From Canon 6D to Panasonic GH4 - Should I?

duarted

TPF Noob!
Joined
Dec 26, 2013
Messages
65
Reaction score
3
Location
Belize / Portugal / USA
Can others edit my Photos
Photos NOT OK to edit
Hello everyone,

So I've been researching a lot about this and still have some questions.

I currently have a Canon 6D and I do a lot of Hotel & Adventure photography and video.

I'm still not very happy with the results I'm getting with the 6D in terms of video quality and also the fact that it only shoots 30FPS at 1080p so I'm wondering if changing to the GH4 will give me better results?

My other question is, if I use the Metabones Speed Booster XL 0.64x Adapter with my Canon 17-40mm is it still going to be 17-40mm ?

And also would I get similar results with the GH4 for hotel photography (real estate photography) like on my Canon 6D? I'm a little worried that by changing from a FF camera to a Micro 4/3rs I won't be able to get the same wide angle shots

I think for now these are my main questions!
 
You can get wide angle m4/3 lenses so that shouldn't be an issue.

Don't know to much about video but apparently the panasonic is great.

You can read what you want about image quality but for photos a m4/3 sensor Will not give you the same image quality as a fullframe does when you start getting into the dimmer type photos.

Personally i would keep the 6d
 
Like "Jaomul" I never used the GH4 but from what I heard from so many others who do use it is that this camera is an excelent video camera.
Its also a very good steels camera but due to the tiny MFT sensor you will not get same low light performance as you will with the FF 6D.
I dont do video so I would keep the 6D but if video was a very important part of what I do I would either keep the 6D and add a 70D or mirrorless like the GH4 or I would just get the A7S or A7RII which are full frame and has a very good video features.
Mind you though the later cameras has a smaller lens selection then the MFT or Canon/Nikon cameras.
 
17mm x 0.64 is 10.8mm, and 40mm x 0.64 is 25.6mm, so I think that would be the focal length ranges the 0.64x converter factor the Metabones adapter would give, right? It will also BOOST the effective aperture, right? Such an interesting device!

I dunno...Kirk Tuck has been shooting with the Panasonic G-series cameras for professional video interviews and pro-level work for a few years now; he has nothing but good things to say about the video features Panasonic offers, like the ability to synchronize footage from A- and B-roll cameras effortlessly, as well as the PRACTICAL benefit of shooting video to the smaller sized sensor; less critical focusing issues, deeper DOF so one can show context, and so on. He really seems to think that the Panasonics are the best choice for video work in a camera system that also has good lens choices, and which also does stills well.
 
17mm x 0.64 is 10.8mm, and 40mm x 0.64 is 25.6mm, so I think that would be the focal length ranges the 0.64x converter factor the Metabones adapter would give, right? It will also BOOST the effective aperture, right? Such an interesting device!

I don't think that's the right math because the GH4 has a 2x "magnification" (not sure what's the correct term). Can anyone help with this math? Is it 17mm x 2 x 0.64 = 21,76mm ?

I dont do video so I would keep the 6D but if video was a very important part of what I do I would either keep the 6D and add a 70D or mirrorless like the GH4 or I would just get the A7S or A7RII which are full frame and has a very good video features.
Mind you though the later cameras has a smaller lens selection then the MFT or Canon/Nikon cameras.

Now I was doing some research on the Sony A7S because I don't know much about it and aparently there's also a Sony A7 which is 1000$ cheaper than the A7S. And according to Snapsort these are the differences:Compare the Sony A7 vs the Sony A7S

I know the A7S is better in low light, but is that all? The A7 seems to have more "advantages"

Thanks to everyone!
 
17mm x 0.64 is 10.8mm, and 40mm x 0.64 is 25.6mm, so I think that would be the focal length ranges the 0.64x converter factor the Metabones adapter would give, right? It will also BOOST the effective aperture, right? Such an interesting device!

I don't think that's the right math because the GH4 has a 2x "magnification" (not sure what's the correct term). Can anyone help with this math? Is it 17mm x 2 x 0.64 = 21,76mm ?

I dont do video so I would keep the 6D but if video was a very important part of what I do I would either keep the 6D and add a 70D or mirrorless like the GH4 or I would just get the A7S or A7RII which are full frame and has a very good video features.
Mind you though the later cameras has a smaller lens selection then the MFT or Canon/Nikon cameras.

Now I was doing some research on the Sony A7S because I don't know much about it and aparently there's also a Sony A7 which is 1000$ cheaper than the A7S. And according to Snapsort these are the differences:Compare the Sony A7 vs the Sony A7S

I know the A7S is better in low light, but is that all? The A7 seems to have more "advantages"

Thanks to everyone!
I believe the A7S is considered the "video" camera
The A7 and A7II are more of the general use cameras
The A7R and A7R II are more studio cameras but the A7R II is the only A7 series camera that can do "in body" 4K video, the A7S can do 4K video but you need to buy an exterior accessory for that which I think cost almost same as camera.
 
Duarted, on the math, yes, one multiplies the lens and its actual focal lengths as 17mm actual x 0.64x Metabones equals the actual LENS length with the converter installed. Then a second computatuon is done, to calculate the field of view factor for the sensor size or capture size being used.

The optical end is always specified (by me at least) by the len's actual length x converter power; that number gives the OPTICAL or real focal length. Then, compute the field of view factor last, to arrive at the "equivalent lens angle of view" as compared to a 135 format film camera.

Ergo, 10.8mm x 2.0 FOV factor and 25.6mm x 2.0 FOV factor.

Focal length is one thing. Equivalent lens angle of view as compared against another format is an entirely different specification, a second number. 21.5mm and 51.2mm--so, from in other words, a pretty wide wide-angle, and the semi-wide and semi-normal ranges, right up to the standard "normal lens" angles of view--pretty useful!!!
 
I dont do video and I dont use MFT, I only informed myself about either from time to time out of curiosity.

But I know a MFT camera like the GH4 has a much smaller sensor than a full frame camera like the Canon 6D (17.3x13mm vs 36x24mm), and I know the GH4 is THE affordable video option right now. It doesnt have a flat color profile(*) and it doesnt have a global shutter, but for example it can do UHD (3840x2160) at 60Hz, 4K (4096x2160) at 24Hz, 1080p (1920x1080) at 240Hz, many more formats including really small ones, has unlimited recording time (until your space runs out), and can record 10 bit per color channel (instead of the usual just 8 bit) to external recorders, etc.

I cant give any advice about MFT lenses, I only know theres some pretty good stuff around and recently there was Cine lenses for MFT that have been really affordable, too (Really affordable means you have to pay less than 2k$ or € for a true CINE prime lens, which is really cheap compared to what insane prices you would have to usually pay for that. A true CINE prime lens meaning a lens 100% developed for video, not what Canon thinks is a CINE lens [they just relabel their usual lenses and change their construction a bit]).


A Speed Booster is the inverse of a teleconverter. That means, the real focal length gets shortened while the aperture goes up. With a 0.7x speed booster, a half as big sensor will get twice as much light, and the focal length gets muliplied by 0.7x, but the equivalent focal length will stay the same, i.e. the final picture will be the same on the smaller sensor as on the larger.

Also Speed Boosters are all SLR to mirrorless extensions, since there is some space needed for the optics and all SLR lenses have a bigger distance between optics and sensor (called flange distance) than mirrorless cameras since there has to be space for the mirror box; this difference allows to put the Speed Booster optics in place.

All Speed Boosters I know about are approx 0.7x. This allows to keep the quality loss very low.

A Speed Booster wont really replace a native optics. Its a crook. Twice as much light on the sensor wont change anything about the Base ISO of the sensor, i.e. the maximum amount of light that sensor can record. Thats the core reason why a larger sensor is always superior to a smaller one, over the whole area they can record more light. Also, if you want shallow depth of field, the larger sensor again has the upper hand.

In low light the Speed Booster will help you well, but in good light you'll have to stop down more or will have to use a ND filter.



(*) In a truely weird move, Panasonic will soon release a GH4R that offers flat profiles. Sony has added flat profiles through firmware updates and its hard to see why Panasonic couldnt do the same.
 
Last edited:
Thank everyone again!

Seems to me that what makes more sense is if I buy the Gh4 I would need to keep my 6D for photography, specially the real estate photography.

The Sony A7S is a nice option too but doesn't have the in-camera 4k and it's so expensive... would prefer the GH4

Tough one...
 

Most reactions

Back
Top