Why not Panasonic GH4

[Mjollnir]

This guy compared the GX8 in RAW to the FF Nikon D750 and, believe it or not, the GX8 is actually better in terms of detail and noise at 200 and 6400.

Not better by miles, but still visibly better.

http://www.soundimageplus.com/soundimageplus/2015/8/21/dslr-or-mirrorless-panasonic-gx8-compared-to-nikon-d750

[tnargs]

This guy compared the GX8 in RAW to the FF Nikon D750 and, believe it or not, the GX8 is actually better in terms of detail and noise at 200 and 6400.

Not better by miles, but still visibly better.

http://www.soundimageplus.com/soundimageplus/2015/8/21/dslr-or-mirrorless-panasonic-gx8-compared-to-nikon-d750

Now you've gone and done it, we're gonna get soooo bombed. 

My take on the thread topic is that the GH4 is Panasonic's top camera for stills and video photography, with its top body for stills use and for video use, and the highest price. IOW it's a great stills camera.

Its still images are as good as the E-M1 and its performance in terms of AF and other features is as good, with each model having a few pros and cons as usual in any head-to-head comparison. Ergonomics for stills is top notch, possibly better than the E-M1, which has excellent ergos but clearly puts more emphasis on (retro) style, while the GH4 is function-first.

It's a travesty that people want to give the impression that the GH4 is 'for video', when it is at least deserving of equal-first ranking of all m43 cameras, for stills photography. IMHO.

[Hywel]

I'm with you on that.

I like the stills ergonomics of my GH4 better than any other camera I own (although the Hasselblad is pretty damn good too).

Although I admit in technical quality terms it isn't up with the A7Rii, my hand ALWAYS goes to the GH4 first for anything out of the studio because I just like shooting with it better... and for the vast majority of uses 16 megapixels is just fine. IBIS is the only major lack, but with OIS on a couple of lenses it holds up surprisingly well.

Cheers, Hywel

[Mjollnir]

Now you've gone and done it, we're gonna get soooo bombed. 

My take on the thread topic is that the GH4 is Panasonic's top camera for stills and video photography, with its top body for stills use and for video use, and the highest price. IOW it's a great stills camera.

Its still images are as good as the E-M1 and its performance in terms of AF and other features is as good, with each model having a few pros and cons as usual in any head-to-head comparison. Ergonomics for stills is top notch, possibly better than the E-M1, which has excellent ergos but clearly puts more emphasis on (retro) style, while the GH4 is function-first.

It's a travesty that people want to give the impression that the GH4 is 'for video', when it is at least deserving of equal-first ranking of all m43 cameras, for stills photography. IMHO.

Ain't THAT the truth.

I've shot them all from the GH1 onwards, and it's still almost bracing to me how good the GH4 is for stills in almost every (but not every) environment.  And for me, the form factor/ease of use factor of Panny is so much better than anything else I've ever shot with.

If people want to keep up the charade of "Panny for video, Oly for stills", I won't try and correct them.

[Remo Nonaz]

For me, the question is still, "Why the GH4?" Or the GX8 for that matter. Both are somewhat better than my GH2, particularly the GH4 for its better ergonomics and viewfinder, but in terms of IQ, I don't see a great leap forward. I downloaded the RAW files noted in the earlier comparison to a D750 and, yes, the GX8 does perform better at ISO 6400, but its still pretty grainy. Lr will fix the issues in any of these cameras if you shoot RAW, but it would be nice have a higher ISO capability in any M43 camera.

[Bob Rockefeller]

How much of this is the market's perception that Panasonic is not a "real" camera company, compared to "old" brands such as Nikon, Canon, Fuji and Olympus?

[SZRitter]

How much of this is the market's perception that Panasonic is not a "real" camera company, compared to "old" brands such as Nikon, Canon, Fuji and Olympus?

Wouldn't be surprised, photographers can be a notoriously conservative lot. Just look how hard Samsung is having at making a go with, what is supposedly, a decent system.