Sony a6000 Camera Special Pricing

I am so tempted right now... But I already have two very capable cameras...

B&H has the Sony a6000 mirrorless interchangeable lens camera for just under $400 USD right now as part of their black Friday specials. I bought the a5100 for my wife last December and she's been really happy with it. Truth be told, I've been really happy with it too as its the camera that usually comes along on family outings.

When I reviewed the a5100 early this year, the a6000 didn't have the XAVC-S codec while the a5100 did. In true Sony fashion, they since added the XAVC-S codec in a firmware update for the a6000 so now it is capable of recording full HD at 50mbps and reads out the entire sensor to make that image. It is quite beautiful. In fact, I like the footage the a6000 produces better than my Nikon D750.

But the a5100 doesn't have an electronic viewfinder which can be a problem when shooting outdoors. And now the price of the a6000 is same that I paid for the a5100 last year - only $400 for the body.

Yes, Sony will probably release an update of this camera some time in 2016, but wow, this is a great deal for a camera that produces some very nice HD footage with a solid codec. High ISO performance is very solid up through 3200 and maybe even up to 6400. That's not Sony a7S II territory, but plenty of gain for 99% of the shooting I do. Focus system is solid, even in video mode. I really love these little Sonys.

So the $400 gets you just the body, or for $550 you can get it with the 16-50mm kit lens. And that lens is ok, but not the fastest (f/3.5 - 5.6). When we took it along to an indoor dance competition, my wife asked me to shoot during her competition. And while that lens got some great shots, it would have been nicer to have a few more stops to work with. I could have walked away with more motion-blur-free photos. So if I were buying, I'd probably get the body only and then add the Sony 50mm f/1.8 lens.

In case you missed it, here's the review I did of the a5100 earlier this year. Nearly everything on the a5100 also applies to the a6000 except that the a6000 has that electronic viewfinder (which would be very helpful when shooting outdoors):

Please don't be tempted like I am unless you are in the market for a camera and have the cash sitting around.  ;-)

Cage for Atomos Shogun: PV Gear KavalCage

In my ongoing quest to find a solid cage for my Atomos Shogun 4K recorder, I came across the PV Gear KavalCage. As I’ve mentioned before, I love the Shogun for the beautiful ProRes footage it captures but I have worried about its durability with its plastic casing and glass face. This thoughtfully designed, aluminum cage provides solid protection for your Shogun and includes retention systems for both the HDMI input and output as well as the DC power and audio Lemo cables. It is also the most aggressively priced aluminum cage for Shogun that I’ve encountered so far. Let’s take a closer look!

For a limited time, PV Gear has offered a discount to our little community here if you use coupon code "CJP" at checkout (use the link above).

I've got this mounted to my Varavon Armor II cage for Panasonic GH4 via the Manfrotto 492LCD cold shoe ball head which has been rock solid. Not the cheapest ballhead available but after one of the cheap heads dropped my Atomos Ninja II to the ground, I decided to step up my rigging game.

Panasonic GH4 VLOG for Purchase?

For many months, we GH4 shooting enthusiasts have been awaiting Panasonic's new firmware to include a VLOG profile.

For those not familiar, a log profile allows your camera to capture video in a way that can potentially compress shadows and highlights so that they do not digitally clip. They do this by applying a logarithmic curve to the captured images.

As an example, when you shoot a scene where there are some things in shadow and other things in bright sunlight, either the shadows or highlights lose all their detail. The image below is a good example. In this case, this is supposed to be a scene that was shot in VLOG and then graded so that details remain in both the trees above and the shadows of the waterfall below. Normally, one of those would be blown out or crushed.

When the GH4 was originally released, it included a Cinelink D profile which was sort of similar to a logarithmic profile but it was more of a flat profile where it mainly just de-saturated the color values and reduced the contrast of the overall image. That's not quite the same thing. And, it seemed to be doing more than that. I found that Cinelink D worked ok for some landscape type shots but it did rather odd things to skin tones. So I very rarely use it.

A log profile, however, should essentially give you additional dynamic range - the range of luminance values you can capture. However, the GH4 records to 4:2:0 (color subsamping, which is consumer grade) 8-bit color. While this works decently if you're not going to grade heavily, it can begin to fall apart pretty quickly if you try to make any sort of exposure, contrast, or color grading adjustments in post production.

On the bright side, the GH4 can send a 4:2:2 10-bit stream out its HDMI port which I use to record to my Atomos Shogun recorder. I'd like to test whether that makes a difference at all.

However, Panasonic has done something a little different here. Like with most professional grade cameras, they are selling the ability to turn this feature on. You don't just get it for free. That's pretty common in the pro camera world.

In the world of consumer products, paid firmware upgrades are not as common. And for many, this paid approach is a little disconcerting.

Arguments can be made for both sides (why should I have to pay for a software enhancement that my camera hardware is capable of supporting? Why should Panasonic not charge for the research and development they poured into this effort?) I get the reason for the price. It sort of makes sense. I'm not thrilled to plunk down $100 for the feature, but I understand that they need to at least cover the cost of their R&D.

Some may argue that the Sony a7S and a7RII already have log included. But keep in mind that those cameras are priced at over $2000 and $3000 USD respectively whereas the GH4 was originally $1700 and now sells for under $1500 USD.

Nevertheless, it is a little bit awkward since Panasonic is a little later to the LOG game for a camera that has been on the market for about 1.5 years. Also, my impression is that the largest user base of the GH4 are enthusiasts and low to no-budget filmmakers. Not the entire user base, but probably the largest portion of it by quite a lot.

I'd like a way to test it out before committing. But maybe that's what Panasonic is doing here; selecting out a user base that is more likely to actually understand log profiles and how to use them properly.

I think I'll wait to see what people can accomplish with VLOG in practical terms before plunking down the $99.

Mirrorless Cameras for Truly Hybrid Shooters?

Before I get started here, let me just say that this post is more of a stream of consciousness than anything that you may learn from. Sorry for that. I need to get this out of my brain and into writing to help me work my way through... I've been shooting still photos for over 25 years. I shoot all sorts of things including professional headshots, senior portraits, families and weddings. And for still photos, I've been using DSLRs since the early 2000s. And even today, my main still photos camera is the Nikon D750.

I also have a Panasonic GH4 for a little over a year and I bring it along to my wedding shoots and pull it out for candid shots. But I never find it to be a very satisfying choice relative to the D750 for still photos in these conditions, with a few exceptions.

At a wedding earlier this month, I wanted to get some of the family shots after the wedding from a high angle. I'm very tall at 6'7" so I have the advantage of being able to hold the camera above my head and get a nice high angle perspective. I'm not anywhere near the first person to ever do something like this and some have given this type of shot, when you hold the camera up and lose all visibility as to what you're actually shooting, a "Hail Mary" shot.

But in the modern age, we have live view! So now you can actually compose the shot while holding the camera well above your head. But if you're a dedicated DSLR shooter, live view is pretty frustrating when you're trying to keep between 4 and 40 people in place and looking their best. The DSLR shows you the image while you're getting things framed up, then you press the shutter release and 2 - 5 seconds later, the photo is captured. 2 - 5 seconds!

A lot can change in that time. And that's where I think the mirrorless cameras have the advantage. Live view is just normal on mirrorless cameras. That's simply how they operate. No mirror to flip up and out of the way of the shutter and sensor. That means that you press the shutter button and it takes the photo almost instantly. That's genuinely useful.

Or I could just pack a 6 foot ladder and stand at the top of that while I use the optical viewfinder on my D750. No.

So I've been starting to wonder more and more if it might be time for me to look at full frame mirrorless cameras. Right now, the main thing keeping me with the Nikon is that I have a full set of lenses and flashes. And the Nikon CLS flash system is quite convenient. I can crank through photos of the couple with a flash and umbrella very quickly and easily with full TTL flash off the camera on a stand or in the hands of an assistant.

And I'm not sure the flash ecosystem for the Sony line of cameras would be as effective and easy and quick to use. I'm not saying they aren't, I just don't know and need to do some research on that.

I'm probably not going to look at m4/3 for still photos simply because there haven't been amazing cameras in this domain with great high ISO capabilities as far as I'm aware. The GH4 definitely isn't that great relative to the Sony's I've used. The Olympus cameras may be better but in my limited exposure to them, they weren't stellar either. I think it is a limitation of the sensor pixel size.

But things aren't perfect on the mirrorless side either. Get a full frame Sony with it's tiny little body and put a 70-200mm f/2.8 zoom on that thing. That's a very, very front-heavy piece of gear. It doesn't matter how small the body is, if its got a 35mm sensor in it, you still need very big lenses in front of it. And hefting that front-heavy thing around for several hours...not sure how that would feel. Maybe ok, maybe a pain...

There's the issue of lens options with Sony as well. They've got some good lenses, don't get me wrong, but not a lot of choice. And good, fast, full-frame lenses are not cheap. The price for fast zooms usually sits around $2000 and goes up from there. That's a serious commitment and part of the reason I'm still using a Nikon DSLR (I've got a good, solid set of lenses there and I'm feeling a little overwhelmed at the idea of selling all that off and building up a new kit...)

The Sony A7 series of cameras use tiny little batteries that don't really last all that long. In my Nikon, I can shoot an entire wedding on one or two batteries. That's one battery change max. I know this sounds petty, but when you HAVE to move quickly and get great results and you're not going to have a second chance, how many times you have to change your battery really does matter.

Over time, I think I'm finding that APS-C sized sensors are probably the right size for my style of shooting. Full-frame sensors are really hard to focus when you're shooting wide open. You miss focus a lot. Or the eye of your subject is in focus but their ear is out of focus. And that's a fine look sometimes, but not always. So I end up stopping down and getting the look that you usually get with an APS-C camera anyway. And for close product shots, you need a LOT of light for a full frame camera so that you can stop down enough to get everything into focus. On a smaller sensor camera, you get more depth of field at the same aperture.

So at this point, I think I need to try one of these mirrorless cameras for one of my upcoming still shoots. I'd like to wait and see what Sony announces in the next few months to update or replace their a6000. If they surprise us with an in-body image stabilized APS-C 4K shooting camera, that could be the right camera for me. I'll need to get my hands on it and give it a go! Oh, and do more research on the flash options for that camera as well. Oh, and the lens options, too...

Oh and battery life...I'm hearing not so great on the Sony's. Especially the full frame cameras. Can anyone tell me if I'm hearing that wrong. I know it sounds petty but it can really throw off a video or still shoot if you're changing batteries every 30 to 45 minutes.

Oh yeah, and overheating during video shoots. On my wife's a5100 I can get clips about 20 to 25 minutes in length and that's HD, not 4K.

It sure would be nice to have one camera that's great at still photos and 4K/UHD video. There's a great advantage that is often underestimated by many people: Being intimately familiar with a single camera. You can work more efficiently and fluidly and focus more on creativity and story-telling rather than spending a lot of effort getting your camera to do what you need it to do.

In any case, I'll look at that new APS-C Sony once they announce and start shipping.

Cage for Atomos Shogun: Varavon Armor

I really like the Atomos Shogun for a lot of reasons. It is a great monitor, the files it records to ProRes are buttery smooth in edit so I don’t have to transcode my 4K footage, and it has a whole series of valuable exposure, color, and focusing tools.

But there are a couple of things I don’t love: The case is plastic, and not a super high density, really tough plastic. Also, the microphone lemo cable puts a lot of strain on the lemo input, so much so, that I don’t like using it for fear that I’ll tear the port right out of the Shogun. So I was interested in cages for the Shogun and it just so happens that several have become available on the market just recently.

In this episode we’ll take a close look at the Varavon Armor cage for Shogun. Overall, the cage fits my needs quite nicely, protects the Shogun so that I no longer worry about falls, and provides some solid rigging for the audio lemo, dc power, and HDMI inputs.

Varavon Armor II Camera Cage for GH4, a7S, NX1

We reviewed the Varavon Armor GH4K camera cage in late 2014 and found it to be a more ergonomic cage than the Fhugen Honu 2.0 cage. I stopped by Varavon’s booth at NAB back in April and was interested to see a couple of prototypes with updates to the original Armor cages. So here we take a closer look at the Armor II for the Panasonic GH4 and GH3. There are also versions specifically designed for Sony a7S, Samsung NX1, and the Canon 5DIII and 7DII.

The updates include a new 15mm carbon fiber rod with an interesting mount (as well as two additional mount points on the cage’s handle) that allows you to mount a follow focus, a shoulder stock for an ultra compact and lightweight should rig, or to attach additional accessories. Gone is the HDMI retaining clamp (which didn’t work all that well anyway) and the pro rotating handle.

Overall, this is a nice, thoughtful update from Varavon to the Armor cage that makes it an even better camera cage for mirrorless and DLSR shooters.

Random Thoughts on Buying Gear for Film and Video

Here are some random thoughts I wrote down some time ago. Maybe they'll help you and maybe they wont. But here's a sample of my thought process:

Notes first written sometime back in 2014, before I had my Panasonic GH4 and Shogun recorder and my iMac 5k:

What should I buy next for my filmmaking kit? Often I find myself distracted by all the cool gear available on the market. This is a problem in two ways: 1) I lose precious creative filmmaking time by endlessly researching gear and 2) I sometimes get my priorities mixed up and end up with the wrong gear, at least it is wrong from the standpoint that it doesn't help me solve my most pressing filmmaking issues.

Here are a few ideas that I've attempted to use to work through this dilemma…

First, I list out the problems that I'm trying to solve for my current or upcoming project. I don’t worry about priority yet, just all the issues that I need to or would like to solve. I avoid listing gear, just list the problems I need to solve.

- No 4:2:2 4K record capability

- Lack of stabilized movement

- Mediocre audio quality with indoor dialogue in particular, but also outdoor

- Difficulty getting colors right when color correcting/grading

- Framing issues

- Lack of energy in recordings

Next, work through the list and choose the one that will make the most difference or, in some cases, simply must be done first because of client needs.

In this case, I chose color—I seem to really struggle getting consistent color and can never seem to really tell what my video is going to look like because I don’t trust my two monitors…

Next, think it through, what is the problem if you think it through in greater detail?

I don’t trust that either of my monitors closely represent the standard color space, gamma, etc. where my videos and films will be viewed. When I see my finished videos on other peoples’ monitors or projectors or TVs, they look different than on my PC monitor. Where will they be viewed? Mostly on office computers and projectors and TVs. But mostly on PCs. However, it is most critical that they look their best on the office projectors and TVs (where they will be viewed by larger groups).

Can this be solved with my current gear?

Maybe, but I’m not sure. I have calibrated my Dell Ultrasharp 2413 with an X-Rite i1 Display Pro and that seems to help, but it often seems too saturated and doesn’t at all match my cheapo HP monitor. Calibrating in this way is not very effective, I learn, because we're using an 8 bit color workflow via a computer video card. If colors are way off, there isn't much space to move around to compensate. It will never be amazingly accurate.

What are the potential solutions?

- Invest in a color workflow that works via a video I/O device (different than a computer video card) which supports 3D LUTs and ideally, 10-bit color.

- Buy a modest reference monitor

Added notes June 2015:

I opted not to solve this problem for now. I'm now working mainly on an iMac 5k. It is NOT a reference monitor, I know that. Colorists would scoff and some might even totally discount everything I have to say from this point forward. But let me give some context.

My jobs don't pay all that much. There is absolutely, positively no budget for a colorist in 99.9% of my jobs. My clients don't expect exceptional color (sadly). So they get what they pay for - a decent quality internal video that has not been edited or graded on a reference monitor and may look decent but may not look great.

For the record, I don't just go all cavalier. I do use an

X-Rite i1Display Pro colorimeter

to at least get me into the parking lot of the right ballpark. But I am fully aware that calibrating through a computer video card that supports 8 bit is problematic and not anywhere close to reference grade.

I will keep at this until at some point I can charge more and can afford a reference monitor. Perhaps I can start serving a higher tier client base. I'm working on it. But this is a decent start and working with a "color calibrated" iMac has produced content good enough for low-end corporate gigs.

So that's the context. And that's a problem that I opted not to solve for now.

Another thought that I don't think occurs to a lot of people. Some gear is a better investment than other gear.

I think that most sound gear, microphones in particular, are much better investments than camera bodies. Hear me out on this, it isn't quite as absurd as it first sounds.

Of course you need at least one decent camera to produce a film or video. But cameras become obsolete very quickly these days. I counted the cameras I've had over the last 9 years and I believe I've had 7. That's almost a new camera yearly. At this rate, I barely have time to get well acquainted with my camera before it is upgraded. Some DPs are so awesome that they can pull that off and adapt to a new camera really quickly. But I think many of us indy guys that don't shoot all day long every day could benefit from a little more practice with our cameras. A year may be enough time for some, maybe not for others. I personally could probably benefit from more practice with my cameras.

Now consider microphones. How many of us own a $2,000 microphone? Not many is my guess. I certainly don't and I'm a self-professed sound enthusiast.

Back to cameras. How many of us own a $2000+ camera? I do and probably a lot more of us than those that own a $2000 mic.

Schoepps Collette Series MK41 Supercardioid Microphone Set

Now try an exercise: Choose a movie and watch one scene from the movie two different ways. On the first viewing, don't watch the visuals, just listen to the sound. Second time, just watch the visuals and turn the sound off.

Which had more emotional impact? Which was easier to follow?

I'm betting that in most cases, it is easier to follow and there is more emotional impact from the audio only experience. That's not always true and of course we all want stunning visuals and awesome sound. But if you have to cut back your budget a little on one to invest in the other, it might make sense for most of us who have skimped on audio gear to re-allocate our budgets a little and use more for sound and a little less for cameras. Don't get angry. Just think about it. It may not apply in your case but for most of us, I bet it is a valid point worth considering.

To be clear, I'm not saying you should spend thousands on audio gear and just work with a $500 USD camera with a kit lens. But on the other hand, I am suggesting that might help get you out of a creative slump in you're in one.

Of course lenses are also probably a better investment than camera bodies in most cases. So there's that to consider.

Zoom H6 Audio Field Recorder

But I think my next big, multi-thousand dollar investment is going to be either a mic or a good solid field recorder. And to make a step toward that goal, in the next few weeks we're going to have a look at the difference between $200 - $400 field recorders and a Sound Devices audio interface that costs $900 (and only has two mic inputs). To do this, I'm borrowing a Zoom H6 and Sound Devices USBPre 2 to compare with my trusty Tascam DR-60DmkII. I opted for the USBPre 2 because it is really a proxy for a Sound Devices 700 series field recorder that many pros use. It has the same preamps and analog to digital converters. So it should give us a good idea of what a $3300 Sound Devices field recorder or mixer would do for us.

Now before you cry, "But that's not a fair comparison!" I totally get that. I'm not trying to compare, really, just answer the question, "What practical benefits do you get when you use a pro level field recorder?" I'm guessing that the difference in audio quality is not worlds better. Probably a little better, but not night-and-day different. I bet reliability and routing options and flexibility and powering options and durability are better on the pro units. But we'll see.

Thanks for enduring my rambling thoughts. I'm not sure whether this has helped anyone aside from me so you're a good sport for reading through if you've made it this far!

Sony a5100 Special Pricing

A few months back we did a review of the video features on the Sony a5100 mirrorless camera which impressed me quite a bit. I bought one for my wife, who was looking for a camera nearly as small as her point-and-shoot from 8 years ago, but a little quicker at actually capturing photos. Yes, she has a smartphone and yes she uses that plenty, but wanted a "real" camera that would take nicer photos when there wasn't a lot of light and that could zoom optically. https://youtu.be/tq2AkLc_hGI

While this camera doesn't have as many physical buttons as higher-end models, and the default settings are definitely aimed at beginners, Sony was wise enough to allow shooters to turn off all those annoying auto/beginner features and take total control. And the HD video this camera captures is quite impressive with its XAVC S codec (a higher bit-rate flavor or H.264 encoding) and its large APS-C sized sensor. The only downside I really find is that it is limited to about 25 minutes of continuous shooting. That's not a problem for those of us that are doing short pieces, but probably not the best choice for someone doing long-form video like lectures or shows where you want to capture the whole hour or two on one camera.

And the best part? This camera won't break the bank. Right now, it looks like they've reduced to the price so that the camera body alone is less than $350 USD. Even with the 16-50mm kit lens, which is a solid beginner lens, the package still comes in at just under $500 USD. I'm not sure how long this lasts but I'd say that if you're looking for a camera for shooting talking head, interview, or dramatic style film, this is a very solid starting point. Same for those looking for a B (second) camera.

Nikon D750: I Love It!

Last fall after I first bought and worked with the Nikon D750 for a while, I put together a review of it's video features. The response to that review has been really helpful to me because I learned that a lot of viewers thought I didn't much care for the D750.

Nothing could be further from the truth and let me be 100% clear: I love my Nikon D750!

I think the confusion came as I felt I had to explain why I bought a DSLR instead of the amazingly popular Sony a7S which is also a full-frame camera but with a mirrorless design. Oh, and the a7S can record 4K via its HDMI output. Oh, and it can also record S-Log.

Why would you go for a Nikon D750 instead of a Sony a7S, particularly when they are priced within a couple of hundred dollars of one another? I could have dropped the additional money without an issue at all.

And don't misread me when I give my explanation here. I love what Sony is doing, the direction they're heading. They are leading in a direction that is amazing - large sensor cameras and small bodies that ditch the mirror design of SLRs since the focus technology is at a point where that doesn't sacrifice anything. What's not to love about that?

But that's what made everyone think that I don't like the D750. I essentially said that it is a decent full-frame DSLR for video. Just decent. Not amazing. And I still think that is fair. The bitrate of the internal codec is relatively low compared to cameras like the latest generation Sonys or Panasonics. It is 1080p. It still doesn't have focus peaking. It doesn't do waveforms or false color. The footage it produces is good 1080. It is a totally workable solution for many types of shooters. Just not as much of a commitment to video from Nikon as I would like to see and that Sony and Panasonic are putting into their cameras. As a result, shooting video with the D750 is a good experience, but not as pleasurable as with my GH4.

When I'm going to shoot video and I have a choice between my D750 and Panasonic GH4, I'll choose the GH4 90% of the time as the main camera. It is a pleasure to use when shooting video and it produces lovely 4K footage. But there are 10% of cases where I'll choose the D750. Those are usually cases where I'll be doing an interview or talking head on location. Only the D750 allows me to blur the background like full frame cameras allow. The color it produces is great. It works beautifully with my Atomos recorders, both the Ninja II and Shogun. And in fact, with the Shogun, it becomes almost pleasurable to use (because the Shogun has all those video exposure and focus tools that make things so much easier and quicker). That setup gets a little bulky and isn't for everyone but it works well for interviews for me.

Now when it comes to shooting still photos and I have a choice between the D750 and the Panasonic GH4, I choose the D750 99% of the time. It is that amazing. Dynamic range on this camera is stellar. When I'm shooting still photos for weddings or portraits, the D750 is unrivaled in its ability to pull out shadow detail. That allows me to create stunning wide dynamic range type images in post. The focus is snappy, the flash eco system that Nikon provides is still pretty good (where are the RF transmitters, Nikon? That's one thing you're missing). The lenses available, both from Nikon and others, are top notch optically.

If I could only keep one of my cameras, I think I would keep the D750. Why? Because 4K is nice but not critical for me at this point. Paired with the Atomos Shogun, I have all the exposure and focus tools I need for shooting video. The large sensor produces amazing quality footage. On the still photo side, the GH4 is not bad, but not even in the same league as the D750 which is probably the best DSLR for the price on the market right now in most ways. Low light/high ISO performance on the D750, while not quite as amazing as the a7S, strikes the perfect balance of resolution (24 megapixel) and high ISO performance. That means this is an incredibly versatile camera.

And now, of course, it is priced at about $300 less than when I bought it last fall.

If I had to make the choice again today, I'd still choose the Nikon D750.

Panasonic G7: UHD Interchangeable Lens Camera for Under $1000

Today Panasonic announced the Lumix DMC-G7 mirrorless interchangeable micro 4/3 camera that shoots 16 megapixel still images and UHD (sometimes mistakenly called 4k) video at up to 30fps. Is this a big deal? Well, sort of.

I've been shooting video with a Panasonic DMC-GH4K for almost a year now and absolutely love the GH4. Why? It works really well for the type of shooting that I do. I'm not suggesting it is the perfect camera. No camera is perfect. But I have not found a better camera with the following traits:

• Reasonably large sensor (m4/3 or larger)
• UHD video in camera
• 4:2:2 10-bit output of clean video via HDMI (so that I can record to my Atomos Shogun in ProRes codec which is awesome for editing on a Mac)
• Decent battery life
• Wide lens selection (preferable native lenses, not adapted lenses
• Ability to shoot decent still photos
• Focus and exposure tools nice to have but not critical (focus peaking, histogram, zebra stripes)
• Small-ish in terms of physical size
• Electronic viewfinder

The GH4 meets each of these criteria and outside of specs, it produces what I would consider very nice footage in video mode.

There are some things it is not great at. Low light/high ISO is not a strength of the GH4 though I don't mind taking it up to 800 ISO, or even 1600 ISO if I can afford to apply some good noise reduction in post processing. The sensor is not as large as APS-C or full frame cameras so getting that shallow depth-of-field look is harder. But on the flip side, I run into far fewer "missed focus" situations with the GH4 relative to my Nikon D750 (full frame camera).

Panasonic's promo video for the G7:

https://youtu.be/gm2Z2572JLc

We're not entirely sure yet that the G7 meets all of the above criteria, but it looks promising. And at a price of under $800 for the body, that's $900 less than the GH4. Not a bad place to start.

There are some things we still need to clarify about the G7: do we get 4:2:2 10-bit clean output from the HDMI port? Is the video footage as good as the GH4 on all the typical measures both objective and subjective?

Perhaps we'll need to get one and put it through some tests! Or maybe just wait for the GH5... What do you think?