@fahrenheit

Is there S, A, P modes in manual movie mode via menus like in GH2,3 and 4. I ment those modes.

Does the G7 show exposure numbers (aperture, shutter, iso) when shooting video in A, S or P mode? My GH4 does not show and it is not funny guessing what the camera is doing.

@DrDave, Great review! I'm targeting the G7 myself. I am still using your old GH1 EVERY WEEK doing local TV Shows and Commercials :) I also use a couple of G5's. The G7 sounds like my perfect upgrade.

@jjj-ri-usa I can assure you that the best way to get awesome 1080p is to downsample 4K in post, and it doesn't really add much time to the workflow. There really is no comparison. If you really want 60p,the low bitrate will look "OK", but you can't push it in post. It's not the ideal 60p solution.

When I was looking around for info on why the crop factor might be different, I came across this thoughtful and insightful review by Cameralabs (which is well worth reading) and has this nice photo showing the differences in the crop factor (I didn't test the exact difference but this certainly looks about right):

http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Panasonic_Lumix_G7/images/results/Brighton-Video-Coverage-745.jpg

@DrDave Big thanks for the write up :-)

Panasonic G7 minireview

This review has two parts. In the first part, we imagine a world in which the GH4 had yet to be invented. In the second part, we compare the G7 to the GH4.

Part One: A budget filmmaker's dream

I purchased the Panasonic Lumix DMC-G7 in the form of an NTSC body through the Personal View deals. My camera was shipped the next day DHL and arrived without a hitch two days later. This camera is sold as a kit, so my box was opened and the kit lens removed. This is a common practice: for example, I bought my Panasonic 14mm lens as part of such a split-kit for a substantial discount. The box says "International" version. That's good, because I expect to go places. My camera arrived unlocked. So if you compare a camera to a cellphone, you can see that there are typically different models with different features, and some of these can be unlocked, In this case, the main difference is that there is no time limit on recording: you hit the button, come back later and it is still rolling. The camera records a succession of MP4 files each of which, in 4K, is six minutes long. Incidentally, I used a basic, though fast, SDXC card with no issues. If you buy the locked version of the cam, you will get the same video, but you will be time limited. Importantly, unlike the GH4 this came is (so far) not switchable between 24p and 25p recording. My cam is NTSC, and the 24p comes up as 23.976 frames per second. Note that there is no 4096 version of 4K, just the 2160p (3840x2160). This camera has been thoroughly reviewed on many sites, so I'm going to focus only on what is important for my main use, which is 80 percent video 20 percent photos.

First of all, the camera produces a rock solid video image with a fine, filmic grain with minimal clumping. The difference in the grain may be described as the difference between a biscuit and a scone. Previous versions of the GH series (and this cam is really a GH3 should-have-been) always had noticeable clumping in dark, shaded and uniform surfaces. The term filmic is thrown about quite a bit, and the term has no standard definition, let me just simply say the the grain in this case is like dither in an audio recording--you need a tiny bit of non-intrusive grain to reveal low level detail and to make the video look less digital. An awful lot of video nowadays looks fake, and that's due in part to the way the grain is either not present or removed as part of the streaming process. Stream any recent vid on Netflix or Amazon; it's squeaky clean. For me, this cam has a reasonable, usable & easily removable grain (if need be).

Let's talk about heat for a moment. Many cams now have a warning that the cam will power down if it overheats. Again, this is similar to a cellphone. For example, my rooted and modded Samsung S5 (Prime version) will record way beyond the stock 5 minutes, but it gets super hot, This phone, and, notably, the Sony phones and some cameras (Sony makes a lot of sensors) will power down in a hot environment. OTOH, a Pro cam (which might have a noisy fan) is less susceptible to heat shutdown. After one hour of recording at ambient 70 degrees, my G7 was warm, but not hot. It was less warm than my GM1, GH2, GH1, etc, by a small difference. But, the cam outdoors in the sun, or indoors under lights, might overheat, and I've been on some pretty hot sets. FWIW.

Just as you can fit an aluminum back to the S5 prime to act as a heat sink, you could add an aluminum grip to this cam, but the heat source is buried pretty deep withing the armature of the cam. Summary--no heat issues so far, and Panasonics do this better than many others.

Let's talk about the construction, grip and dials.

Many reviewers have noted that this cam is fairly solid but relies on plastic as opposed to the finely-milled magnesium of the high tech shell of cameras like the GM1. Reviewers have also noted that the G7 is very light. Both of these evaluations are not really accurate. Just for fun, I put the camera on the postal scale. With a battery and a flash card, the G7 clocks in at 15 ounces, or just under a pound. The GH2 is 16 ounces, or one pound--again, not the similarities between the GH2 and the G7. With the lightweight, supper cheap (and pretty sharp) Olly zoom this is a pound and a half. So, the cam basically weighs the same as the GH2. Owing to the balance and grip of the cam (the grip is excellent), in the hand it feels not light but solid. My magnesium GM1 weighs 7 ounces, or less than half of these "lightweight" cams. You want light--this is light. Despite using a polycarbonate-hybrid material, this is a solid camera with metal dials. Looking at this camera from the top down, it looks just like the GH2 except the dials are different--lots of dials; the main difference is the extended grip. Many reviewers have commented on how well the grip works, and this is true: this is really a good grip. I read in a few online reviews that the G7 features an "innovative viewfinder and new body design." Actually, it looks just like the GH2 (see photo, below).

Speaking of dials, this is where the cam really shines. There are dials and buttons everywhere, so, suffice it to say that all your dials and button wishes have been granted, and then some. Also, you can think of this as a camera, with the drive train dial on the left, or a video cam, with all the dials you need on the right. As far as "hybrid" goes, this is a very clever layout, your brain can sort this out in a way that seems like you have two cams, left and right. Similarly, you can operate the shutter and aperture both independently and simultaneously with dedicated wheels. This is a serious upgrade for both photographers and videographers. There's a number of other pro features on this cam as far as the fine points of focus, exposure and so on. Plenty to chew on.

The last thing in the world you want during filming is to be trapped in a menu system when you need to change the basic food groups of ISO, white balance, shutter, aperture, etc. This finally fixes that issue, and adds a layer of lateral integration between the physical dials and the software menus.

Let's take a moment here to reflect that if the GH4 and, to a lesser degree the GX8 had yet to be invented, this would be a revolutionary camera at a ridiculously cheap price and everyone would want one. But life is not so simple, so read on.

Many of the Pro features of the G7 have already been discussed. There are dual Zebra settings, multiple custom white balance settings, focus peaking, and so on. There's an innovative focus pull mechanism which might come in handy for B roll. Suffice it to say, there's a lot to choose from. Had the GH4 not come along, this would all be hailed as revolutionary. And the GH4 has a few more options. But the G7 has most of what you need. And this leads us to the subject of V-log, Cine, Cinelike and blah blah blah. And part two.

Part Deux: they meet; the GH4 and the G7.

Spoiler alert--chance are, you are going to want the G7 because the image is better. If you want a better image, you need read no further.

Beginning with the GH4, Panasonic offered a real Log upgrade. In short, the log curve allows you to dial down the contrast and a few other items, and gain a bit of dynamic range. Let's see if this is really valuable, and to do this, let's go back in time a bit.

All technologies create a temporary fix to overcome a shortcoming. DBX and Dolby were invented to increase the dynamic range of tape recorders, and reduce noise--age old problems. When Digital audio was invented, the dynamic range was so huge that these "fixes" disappeared. In fact, compression reduce dynamic range, so as far as audio goes, we not only don't need it, we don't want it. We work hard to get rid of it.

Similarly, if you look at TV from a few decades ago, you will notice that the shows have a different color curve. We now "compress" color into the saturation bands, so that everything looks like candy. We lose the full range of color. So wide range is not all you might imagine, but OTOH no one want a blown highlight, no one want a peak overload on audio, and no one want to underexpose so that the colors and details are beyond repair.

But what about video? Well, with video--similar to "TV"--we still are back in the 70s in a way. We want a bit more dynamic range, and, for sure, in a year or two, we will have that owing to improved sensor tech. So D-Log, V-Log, X-Log, whatever, this is a temporary fix which will disappear soon. It is really important to consider that on the G7, you can really dial the contrast, NR, saturation and sharpness way, way back. Plus, hidden in the menus is basically a custom log curve where you can create your own, custom Log. Pretty fancy stuff.

There's a lot of hype around all these Logs and Luts, and it is basically BS. Instead of trying to squeeze dynamic range from a 4/3 sensor, if you want dynamic range, go out and get a real cam that has actual, real dynamic range. Because fake dynamic range pales in comparison. It isn't "pro", it is "pseudo-pro." Log is a useful tool, but it isn't a substitute for better technology.

In fact, there is little or no difference between making your own Log curve by tweaking the myriad settings in the Cam, and using the color by number Log curve that cost $99. Several creative types have produced better images in this way. So forget the log, go with slog. Remember, you can buy an old lens, like the Rokkor 58mm, and gain dynamic range that way, and this has been well-known for years. In addition, your custom curve will give you a custom look. Why look like everyone else? The HDR mode on my S5 cellphone gives better results.

Crop factors and the strange case of ETC mode and noise.

You will read online that many of these cameras have "the same sensor". Well, maybe, but maybe not. Right off, the G7 is about one stop better than the GH4. And, again, if you are a typical videographer, you might want to stop reading right here. Because one stop is a huge difference, and this fact has been seriously underplayed. So if you gain a stop with some weird looking log curve, you can almost get to where the G7 is, except the grain will still be worse, especially because log curves can mess with the grain.

The fact is, when you look at shadows and flat, uniform surfaces, the G7 is simply better. And that means that without going into any arcane BS, you simply have a better image, right out of the Box, with the same headroom to tweak the Log curves if you so desire. That really is the end of the story, but lets look at some minor issues.

All these cams have ever-so-slightly different crop factors. This is probably due to the balance of pixels that are read and sampled from the sensor. So if the G7 uses a few more pixels, you get a nicer crop fact, but you run the risk of aliasing and moiré. First off, the G7 is really about the same as the GH4 for aliasing and moiré; I figure Panasonic just incrementally improved their smoothing software. So the G7 gives you better noise and a wider image, but, you may get a tiny bit more moiré etc. Going back to my top point, this seems like we are talking about the ETC effect, to a degree. When Panasonic rolled out the ETC effect, everyone was really excited about it, But not a lot of people used it, because it was noisy. But, there is another reason. The fact is, when you have ETC mode and regular mode in one cam, you can easily do an AB comparison with the same light, same scene, same lens groups, and so on. So anyone could instantly see that one was noisier than the other, and that differences in aliasing were minimal. In this case, even though the comparison has been done by well-respected reviewers, the differences don't stare you in the face. But, they are there.

Another thing to think about in this regard, the GH2 makes a 12mm lens look like magic. We lose a lot of that magic with 4K in the GH4, and we gain some of that magic back in the G7. Add on a metabooster, even more goodness. Do not underestimate the powerful effect of the crop factor on your lens collection. Obviously, if you want super-telephoto, it's a different story.

I'm going to take moment to say that even with a 20mm Panasonic on this cam, forget about the on-paper specs, you get a really nice transition from the sharp areas to the out-of-focus areas. You can't quantify it, it's a look and this camera has more than a hint of it--there's a synergy between the grain and the bokeh.

Other factors To argue the other side for a moment, the GH4 has more than a few gizmos that you might want. For example, you get real Cinematic 4K with a few extra pixels. Of course, you get those extra pixels through the crop factor on the G7, and they are better pixels--in other words, you could upsample the image a few pixels and still have a better image.

The GH4 also is a world camera, and has switchable frame rates, and it also has "real" 24p, that is, 24 actual no-hideous-fraction 24.000 fps, as opposed to 23.976. OK, handy but immaterial.

Auto focus and manual focus

You have some nice new autofocus tech here, both the GH4 and the G7 uses lens info to help focus. Note that this really works best with newer lenses. But even the Olly 45mm focused fast, smooth, and silent. The Panasonic 20mm sounded like an egg beater and was slower. There are several enhancements like PIP (Picture in Picture), and so on, overall, the built in autofocus is a big winner.

Image stabilization

Surprisingly, The G7 will work even with my first generation Panasonic image stabilized lenses. The manual has some CYA stuff about newer lenses, and maybe these newer lenses work better. The GX8 has IS built in, but less effective at 4K. A good camcorder will trump the IS in these cams, and the IS will not work with legacy lenses in 4K.

Audio: all these cams have crappy audio. The G7 has a mic input which will allow you to hook up your crappy mic to a crappy preamp and record 128 bitrate crappy audio to go with your 4K video. If you think in-cam audio is the way to go, think again.

Automatic 180 degree shutter The G4 has a handy feature, the 180 degree shutter, which just locks down the shutter and aperture in the best fit. I lived without this feature years and never noticed it, but it is handy, for sure. It also tends to exclude an artistic choice for the shutter.

HDMI: the G7 has one of those horrible mini-HDMI cables. You can record from it if the cam is not recording to disk, and so the GH4 has a real, tangible advantage here. But, you still have a stop of noise on top of all this, so remember that you are recording a worse picture over a fancier connector. Still, nothing to sneeze about. If external recording is your thing, do consider the now heavily discounted Sony A7S--it's an awesome cam.

Other thoughts: notes on the photo capabilities

NB: This section appears in the next comment, owing to the length limitation on posts. Panasonic cameras have slowly and surely made improvements to the JPEG engine and overall image quality. First off, you will see that you can graze serenely up the ISO scale a bit more, but nothing like the Sony cams: repeat: nothing like the Sony cams. You can take very good photos with this cam if you use RAW and develop the RAW with the powerful DxO RAW engine that combines lens, camera and RAW info. Similarly, noise can be well managed with DxO prime NR filter. You can also use any of a number of excellent NR plugins for Photoshop. Basically, the out-of-camera image quality is the same as the GM1, but a tiny bit softer. This cam is clearly optimized for video, not photos.

Lastly, if you like the hacked GH2, you will love this cam. Gone is the clumping, ugly grain, it has glorious 4K video and a whole set of cool-yet-practical features. And it looks just the same, with a better grip and a ton of extra dials.

Summary and image quality

It should come as no surprise at this point that the G7 is a better buy, and is also the better camera because it has almost a stop difference in the way the pixels are sampled (or incremental improvements to the "same" sensor). It is cheaper and has better image quality. Strip away all the BS and just ask yourself the opposite of this: Do I want to pay more for worse image quality?

As I say this, I am well aware that this is a "minority report." And most people will buy the GH4 because it is more expensive and because they have heard a litany of reviewers state en masse (like Sunday morning TV) that if you are a "Pro" you want the GH4. As an artist, it's a good rule of thumb to disbelieve what the majority is saying, but only up to a point. There's some valid arguments on both sides. But there is a punchline here: sorry to shock you but neither the GH4 nor the G7 is as good as the Sony FDR-ax100 camcorder, The Sony simply outresolves Panasonic, and the color and log of the Sony grades beautifully. However, the G7 is a bit closer to the Sony, and has the extreme virtues of being way less expensive and also allows you the window into the world of a full complement of world-class, interchangeable lenses.

That's all for now, see you on the set!

Thanks Scot - much appreciated.

Quick question for G7 owners. When the electronic/silent shutter mode is enabled, does the camera limit the max ISO setting (like on GX7)? Thanks v much.

FYI, Clipwrap can merge files together.

For the GH4 I just lay all the 4k .mov files it generated into a plural eye and sync it with my ext. audio recorder. Then I export the timeline to premierePro. Sometimes there is a 1 farm gap between the GH4 files, as if the clock in the Gh4 is not exactly the same as the clock in the Zoom H4n. If its a problem I will duplicate a GH4 frame to plug the hole in the timeline, if there's no extreme motion, it's not noticeable on the "small screen" i.e.: TV, 27" monitor, etc.

For MTS GH2 files I had the same problem, but using MTSmerger or clip wrap there was no problem with a missing frame, as if the info is in there just PremierePro can see it. This is a program someone on DVBXuser wrote and shared. There is a way to do it in thermal manually too.

All of this I am referencing is on a Mac, 24p, 48 KHz files.

YMMV

• http://www.ixbt.com/divideo/panasonic-dmc-g7/quality/01-3840x2160-25p-100mbps.mp4
• http://www.ixbt.com/divideo/panasonic-dmc-g7/compare/01-3840x2160-25p-100mbps.mp4
• http://www.ixbt.com/divideo/panasonic-dmc-g7/compare/02-3840x2160-24p-100mbps.mp4

http://www.ixbt.com/divideo/panasonic-dmc-g7.shtml

I didn't find the 30 minute restriction to much of a problem but the 4 GB limit is a royal pita and works out to about 6 minutes.

It is not specific camera thing. It originates from FAT restrictions, and even for exFAT almost all cameras do the same.

http://www.pixelmania.nl/2015/09/test-panasonic-lumix-dmc-g7/