GH5 or Sony A7s II for cinematography

[Al_Salvador]

Hi people, 

 

I've been looking a lot between these 2 cameras review over reviews, but i'm still confuse to which of the them I should upgrade for cinematography. According to my what i've seen theThe GH5 seems to be a camera better in every other way (than low light of course) and by that I mean really better. Is that Full frame sensor (then super shallow depth of filed) really worth choosing the A7sII over the GH5 for cinematography. I am asking this question only for filmmaking purpose. So which one is the best?

 

 

 

[Daniel Z.]

I would get the A7s II

[Al_Salvador]

1 minute ago, Daniel Z. said:

I would get the A7s II

Why?

 

[cc143]

What sort of cinematography are we talking here? 

 

If its filming yourself, then the gh5 will be better, If you are filming others, the sony might be better. 

 

That's the jist of it, but there is more depth to it than that ofcourse. If you ask me, the a7sii isn't worth it over the gh5. You can get a shallow DOF even with an MFT sensor. Maybe you could look at the a6500 or fuji x-t2 as well. 

 

But, the most importan;t, if all you care for is cinematography, why not go for a camcorder? 

[historicalpoultry]

Not an expert here, but I'd also choose the Sony. Looking at footage from both, the Sony's picture just appeals more to me. Also, I feel like shooting conditions are seldomly ideal (unless you shoot in a studio of course) and Sony's sensor is a beast in low light. In addition, Sony has some pretty nice glass now.

Also: as @cc143 mentioned, maybe look at some other cameras as well (for what I would shoot, I'd go for an a6500 for example, or rather its successor)

[Al_Salvador]

2 minutes ago, cc143 said:

What sort of cinematography are we talking here? 

 

If its filming yourself, then the gh5 will be better, If you are filming others, the sony might be better. 

 

That's the jist of it, but there is more depth to it than that ofcourse. If you ask me, the a7sii isn't worth it over the gh5. You can get a shallow DOF even with an MFT sensor. Maybe you could look at the a6500 or fuji x-t2 as well. 

 

But, the most importan;t, if all you care for is cinematography, why not go for a camcorder? 

Im more of an enthusiast than a profesional who does that for a living, plus you can actually imagine what budget I have for a camera, so considering the Canon C300 it's not that possible for the moment. I may upgrde bt not now. And I am talking short films for example. I mean really good looking one though. Not for youtube also. Just for the passion of maing great looking shorts. 

[Al_Salvador]

4 minutes ago, historicalpoultry said:

Not an expert here, but I'd also choose the Sony. Looking at footage from both, the Sony's picture just appeals more to me. Also, I feel like shooting conditions are seldomly ideal (unless you shoot in a studio of course) and Sony's sensor is a beast in low light. In addition, Sony has some pretty nice glass now.

Also: as @cc143 mentioned, maybe look at some other cameras as well (for what I would shoot, I'd go for an a6500 for example, or rather its successor)

Are you talking about the sony A9 when saying sucessor??

 

[cc143]

Just now, Al_Salvador said:

Im more of an enthusiast than a profesional who does that for a living, plus you can actually imagine what budget I have for a camera, so considering the Canon C300 it's not that possible for the moment. I may upgrde bt not now. And I am talking short films for example. I mean really good looking one though. Not for youtube also. Just for the passion of maing great looking shorts. 

The c300 isn't the only camcorder out there, you should be able to get something like an xc10 for around as much as the gh5 if not cheaper when considering the cost of glass, rigs etc, 

 

Also, if that's the case, why are you looking for 4k compatible cameras in the first place? Why not look at fhd dslrs from Canon or Nikon (probably Canon though) that you can build a glass collection for. You have to consider the added cost of recording in 4k, in storage etc. 

 

I assume the person above was talking about the successor to the a6500, the a9 is an entirely new thing in Sony's lineup. 

[Al_Salvador]

2 minutes ago, cc143 said:

The c300 isn't the only camcorder out there, you should be able to get something like an xc10 for around as much as the gh5 if not cheaper when considering the cost of glass, rigs etc, 

 

Also, if that's the case, why are you looking for 4k compatible cameras in the first place? Why not look at fhd dslrs from Canon or Nikon (probably Canon though) that you can build a glass collection for. You have to consider the added cost of recording in 4k, in storage etc. 

 

I assume the person above was talking about the successor to the a6500, the a9 is an entirely new thing in Sony's lineup. 

Ok, I'm definitely considering these cameras, Mostly the a6500. But if i could only get one of these two for filmaking. Do you still advice the A7sII?

[historicalpoultry]

13 minutes ago, cc143 said:

I assume the person above was talking about the successor to the a6500, the a9 is an entirely new thing in Sony's lineup. 

Yup, at the rate Sony is releasing the new versions of the a6xxx, the next one will be just around the corner 

[cc143]

1 minute ago, Al_Salvador said:

Ok, I'm definitely considering these cameras, Mostly the a6500. But if i could only get one of these two for filmaking. Do you still advice the A7sII?

I recognise I am kind of biased against sony's cameras, but I would still have to say I'd prefer the gh5, I think its more versatile than the a7sii and you can get really fast lenses that can get you the shallow DOF you require, even with the smaller sensor. Afterall, focusing at f1.4 on FF can be quite a bitch. 

 

Also, if what you are filming doesn't require shallow dof a lot, I think the pros of the gh5 outweigh the pro of a FF sensor. (Here's something I didn't expect I'd ever utter!). 

[Al_Salvador]

1 minute ago, historicalpoultry said:

Yup, at the rate Sony is releasing the new versions of the a6xxx, the next one will be just around the corner 

Thank you very much. Im not also really talking about Camcorder much because I also want to do a bit of photography too. But I didn't mention it above cause I wanted a pure filmmaking answer on this topic

 

[Al_Salvador]

2 minutes ago, Al_Salvador said:

Thank you very much. Im not also really talking about Camcorder much because I also want to do a bit of photography too. But I didn't mention it above cause I wanted a pure filmmaking answer on this topic

 

Sorry cc143. I confused you're answer with historicalpoultry. Sorry historicalpoultry too. However I also think the gh5 is a valuable upgrade though. But Im also going to wait the successor of the sony a6500. Thanks to you both though your answer were really useful.

 

[xQubeZx]

I'd wait for the the Sony A7s iii if you can. That one may fix the issues of the A7s ii and may be better than the GH5. But if we are talking video features the GH5 is better but the AF is said to be unusable. So if that is important I'd defentivly wait. 

 

The A6500 is also a decent option but also lacks in some video features as 4k 60fps and very little rolling shutter on the GH5. 

 

Lenses will be the same price wise it seems. You got more options on m4/3 but if we are talking pricing there shouldn't be much of a difference. (For the same quality of glass)