GH5 or the G9

[John McCully]

I have a question regarding the Lumix GH5 vs the Lumix G9 particularly regarding shooting video however as a hybrid shooter still photography is of serious interest also.

Reading the specifications I note that the big differences are the ability of the GH5 to shoot V-Log and 10 bit 4:2:2. So what, is my question. Do I need V-Log and 10 bit 4:2:2?

Many thanks

[Robert Lane]

John, you should look at the plethora of YouTube videos that clearly explain the differences between 4:2:0 8-bit and 4:2:2 10-bit color. It's a major, visible palpable step-up in image quality.

As I've mentioned in other posts, the GH5 is the ONLY DSLR that shoots the same formats, color space, and high data-rates as true digital cinema cameras. No other DSLR comes even close to it's capabilities.

Think of it this way: The GH5 is a video camera that also shoots stills, so the majority of it's feature-set and capabilities are primarily focused on video. Every other DLSR's primary use is photography, and just also happens to shoot video. But they lack the features and the far-higher quality output the GH5 is capable of.

Hope that helps.

[John McCully]

Many thanks Robert for taking the time to reply to my question, much appreciated.

Indeed I have looked at various YouTube videos and I more or less understand the math involved, the theory. In a prefect world my local gear supplier would send me one of each model to see for myself. Not going to happen!

I do understand that the GH5 delivers a 'far-higher quality output' but I remain unconvinced that I would utilize that capability given my shooting/viewing behavior.

I need to talk again, convincingly, to my supplier about a loaner GH5.

Cheers, and thanks again.

[Ron Evans]

You may want to look at this comparison which I think covers the main differences. https://www.wexphotovideo.com/blog/r...-need-to-know/ If your primary focus is video then the GH5 or the GH5S would be the choice.

[Robert Lane]

If video is an add-on to your primary work in photography then the G9 would be perfect. It is in fact optimized for photography, not video, unlike the GH5 which is the reverse.

I like the G9 a lot however if you're looking to get a new body that's an excellent stills camera but still has pro-sumer video options I'd take a serious look at the Fuji XH-1; it's head-and-shoulders superior to any MFT-type system and has enough video capabilities to be relevant for the next 5-6 years, minimum. Not to mention Fuji is very aggressive with firmware/feature updates so as time goes on it will become even more of a powerhouse.

As I just mentioned in another thread, for my own personal "pro" film camera I'm migrating up to a Super-35 system. And while I've been using my GH5 for stills (commercial-print is where I got my career started) I'll be replacing it with the Fuji XH-1 specifically for stills.

A lot of people are screaming "Sony" these days, what with a mirror-less, full-frame format and all, (The a9 especially) but I can't justify the price-point. Especially when the new Fuji is every bit as capable and, has much more natural, organic color output than Sony chips. (The a9 might be the exception)

If you're heavily invested in the MFT format already the G9 is a killer camera. if not, take a gander at the Fuji XH-1 system. That's my pick for dedicated photography with a video-add on feature.

[John McCully]

Ron, many thanks. Your input most appreciated, as always. I have visited countless web sites like Wex Photo and they all say the same things, more or less. It all depends on your 'primary focus' we are told over and over again. I imagine this simplistic phrase originated in the Panasonic marketing department. To me this comes across almost as a false dichotomy in that we are forced to go one way or the other. In point of fact I invariably shoot both video and stills at all times and I refuse to entertain the 'primary focus' notion. My primary focus changes by the minute, if you will.

Having said that one thing is clear; I do not plan, have no intention of, nothing could be further from my wildest dreams than the thought of being or becoming a 'filmmakers and independent video producers' per se.

Robert, I understand that the GH5 is optimized for video while the G8 is optimized for photography but as a hybrid shooter what really interest me is which camera best does both video and photography that more than meets my needs. Thanks for the Fuji thought however in that it does not shoot 4k 60p it is simply a non-starter.

At the risk of being boring let me say again loud and clear: is video important for me, absolutely totally important, as is photography, and in fact both are my primary focus.

For me it all comes down to functionality, 'features' as the sales brochures tell us. I remain ignorant as to the advantages for me of the added video capability the GH5 offers versus the G9. I know the theory ad nauseum and now I want to view a side by side critical comparison. The G9, on paper, out-performs by a country mile most all of the competition with the proviso that this applies to those not about to make a Hollywood-style movie.

Anyone want to loan me a new GH5 and a G9 for a few days :-)

[Ron Evans]

I think there are a few limits to look at. If you want to shoot 4K/UHD60P for more than 10 mins then the G9 will not do that or UHD 30P for more than 30mins. VlogL and HLG for HDR video 10bit 4:2:2 video etc all in GH5 territory. The GH5 can still shoot stills too!!!! If you do not think these features are worth the about $300 difference in price then the G9 is your camera and it has the advantage over the GH5 of being USB C powered.

[Noa Put]

The gh5 has gone down in price, the difference is only 100 dollar now

[John McCully]

Thanks Ron, yes, I'm aware of the time limits and how for you such limitations render the G9 unacceptable. Not so for me as I always only shoot short bursts.

It's not just the $300 but if one compares side by side the on-paper attributes, features, functionality clearly the G9 has certain clear cut quantifiable 'improvements' verses the GH5.

The big unknown for me is the value the superior video capability of the GH5 brings to the table in real life, for me.

We can talk until we are blue in the face but I need to see a side by side...

Thanks Noa, for me it's not so much about the money difference.

[Noa Put]

Have you seen this video?

YouTube (Short URL)

[John McCully]

Thanks Noa, I have viewed the Calgary lad's input over the years and proudly confess to being also a Canadian. My company head office was in Calgary so my visits there were regular and mostly pleasant. I routinely enjoy the Chris and Jordan show but I did find this episode not up to their usual top notch quality in that Chris sort of overdid himself a bit and poor old Joe hardly got a word in edgewise. So that got in my way somewhat. I shall take another looks though. Thanks for reminding me.

[Noa Put]

This one also explains well what you will be missing or gaining, it's up to you to decide what is most important for your use

YouTube (Short URL)

[John McCully]

Thanks again Noa but I don't believe this fellow even remotely talked about let alone demonstrated the attributes that are the subject of this thread. I most admit I fast forwarded as I already know all that stuff and I found his style not to my taste so I may well have missed something.

Both of these YouTube videos are just words, more words, nothing but words.

[Robert Lane]

Noting that you've already been given the breadth of advice that anyone can offer with this comparison, there is one more factor you might want to consider, to have the "best of both worlds" as it were:

The newly released GH5s is a totally different animal in two regards:

- There is no IBIS (stabilization will have to come from lenses or an external device) and;

- It's a totally different sensor, fewer pixels (larger) which allows for greater low-light sensitivity in both stills and film modes.

Aside from the obvious low-light/less noise characteristic, the new sensor is also just a *smidgen* sharper. That's because it's no longer in a floating device which is how it gets it's in-body stabilization.

Powered off the GH5 sensor literally slips around inside the camera, you can hear it bang against it's mounts when you pick up and move the camera around. So even with Stabilization turned off, those micro-magnets are in "keep in place" mode, which means it's not rock-solid. I've had several images (stills) that should have been tack-sharp but weren't simply because of this "slip-magnet" mounting.

I made the exact same shot, seconds later with the same lens on another MFT camera without IBIS and in fact the images were tack sharp. This is pixel-peeping sharpness, not something the causal observer would ever notice - but it IS a known issue with floating imaging sensors. Nature of the beast, as it were.

Having a solid-mount sensor in the GH5s removes that issue but, now you're left to getting stabilization outside the body. For me this wouldn't be a problem either for stills or filming because I've got decades of experience hand-holding and manual focusing, and for filming we've got various stabilized rigs.

My final thought on your query is that the GH5 would be the best-bet for you. It's got IBIS, it's got superb stills capabilities and, IF you ever decided that you wanted the higher quality video then it's an option! With the G9 it's not.

Best to have all options on the table as-needed rather than shortchange yourself and realize later, "damn, wish I had that other camera!!"

My two cents.

[Robert Lane]

Here's some GH5 samples from commercial portfolios shots recently (what I do in my downtime between film gigs). Not full-size obviously, but straight from the camera with my own custom color settings: