/p/ - Photography » Thread #3633770

[21 / 4 / ?]

Anonymous Sun 29 Mar 2020 16:16:02 No.3633770 View View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>3633773 >>3633774 >>3633948 >>3633986 >>3634085 >>3634701 >>3634706

So I just bought a Lumix GH4 for dirt cheap, and I actually wanted it for stils not for video, I'm looking online and there is no reviews about ti in terms of stills performance. Would you guys recommend it for stills?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 29 Mar 2020 16:28:56 No.3633773 Report

Quoted By:

>>3633770
It is now the one you have with you, so go out and shoot then find out whether its good for stills or not yourself.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 29 Mar 2020 16:34:40 No.3633774 Report

Quoted By:

>>3633770
Are you joking ?

https://www.cameralabs.com/panasonic_lumix_gh4/

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 29 Mar 2020 16:55:51 No.3633782 Report

Quoted By:

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO P1066128_large.jpg, 2MiB, 1080x1620

Anonymous Mon 30 Mar 2020 00:57:00 No.3633894 Report

Quoted By: >>3633956 >>3633987 >>3634705

I own a GH5. As far as I know, the two have pretty similar quality. Quite good for a MFT, I'd get it if it's that cheap.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 30 Mar 2020 04:35:57 No.3633928 Report

Quoted By:

im looking for a cheap GH5

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 30 Mar 2020 06:52:05 No.3633948 Report

Quoted By:

>>3633770
test stills in low light, no flash, no tripod. if you're fine with the shots, good for you.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 30 Mar 2020 08:18:32 No.3633956 Report

Quoted By:

>>3633894
GH4 is 16 Mpx, GH5 20 Mpx.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 30 Mar 2020 12:23:06 No.3633986 Report

Quoted By:

>>3633770
Just use it, mate, don't worry. Your direct upgrade path is for a used G9 which is geared more towards stills. Get some good lenses you can carry over.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 30 Mar 2020 12:24:43 No.3633987 Report

Quoted By: >>3634061

>>3633894
Just this once, post full size please. The middle section looks funky and cloned in the downsized image.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO P1066128_1-1-middle-crop.jpg, 3MiB, 2172x2172

Anonymous Mon 30 Mar 2020 16:47:03 No.3634061 Report

Quoted By: >>3634089

>>3633987
There's no trickery. Oregon has a lot of evergreens mixed in with the other trees, so it look patchy after the leaves fall.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 50-032360-.jpg, 1MiB, 1100x1467

Anonymous Mon 30 Mar 2020 18:01:34 No.3634085 Report

Quoted By: >>3634089

>>3633770
It's same sensor as on all current 16mp m43 cameras. g7, g85, e-m5 ii, e-m10 iii... Only some much older Panasonic cameras have older Panasonic sensors. You can look any of those cameras reviews or samples to see how it'll perform. What it misses is ibis, so just keep that in mind when buying lenses for it. Up to 50mm you'll have no problems handheld, a bit above that you'll need lens stabilization.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 30 Mar 2020 18:11:50 No.3634089 Report

Quoted By: >>3634128

>>3634085
>>3634061
I don't think there is any problem with the IQ on both the sensor and the lenses you used. On the other hand I would've used a longer exposure on the waterfall.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 30 Mar 2020 18:13:03 No.3634090 Report

Quoted By: >>3634107

>i have camera
>but i need to go online to see if camera is good
use the damn camera

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 30 Mar 2020 19:07:54 No.3634107 Report

Quoted By:

>>3634090
This.
OP, use the camera. Also buy Panasonic lenses so you can take advantage of Panasonics "pseudo phase" AF for faster focusing.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 30 Mar 2020 20:50:05 No.3634128 Report

Quoted By:

>>3634089
I'm just that last one. Had no nd with me, I think i was at f20 already.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 01 Apr 2020 04:36:54 No.3634701 Report

Quoted By:

>>3633770
Olympanon, it has a tiny micro poor turds sensor. So if you grind your lenses to the same precision as a FF lens, you'll get at best 1/4 of the sharpness and quality. And your f/1.2 "pro" lenses are actually f/2.4 equivalent. That's the upper bound on stills performance that you can expect.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 01 Apr 2020 04:38:20 No.3634702 Report

Quoted By:

Olympanon, it has a tiny micro poor turds sensor. So if you grind your lenses to the same precision as a FF lens, you'll get at best 1/4 of the sharpness and quality. And your f/1.2 "pro" lenses are actually f/2.4 equivalent. That's the upper bound on stills performance that you can expect.

An̴ónymous

An̴ónymous Wed 01 Apr 2020 04:45:50 No.3634705 Report

Quoted By:

>>3633894
That picture proves what exactly? Am I supposed to be "amazed?"

A̸nonym͡o͜us̛

A̸nonym͡o͜us̛ Wed 01 Apr 2020 04:52:27 No.3634706 Report

Quoted By: >>3634709

>>3633770
It's not a Nikon, so no.

An̕ony͝mous

An̕ony͝mous Wed 01 Apr 2020 05:21:23 No.3634709 Report

Quoted By:

>>3634706
Hello brother. Let's spread together

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Verified Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Manager Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts Only Founder Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images Only Spoiler Images Only Non-Spoiler Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

On these archives

Your latest searches