A speedbooster focal reducer will not change the DOF of the lens but because it changes the field of view you have to move closer to the subject for the same framing, therefore focus closer and therefore the BG will appear softer. Basically you get an image that will look like a larger sensor camera.
Hands down, the most civilized and polite Panasonic vs Sony discussion ever. Well done. I'm happier with the GH5S (personally)...and yes, the GH5S has LUT support.
The perceived depth of field does change with a speedbooster because the field of view is greater on the gh5. If you shoot at the same distance from the subject with the same lens and aperture on both the full frame and m4/3 cameras the depth of field will be the exact same. The field of view will be different which changes the PERCEIVED depth of field but if cropped in on the full frame to match the m4/3, you will find that it is the exact same depth of field. Now if you change the lens focal length and/or distance from subject on the m4/3 camera to match the full frame (which is either a wider lens or moving further away from the subject or a combination of both) the depth of field will change because the focal length and distance to subject has changed. So in all, the speed booster does not change the depth of field on the m4/3 camera because it is always the same when compared to the full frame when all the external variables are the same. The perceived depth of field changes because the field of view becomes wider to further match the full frames field of view.
Agreed, the more I think about it, the more I like the colour from the GH5s, not to say you can't get good colour on the Sony. If Sony announces an A7s III, I'm curious how the colour will look, (and how it will compare to the GH5s) especially with the improvements that have been made to the colour science of the FS5 II. Dan
Excellent discussion and well articulated points. Feels like this series is going great. Possibly 33min is a tad extreme length for a UA-cam episode, but I was happy I had time to watch it fully. You might consider showing the final concluding discussion or a TL;DR in the beginning (eg like Curtis Judd makes often) to avoid “lazy”/“negative” people thumbing down due to feeling the video is too long for consumption. As the content is 99% Golden I wager almost all downvotes are from people who thought it was too long without a TL;DR. Cheers!
Full frame does not give you larger depth of field just to be clear. I'm sure you meant to say smaller dof. Most of the time I'm not a big fan of the shallow DOF on FF compared to M4/3. I think M4/3 is just right. The only exception being with pinpoints of light at night. That FF bokeh is really nicer. Seems most people are talking stills when they say IQ, yes? But you are talking about it for video. Is that right? Also, not sure the Sony Zeiss lenses are really better than the Panasonic Leica lenses.
Thank you for these videos. I shoot in 4K 60 so often I rarely use v-log. 4K 60 without limits and the codecs are what pushed me ever so slightly to the GH5s over the a7iii. Also don't forget about the 1080 60p all-i 200. That's on of the many great things this camera can do. You're right though. There's nothing like a full frame look.
Not specifications (plenty of videos out there with list of that), just b-roll side by sides of camera footage (maybe a close up of the camera or menu) when talking about certain points....even just camera footage from projects that these cameras have been used on (even if its not directly relating to what is being said, would spice up the video a bit). It's still a great video, very informative, and I understand that adding b-roll / cut-aways to footage can add a lot of time overall (especially if you don't have access to footage captured).........so either way I appreciate it. just thought it could leave some feedback, thankyou
I really like these gear debate videos and I appreciate you two doing them. Why not make them live-streams? and while I'm giving unsolicited advice, it would also be nice to have footage from the cameras you're talking about. Thanks, gents!
Great comment, thank you! We have discussed doing them as live streams in the future. And your right, some footage would be nice to see. We will try and work footage from our other reviews in to future episodes Carl
...But you can match FF DOF by shooting with a M4/3 lens that is half the focal-length of the FF lens and 2 F-stops faster. So if you're shooting with a FF camera using a 50mm lens at f/4.0, then you should be using a 25mm lens at f/2.0 on the M4/3 camera. Sometimes you can't find a M4/3 lens that is 2 F-stops faster ( especially with wide angle lenses ), but most of the time you can because f/2.0 with a FF camera has paper-thin DOF at normal shooting distances, so you're going to close down to f/2.8 or f/4.0 when shooting video with a FF camera.
For some shots yes, but I often do very shallow at f1.8 for example with full frame. Especially for stills. But when the subject works in video as well. A 50mm f1.8 is one of my favourite lenses for my full frame a7rII. And that just can’t be replicated in m4/3rds Carl
Yes, this is not an issue for video work where you need to have enough of your subject in focus for a successful shot, but I can see the issue for photography where you might want to shoot Full Frame at f/1.4 and their are no f/0.7 lenses for Micro 4/3 to match the FF DOF.
+SewTubular ........I would certainly try to avoid shooting a long interview at f1.4, but for narrative work I like shooting f1.4 on a full frame camera (could just be a close up of an object too, doesn't always have to be a face,)
Shooting at f/1.4 is too shallow for an interview with a M4/3 camera, but paper-thin DOF from a FF camera would be horrendous. For narrative work I can see f/1.4 being usable with a M4/3 camera, but paper-thin DOF is not that usable to shoot video with a FF camera. For close-ups of an object you usually want enough in focus to tell what you are looking at, the problem is almost always trying to get enough in focus with tight close-ups. The only place where I could see shooting video at f/1.4 with a FF camera is low-light work where you are willing to sacrifice DOF to get good exposure. But with the GH5s being usable up to ISO 12800, I can't see that much FF video being shot at ISO 25600 or higher speeds.
+SewTubular........Christopher Nolan shot walk and talk scenes in the feature film "Dunkirk" at f1.4 full frame equivalent (they where at a higher f-stop like 2 and 2.8, but christopher nolan was shooting 65mm and 70mm film which is huge compared to even full frame), I've shot many scenes at f1.4 on full frame for narrative work and had my subject perfectly in focus throughout. As I said, for an interview I shoot at 70mm f4 on an a7sii, but for narrative I have shot many things at f1.4 (keep in mind focal length and distance effect dof. I like shooting a 35mm f1.4 on full frame, but also want a shallow depth of field at that wide of an angle, it helps to have a full frame camera to get a really shallow depth of field when shooting a wide shot like 24mm and 35mm)
This is really well compared, great job! Id like to see more of these in the future, for exymple BMPCC4k vs. GH5S; Nikon Z vs. Lumix S vs. A7III vs. Canon 6dii. Theres really much to compare right now on the market :) Which is good because the competition is the best way to improve..
We shoot big events and have switched to Gh4, we thought that was impressive, then GH5 blew us away so we have 4 or them. and in 2020 we got the Gh5s. Our group has the Canons and Sony's. but for multi cam work and sort films it's Panasonic all the way. . mind you, we do use V90 cards and M43 native lenses (Pana & Oly). we prefer it over the ""other Big name" costing upwards of $10,000. Gh5 and the Gh5 S has it all. . Thanks for the accurate comparison, lets have more Gh5 vs anything else please.
RED, arri, Canon and Panasonic high end cameras none of them are FF sensors. Audiences have become accustomed to the language of crop sensors. FF is not advantageous in that regard, at least not for me. The wheelhouse for the a7s ii is really low light performance. Other than that theres just too many advantages you get with the GH5 for video, better data, better codes, better hfr quality, better prices body and lenses, anamorphic mode (no longer niche), better battery life I shot with the a7s ii for two years and I think people slightly exaggerate he good the video is by today's standards. The GH5 a day gh5s have pulled ahead of it, imo.
We were comparing the GH5s specifically rather than the GH5. But yes, I agree with you for the most part. If the full frame and extreme low light performance don’t bother you then the gh5s is the clear winner. Carl
A lot of theory and perhaps views of sony a7 shooters. I have both cameras. glass being "better" on Sony is a personal shout and not a given fact. I find it hard to see creadibility in the review unless you have used micro 4/3 as mush as your a7. FF doesn't mean better. It's a different style. And to say a speedbooster does not affect dof - clearly shows lack of experience using the product.
Thank you for doing this test. Of course it's all pretty subjective when it comes to image quality. I find it interesting that you say color is better, you have better codecs and have 4k 60p on gh5 yet still prefer the image "quality" of the a7sII. I think you're a bit in love with full frame (can't blame you there) but aesthetics and image quality don't feel like the same thing to me. Futhermore, My gh5 ALWAY has a speedbooster attached and it doesn't seem like you use one when using your GH5. I think you might be missing the best of both worlds by not. I think the crop factor works out to 1.3 crop (same as 1dx) when using the speed booster. Pair this with the Sigma 18-35 1.8 lens and you end up with a show stopper. s-log takes WAY more work to get you where Panny can get you almost straight out of the cam. I really think you should get yourself a speedbooster and spend some time with the GH5s. I have no doubt you'll fall in love. I think in between Super35 and full frame is such a great sweet spot. I'm not willing to trade color and image quality for Shallow DOF. I don't mean to discredit any of your hard work. I just see someone who really wants to love the GH5 but is struggling to put a ring on it because of the sensor size when there is a product out there (metabones) that gets you most of the way there.
Guilty as charged, definitely in love with full frame sensors. I do love the gh5s, we use it a lot when we want a small camera, often instead of the a7sII for our video work. The speedbooster will get you the field of view, and faster sharper lenses. But doesn’t make a m4/3rds sensor exactly the same as a larger one. It does help though. Carl
Nakean Wickliff I use the GH5, but the Sigma 18-35 is grossly overrated. Large, heavy, not weather sealed, not stabilized, poor AF performance, requires an adapter, has a pretty mediocre zoom range (about 13-25mm after a .71 speedbooster), etc. The 12-35 2.8 is better in every way (including sharpness, one of the Sigma's most overrated traits) except max aperture. I only use the Sigma when I have NO other choice and need all of the light I can get.
Brett the Behemoth to each their own I suppose but large, heavy, weather sealed and not stabilized? Ask anyone making real movies and ask them if they take any of that into consideration when lensing. Again it all depends on what you’re shooting. 13-25? Huh? I think your math is all wrong there. With my speed booster I get super 35 which equates to a 28-56mm I’d say between 25, 35, and 50mm. You’ve got some pretty usable focal lengths. There’s also HUGE difference between 1.2 (you get an extra stop of light with speed booster) and 2.8!!! And it’s sharp as heck wide open. If there’s one thing I don’t need on the GH cameras, it’s more sharpness so you can keep your extra sharpness achieved with the M4/3 lens. I can also use my sigma on canon c200 when I rent it for larger gigs. Horses for courses but, overrated....I think not.
It's not a rumor that the GH5 uses a Sony IMX272 image sensor. "Tech Insights" has already x-rayed it and done cross sections using their electron microscopes. This now a fact. The full report that consists of the entire electronic schematics, bluprints and complete foundry design of the sensor as well as other deconstructed mainboard components will cost you over $10,000 USD. Oh,..they also thoroughly raped every microchip on the GH5-S mainboard, identified and electrically plotted it's sensor in same exact way. Conclusion = Sony IMX299. No company can hide from these guys. They are highly surgical and thoroughly brutal in their teardown of everybody's microchips. They literally peel them away, slice by slice like onions.
Just to clarify though, (not that anyone cares but me LOL) an SEM does not do a cross section. It images the cross section and can do chemical analyses on it.
Yeah,...this is a hard pill for Panasonic to swallow. Forensic reports of critical components like this are NOT something that Panny EVER wants out there. There are allot of Panasonic loving, Sony haters out there that dont want to believe that Panny would NOT use their own sensor technology and dare to buy Sony chips. Companies like Tech Insights are like the kid across the street that revealed to you that Santa Clause was not real and ruined your Christmas forever! lol
Why is it a big deal? I'm sure many companies use parts made by other companies. How the camera works is the important thing. Kudos to the Panasonic engineers for using the best parts available.
Brett the Behemoth - Err, because Panasonic makes and sells their own image sensors. It's embarrassing for Panasonic NOT to use their own sensors in favor of buying a competitor's sensor instead. This is why Panasonic claimed that it was a Panasonic sensor at NAB only to finally admit it was a Sony right after TechInsights X-ray'd the chip and identified it as an IMX272. This is not something that Panasonic is proud to talk about. Even BlackMagic doesnt want to discuss the IMX299 in their new Pocket 4k camera. Most camera companies prefer to have customers believe THEY make all the parts in the camera. Especially the most critical part, the image sensor.
a7sii outperforms a7iii in lowlight (a7iii has too much denoising in camera and starts to look like mush up at iso 50,000). a7iii also has a mediocrre 1080p mode, while a7sii 1080p is great..........for professional use 1080p is important becuase a7 cameras black out the screen in 4k when using hdmi out (for a wireless directors monitor)
A speedbooster focal reducer will not change the DOF of the lens but because it changes the field of view you have to move closer to the subject for the same framing, therefore focus closer and therefore the BG will appear softer. Basically you get an image that will look like a larger sensor camera.
Hands down, the most civilized and polite Panasonic vs Sony discussion ever. Well done. I'm happier with the GH5S (personally)...and yes, the GH5S has LUT support.
The perceived depth of field does change with a speedbooster because the field of view is greater on the gh5. If you shoot at the same distance from the subject with the same lens and aperture on both the full frame and m4/3 cameras the depth of field will be the exact same. The field of view will be different which changes the PERCEIVED depth of field but if cropped in on the full frame to match the m4/3, you will find that it is the exact same depth of field.
Now if you change the lens focal length and/or distance from subject on the m4/3 camera to match the full frame (which is either a wider lens or moving further away from the subject or a combination of both) the depth of field will change because the focal length and distance to subject has changed.
So in all, the speed booster does not change the depth of field on the m4/3 camera because it is always the same when compared to the full frame when all the external variables are the same. The perceived depth of field changes because the field of view becomes wider to further match the full frames field of view.
Panasonic color is outstanding.
Agreed, the more I think about it, the more I like the colour from the GH5s, not to say you can't get good colour on the Sony. If Sony announces an A7s III, I'm curious how the colour will look, (and how it will compare to the GH5s) especially with the improvements that have been made to the colour science of the FS5 II.
Dan
gh5s = low light
7sII = no light
btw. what i really love is that you can turn the display to b/w so you cann better see the focus peaking
Excellent discussion and well articulated points. Feels like this series is going great. Possibly 33min is a tad extreme length for a UA-cam episode, but I was happy I had time to watch it fully. You might consider showing the final concluding discussion or a TL;DR in the beginning (eg like Curtis Judd makes often) to avoid “lazy”/“negative” people thumbing down due to feeling the video is too long for consumption. As the content is 99% Golden I wager almost all downvotes are from people who thought it was too long without a TL;DR. Cheers!
I agree, 33 mins is a little long for this. I’ll try and stop waffling on quite so much for the next ones
Carl
Full frame does not give you larger depth of field just to be clear. I'm sure you meant to say smaller dof. Most of the time I'm not a big fan of the shallow DOF on FF compared to M4/3. I think M4/3 is just right. The only exception being with pinpoints of light at night. That FF bokeh is really nicer. Seems most people are talking stills when they say IQ, yes? But you are talking about it for video. Is that right? Also, not sure the Sony Zeiss lenses are really better than the Panasonic Leica lenses.
Shallow depth of field with Voigtländer MFT lenses is comparable to full frame. And you can use them as macro lenses.
The GH5S does have LUT support in camera.
Thanks, we couldn’t remember at the time.
Carl
Thank you for these videos. I shoot in 4K 60 so often I rarely use v-log. 4K 60 without limits and the codecs are what pushed me ever so slightly to the GH5s over the a7iii. Also don't forget about the 1080 60p all-i 200. That's on of the many great things this camera can do. You're right though. There's nothing like a full frame look.
Great video! The weather sealing in the Panasonic is crazy! Much better than the 5d
Glad you liked it! Weather sealing is very welcome.
Dan
would have been nice to see some overlay when talking about video differences
What sort of things do you mean? B-Roll or the specifications?
Carl
Not specifications (plenty of videos out there with list of that), just b-roll side by sides of camera footage (maybe a close up of the camera or menu) when talking about certain points....even just camera footage from projects that these cameras have been used on (even if its not directly relating to what is being said, would spice up the video a bit). It's still a great video, very informative, and I understand that adding b-roll / cut-aways to footage can add a lot of time overall (especially if you don't have access to footage captured).........so either way I appreciate it. just thought it could leave some feedback, thankyou
I really like these gear debate videos and I appreciate you two doing them. Why not make them live-streams? and while I'm giving unsolicited advice, it would also be nice to have footage from the cameras you're talking about. Thanks, gents!
Great comment, thank you! We have discussed doing them as live streams in the future.
And your right, some footage would be nice to see. We will try and work footage from our other reviews in to future episodes
Carl
You say in the image quality part that a speedbooster makes the image sharper? How?
6:00 That’s utter BS. When a speed booster changes the FoV it also changes the equivalent DoF and the perspective on an equivalent focal length. Geez.
I'm also a very big fan of ergonomics of the GH cameras, the long battery lfie, flip out screen, EVF. Just really nice in the hand.
Agreed, Panasonic did the right thing by making the gh5 a little bulkier than the a7 lineup. Feels much nicer in the hand.
Carl
...But you can match FF DOF by shooting with a M4/3 lens that is half the focal-length of the FF lens and 2 F-stops faster. So if you're shooting with a FF camera using a 50mm lens at f/4.0, then you should be using a 25mm lens at f/2.0 on the M4/3 camera. Sometimes you can't find a M4/3 lens that is 2 F-stops faster ( especially with wide angle lenses ), but most of the time you can because f/2.0 with a FF camera has paper-thin DOF at normal shooting distances, so you're going to close down to f/2.8 or f/4.0 when shooting video with a FF camera.
For some shots yes, but I often do very shallow at f1.8 for example with full frame. Especially for stills. But when the subject works in video as well.
A 50mm f1.8 is one of my favourite lenses for my full frame a7rII. And that just can’t be replicated in m4/3rds
Carl
Yes, this is not an issue for video work where you need to have enough of your subject in focus for a successful shot, but I can see the issue for photography where you might want to shoot Full Frame at f/1.4 and their are no f/0.7 lenses for Micro 4/3 to match the FF DOF.
+SewTubular ........I would certainly try to avoid shooting a long interview at f1.4, but for narrative work I like shooting f1.4 on a full frame camera (could just be a close up of an object too, doesn't always have to be a face,)
Shooting at f/1.4 is too shallow for an interview with a M4/3 camera, but paper-thin DOF from a FF camera would be horrendous. For narrative work I can see f/1.4 being usable with a M4/3 camera, but paper-thin DOF is not that usable to shoot video with a FF camera. For close-ups of an object you usually want enough in focus to tell what you are looking at, the problem is almost always trying to get enough in focus with tight close-ups.
The only place where I could see shooting video at f/1.4 with a FF camera is low-light work where you are willing to sacrifice DOF to get good exposure. But with the GH5s being usable up to ISO 12800, I can't see that much FF video being shot at ISO 25600 or higher speeds.
+SewTubular........Christopher Nolan shot walk and talk scenes in the feature film "Dunkirk" at f1.4 full frame equivalent (they where at a higher f-stop like 2 and 2.8, but christopher nolan was shooting 65mm and 70mm film which is huge compared to even full frame), I've shot many scenes at f1.4 on full frame for narrative work and had my subject perfectly in focus throughout. As I said, for an interview I shoot at 70mm f4 on an a7sii, but for narrative I have shot many things at f1.4 (keep in mind focal length and distance effect dof. I like shooting a 35mm f1.4 on full frame, but also want a shallow depth of field at that wide of an angle, it helps to have a full frame camera to get a really shallow depth of field when shooting a wide shot like 24mm and 35mm)
This is really well compared, great job! Id like to see more of these in the future, for exymple BMPCC4k vs. GH5S; Nikon Z vs. Lumix S vs. A7III vs. Canon 6dii. Theres really much to compare right now on the market :) Which is good because the competition is the best way to improve..
The market is getting pretty crowded isn't it!
Carl
In the setup you say that it really comes down to micro 4/3 vs full frame. Job done then.
Flip-out screen on the Panny is fantastic - until it goes out on you from repeated flip-outs over time. And it will.
We shoot big events and have switched to Gh4, we thought that was impressive, then GH5 blew us away so we have 4 or them. and in 2020 we got the Gh5s. Our group has the Canons and Sony's. but for multi cam work and sort films it's Panasonic all the way. . mind you, we do use V90 cards and M43 native lenses (Pana & Oly). we prefer it over the ""other Big name" costing upwards of $10,000. Gh5 and the Gh5 S has it all. . Thanks for the accurate comparison, lets have more Gh5 vs anything else please.
love this, I actually really dont like the full frame look.
Well there you go! As we said it’s very subjective. So for you the GH5s would be a clear winner
Carl
RED, arri, Canon and Panasonic high end cameras none of them are FF sensors. Audiences have become accustomed to the language of crop sensors. FF is not advantageous in that regard, at least not for me.
The wheelhouse for the a7s ii is really low light performance. Other than that theres just too many advantages you get with the GH5 for video, better data, better codes, better hfr quality, better prices body and lenses, anamorphic mode (no longer niche), better battery life
I shot with the a7s ii for two years and I think people slightly exaggerate he good the video is by today's standards. The GH5 a day gh5s have pulled ahead of it, imo.
The a7s ii produces 10mp stills. Are those stills better than the GH5 at 20mp? No.
We were comparing the GH5s specifically rather than the GH5. But yes, I agree with you for the most part. If the full frame and extreme low light performance don’t bother you then the gh5s is the clear winner.
Carl
trevorpinnocky actually all but Panasonic now have full frame flagship cameras including sony
A lot of theory and perhaps views of sony a7 shooters. I have both cameras. glass being "better" on Sony is a personal shout and not a given fact. I find it hard to see creadibility in the review unless you have used micro 4/3 as mush as your a7. FF doesn't mean better. It's a different style. And to say a speedbooster does not affect dof - clearly shows lack of experience using the product.
Thank you for doing this test. Of course it's all pretty subjective when it comes to image quality. I find it interesting that you say color is better, you have better codecs and have 4k 60p on gh5 yet still prefer the image "quality" of the a7sII. I think you're a bit in love with full frame (can't blame you there) but aesthetics and image quality don't feel like the same thing to me. Futhermore, My gh5 ALWAY has a speedbooster attached and it doesn't seem like you use one when using your GH5. I think you might be missing the best of both worlds by not. I think the crop factor works out to 1.3 crop (same as 1dx) when using the speed booster. Pair this with the Sigma 18-35 1.8 lens and you end up with a show stopper. s-log takes WAY more work to get you where Panny can get you almost straight out of the cam. I really think you should get yourself a speedbooster and spend some time with the GH5s. I have no doubt you'll fall in love. I think in between Super35 and full frame is such a great sweet spot. I'm not willing to trade color and image quality for Shallow DOF. I don't mean to discredit any of your hard work. I just see someone who really wants to love the GH5 but is struggling to put a ring on it because of the sensor size when there is a product out there (metabones) that gets you most of the way there.
Guilty as charged, definitely in love with full frame sensors.
I do love the gh5s, we use it a lot when we want a small camera, often instead of the a7sII for our video work.
The speedbooster will get you the field of view, and faster sharper lenses. But doesn’t make a m4/3rds sensor exactly the same as a larger one. It does help though.
Carl
Nakean Wickliff I use the GH5, but the Sigma 18-35 is grossly overrated. Large, heavy, not weather sealed, not stabilized, poor AF performance, requires an adapter, has a pretty mediocre zoom range (about 13-25mm after a .71 speedbooster), etc. The 12-35 2.8 is better in every way (including sharpness, one of the Sigma's most overrated traits) except max aperture.
I only use the Sigma when I have NO other choice and need all of the light I can get.
Brett the Behemoth to each their own I suppose but large, heavy, weather sealed and not stabilized? Ask anyone making real movies and ask them if they take any of that into consideration when lensing. Again it all depends on what you’re shooting. 13-25? Huh? I think your math is all wrong there. With my speed booster I get super 35 which equates to a 28-56mm I’d say between 25, 35, and 50mm. You’ve got some pretty usable focal lengths. There’s also HUGE difference between 1.2 (you get an extra stop of light with speed booster) and 2.8!!! And it’s sharp as heck wide open. If there’s one thing I don’t need on the GH cameras, it’s more sharpness so you can keep your extra sharpness achieved with the M4/3 lens. I can also use my sigma on canon c200 when I rent it for larger gigs. Horses for courses but, overrated....I think not.
Good freakin’ review. Thank you. 🤙🏻
brilliant guys !!
It's not a rumor that the GH5 uses a Sony IMX272 image sensor. "Tech Insights" has already x-rayed it and done cross sections using their electron microscopes. This now a fact. The full report that consists of the entire electronic schematics, bluprints and complete foundry design of the sensor as well as other deconstructed mainboard components will cost you over $10,000 USD. Oh,..they also thoroughly raped every microchip on the GH5-S mainboard, identified and electrically plotted it's sensor in same exact way. Conclusion = Sony IMX299. No company can hide from these guys. They are highly surgical and thoroughly brutal in their teardown of everybody's microchips. They literally peel them away, slice by slice like onions.
Just to clarify though, (not that anyone cares but me LOL) an SEM does not do a cross section. It images the cross section and can do chemical analyses on it.
Yeah,...this is a hard pill for Panasonic to swallow. Forensic reports of critical components like this are NOT something that Panny EVER wants out there. There are allot of Panasonic loving, Sony haters out there that dont want to believe that Panny would NOT use their own sensor technology and dare to buy Sony chips. Companies like Tech Insights are like the kid across the street that revealed to you that Santa Clause was not real and ruined your Christmas forever! lol
Why is it a big deal? I'm sure many companies use parts made by other companies. How the camera works is the important thing. Kudos to the Panasonic engineers for using the best parts available.
Cliff Totten Err, why would Panasonic care? Companies source parts from competitors all the time.
Brett the Behemoth - Err, because Panasonic makes and sells their own image sensors. It's embarrassing for Panasonic NOT to use their own sensors in favor of buying a competitor's sensor instead. This is why Panasonic claimed that it was a Panasonic sensor at NAB only to finally admit it was a Sony right after TechInsights X-ray'd the chip and identified it as an IMX272. This is not something that Panasonic is proud to talk about. Even BlackMagic doesnt want to discuss the IMX299 in their new Pocket 4k camera. Most camera companies prefer to have customers believe THEY make all the parts in the camera. Especially the most critical part, the image sensor.
Gh5s stills is at 14 bit.
Solid!
Thanks for watching!
Carl
Dudes you needed to compare this to A7III not A7s
a7sii outperforms a7iii in lowlight (a7iii has too much denoising in camera and starts to look like mush up at iso 50,000). a7iii also has a mediocrre 1080p mode, while a7sii 1080p is great..........for professional use 1080p is important becuase a7 cameras black out the screen in 4k when using hdmi out (for a wireless directors monitor)
We will probably look at the a7III as well for some gear debates don’t worry
Carl
I think you should have waited for the A7s3.
We will do one with the A7sIII when it’s released as well, don’t worry
Carl
Why not compare 2 available cameras at the time?
A7III is a more proper comparison