After all my kicking and screaming about the GH4...... I'm leaning heavily towards buying one next week. I had my sights set on a C100, but now I'm having second thoughts.

I was primarily concerned about the basic look of the GH4 where everything was in focus and detailed, not a look I wanted after learning the ropes on my 5D3..... I need the Shallow DOF for most of what I do. Investigating the Metabones adopter has changed my mind towards the GH4, and now believe a SDOF is possible especially with my Canon lenses. Low light was another issue but again with some fast glass and the extra stop the Metabones gives you a super 35 sensor, I don't think it will be an issue for me.

I guess because I never really looked into the GH4, I never bothered to understand I didn't need to buy all new Panasonic glass which I know nothing about, and that changes everything.

I would never buy the interface because I never use XLR adopters, I use a Metric Halo external recording device, and don't like the power supply of that thing after using Jucied linked stuff that eats up batteries like there is no tomorrow.

So for $1700 plus $600 = $2300......... I'm in business! I save $2200 bucks rather than buying the C100.

I am mystified...... is there an SD card that delivers 200 Mbps? Or is that only possible with an external recorder?

Any reason I shouldn't get this thing? Anything I've over looked?

Hey Michael,

I looked at both and ended up with the c100 / Ninja2 combo. I really was going to go GH4, but after using a 5D mk 2 for 5 years - I shelled out the few extra bucks and went with the Canon. I absolutely love my 5d and the shallow Dof look- enough so that I was willing to put up with all of the drawbacks, like no reliable on board audio, moire, and manual everything.

But I will rarely if ever shoot 4k. I have a friend with an Epic that I can use if a project calls for more pop than I have. I much rather care about dynamic range and low light/low noise. I shoot run and gun and might use bounce or a small fill.

I always looked at DSLR as a transitional phase... f-ing awesome for what they were, but really there has been enough development in traditional video systems now that we don't need to put up with the downsides... I will keep and shoot the 5D when it works, but I am stoked to have the c100 with the ease of use... buttons and dials that are easy to access, and very functional.. and on board audio.

You can't go wrong with the GH4. I'm sure that you've done all your homework (including a financial analysis - this is a big one). Make your decision, live with it, and do your thing. We are lucky to live in a time with so many great, affordable, creative tools.

Operators standing by. INSTOCKNOW!

Panasonic DMC-GH4 (http://www.omegabroadcast.com/product-p/pan-dmcgh4kbody-90-4624.htm)

We recommend the Delkin 600X 64GB cards. SDXC.

:)

What is the actual, exact crop factor (relative to full frame) for the GH4?

I will answer for you. I believe it to be about 2.3, which is why my collection of Canon glass will mostly not be particularly useful, regardless of the lens adapter.

For me (ymmv), a crop factor of 1.5 (for the Canon C100) is about the bare minimum for sensor size I would go and still consider using existing glass.

Of course, I could buy dedicated lenses for the smaller sensor size, but there is also the issue for me (again, ymmv) of weather resistance and the issue of my preference for Canon color.

I wish the C100 replacement was available, or at least announced.

Hey Michael,

I looked at both and ended up with the c100 / Ninja2 combo. I really was going to go GH4, but after using a 5D mk 2 for 5 years - I shelled out the few extra bucks and went with the Canon. I absolutely love my 5d and the shallow Dof look- enough so that I was willing to put up with all of the drawbacks, like no reliable on board audio, moire, and manual everything.

But I will rarely if ever shoot 4k. I have a friend with an Epic that I can use if a project calls for more pop than I have. I much rather care about dynamic range and low light/low noise. I shoot run and gun and might use bounce or a small fill.

I always looked at DSLR as a transitional phase... f-ing awesome for what they were, but really there has been enough development in traditional video systems now that we don't need to put up with the downsides... I will keep and shoot the 5D when it works, but I am stoked to have the c100 with the ease of use... buttons and dials that are easy to access, and very functional.. and on board audio.

You can't go wrong with the GH4. I'm sure that you've done all your homework (including a financial analysis - this is a big one). Make your decision, live with it, and do your thing. We are lucky to live in a time with so many great, affordable, creative tools.

Thanks Ken, you know how it is when you are camera hunting, I've spent months looking and dreaming about the C100.... I still am, the ergonomics of the C100 look phenomenal! I did look into a real video camcorder, but hard to do that after having inter-changeable lens. The C100 was the only video camera that interested me.

I've watched every GH4 verse the 5D3, C100 video there is, and don't always think the GH4 is the winner image wise...... what did it for me was the slow-mo, even though I never used slow-mo in my life, and the time lapse.

I love my 5D3 and will never sell it and think it's a great complementary camera to the GH4.

I will answer for you. I believe it to be about 2.3, which is why my collection of Canon glass will mostly not be particularly useful, regardless of the lens adapter.

For me (ymmv), a crop factor of 1.5 (for the Canon C100) is about the bare minimum for sensor size I would go and still consider using existing glass.

Of course, I could buy dedicated lenses for the smaller sensor size, but there is also the issue for me (again, ymmv) of weather resistance and the issue of my preference for Canon color.

I wish the C100 replacement was available, or at least announced.

So my Canon 70-200L f2.8 IS becomes a 50-142mm f2.0 on the GH4, with the speed booster?

Operators standing by. INSTOCKNOW!

Panasonic DMC-GH4 (http://www.omegabroadcast.com/product-p/pan-dmcgh4kbody-90-4624.htm)

We recommend the Delkin 600X 64GB cards. SDXC.

:)

Thanks Phil...... free 2 day shipping?

Google this article:

B&H Photo Video - How to Emulate Super 35 4K video with Panasonic GH4

Look at the table at the bottom

Sigma 50 - 150 becomes a 82 - 245 (35mm equivalent) with 4H crop factor and Speedbooster
Nikon 35 becomes a 57 (35mm equivalent)
Tokina 11-16 becomes an 18 to 26 (35mm equivalent)

Thanks George, I mean Richard.....OK so my 50mm 1.4 becomes an f1.2 70mm...... I think I can live with that. I think then the lens I will use most is the 24-105 f4 for now, which becomes an f2.8..... sweet!

I hardly ever shoot anything wider than a 50mm on my 5D3 anyway.

I've shot full frame DSLR in the past, a lot.

I currently own the C100 AND the GH4.

Guess which one is actually getting the most use?

Answer: The GH4.

Why? And when do I choose the C100 over the GH4?

The thing I love about the GH4 is it's size, it's general ease of use, the articulating LCD and the fact that for general ambient audio the mics really aren't that bad (I wouldn't rely on them for primary sound). Oh, did I mention 4K and the ability to do 1080 in 60p & 96p for slo-mo, and the ability to do timelapse in-camera?

Hmmmm......

So when do I choose the C100?

• When I know I'm in a really high dynamic range situation, the C100 can capture those extra few highlights and shadows, but that's really not that often for me.

• When I need to run with a shotgun mic and perhaps a wireless lav and I don't want to be bothered by external recorders.

• When I know I need to record for more than 30 mins (a european limitation due to stupidly out of date tax
laws).

But wait, there's more....

While the C100 allows punch in to 2x for focus assist, often that's not enough for me to be sure I have absolute critical focus and I really miss the 5x and 10x from the 5D3. The GH4 allows much better punch in so I can focus more accurately, just like the DSLRs.

OTOH, I really miss the waveform monitors that the C100 has. The GH4 only has histogram.

I always record the C100 in dual card mode (for instant backup, even though I've never lost data from an SD card - yet), the GH4 only has a single card.

At the end of the day, if I could only buy one camera system which would it be? Hands down the GH4. OTOH, I probably wouldn't select the GH4 if I were limited to only using adapters and only manual focus (which to be fair I use much of the time). The native M43 glass, particularly the primes and 7-14 are amazing.

Shallow DOF? Sure I can get that from my Samyang 75 T1.4 with the EF adapter.... but quite often I actually wanted MORE DOF than I could get form a full frame DSLR, like looking at both the B+G from the front/side in the ceremony. The GH4 lets me do that too.

and we have the deal on the GH4 with the interface & the Metabones:

http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/panasonic-lumix-gf-gh-series/525208-more-gh4-packages.html#post1864180

Jim Martin
EVSonline.com

An interesting test, and overall comments, of the GH4 compared to the Canon C100 (and others) at the Hurlbut Visuals site posted September 11th. Very careful testing. Shane thought it was "video" looking, not cinematic, and had other drawbacks. He recommended renting one and doing tests for potential buyers.

Thanks for that Link Richard...... I read it with great interest! It pretty much confirms what my main hesitation with the GH4 is. I think I have been whittled down by all the over the top reviews of the GH4, mainly by amateurs who make some jingling change from video reviews and weddings, who in their knee jerk reactions to Canon declare they are unloading all their Canon gear...... I mean at least they should keep a 5D in their arsenal for low light, or shallow DOF stuff...... emotion usually trumps common sense, and rational thought

It's great to have a real professional film maker such as Shane weigh in on the - Elephant in the room - when it comes to the GH4 and that is, it's "broadcast like image"...... I always refer to it as a digitalized image, and not a cinema like image as on the 5D3 or the C100.

Since I'm going to be living with the decision I make for a number of years, saving some extra money isn't the main consideration. My intuition and heart tells me to go with the C100, like I had originally intended to do. When first looking at the GH4 footage I noticed right off the bat the digitalized image.... I'm not a professional at all but, it was quite obvious to my lying eyes what I was seeing.

The purpose of this thread was if there was anything I was overlooking in leaning towards the GH4, and Richard you have certainly called my attention to a few things....... I think I'm back in the C100 camp, but still remain open minded!

Does it really matter what shane thinks about it? I often find it funny how easy people get influenced by what other people have to say and the more "important" they are, the more it must be true what they say. Cinematic is a overused word, just the word alone seems to make people think their work will be better. If you make crap films now on a iphone 5, you will make crap films on a red camera as well, but that Red does produce a cinematic image so it must be better, right? :)

Somehow I knew you would comment.....

Well, someone has to tell the truth...:)

Somehow I knew you would comment.........

My intuition and heart tells me to go with the C100

To me it looks the only reason why you doubt between the gh4 and the c100 is price difference, based on what you expect from a camera I"m sure you will be disappointed if you get the gh4 and if your gut feeling tells you to get the c100 then you should, even if it burns a hole in your wallet.

Well, someone has to tell the truth...:)

Truth can be a relative thing, and in most cases it is. Yes, I would listen to someone like Shane more than Dave Dugdale, or Caleb Pike, for crying out loud! Both of these guys along with the rest of the gang, seem to have some deep emotional scars they feel Canon has inflicted upon them, so of course like any dysfunctional relationship..... rejection is the only answer..... ha ha! That said, I do enjoy some of their reviews and they provide a great service to people like me,and others! However, I do recognise emotional frustration when I see it, and I separate the wheat from the shaft so to speak.

Somewhere in between the Canon bashing, and the relentless GH4 fanatics, I lost track of my own perceptions and feelings and started to question my basic visual sanity and looked seriously at the GH4 for the first time. My gut instinct from the first time I saw the GH4 footage was "digital video" image, and never really considered it for my next camera until I gave in to the peer pressure last week and tried to look at it with an open mind and seriously considered getting it..... and just be done with it.

Noa, I don't just listen to one guy like Shane, I've looked at every video review out there for MONTHS! I am truly agonizing over this decision. However, reading Shane's review simply resonated with my gut instincts and brought me back to the reason I never really liked the GH4 image all that much, and it's a hugely important issue for me! If I wanted a video image I'd by a Camcorder, but I want low light and SDOF. I don't want another digital image!

To me it looks the only reason why you doubt between the gh4 and the c100 is price difference, based on what you expect from a camera I"m sure you will be disappointed if you get the gh4 and if your gut feeling tells you to get the c100 then you should, even if it burns a hole in your wallet.

Well yes, price is the all important issue. I have the money to buy the GH4 today! I have to wait a few more weeks to get the C100. After months of looking it is very tempting to just get the GH4..... NOW! You know, "buy it now" with one click button, for us impulse buyers.

The GH4 certainly has some incredible bells and whistles, no doubt about that, and that makes the process even more agonizing.

Does it really matter what shane thinks about it? I often find it funny how easy people get influenced by what other people have to say and the more "important" they are, the more it must be true what they say. Cinematic is a overused word, just the word alone seems to make people think their work will be better. If you make crap films now on a iphone 5, you will make crap films on a red camera as well, but that Red does produce a cinematic image so it must be better, right? :)

I would substitute the phrase " the more important they are ''to the more skillful and knowledgeable they are". However, I don't think you need to be a professional to see the difference in the images. Will 99% of the public notice? I don't think so unless its blatantly bad video.

That said, I've learned a lot by people with a better eye than mine, and their ability to expound on the various differences.

And yes Noa, the RED is better than the iPhone 6.

I really, truly, don't need any more lectures on "its not the gear, its the ability of the user" lectures. I really, really don't.

Good luck to you, Michael. I am wrestling with purchasing a C100 myself right now, so I can relate.

After months of looking it is very tempting to just get the GH4..... NOW! You know, "buy it now" with one click button, for us impulse buyers.

If you need a second camera right now then you have to get what your budget allows, if not, then you have to save money until you can get what you want. Right now you are asking for advice on a camera that you can't afford so it's rather pointless to convince you to get a camera instead that you didn't like from the first time. :)I think you already answered your own question, just wait until you can buy the c100.

I was actually going to submit a post about the relative merits of purchasing a C100 now, given my particular situation, in hopes of getting some good advice from folks that ACTUALLY OWN A C100.

However, I not going to subject myself to gratuitous comments and condescending lectures from folks WHO DON'T.

A shame. I will figure it out on my own.

I think that Dave gave some very good advice: http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/canon-cinema-eos-camera-systems/525258-looks-like-im-getting-gh4.html#post1864151

I was actually going to submit a post about the relative merits of purchasing a C100 now, given my particular situation, in hopes of getting some good advice from folks that ACTUALLY OWN A C100.

However, I not going to subject myself to gratuitous comments and condescending lectures from folks WHO DON'T.

A shame. I will figure it out on my own.

This thread was about getting a GH4 and guess what, I do own one, so I don't understand your point.

If you need a second camera right now then you have to get what your budget allows, if not, then you have to save money until you can get what you want. Right now you are asking for advice on a camera that you can't afford so it's rather pointless to convince you to get a camera instead that you didn't like from the first time. :)I think you already answered your own question, just wait until you can buy the c100.

Well I never said I NEED it now, and from the context of my posts I think that's obvious. I'm just pointing out the impulse to get something right away is seductive.... especially at half the price!

Your statement...... it's pointless to research the differences in cameras simply because I must wait a couple a weeks to buy it is ridiculous! Noa, with all due respect, you seem to personify the GH4 phenomena and get rather defensive and condescending to those of us on the fence and doing our research if we don't jump on the GH4 bandwagon. Perhaps this is what Richard is alluding to.

Like I said, there many very seductive features on the GH4, based on those alone I probably would click the "buy it now" button today. However, the "digital look" is something I'm struggling with, and is the number one reason I don't buy it today.

Good luck to you, Michael. I am wrestling with purchasing a C100 myself right now, so I can relate.

Good luck to you as well Richard!

I've noticed the research and looking at different cameras is the best part. I used to sleep with my 5D3 a few months after I got it....... now it just stays in my camera bag. Whichever camera I get I want it to be a mad insane crazy love affair!

Don't let Noa get the best of you, your posts here have been tremendously helpful, as well as Dave's. I hope you keep us posted of more insights as you decide who to marry.

Noa, one reason I need to buy this thing later is I'm preparing my wife for a new family member, she is generally very supportive of my camera addiction, but none the less I need to prepare her for this and its taking a little time.

The thing I worry about most is, after I die, my wife will sell my cameras for what I told her I paid for them!

Like I said, there many very seductive features on the GH4, based on those alone I probably would click the "buy it now" button today. However, the "digital look" is something I'm struggling with, and is the number one reason I don't buy it today.

So, whats the point of asking if there is any reason you shouldn't get the gh4 if you don't like the digital look in the first place? If you don't like it today you won't like it tomorrow. It looks to me you only want to hear what a sensible choice the c100 will be.

To quote yourself
However, reading Shane's review simply resonated with my gut instincts and brought me back to the reason I never really liked the GH4 image all that much, and it's a hugely important issue for me! If I wanted a video image I'd by a Camcorder, but I want low light and SDOF. I don't want another digital image!

So you answered your own question again...If the image look is so "hugely" important for you, why are you even considering the gh4? Why start this thread asking for buying advice while you clearly state you don't like the image the gh4 produces at all. :)

Also, I didn't say anything bad about the c100, on the contrary, I have been advising you to get a c100 but If you have any questions from a gh4 owner I will be happy to answer them for you.

So, whats the point of asking if there is any reason you shouldn't get the gh4 if you don't like the digital look in the first place? If you don't like it today you won't like it tomorrow. It looks to me you only want to hear what a sensible choice the c100 will be.

To quote yourself


So you answered your own question again...If the image look is so "hugely" important for you, why are you even considering the gh4? Why start this thread asking for buying advice while you clearly state you don't like the image the gh4 produces at all. :)

Also, I didn't say anything bad about the c100, on the contrary, I have been advising you to get a c100 but If you have any questions from a gh4 owner I will be happy to answer them for you.

Well it seems I had talked myself out of the C100 and into the GH4 primarily because of all the amazing features, I was willing it seems, to sweep the "digital image" problem under the rug because of all the wondrous reviews of this camera, I thought perhaps I'm crazy and imagining this "digital image" problem.

When I read Shane's review of the GH4 it reawakened my discontent with the image, I am still weighing the pros and cons and can honestly say I still can't make up my mind 100%. In purchasing any camera it's more of a matter of compromise, and trade offs then getting everything you want.

One of the biggest questions I have is will anyone notice the "digital image" or for that matter the "cinema image" except for the people on this forum? Will the general public like a more detailed image or do they prefer a softer image, and how much can we compensate for one or the other in post. So I once again raise the issue with the GH4, because I'm getting close to pulling the trigger on this thing.

So Noa, calm down and lets let nature take it's course. I'm asking questions, you are handing out proclamations!

Michael,

Exactly what do you think you'll be shooting with the camera you finally purchase?

How long do you hope to keep it and it remain relevant without you wanting to 'upgrade' to the next one?

How much are you invested in EF glass and want to continue investing in it?

How much does the (tiny amount of) extra shallow DOF that the C100 provides mean to you, vs the ability to shoot wide open on M43 glass yet still get 'enough' DOF to keep people in focus?

How often do you think you'll be shooting wide angle vs telephoto?

How often do you think you'll be shooting in extra low light (high ISO)?

Does 4K mean anything to you now, or do you think it will mean more to you in the future?

Do you ever film interviews where you'd like to be able to zoom in (in post) without needing a second camera?

Do you mind dual system audio or do you absolutely need audio & video from the same card?

How do you expect to record your audio? (Shotgun, wireless Lav, wired Lav, mixing/house desk output etc?

Are you filming mainly in static or run & gun situations?

How long do you need to record for in one go?

How long do you need the battery and cards to last (recording time) ?

Are you OK with the fact that virtually no NLE correctly interprets the C100 footage and you are forced to manually adjust the clip settings to progressive (and hope you don't forget!) because almost all NLEs see the C100 as interlaced? If you forget the footage can look pretty nasty!

I could go on with more questions, but let's start with these. Depending on your answers I could recommend either way, so thinking these things through is important.

Talk of the 'digital look' is over blown IMHO. I can like or dislike the image from both cameras equally, depending on how I shot things on the day. There are shots from both cameras that totally blow me away, then there are equally shots from both cameras I could be disappointed with.

Michael,

Exactly what do you think you'll be shooting with the camera you finally purchase?

How long do you hope to keep it and it remain relevant without you wanting to 'upgrade' to the next one?

How much are you invested in EF glass and want to continue investing in it?

How much does the (tiny amount of) extra shallow DOF that the C100 provides mean to you, vs the ability to shoot wide open on M43 glass yet still get 'enough' DOF to keep people in focus?

How often do you think you'll be shooting wide angle vs telephoto?

How often do you think you'll be shooting in extra low light (high ISO)?

.

Hi Dave, I was getting around to addressing your post this evening, but you beat me to it with some fantastic things to consider. First off, let me thank you for the effort you have put in to helping me!

I can't figure out how to use the quote stuff here so I will take a chunk at a time.

I do classical guitar videos and some how to make guitar videos. Right now I'm beginning to work on a documentary about making a guitar for a world class guitarist and our friendship over the last 30 years weaving in and out of actually making the guitar in my shop, and stories about our lives, and how it all enter twines. This is all stuff I want to do potentially, but what I do now is this...... nothing earth shattering pretty basic. In a few months I will film this guitarist in Santa Fe in the oldest church in America playing a concert so basically stuff like that. This video was shot at ISO 625 on the 5D3.
Rafa Elizondo, Dionisio Aguado- Andante and Rondo, Op.2, No.2 - YouTube

Second question: well of course I would like it to remain relevant forever. I bought a XH-A1 back in 2008 and watched that camera become non-relevant sold it last year with the letus adopter for just about nothin..... ha ha.

Third question: I have the 70-200 f4 IS, a 24-105 f4, and the 50mm 1.4, and 1.8.

Forth question: DOF is very important to me, it's the whole reason I went from my XH-A1 to the 5D3! However, I thought perhaps for the S-DOF I can use the 5D3 because it is the reigning King of S-DOF. I'm willing to give up some S-DOF with the GH4, but as I said, I don't want another video camera like the A1 where there is vitally no S-DOF. I saw this review today of the GH4 and this is exactly what I don't want! He's is in focus while talking and so are the leaves on the trees hundreds of feet in back of him. The basket ball game looks like a cheap video camera to me, where as some of the food shots looked very good.
#TLD4K - Panasonic GH4 Impressions! (with 4K Video Footage) - YouTube

Fifth question: I never shoot wide angle to date, but never say never.

Sixth question: I almost always shoot indoors in low light or in an evening concert situation. I also shoot in my shop indoors and it's hard to get enough natural light to shoot under 1600 on my 5D3.

Sorry for the Quote issues hopefully someone can set me straight on using Quote properly.

Does 4K mean anything to you now, or do you think it will mean more to you in the future?

Do you ever film interviews where you'd like to be able to zoom in (in post) without needing a second camera?

Do you mind dual system audio or do you absolutely need audio & video from the same card?

How do you expect to record your audio? (Shotgun, wireless Lav, wired Lav, mixing/house desk output etc?

Are you filming mainly in static or run & gun situations?

How long do you need to record for in one go?

How long do you need the battery and cards to last (recording time) ?

1st Question: 4k means nothing to me at this point other than a better looking image, I shoot only for YouTube, Vimeo.

2nd question: I record on the Metric Halo ULN-2 a separate audio device and sync up the audio in post. If I need to record voice I use a rode video mic or a lavaliere mic both with mini jacks....... I rarely if ever used the XLR's on my old XH-A1. I just need enough audio in camera to use to sync.

3rd question: I almost never film run and gun..... 99% of the time on tripods or my Shark slider. The only time I do run and gun is on vacation in Thailand!

4th question: I have had many problems with the 5D3 and the 30 minute limit, expesically shooting 2 hour long concerts. I get worried about it heating up! Thus one of the main reasons I need a new camera that can record for perhaps 2 hours at a go while I use my 5D3 as a B cam doing some more lets say artistic shots.

Michael,

Are you OK with the fact that virtually no NLE correctly interprets the C100 footage and you are forced to manually adjust the clip settings to progressive (and hope you don't forget!) because almost all NLEs see the C100 as interlaced? If you forget the footage can look pretty nasty!

I could go on with more questions, but let's start with these. Depending on your answers I could recommend either way, so thinking these things through is important.

Talk of the 'digital look' is over blown IMHO. I can like or dislike the image from both cameras equally, depending on how I shot things on the day. There are shots from both cameras that totally blow me away, then there are equally shots from both cameras I could be disappointed with.

Dave, I was unaware of this problem. I had heard the AVCHD was not a very user friendly codec, but I had no idea it caused such problems...... BTW, I use FCPX. Yes, another major consideration!

I generally like a softer image with S-DOF..... I don't need to see every blemish on peoples faces. I do like I said like some S-DOF and I shoot in mostly low light. I do see the "digital image of the GH4, just how much of an issue it will be for me to adjust my mind to it is another problem, and whether the general population will even notice the difference.

I go crazy going back and forth between liking the GH4 image and not liking it. There is a place for the clarity and detail of the GH4 and maybe I can work it into what I do.

On one hand, I'm beginning to think I could just go a head and get the GH4 and give it a try! If it doesn't work as my main camera I can keep it for certain uses, and just go a head an get the C100 a little later. Or just sell the GH4. Huh...... maybe that's the solution!

Michael and Richard,

I can talk from experience on this topic. I purchased a C100 last year. I replaced it with the GH4 several months ago (chasing the 4K dream)! I had a good set up (cage, metabones speedbooster, Tokina 11-16, Voigtlander 25mm, Lightworks Variable ND, & more).

My last shoot with the GH4 was a Martial Arts training video. I had proper equipment, lighting, etc. That shoot, along with a previous doc shoot on the GH4, didn't work for me. I shot 4K, down rezzed to 1080p. It was ok, but not what I liked with the Canon C100. Again, the images from the GH4 were ok, I can even say at times good, but in my opinion, it didn't have the look my client preferred (I completed a previous shoot with this client last year, with my C100).

Last month, I sold the entire GH4 package and purchased another C100. I'm very satisfied with my decision. I also ordered and just received the Atomos Ninja Star. For several years, I used Sony Vegas Pro for editing. I'm now using Final Cut Pro X, with a Macbook Pro Quad Core laptop.

I like the grab and go factor of my C100 (no cages, no ergo issues, as with my GH4). The low light capability is a life saver (especially when you can't control lighting). The images out the box just works!

I prefer not to get into any long term post, regarding which camera is better. Whatever works for you (as an individual, is the best camera)! Many good choices out there!

Wow, you guys have really been getting into it while I was gone for the last couple of days...

After reading through your posts Michael - I just have to ask, is the GH4/C100 to replace the 5d3 or to shoot along side?

I really don't see the GH4 as being a huge step up from the the 5d3. And I don't see why you would possibly need 4k for what you're doing.

I shoot professionally (corporate promos mostly) as a half time job. I work for a few select clients and my main camera for 5 years was a 5d2. But I knew it inside and out. I shot over 50,000 clips through it. It was a bullet-proof beast. The only thing that failed me in all those years was the audio port - which is one of the reasons why I upgraded. I also had a couple of broadcast spots to do that pretty much paid for the c100 and the ninja - so the upgrade was a no-brainer to justify. I thought about upgrading many times along the way, but there were no real compelling reasons - and my camera was long paid for and still making money.

Point is... Do you really need to upgrade yet? There are always good reasons to wait. Eventually you will pull the trigger, but in the meantime your 5d3 is more than adequate for producing for the web. And when you do pull the trigger - be happy with your decision, and make beautiful images...

Ken, i'll never sell my 5D3 I love it! But I need two cameras and I need one that shoots longer than the 30 minute limit of the 5d3 for concerts. I will use the 5D3 along with the new camera.

Probably a stupid question but why don't you get a second 5DIII body? You get exactly the same image, you know the camera and it will be cheaper then getting a c100.

Edit: ok, I saw you want longer then 30 min recordings, can't you just start one camera a few minutes after the other? For the type of recordings you do it does seem an option to record in that way. Weddingvideographers have been shooting ceremonies in that way for years, if you have the cameras standing side by side then it's actually very easy to follow-up on remaining recording times. I also don't think you need to worry about overheating, unless your shooting outside in the summer and the sun is shining right onto your camera's but even them you could put a small umbrella or something like that over your camera.

About getting shallow dof on the gh4, you just need fast enough lenses such a the voigtlanders if you want to get really shallow dof but also any other f1.4 like lens will do, unless you want one cm in focus and all the rest blurry, then you need a full frame camera. The example video you referred to was shot with either slower lenses or just with the iris wider open. If you want to know how it looks like just google voigtlanders, plenty of very shallow dof videos to find.

Michael,

Thanks for answering those questions, it was helpful.

Firstly, on the quote stuff, when you're editing, add a close quote [ / quote ] (remove the spaces) after the part you want to answer, then following your answer add an opening quote [ quote ] (remove the spaces) and it will begin quoting again from there on. The '/' is the only difference between an open and close quote. You'll see them in the text you're quoting already, so you can just copy / paste. Hope that helps.

From your answers the choice for me would be a very simple one. The C100. Why?

• It has better indoor low light abilities

• Easier to record longer events without breaks at all supported frame rates

• Better meters (e.g. waveforms etc) for checking lighting situations

• Slightly more dynamic range (in certain profiles)

• Dual cards means instant backup for those long non repeatable events

• Better audio pre-amps if you want to feed from your recorder in to the camera.

• Mounting points for external monitors / Ninja / Samurai etc if you ever need them.

Really, the only two things that sour the C100 for me are the fact that we only get a 2x punch in, I really would have liked a 5x or 10x, and the fact that I have to make the interlaced / progressive change for every clip in FCPX (same in Premiere Pro etc). It's just something you get used to doing. I actually talked with Apple engineers about this and they were initially open to the idea of 'fixing' it, but then decided against it. I really wish Canon would stop using this crazy PSF encoding scheme.

The 4K, 60/96fps slo-mo, small size and articulating screen probably aren't as important to you.

Don't be lead in to thinking the GH4 can't get shallow DOF, it absolutely can, just like the C100 is a crop sensor and won't offer the same shallow DOF as the 5D3, but you can still do shallow.

With all things considered, in your situation I think the C100 would be the better camera.

There is one big gotcha though. I absolutely hated trying to mix C100 and 5D3 footage. I could never make the 5D3 look as good as the C100 so always ended up dumbing down the C100 footage to look as bad as the 5D3! Having 2xC100 would have been awesome.

The GH4 matches the C100 better than the 5D3 because it's similarly sharp. There are some pretty nasty edge artefacts coming from the 5D3 that you probably don't even notice until you put the same shot side by side with something like the C100, then you can really start to hate the 5D3 footage! Arrgghh!!! Sorry if that just threw another wrench in the works!

to add and clarify, the GH4 is a DSLR that happens to shoot video, the C100 is a functioning video camera......I like to re-iterate to our clients the big 4 as I call them......chip. codec, FUNCTIONALITY, reliability....those are the key items to make decisions on...the rest plays into personal choice and the needs/requirements of the people you are working for.
BTW, both cameras are great (and well sell them) but you must look at the day to day in what makes your job harder or easier.

Jim Martin
EVSonline.com

I have a couple of C100s for my video work and I have recently got the GH4 as a 'going out and about' camera.

If I was in your position what would i do? I'd wait and buy the C100. I'm consistently pleased with the images from it and it's great to use in corporate doco and narrative work I do, so overall I'm very happy with it. Above all, I 'trust' it to get the quality images I need when I'm working. I know it'll perform under all sorts of difficult situations and with the ergonomics, it's easy to work with quickly and efficiently for when I'm shooting on my own.

The GH4 is also a lovely camera. I'm blown away by the image quality in the ol' 4k downsized to 1080' routine. It's not as good in low light maybe, and perhaps the dynamic range isn't quite as flattering to an image as the C100 but in good light, it's simply a lovely image. Add to that all the bells and whistles I wish the C100 had, (codec choice, slo mo, stop motion, 4K) it's a great little camera that punches above its weight for its price.

I also have a 5D3 which I only ever use for stills now. Always found it too soft for video and it seemed to me that in order to defeat the moiré and artefacts, Canon just softened the image too much.

So this is my two penneth to add to the discussion: which camera do I reach for when doing serious work? The C100 every time. Which do I reach for when I want to do a fun project? The GH4.

Hope this helps.

Thanks to everyone for the incredible help! I feel like I've seen the light! C100 it is!

Trying to fall in love with the GH4 image is like going on a date with a frigid women, I want a sexy bombshell.

I've narrowed it down I think. The GH4 image is full of amazing detail but with no depth, or breath, some refer to this as a digitalized image, or a broadcast camera image.

Here is a short 4K UHD clip I shot yesterday with my GH4 :
GH4 4K UHD 2160p with 100-300mm F/4.0-5.6 OIS Lens handheld with V2.0 firmware on Vimeo
Michael's Football Game Oct 11 2014 in 4K UHD - YouTube

I just came across this which, despite all the fancy crossfade/editing malarkey, shows quite a cinematic image for the GH4 I thought (Just personal opinion)

Camille -11.10.14 / Test Panasonic GH4 et lumix 12-35 f/2,8 / FCPX / LUT Visioncolor (impulz) on Vimeo

As nice an image as my C100s easily, I would have said.

I follow a few persons on Vimeo that deliver outstanding work, below is one done by one of them on a gh4, everyone saying that you can't get a shallow dof or a "cinematic" image from a gh4 either has not shot with the camera and/or does not have the knowledge or experience to use the camera capabilities to it's full extent. Like any other camera it does have it's pro's and cons but in the right hands it can produce some very good results.

Without You on Vimeo

He did the same with the GH3
Every Lost Breath - GH3 Middle East launch film on Vimeo

I like the videos Noa linked. The GH4 looks good there. Perhaps at some point a GH4 is in the cards for me, but for now I'm getting the C100....... in fact, I'm getting one today, with a Samuri blade..... the long hunt is over, at least for the time being.

Thanks again for everyones help!

I was not trying to convince you to change your mind Michael :) Just showing you that what I have been saying all along that it's the man behind the camera who knows how to use it that makes the difference.