ehanauer

Done.

Any news on Adam Hanlon? A lot of us are concerned.

Hang in there, Adam. Best wishes for a healthy recovery.

I had been a Nikon user for over 40 years. But when I started shooting video, I realized they were way behin in that area, as well as ignoring the mirror less revolution. So I switched to Panasonic GH5. Since then my only upgrade has been to the GH5 II. Same body, improved firmware.

With the imminent demise of print media, most of us are shooting for online presentation. Also, AI is the joker in the deck. It’s so easy to uprez images now, and quality will continue to improve. Even cropability and low light capability are no longer the crop sensor killers they used to be. Therefore I’m still shooting my Panasonic GH5 II.

I encountered this situation earlier this year. My GH5 was getting long in the tooth, and the GH6 was announced. That would have required a new housing. Instead I bought a GH5II. Exactly the same form factor, fits in GH5 housing. Improved autofocus, log included, improved stabilization, 10 bit 4k at 60fps. What's not to like? Why don't I move on from 4/3? For myself, I don't see the need. Most of my video work ends up online. I've had excellent results when projected on 30x30 foot screens. I rarely shoot iso higher than 3200. On a trip to the Philippines in September I shot all my underwater footage with the Lumix 14-42mm lens and the WWL 1 wet lens. The added cost and weight and bulk of moving to full frame is a non starter in my situation. Your experience may differ.

What are the advantages of full frame over micro 4/3? Better low light performance, better focus tracking, greater cropping ability. Disadvantage? Cost, bulk, weight. Everything in photography/video is a tradeoff. Realistically, most of what we shoot will be posted online, where it's usually downrezzed to HD. Even in film festivals, 4/3 holds up exceptionally well projected on a 30x30 foot screen. I can't tell the difference compared to full frame. What I'm getting at is that for the vast majority of us, 4/3 or crop sensors are more than what we need, barring future developments. They are on the way, but aren't here yet. For myself at this point, I don't see the need for full frame.

For sale: Gently used Panasonic Lumix G9 body with third party vertical grip that has all the controls of the factory model. G9 is an ideal backup to GH5/6 that focuses on stills and also shoots video. It won't fit in a GH5/6 housing, but is an outstanding topside camera. Price $690 or best offer.

This sounds a lot like the discussions comparing digital to film some 22 years ago. I wonder how that turned out.

Will my GH5 stop working once the GH5 II and GH6 are released?

Companies like Nauticam and DJI attest to the high quality design and manufacturing in China these days.

My biggest regret moving from apsc to 4/3 was losing my Tokina fisheye zoom. The WWL1 has partially compensated. But it would be awesome to have a 4/3 version. Olympus’ departure makes that unlikely.

I made my decision 4 years ago when Nikon was treating video as an illegitimate stepchild. I sold all my Nikon gear and switched to Panasonic GH4 (since updated to GH5). No regrets, never looked back.

Oops. Correction: The 7-14 is f4. The 12-35 is f2.8.

The dome port has been sold. Lenses, zoom gears, and camera are still available. Make me a reasonable offer.