Surely the S5iix would win in image quality because you used the same lens on both, to get a fair comparison you have to use a lower aperture on the GH7. For example if you use f2.8 on the S5iix, then you f1.7 on the GH7. In the color chart test, there is shadow reflection on the GH7 footage but not on the S5ii, does that have to do with lighting or placement of the camera? We should note that aside image quality, to me the GH7 is better in almost every other area. Thanks the review ❤
I knew right away it wasn't fair, if we're trying to squeeze out the best quality we'd get out of the either camera. Plugging in the same lens on different sensors, one tastes like apples, the other tastes like oranges. See what I did there? One looks like 24mm, the other like 48mm. There's no clear winner. Put both on an equivalent aperture, test the different apertures, maybe we can judge better which produces better image in good light. A proper DP should know. Would you say the S5 II wins against the Arri 35 because the perspective is better on the S5 II? 4:40 4:50 S5 II just has a blurrier background, that's all. The FF is on a different depth of field and compression.
Great comparison. It really is a tough call. But, with the ARRI Log, 32-bit internal audio, etc., the GH7 stands out. But, that being said, I have been able to find some used/excellent condition S5ii's for around $1,500-$1,600 USD. Although, for the GH7, you do have to spend an additional $500+ to get the XLR2 unit to capture the 32-bit audio. In the end, it really comes down to use case scenarios. Which camera would serve your needs the most would be the best choice. Either way, LUMIX has really released some impressive cameras since adding PDAF to their line of cameras. P.S. For myself, I do prefer the less saturated image of the GH7. I tend to turn down the saturation because to me it looks more realistic and dramatic with less saturation.
I was waiting for this video. Thanks. Something I've noticed: at 4:40 the GH7 seems to be out of focus and the S5ii clearly wins. But when you went outdoors at minute 5:06 the GH7 looked sharp and the S5ii was out of focus. I think the S5ii wins for over all image quality but the GH7 is very good too. Thanks for the video
@@petercofrancesco9812 No, I have the G9II and the GH7 has the same video IQ than the G9II, there is no way this is because of noise reduction. If you download and pixel peep the video at 4:28 (I use mediaplayer classing and I have assigned a touch to crop to 200%) you will see the face and beard totally out of focus. If you look at 5:00 you will see this time this is the S5II which is out of focus, so a comparison about sharpness is not reliable. Noise reduction affects the image differently making mushy details. Of course at very high ISO, the S5II has less noise and has more details but the GH7, the GH6 and G9II make a good job at preserving fine details if the image is properly exposed. I can resume like this : 5,7K on the GH6/G9II/GH7 is very sharp, the camera keeps a lot of detaits and the in camera sharpening is average (worse than the GH5 in Open Gate 5K). The S5II in 5,9K or 6K also have a very good level of details but the in camera sharpening is very high and pretty bad. V-log has slightly less digital sharpening but the image still looks worse than on the S1 and S1H. 4K/C4K on the GH6/G9II/GH7 is soft with a good amount of edge sharpening, complex and very fine textures like on skin or foliage look mushy and it's worse in low light or when the image is not properly exposed, this sometimes looks like a 1440P file upscaled to 4K. The S5II in 4K/C4K looks very sharp but because of even more edge sharpening, and like the m43 cameras the files of the S5II looks like upscaled 1440p, lower details but strong edge sharpening when recording with the 709 profiles. In -Vlog, there are a bit more details but the edge sharpening is still very strong and the overall image looks worse than the S5 mark I or the S1. If you want the best quality on these new cameras, you must shoot in 5,7K or 6K and downsample to 4K. But be aware you will get a very very slight crop compared to C4K along with worse IBIS performance, for some reasons 4K and C4K recording have better stabilization. I think it's maybe because of the worse image quality of 4K and C4K, allowing more processing power for the IBIS.
@@petercofrancesco9812 I know it seems like. But please compare the GH7 at minute 4:40 with the GH7 at 5:06. You will see that the GH7 at 5:06 is sharper than at 4:40
@@kenslyder I'm saying 5:06 is outdoor with lots of light. btw S5II looks out of focus there. When I rewatched I heard him say 24mm cine lens so does this mean he manually focused? 4:40 it looks like both in front and behind his face is soft so that's why I assumed it was NR. Could also be to get the same exposure indoors on the GH7 he had to fully open the aperture and it yield a soft image.
@@petercofrancesco9812 yes I think so.. because I've seen a lot of footage from other creators where the image of the GH7 were sharp and crisp. "Geeky Nerdy Techy" just made an autofocus test with some native lenses and I was impressed with the results. :)
Thank you for the comparison. But about the sharpness test, it's hard to measure because Panasonic is tricky about resolution and detail quality. 5,7K has finer details than 4k or C4K. On the S5II 6K is also much better than 4K, even more when using the rec709 profiles. And sharpness is not everything, the resolution and how the details renders are much more important, most people confuse sharpness and the level of details. By exemple, the S5II looks sharper than the S5 but the level of details is not the same, the S5 just looks better with an image closer to what you get when recording in raw. The S5II looks sharper but not in a good way. And adding some extra sharpening in post make the S5 image as sharp but with more details. I see the same when I compare my GH6 5,7k files to my S5II 6K files, the GH6 details look finer. Also a lot of people make the mistake to test the cameras with noise reduction ON, it makes a huge difference for fine details on some cameras.
@@akshaysaiju4615 Yes but from my experience with the GH6, Prores makes better noise texture but the fine details look very similar. The real difference is when using Raw, because on the S5II the extra processing is gone when using Braw. I think Proresraw on the GH7 will be better as well with more fine details (and more noise) but I'm not sure because I've seen baked in noise reduction in some raw files with Canon and Nikon. Anyway, I will certainly don't use Proresraw a lot with the GH7 because of the files size.
I was really disappointed with the image quality of S5ii after s5, it looks like video from mobile phone, there is no even 420, its 0 color details :)) Ans this annoying sharpness, which cannot be turned off. S5 really looks like RAW. Maybe gh7 didn't make the same mistake
@@VicTerProd We will see but both the G9II and GH6 also have slightly less details and use slightly more sharpening at -5 than the GH5. Nothing as bad as the S5II though. Pretty surprising that a lot of people are not able to see the difference.
S5ii all the way. I have the kit lens and a 50mm s 1.8 lens and they do me fine. No need to go expensive. The S5ii is just a better camera all around in my opinion. Low light is fantastic so much so that I don't worry about it even in dull lighting. The AF is as good as anything else out there now and the IBIS goes without saying is great as well.
I think it’s super awesome that you did this take that to heart before I critique you: the lenses are more important than the sensor size when it comes to sharpness with equivalent megapixels. Of course nailing focus perfectly is also important. one other commenter said why did you test the iso so high? I would probably agree with that but I think up to 6400 is a fair test.
Shouldn’t the comparison be with the S5IIx with an external SSD? I don’t have the codec specs memorized but seems like each camera should have been shot in the same flavor of ProRes with similar bit rates.
Thanks for making this comparison.. I would like to upgrade from the original S5 in FF.. which I bought only because I was sick of waiting for them to come out with an upgraded mft camera after after the GH5.. I have the basics covered in full frame glass with adapted EF lenses.. I'm sooo much deeper in MFT glass.. and who knows what the S1 series updates will bring.. (sigh).. I only want to buy one more MAX camera..
Hi, thanks for the video! But I think it's crazy to choose between full frame and micro 4/3. I think the gh7 is suitable for those who need to slow down the video speed qualitatively. In other cases, in my personal opinion, I would always choose S5iix. A full frame has too many advantages in everyday life: details, photos are much more interesting, focal lengths are what they should be. The gh7 certainly has its own audience, but it's not as wide as it is in full frame.
Thank you for the video and your opinions. I am an m4/3 user and have the PL 10-25 & 25-50, along with Voigtlander lenses. Would your opinion have changed if you had used better m4/3 glass? As an m4/3 user, I am considering adding a second ecosystem. I lean toward either the L-mount or Fuji, depending on their next camera iterations.
Great comparison. Seems like no matter how good the sensor technology, you can't fight the physics of the sensor size. This is why I'm hoping (but not holding my breath) for a lumix APS-C L-mount camera. I know lumix are worried about cannibalizing their MFT sales, but at this point they need to worry more about Sony and Canon tbh.
It's a matter of speed. How much your scene is dynamic and how much of thought and prep work you wanna do. GH5, JUST SHOOT anything anyday anytime on the fly because it has all the features for it. If you want a thought and less dynamic (controllable lighting) scene, fixed to slight movement, shoot with lot of planning. S5ii
5:52 I don't think M43 has much cheaper lenses. In fact, I think L mount lenses are better value considering Sigma and Panasonic keeps on making pro FF lenses for L mount, not to mention adapting FF EF lenses, whereas there is little if not no support on M43. And the gap is only gonna get wider. This is the main reason why most users like you and me will never switch to M43 entirely no matter how good the M43 body is.
I have a bunch of MFT lenses, many are Pro Olympus lenses, I used to have FF, but for my work MFT made more sense. As somebody who’s used a lot of both full frame and micro 4/3 I would say getting higher quality, pro micro for third glass is cheaper than pro full frame glass.
@@3dtrip870 Unfortunately those "Pro" lenses are oversized and overpriced and do not fully work in sync with Panasonic bodies. The market just doesn't favor M43 and neither do M43 camera companies themselves.
@@frankfeng2701 sure, well I guess I should take them off my GH6…I didn’t realize they don’t work on it! But seriously, if you are talking about sync IS, that is only a limited number of lenses, so not a big deal. As far as size, it is true FF lenses are smaller these days, but on long treks through the mountains, MFT is still way smaller and lighter. Not sure your experience with them, but try hiking with a Canon 100-300 f2.8 (2590g $9500), vs my Olympus 40-150 f2.8 (880g $1300). Both are phenomenal lenses, but one is clearly better for certain scenarios, and is over 7 times less expensive.
you're gaining a stop of light with the aperture of the s5ii but when you match iso and aperture by dropping them both in half on the gh7 I'm sure the results would be different
@4:58 So much nicer color science on the GH7. Mush smoother highlight rolloff and the greens are really pretty. Confirms once again how off the S5II color science is and how much of a step back is from S5. It's not all about bokeh and sharpness.
Thanks for this comparison! I don't care about those who are saying that the size of the sensor doesn't matter.. There's a lot more to it than DOF in my opinion. The GH5 was excellent ''at the time'' (owned it).. the sensor was still inconsistent in different lighting scenarios.. and required quite a lot of color correction. The BMPCC4K was very good.. still the BMPCC6K (owned it) was A LOT better, especially in retaining color accuracy when underexposing (HUGE difference). They also always lack that extra stop of DR, and DR Boost isn't the same. Low light performance is sometimes pretty good, but never on par with FF cameras. Plus, we're all consciously/unconsicously seeking for that 35mm film look that we've seen throughout our youth, and FF sensors give you that perspective. Yes, you can use a speedbooster, it sure helps.. but other cons come into play. Yeah, I'm also sticking with my S5IIX until the next S series gets released. The only things I'd like to get from the GH7 is internal ProRes RAW and the screen.
Sadly physics will always make this an uphill battle for m43. The GH7 sensor is much newer sensor tech, only a couple of years old (first used in the GH6), and the IMX410 in the S5ii (which was first used in the A7iii in freakin' 2018!) is still edging it out. When we see the tech from the GH7 sensor come to the next S-series camera it will put quite some distance between itself and the GH7.
Nice video. Good to see the quality of the image, which is little disappointed with gh7, will be good to see more comparison with the stabilization, autofocus of this both cameras or s52x
In fact, full frame is superior to MFT in highlights, not in low light, i.e. in recovering shadows, and therefore you can get better results with MFT in low light. The ISO equivalent of MFT to full frame is multiplied by 4, so you don't have to increase the ISO, what you have to do is overexpose. (The noise problem in MFT comes from underexposure) and it is advisable to use faster lenses since you have the advantage of not having such a short depth of field and getting more light. Regarding MFT lenses, in most cases you can get all or almost all the sharpness at full aperture, and in full frame you have to close 1 or 2 steps of the diagram in many lenses, i.e., the concept of less depth of field falls apart. Something they don't mention regarding ISO is that the more you increase the ISO, the more dynamic range you lose, and therefore the concept of greater dynamic range in full frame falls apart, i.e., you can get more dynamic range in MFT. I must mention that the biggest advantage in mft is the stabilizer to get more light, more dynamic range and more stable and sharper images because you can lower the shutter speed more and therefore get more light without losing image quality. In conclusion, you can get the same or better results in low light conditions in mft since everything is in favor of the smaller sensor but most people don't know how to use it and compare it in the same conditions as full frame.
Thank you for your helpful and informative videos! Quick question about Cine Guide. Even though I turn on the English subtitle, it doesn't show up for some reason. Is it the application issue?
Also. I wouldnt call mft pana is cheaper lens especially the leica branded. With a sigma mc21 , you can adapt any sigma art or canon ef lenses with teh s5 s52 s52x and get native performance. And if you stick to lumis S lineup not the pro, those are cheap use or new. Now thats cheap.
Hi Thx great comparison...still have some MFT lens and GH5,5s,P4K...will probably upgrade one day but IQ wise I think the BMCC 6K FF is the best you can get around these prices...if IQ is the most important thing...after hard to tell I still prefer shooting multicam on my S5 vs MFT image is just stellar...
No matter how ''good'' the IQ is on the BMCC 6K FF, it doesn't have IBIS and AF... so people who need these features would instantly regret the switch.. If you plan on planning everything that you do like on a production set, than yes you're right. I started with the Canon T5i, which had very shitty video quality (low DR, awful codec, and only 8 bit 420, bad AF and had to use stabilized lenses) Then I switched to Sony a6300 (much better AF but still unreliable, much better DR and higher resolution... but still no IBIS and it had to worst rolling shutter I ever seen... unusable) Then I switched to Lumix GH5 with MB Speedbooster (still no reliable AF, but finally IBIS, 10 bit 422 and good rolling shutter performance... that was a total game changer) Then I've got obsessed with 12-bit BRAW and the DR of the BMPCC 6K (OG), so I sold my GH5. But then I realized that IBIS was CRUCIAL for my type of shoots (run n' gun, solo shooting) and was looking for more background separation when shooting indoors close to walls. So I switched to the Lumix S5 (OG). To me, IBIS was much more important than 12-bit BRAW. I end up with much more good usable footage with the S5, compared to the BMPCC 6K. But then, I realized that I still wasn't all set because I still had to focus manually, and it's very limiting for a solo shooter (especially for run n gun). So when the S5IIX was announced, I sold my S5 and pre-ordered it. This is the very best camera of them all. Yes, I do miss some thing about the BMPCC 6K, but I wouldn't go back.. because I know I'll be frustrated on every shoot, not being able to do what I need to do, and the way I need to do it. I could drop 699 USD + shipping and duties for the awesome Kolari OLPF, and 595 USD for a Video Assist 12g HDR... almost did a few times... but I prefer to wait for the next S series generation!
@@davidmultimedia2024 Good point I agree with You all depend how you shoot Yes I have the P6K OG and know the S5iiX Wich is specially good with 12G video assist which I have. If I do run and gun for sure S5iiX for other jobs on tripod live event concert from far I still prefer manual lenses or better to say P6K org with geared Canon 70-300 L is really good... IQ S5iiX Vlog BRAW come very close to P6K org IQ it is a very good investment and file size are manageable... Lumix IBIS is something on his own class...gimbal are better slightly still if you want this particular gimbal style of shooting...I prefer handheld with Lumix IBIS. Went as well with GH5,5s,P4K,P6K,S5... Every camera I own is was good for specific job S5iiX is good in almost everything...and for a relatively small price to pay...thanks to Cinematch matching camera is pretty easy specially in the new HDR DaVinci Widegamut workflow they have implemented.
In the face/body-shot comparison of yourself at the end, the GH7 clearly had more 3d pop than the S5II which flattened your face to a pancake. This would be due to a better lense being on the GH7 at that time. Check for yourself though.
@@OBP_ More interesting is why when you showed 4/3 in the dark the image was so poor? The aperture on micro and full frame is the same, but the noise and iso are different. You just needed to set a lower value on the mic, but you will achieve greater light transmission by opening the lens!
MFT has no future. I speak as an MFT fan. The flagship body is too expensive and can't even shoot open gate 60. Glass - there is no advantage in price - you get what you pay for. If you want something equivalent in MFT it literally costs MORE than the Full Frame L-Mount version.
As someone that just takes photos and videos of my family around the house and on trips out... MFT + lens is lighter and easier to mantle than a 90kg FF setup
4 місяці тому+1
@@SystemParanoiayep, thats why I keep my gh5 and gh4 lens sizes😊
Nikon Z6III... just a better camera overall. Panasonic needs to make the S5 version of the GH7... i.e. S5III Not going to happen for some time so.... All hail Nikon and with acquisition of RED it only looks brighter...
No dual slot recording, no SSD recording, worse IBIS, no active cooling, a weird 2h record limit, no shutter angle, no custom LUT monitoring, limited exposure tools etc. The Z6III sensor seems pretty good but is gimped by nikon's quirks.
I just keep waiting for people to tell the truth about this camera and nobody seems to want to piss off the MFT crowd. FF is better. MFT is a toy sensor with lots of drawbacks. It's a glorified cell phone sensor with tiny lenses that only work for this one camera type. Hardly a good investment. Right now LUMIX seems to be taking the best camera they have (S5ii/x) and removing pieces of it, then replacing them with a gimmick like sharable LUTs or Arri LogC3. hey guess what guys, the only reason to use something like arri log c3 is if YOU ALSO SHOOT WITH ARRI CAMERAS. Who TF owns an Arri AND a GH7? Why would you do that?
The S5II is the same as the S5iix, you want to compare codecs and ssd recording? Overall, the S5II does win here, because as you said, it’s way cheaper
Surely the S5iix would win in image quality because you used the same lens on both, to get a fair comparison you have to use a lower aperture on the GH7. For example if you use f2.8 on the S5iix, then you f1.7 on the GH7. In the color chart test, there is shadow reflection on the GH7 footage but not on the S5ii, does that have to do with lighting or placement of the camera? We should note that aside image quality, to me the GH7 is better in almost every other area. Thanks the review ❤
Have you even used the camera? I trust the guy who has.
Not sure if you know what image quality means. 😂. It does not mean depth of field
@@hhankxagree with this guy here 😂 such a long comment with wrongful information
@@hhankx I think you miss interpret my comment, I never mentioned depth of field or anything related.
I knew right away it wasn't fair, if we're trying to squeeze out the best quality we'd get out of the either camera.
Plugging in the same lens on different sensors, one tastes like apples, the other tastes like oranges. See what I did there? One looks like 24mm, the other like 48mm. There's no clear winner. Put both on an equivalent aperture, test the different apertures, maybe we can judge better which produces better image in good light. A proper DP should know.
Would you say the S5 II wins against the Arri 35 because the perspective is better on the S5 II? 4:40
4:50 S5 II just has a blurrier background, that's all. The FF is on a different depth of field and compression.
Great comparison. It really is a tough call. But, with the ARRI Log, 32-bit internal audio, etc., the GH7 stands out. But, that being said, I have been able to find some used/excellent condition S5ii's for around $1,500-$1,600 USD. Although, for the GH7, you do have to spend an additional $500+ to get the XLR2 unit to capture the 32-bit audio. In the end, it really comes down to use case scenarios. Which camera would serve your needs the most would be the best choice. Either way, LUMIX has really released some impressive cameras since adding PDAF to their line of cameras.
P.S. For myself, I do prefer the less saturated image of the GH7. I tend to turn down the saturation because to me it looks more realistic and dramatic with less saturation.
I was waiting for this video. Thanks. Something I've noticed: at 4:40 the GH7 seems to be out of focus and the S5ii clearly wins. But when you went outdoors at minute 5:06 the GH7 looked sharp and the S5ii was out of focus. I think the S5ii wins for over all image quality but the GH7 is very good too. Thanks for the video
I get the feeling @ 4:40 that the GH7 looks soft not because its out of focus but because the camera is using noise reduction to compete in low light.
@@petercofrancesco9812 No, I have the G9II and the GH7 has the same video IQ than the G9II, there is no way this is because of noise reduction. If you download and pixel peep the video at 4:28 (I use mediaplayer classing and I have assigned a touch to crop to 200%) you will see the face and beard totally out of focus. If you look at 5:00 you will see this time this is the S5II which is out of focus, so a comparison about sharpness is not reliable.
Noise reduction affects the image differently making mushy details.
Of course at very high ISO, the S5II has less noise and has more details but the GH7, the GH6 and G9II make a good job at preserving fine details if the image is properly exposed.
I can resume like this :
5,7K on the GH6/G9II/GH7 is very sharp, the camera keeps a lot of detaits and the in camera sharpening is average (worse than the GH5 in Open Gate 5K). The S5II in 5,9K or 6K also have a very good level of details but the in camera sharpening is very high and pretty bad. V-log has slightly less digital sharpening but the image still looks worse than on the S1 and S1H.
4K/C4K on the GH6/G9II/GH7 is soft with a good amount of edge sharpening, complex and very fine textures like on skin or foliage look mushy and it's worse in low light or when the image is not properly exposed, this sometimes looks like a 1440P file upscaled to 4K. The S5II in 4K/C4K looks very sharp but because of even more edge sharpening, and like the m43 cameras the files of the S5II looks like upscaled 1440p, lower details but strong edge sharpening when recording with the 709 profiles. In -Vlog, there are a bit more details but the edge sharpening is still very strong and the overall image looks worse than the S5 mark I or the S1.
If you want the best quality on these new cameras, you must shoot in 5,7K or 6K and downsample to 4K. But be aware you will get a very very slight crop compared to C4K along with worse IBIS performance, for some reasons 4K and C4K recording have better stabilization. I think it's maybe because of the worse image quality of 4K and C4K, allowing more processing power for the IBIS.
@@petercofrancesco9812 I know it seems like. But please compare the GH7 at minute 4:40 with the GH7 at 5:06. You will see that the GH7 at 5:06 is sharper than at 4:40
@@kenslyder I'm saying 5:06 is outdoor with lots of light. btw S5II looks out of focus there. When I rewatched I heard him say 24mm cine lens so does this mean he manually focused? 4:40 it looks like both in front and behind his face is soft so that's why I assumed it was NR. Could also be to get the same exposure indoors on the GH7 he had to fully open the aperture and it yield a soft image.
@@petercofrancesco9812 yes I think so.. because I've seen a lot of footage from other creators where the image of the GH7 were sharp and crisp. "Geeky Nerdy Techy" just made an autofocus test with some native lenses and I was impressed with the results. :)
Thank you for the comparison.
But about the sharpness test, it's hard to measure because Panasonic is tricky about resolution and detail quality. 5,7K has finer details than 4k or C4K. On the S5II 6K is also much better than 4K, even more when using the rec709 profiles. And sharpness is not everything, the resolution and how the details renders are much more important, most people confuse sharpness and the level of details. By exemple, the S5II looks sharper than the S5 but the level of details is not the same, the S5 just looks better with an image closer to what you get when recording in raw. The S5II looks sharper but not in a good way. And adding some extra sharpening in post make the S5 image as sharp but with more details. I see the same when I compare my GH6 5,7k files to my S5II 6K files, the GH6 details look finer.
Also a lot of people make the mistake to test the cameras with noise reduction ON, it makes a huge difference for fine details on some cameras.
He should've recorded prores on both cameras or Long GOP on both cameras. The difference in codecs also creates a disparity.
@@akshaysaiju4615 Yes but from my experience with the GH6, Prores makes better noise texture but the fine details look very similar. The real difference is when using Raw, because on the S5II the extra processing is gone when using Braw.
I think Proresraw on the GH7 will be better as well with more fine details (and more noise) but I'm not sure because I've seen baked in noise reduction in some raw files with Canon and Nikon. Anyway, I will certainly don't use Proresraw a lot with the GH7 because of the files size.
I was really disappointed with the image quality of S5ii after s5, it looks like video from mobile phone, there is no even 420, its 0 color details :)) Ans this annoying sharpness, which cannot be turned off. S5 really looks like RAW. Maybe gh7 didn't make the same mistake
@@VicTerProd We will see but both the G9II and GH6 also have slightly less details and use slightly more sharpening at -5 than the GH5. Nothing as bad as the S5II though.
Pretty surprising that a lot of people are not able to see the difference.
Omg great video but your lens choice just made the comparison invalid.
S5ii all the way. I have the kit lens and a 50mm s 1.8 lens and they do me fine. No need to go expensive. The S5ii is just a better camera all around in my opinion. Low light is fantastic so much so that I don't worry about it even in dull lighting. The AF is as good as anything else out there now and the IBIS goes without saying is great as well.
I think it’s super awesome that you did this take that to heart before I critique you: the lenses are more important than the sensor size when it comes to sharpness with equivalent megapixels. Of course nailing focus perfectly is also important. one other commenter said why did you test the iso so high? I would probably agree with that but I think up to 6400 is a fair test.
Shouldn’t the comparison be with the S5IIx with an external SSD? I don’t have the codec specs memorized but seems like each camera should have been shot in the same flavor of ProRes with similar bit rates.
Thanks for making this comparison.. I would like to upgrade from the original S5 in FF.. which I bought only because I was sick of waiting for them to come out with an upgraded mft camera after after the GH5.. I have the basics covered in full frame glass with adapted EF lenses.. I'm sooo much deeper in MFT glass.. and who knows what the S1 series updates will bring.. (sigh).. I only want to buy one more MAX camera..
Hi, thanks for the video! But I think it's crazy to choose between full frame and micro 4/3. I think the gh7 is suitable for those who need to slow down the video speed qualitatively. In other cases, in my personal opinion, I would always choose S5iix. A full frame has too many advantages in everyday life: details, photos are much more interesting, focal lengths are what they should be. The gh7 certainly has its own audience, but it's not as wide as it is in full frame.
Thank you for the video and your opinions. I am an m4/3 user and have the PL 10-25 & 25-50, along with Voigtlander lenses. Would your opinion have changed if you had used better m4/3 glass? As an m4/3 user, I am considering adding a second ecosystem. I lean toward either the L-mount or Fuji, depending on their next camera iterations.
To my bloody eyes, GH7 indoor is supper poor vs s5ii, however outside I think the situation is close to tie. Good comparason bro!
Great comparison. Seems like no matter how good the sensor technology, you can't fight the physics of the sensor size. This is why I'm hoping (but not holding my breath) for a lumix APS-C L-mount camera. I know lumix are worried about cannibalizing their MFT sales, but at this point they need to worry more about Sony and Canon tbh.
It's a matter of speed. How much your scene is dynamic and how much of thought and prep work you wanna do. GH5, JUST SHOOT anything anyday anytime on the fly because it has all the features for it. If you want a thought and less dynamic (controllable lighting) scene, fixed to slight movement, shoot with lot of planning. S5ii
Thanks again great information. Also i feel my full frame obsession is still all good for now 😮😮😂. Cheers dude
5:52 I don't think M43 has much cheaper lenses. In fact, I think L mount lenses are better value considering Sigma and Panasonic keeps on making pro FF lenses for L mount, not to mention adapting FF EF lenses, whereas there is little if not no support on M43. And the gap is only gonna get wider. This is the main reason why most users like you and me will never switch to M43 entirely no matter how good the M43 body is.
I have a bunch of MFT lenses, many are Pro Olympus lenses, I used to have FF, but for my work MFT made more sense. As somebody who’s used a lot of both full frame and micro 4/3 I would say getting higher quality, pro micro for third glass is cheaper than pro full frame glass.
@@3dtrip870 Many "pro" M43 lenses are not as pro as FF ones, and yet they cost more. The cheap M43 lenses are really for small low-res bodies.
If you’re adapting FF Glass then yea MFT makes zero sense. I actually used to have a GH5 but that adapting limitation pushed me away with time.
@@3dtrip870 Unfortunately those "Pro" lenses are oversized and overpriced and do not fully work in sync with Panasonic bodies. The market just doesn't favor M43 and neither do M43 camera companies themselves.
@@frankfeng2701 sure, well I guess I should take them off my GH6…I didn’t realize they don’t work on it! But seriously, if you are talking about sync IS, that is only a limited number of lenses, so not a big deal. As far as size, it is true FF lenses are smaller these days, but on long treks through the mountains, MFT is still way smaller and lighter. Not sure your experience with them, but try hiking with a Canon 100-300 f2.8 (2590g $9500), vs my Olympus 40-150 f2.8 (880g $1300). Both are phenomenal lenses, but one is clearly better for certain scenarios, and is over 7 times less expensive.
you're gaining a stop of light with the aperture of the s5ii but when you match iso and aperture by dropping them both in half on the gh7 I'm sure the results would be different
@4:58 So much nicer color science on the GH7. Mush smoother highlight rolloff and the greens are really pretty. Confirms once again how off the S5II color science is and how much of a step back is from S5. It's not all about bokeh and sharpness.
Is the low light on the S5II still better in 4k60 (since it crops) than the GH7?
For many people, the GH7 will be the ideal solution that is hard to beat.
The rolling shutter on the gh7 is unacceptably baf for such a small sensor. Yes it's better than the s5ii but that isn't really saying much.
Thanks for this comparison!
I don't care about those who are saying that the size of the sensor doesn't matter..
There's a lot more to it than DOF in my opinion.
The GH5 was excellent ''at the time'' (owned it).. the sensor was still inconsistent in different lighting scenarios.. and required quite a lot of color correction.
The BMPCC4K was very good.. still the BMPCC6K (owned it) was A LOT better, especially in retaining color accuracy when underexposing (HUGE difference).
They also always lack that extra stop of DR, and DR Boost isn't the same.
Low light performance is sometimes pretty good, but never on par with FF cameras.
Plus, we're all consciously/unconsicously seeking for that 35mm film look that we've seen throughout our youth, and FF sensors give you that perspective.
Yes, you can use a speedbooster, it sure helps.. but other cons come into play.
Yeah, I'm also sticking with my S5IIX until the next S series gets released.
The only things I'd like to get from the GH7 is internal ProRes RAW and the screen.
You did not see 35mm look film in your youth. Most films where shot with a crop sensor in super35(apsc)
Sadly physics will always make this an uphill battle for m43. The GH7 sensor is much newer sensor tech, only a couple of years old (first used in the GH6), and the IMX410 in the S5ii (which was first used in the A7iii in freakin' 2018!) is still edging it out. When we see the tech from the GH7 sensor come to the next S-series camera it will put quite some distance between itself and the GH7.
would love to see some BRAW from the gh7 in its highest resolution 3:2 (the internal raw is limited to 17:9)
Nice video. Good to see the quality of the image, which is little disappointed with gh7, will be good to see more comparison with the stabilization, autofocus of this both cameras or s52x
In fact, full frame is superior to MFT in highlights, not in low light, i.e. in recovering shadows, and therefore you can get better results with MFT in low light. The ISO equivalent of MFT to full frame is multiplied by 4, so you don't have to increase the ISO, what you have to do is overexpose. (The noise problem in MFT comes from underexposure) and it is advisable to use faster lenses since you have the advantage of not having such a short depth of field and getting more light. Regarding MFT lenses, in most cases you can get all or almost all the sharpness at full aperture, and in full frame you have to close 1 or 2 steps of the diagram in many lenses, i.e., the concept of less depth of field falls apart. Something they don't mention regarding ISO is that the more you increase the ISO, the more dynamic range you lose, and therefore the concept of greater dynamic range in full frame falls apart, i.e., you can get more dynamic range in MFT. I must mention that the biggest advantage in mft is the stabilizer to get more light, more dynamic range and more stable and sharper images because you can lower the shutter speed more and therefore get more light without losing image quality. In conclusion, you can get the same or better results in low light conditions in mft since everything is in favor of the smaller sensor but most people don't know how to use it and compare it in the same conditions as full frame.
But there was no dynamic range test?
Thank you for your helpful and informative videos!
Quick question about Cine Guide. Even though I turn on the English subtitle, it doesn't show up for some reason. Is it the application issue?
You can't to match blur background as full frame. Because f-stop always multiplier. This is the sad part of micro four third.
Also. I wouldnt call mft pana is cheaper lens especially the leica branded.
With a sigma mc21 , you can adapt any sigma art or canon ef lenses with teh s5 s52 s52x and get native performance. And if you stick to lumis S lineup not the pro, those are cheap use or new. Now thats cheap.
How do they compare with Ibis and open gate format?
1. Which lenses have you used? 2. Why shoot at iso 12800? Why shoot above iso 3200 at all and how often is it necessary?
Hi
Thx great comparison...still have some MFT lens and GH5,5s,P4K...will probably upgrade one day but IQ wise I think the BMCC 6K FF is the best you can get around these prices...if IQ is the most important thing...after hard to tell I still prefer shooting multicam on my S5 vs MFT image is just stellar...
No matter how ''good'' the IQ is on the BMCC 6K FF, it doesn't have IBIS and AF... so people who need these features would instantly regret the switch..
If you plan on planning everything that you do like on a production set, than yes you're right.
I started with the Canon T5i, which had very shitty video quality (low DR, awful codec, and only 8 bit 420, bad AF and had to use stabilized lenses)
Then I switched to Sony a6300 (much better AF but still unreliable, much better DR and higher resolution... but still no IBIS and it had to worst rolling shutter I ever seen... unusable)
Then I switched to Lumix GH5 with MB Speedbooster (still no reliable AF, but finally IBIS, 10 bit 422 and good rolling shutter performance... that was a total game changer)
Then I've got obsessed with 12-bit BRAW and the DR of the BMPCC 6K (OG), so I sold my GH5.
But then I realized that IBIS was CRUCIAL for my type of shoots (run n' gun, solo shooting) and was looking for more background separation when shooting indoors close to walls.
So I switched to the Lumix S5 (OG). To me, IBIS was much more important than 12-bit BRAW. I end up with much more good usable footage with the S5, compared to the BMPCC 6K.
But then, I realized that I still wasn't all set because I still had to focus manually, and it's very limiting for a solo shooter (especially for run n gun).
So when the S5IIX was announced, I sold my S5 and pre-ordered it.
This is the very best camera of them all.
Yes, I do miss some thing about the BMPCC 6K, but I wouldn't go back.. because I know I'll be frustrated on every shoot, not being able to do what I need to do, and the way I need to do it.
I could drop 699 USD + shipping and duties for the awesome Kolari OLPF, and 595 USD for a Video Assist 12g HDR... almost did a few times... but I prefer to wait for the next S series generation!
@@davidmultimedia2024
Good point I agree with You all depend how you shoot
Yes I have the P6K OG and know the S5iiX Wich is specially good with 12G video assist which I have.
If I do run and gun for sure S5iiX for other jobs on tripod live event concert from far I still prefer manual lenses or better to say P6K org with geared Canon 70-300 L is really good...
IQ S5iiX Vlog BRAW come very close to P6K org IQ it is a very good investment and file size are manageable...
Lumix IBIS is something on his own class...gimbal are better slightly still if you want this particular gimbal style of shooting...I prefer handheld with Lumix IBIS.
Went as well with GH5,5s,P4K,P6K,S5...
Every camera I own is was good for specific job S5iiX is good in almost everything...and for a relatively small price to pay...thanks to Cinematch matching camera is pretty easy specially in the new HDR DaVinci Widegamut workflow they have implemented.
Your S5ii course was really good.
🙌🏼🙌🏼🙌🏼🙌🏼
Thank you Bro!
shame the focal length and aperture wasn't adjusted to more evenly match each other. 24mm 1.8 on MFT becomes the equivalent of 48mm 3.6 on FF.
For wildlife, I think the gh7 wins because of the crop factor
What about 4K 60P Crop Mode in S5II it is Better from the image quality of the GH7?
This is actually a great question. Does the S5II crop cause sharpness/detail loss compared to the GH7 non-crop image?
4K is sharper than 1080? Who would’ve thought?
In the face/body-shot comparison of yourself at the end, the GH7 clearly had more 3d pop than the S5II which flattened your face to a pancake. This would be due to a better lense being on the GH7 at that time. Check for yourself though.
What about the stabilization test?
I only had the camera for a week 😞 had to make a review and the vs S5ii video missed so much 🙄
@@OBP_ More interesting is why when you showed 4/3 in the dark the image was so poor? The aperture on micro and full frame is the same, but the noise and iso are different. You just needed to set a lower value on the mic, but you will achieve greater light transmission by opening the lens!
the S1h is still the best option for video
I'm just shocked by the compare shots. 😧
Amazing video
MFT has no future. I speak as an MFT fan. The flagship body is too expensive and can't even shoot open gate 60. Glass - there is no advantage in price - you get what you pay for. If you want something equivalent in MFT it literally costs MORE than the Full Frame L-Mount version.
As someone that just takes photos and videos of my family around the house and on trips out... MFT + lens is lighter and easier to mantle than a 90kg FF setup
@@SystemParanoiayep, thats why I keep my gh5 and gh4 lens sizes😊
@@SystemParanoiathis is the comment I needed 🙏🏾
This means nothing cause you used the same lens on both wtf
which one？ 😂 Are you kidding me?
Too much commercials. Can´t bear to watch that movie.
dumb to compare with different sensors.
Nikon Z6III... just a better camera overall. Panasonic needs to make the S5 version of the GH7... i.e. S5III Not going to happen for some time so.... All hail Nikon and with acquisition of RED it only looks brighter...
No dual slot recording, no SSD recording, worse IBIS, no active cooling, a weird 2h record limit, no shutter angle, no custom LUT monitoring, limited exposure tools etc.
The Z6III sensor seems pretty good but is gimped by nikon's quirks.
I just keep waiting for people to tell the truth about this camera and nobody seems to want to piss off the MFT crowd. FF is better. MFT is a toy sensor with lots of drawbacks. It's a glorified cell phone sensor with tiny lenses that only work for this one camera type. Hardly a good investment.
Right now LUMIX seems to be taking the best camera they have (S5ii/x) and removing pieces of it, then replacing them with a gimmick like sharable LUTs or Arri LogC3. hey guess what guys, the only reason to use something like arri log c3 is if YOU ALSO SHOOT WITH ARRI CAMERAS. Who TF owns an Arri AND a GH7? Why would you do that?
Not fair. The s52 is waaaay cheaper than than gh7. You should have compared it with the s52x.
Fail video....
The S5II is the same as the S5iix, you want to compare codecs and ssd recording? Overall, the S5II does win here, because as you said, it’s way cheaper
Neither offers BRAW or the Blackmagic menu system, so...pass.
Ahahah what a silly comment.
@@rileyedwardsfilms Well...making someone laugh is not a bad thing. I'll take it.