 dslr's and a handicam and I"m not doing that again, it requires some careful planning and luck and I don't like to rely on luck.

Peter - that's where i got mine from - it's legit, have bought other items from them also with no hassle. It comes from Hong Kong but they have folk in the Uk who communicate with you - they offer 2 year warranty, not sure how that works as have not had a problem with anything yet but if you don't mind imported goods then its fine. Is also a world camera, shoots PAL & ntsc formats

At the 0:49 second mark the next sequence is all using one shot. Being able to crop is great.

That single sequence says it all, I watched the vdeo first before reading your comment and had no idea that was done in post.

Peter - that's where i got mine from - it's legit, have bought other items from them also with no hassle. It comes from Hong Kong but they have folk in the Uk who communicate with you - they offer 2 year warranty, not sure how that works as have not had a problem with anything yet but if you don't mind imported goods then its fine. Is also a world camera, shoots PAL & ntsc formats

Ade can I ask how much import duties were - plus did you have to pay the Royal Mail handling charge?

I'm wary of imported goods as I'm having issues with a Samyang lens (returned for repair under warranty) that has gone missing between Heathrow and Hong Kong and I'm getting no joy from Onestopdigital - they just keep fobbing me off with 'waiting to hear from Hong Kong mail - it's been 2 months now!

Peter - that's where i got mine from - it's legit, have bought other items from them also with no hassle

My experience with those kind of companies is that their prizes on their website are always excluding taxes, so if you get a invoice there is no tax to deduct for your company. Buying from them would only be a advantage when their offered price would be significantly lower then what you would pay at a reputable store excl tax.or ofcourse if you don't have a company you are basically buying taxfree.

One thing that comes to mind though is service if your camera would malfunction, do they have a physical store where you could bring in the camera? I prefer to buy at a local store so I can drive by with the camera and they take care of the rest if there is a problem.

Edit: just see their prices include vat, then you have got a good deal :) Wonder how they manage to sell so cheap then? They are 700 euro below marketprice and just above the price of a gh4, thats' a lot and does sound to good to be true.

Edit 2: this is what I found back on their website:

"10. Will I have to pay any import taxes and duties, such as VAT?

You will not have to pay any. Our prices are all inclusive. All import and customs charges will be covered by us fully, and will be billed to our shipping account directly. You will not be billed."

Just as I expected, on the salespage it says vat included and their faq says there is no vat...so the mentioned price is exl vat but they won't bill it, that's not legal but no-one seems to mind :)

I paid no duties - Panamoz say they will refund you the money if you do get stung but this is my 3rd transaction with them, all for decent amounts and not had to pay anything over the price you quoted. Not sure how they get round it but hey, I'm not complaining

The highlight roll off on the GH4 is awful and the image looks overly sharpened, even after turning down the sharpness in the profile settings. I can't put my finger on it but something about the GH4 image put me off even after trying to grade it (where it falls apart horribly imo). The image of the GH4 is so lackluster that its only advantage over current cameras is the 4K which will be horribly overshadowed in future cameras in my opinion.

The A7s makes a great B cam but does not work well as a main camera. It has a VERY good image that is very flexible for being only 8 bit but it's a very fiddly camera with awful ergonomics. Also the rolling shutter and battery life are terrible.

Skin tones on both cameras are poor but correctable in post.

If you're not invested in either and don't have a need for stills, pick up a used C100 and save yourself the headache of having to buy ND filters and lenses.

This is an interesting thread. Many interesting opinions and experiences. Each to their own.
The ability to crop with 4k looks great. In reality I'm shooting with a C100 in 1080p but giving my clients SD dvds or 720p masters. Nobody asks for more here. I offer Blurays but only have one client who wants them and he's an architect, is a bit crazy and loves tech. Anyway, I have a reasonable crop to play with but more is sometimes more!
I have a C100 and it's been great after using a PD170, 7D and 700D, which were all great as well. The only things I miss from smaller cams is the weight ( C100 is quite a bit heavier than any dslr but on par with the PD170) and the cost.
Everyone has their criteria when buying a camera, mine was great low light, long recording times, ND filters ( I live in a very sunny city, Madrid), peaking ( my eyes are getting old), xlrs, etc
Don't get me wrong, I'd love to replace my b-cam, a 700D, with either of these fine cameras, but i think it's best to pick a brand and stick with it as lenses are very costly.
I was seriously thinking about a Sony fs100, vg30 and nex5n combo. All are great cams but none as great as my A cam, the C100.
Pick what suits you, enjoy it and make money ( or art)! It's great to have so many quality choices!

The highlight roll off on the GH4 is awful and the image looks overly sharpened, even after turning down the sharpness in the profile settings. I can't put my finger on it but something about the GH4 image put me off even after trying to grade it (where it falls apart horribly imo). The image of the GH4 is so lackluster that its only advantage over current cameras is the 4K which will be horribly overshadowed in future cameras in my opinion.

The A7s makes a great B cam but does not work well as a main camera. It has a VERY good image that is very flexible for being only 8 bit but it's a very fiddly camera with awful ergonomics. Also the rolling shutter and battery life are terrible.

Skin tones on both cameras are poor but correctable in post.

If you're not invested in either and don't have a need for stills, pick up a used C100 and save yourself the headache of having to buy ND filters and lenses.

Edward, I have no doubt that you know your stuff (and have benefited from your advice in the past - thank you!). I have read similar opinions regarding skin tones on the GH4 camera... but to say that the image falls apart horribly when grading is surely an overstatement? When perusing videos shot with the GH4, I don't sit there and pick at the skin tones (although they're likely fixed in post) or explain how the image has fallen apart with said grading. In fact, a great number of videographers are saying that the GH4 is great using the Cinelike D setting, although exposures are harder to match, which is why zebras come in handy - I don't deny that skin tones are lacking though when compared to a Black Magic Camera.

How will its 4K feature become horribly overshadowed? By the time said cameras come out, the GH5 will be in the market place. At this present moment in time, at a price point of £1300, surely it is safe to call it a great camera? It shoots 8bit 4:2:0 (Edited) at 100mbps (not that I'm certain what 4:2:2 means! Ha!), which had everyone raving upon its release. Also, you can shoot 10 bit with the adaptor if the user is crazy about getting the most out of the image in post.

For a £1300 camera, I think the GH4 is a landmark camera. I think people forget the cost and comparing it to a Sony A7S constantly becomes slightly idiotic when you place the prices alongside each other (HK imports excluded). They are two completely different beasts. As Noa has said repeatedly, the A7S requires almost 3 times the cost of the GH4 to record 4K. Add in the A7s' shortcomings, as stated in your post (battery and ergonomic downfalls), and it looks like much less of a camera when compared with the C100 - which is more closely linked to the price of the A7S plus 4K recorder. Never mind comparing it to the GH4... which is a much cheaper camera than the A7S, yet shows its strengths by bringing genuine legitimacy and argument when compared with a camera almost twice its RRP (A7S).

For those of us invested in M4/3 glass, the GH4 is a God send.

I'd be interested in shooting with a Black Magic Camera, if it wasn't for their willingness to push forward more devices, rather than refining what is already out.

For weddings? Surely the GH4 is surplus to requirements?

I would of course love to be invested in Canon glass and have the ability to shoot with a C100!!! But I don't have that luxury. A part of me is thankful for this however, as I believe Panasonic are going to continue to strive to do everything that they can to make the GH series the best video camera at its price point. As long as they continue to do this, then I will continue to invest in M4/3 glass and benefit from the smaller form factor and excellent battery life with features like peaking and zebras!

Not knocking your post though - the C100 has surely provided you with stunning IQ, files and features that some of us can only dream about! I just think that some people are expecting too much of the GH4... it's only just outside the range of a prosumer camcorder... when compared to one another, it's insane to consider the prosumer camcorder when considering the benefits of the GH4.

Ah yeah I totally understand. I guess I was approaching the situation as someone who was not vested in any system and they were purchasing to cover any and all situations.

Again I don't think the GH4 or A7s cover most of the situations during weddings. Then again the C100 does not: it is larger and does not have slow motion.

When it boils down to the GH4 vs A7s it all depends on the shooter and their needs. Do you favor a razor sharp 4k image in an ergonomic camera or a filmic 1080p look with terrible ergonomics? I favor the look the A7s over the GH4 much more aside from the crop-ability but it can be so clunky to work with.

Is this suspiciously cheap at £1339.50? It states full UK warranty but the low price suggests to me Hong Kong

Panamoz Sony ILCE-7s Alpha 7s A7s Full Frame CMOS Digital Camera (Body Only) (http://panamoz.com/index.php/sony-ilce-7s-alpha-7s-a7s-full-frame-cmos-digital-camera-body-only.html)

Pete
It will be shipped from Hong Kong. Panamoz smuggle cameras in & evade customs duty & VAT by under declaring the value on the packages. The recipient is responsible for payment of customs duty & VAT whatever the sender may have labelled the package as.

I paid no duties - Panamoz say they will refund you the money if you do get stung but this is my 3rd transaction with them, all for decent amounts and not had to pay anything over the price you quoted. Not sure how they get round it but hey, I'm not complaining

Panamoz smuggle the cameras. You enter into a criminal conspiracy to evade customs duty & VAT when you order from Panamoz. You do a disservice to local retailers who cannot compete with crooks. There is also the moral aspect as you are effectively stealing from us law abiding citizens who do pay correct taxes that are used to pay for schools & hospitals etc.

It brings us back to the age old question - 'why do we pay more in the UK than the rest of the world for our electronic goods?'

Even Vince cable said the government should do more to stop 'rip off Britain'

From the news today - The great gadget price rip-off: How Britons are still paying hundreds of pounds more for the same products as American customers | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2700758/The-great-gadget-price-rip-How-Britons-paying-hundreds-pounds-products-American-customers.html)

I enquired with Panamoz who informed me that they are responsible for import charges which are billed directly to their shipping account - If this is the case In what way does this differ from 'grey imports' which seem to be more acceptable?