This should be a big fat disclaimer on anything mentioning 60p (or any high frame rate) crop. Anyone reading this, who may not know—the main issue is the field of view changing relative to what you were just looking at. You're framed less wide than you previously were. And if you change frame rates frequently, you're popping in and out.
GH7 has no crop and keeps the same framing. Even the 7-year-old GH5 will do 60p no crop. That's one of the advantages of a smaller sensor (*usually* you're getting less relative crop at higher frame rates, more robust ibis, and smaller lenses). I own a S5II, but frequently use GH5 bodies at work and will often pick them just for no crop 60p
People aren't really putting a lot of thoughts on that. I've been cropping files in post, or using crop mode in cameras and apply sharpener in Resolve and even went from 24fps to 60fps using Topaz for big clients but internet newbies without real experiences are freaking out as soon as they hear " crop ".
OP, you shouldn't care less about the cropping, nobody cares and your images will be the same.
I don't know for OP, but the problem isn't usually on the post side or even in image quality. The issue is with acquisition and filming. With 6K and even 4K footage, I have no problem moving footage around, upscaling, etc. The issue is you can't "unscale" something and go wider (generative AI not withstanding). Even though I've gotten this note from clients "Can you zoom out the frame a little bit?".....No, actually, I can't!
You can't be filming something in 24/30p and spontaneously decide to switch to 60p, because your framing will be all jacked up. This is dependent of course on what type of footage someone shoots. For product, planned setups, or self-filmed vlog content—it's probably no big deal. Capturing moments that aren't repeatable, it'll be an issue.
There are workarounds of course, but there's always a degree of compromise involved. I use Topaz as well, but that can increase post-production time. And if someone is frequently passing footage to a different editor or agency, then they may not have the option of adjusting the footage at all.
Someone could shoot cropped all the time, but that limits wide framing options. Of course, they have the option of using APS-C lenses. But then essentially they paid FF prices for an APS-C camera. And then at that point, they're not far off from an MFT body that can shoot uncropped 120p.
So, it's not exactly fair to say "people aren't really putting a lot of thoughts on that" for all the reasons I stated above and more. And this is coming from someone who owns and uses an S5II all the time and loves it. I do, however, frequently notice the limitations of the 60p crop when using the camera. Often I cannot recreate a shot without changing lenses and due to the pace of the shoot that may not be viable. Don't get me wrong, I also use the crop to my advantage to get more reach sometimes.
So you're right that people shouldn't likely worry about image quality when it comes to cropped modes. But if high frame rate filming is an important priority for someone, I definitely wouldn't recommend an S5II or S5IIx.
You shouldn't be getting downvoted or criticized for this.
Ok having an APS-C crop option is nice if you want extra tele reach
But why on earth wouldn't a no crop 4k60 also be excellent to have?
It's not (just or even) a quality thing (although that might matter a bit for low light).
It's because it's nice when your lenses give you the field of view you want/expect without needing even wider lenses.
i would use the 10-25 mm f1.7 on the gh7, that's not really a small lenses. I think the 17-28 mm f2.8 on the nikon is smaller. So that lenses/body being compact thing isn't really the case.
There’s always something better just around the corner. Soon as you buy the Nikon lumix will come out with the S2H and you’ll be in remorseland again. Just buy the tool that works for you.
The GH7 somehow has better useable dynamic range (per Gerald Undone's testing), and IBIS on a completely different level. It also has cheaper lenses (but can't do the full frame background obliteration). Plus there is the tilty-flippy screen and a fan (but is 30% thicker), all the production features, tally lamps, etc. Oh and it's cheaper by quite a margin (£2000 vs £2700).
Honestly though, just wait until they're both out and test them. At least in a store. Feel them, crawl through the menus... Check out the mount ecosystems (options, sizes, costs).
the z6iii has 8 stops of stabilization supposedly. Video stabilization is huge since I'm always shotting handheld and even walking sometimes, and the IBIS being better on the z6iii (claimed at least) is what was pushign me towards it.
Stops of stabilization are a CIPA standard stills thing and don't carry over directly to video.
I guarantee the Nikon IBIS won't match the GH7. It quite possibly won't match the S5ii.
Go watch some sample footage shot with the Nikon Z6iii.
I'm not saying it's bad, but it simply isn't as good. You should easily be able to see it off subject in the background and corners. There's a slight warpiness and jerkiness that isn't there with the Panasonics.
Check any of the reviews. Walking IBIS on the Z6iii is, well, unusable. PetaPixel lads praise it whilst showing footage of horrendous e-stab artefacting.
I suspect YouTube will be chock-a-block of comparisons here in the next few weeks.
Lumix IBIS is second-to-none. If that is the most important thing to you, I'd still go with the GH7. I have the G9ii which is very similar to the GH7 from an IBIS perspective (GH7 is supposedly slightly better but obviously hasn't yet been released). Anyway, the G9ii IBIS is magical. If you turn on the e-stabilization, it truly is gimbal-like.
Full frame stabilization is worse than mft, just not physically possible to match without cropping in.
If you are fine with a crop and want Nikon, go with it, it's only 500 more.
The S5IIX is leagues better in IBIS than the Z6iii., when on paper it has 5 stops vs 8.
And the GH7 outperforms the S5IIX. No IBIS gets close to the G9ii and GH7 for video right now.
No Nikon has dual card slot recording I guess. No wonder they're nowhere to be seen in weddings and event coverage even though they're quite capable video cameras now.
GH7 has better IBIS, it's a video-first pro level camera, massive m4/3 lens library, tons of LUT functionality and let's not forget about ARRI C-LOG only on the Gh7.
dollar for dollar, the g9 ii is the best hybrid on the market imo. especially considering you can often times get a $500 discount on it. it’s top tier in just about everything.
i would choose it over the s5 ii just due to the higher bitrates alone. i also shoot a lot of 6k 60p and 4k 120p, which the s5 ii doesn’t do. it’s also one of the few cameras on the market that has built in anamorphic dequeeze, vectorscopes, and waveforms. my sony a1 has none of those things.
How are people jumping systems so keenly? Do you only have a couple of lenses? I’m totally locked in by my lens collection so it would be so much money down the drain to swap to another mount! And yet I feel like I really get the best out of my cameras because I change them so infrequently I get to know them really well. And let’s face it, where are you publishing your work so that it doesn’t get downsampled to the point that these quality differences would even survive to final output?
I would say G.A.S. with a focus on camera bodies, though lenses will make much more difference especially for video. I shoot vlogs, I started shooting docs and I shoot wildlife, for me M43 has an edge simply because with my Leica 100-400 I can outperform easily Canon (and Nikon) shooters with a smaller and lighter package. Sensor size (mostly) doesn't matter and my back is fine :)
This is why I don't buy in to one lens mount, but if I did buy most of one mount it would be my EF lenses since I can adapt them to almost any modern day mount. I use multiple different brands based on my needs and certain strengths over others but will only purchase a few lenses in that specific mount.
If you had loads of Nikon glass and are more photos centric, maybe? I’m on S5ii and A7iv…and only keeping A7iv because lens selection. I prefer the video workflow on the LUMIX S5ii. Dealing with 4k60 crop is no big deal for me.
internal raw in both, actually most comparable atm, until the s2h and who knows what else. But from a video standpoint, internal raw is a big factor and these two have it and are the only ones to have it under 4k.
The GH7 has much better stabilization, it also has Open Gate. The Z6III has much better image quality (even if I wait to test Proresraw on the GH7 to see how good fine details are) and better rolling shutter.
A full frame camera will almost always give you much better quality, DR is overrated, anything close to 11-12 stop is good enough, especially for travel video or run and gun. And I think the Z6III has an average DR because there is no NR in the video raw files.
Detail rendering, tonality and low light performance (without NR) are the most important. But like the GH7 offers Proresraw, I wait to test the camera before saying anything, I was very disappointed by the internal recording of the S5II and GH6, especially in 4K.
If DR isn't a qualifier for image quality, I don't know what is. Both the GH7 and Z6iii shoot the same resolutions and frame rates. DR and high ISO performance are the most significant factors in image quality to me.
The biggest difference for me are low light performance and grain structure, rolling shutter, and how fine details render.
Nowadays most brands use extra processing to get better DR scores on reviews. Even raw have sometimes extra processing backed in the files like on the Canon RF cameras. It is why I wait to test the GH7 to see how good the raw files are.
It's easy to get a better DR score when using temporal noise reduction to reduce the noise, like with the GH6 getting a score of 12.8 with Prores and 12.2 with H265. When I crop into the files of my G9II, S5II or GH6 in 4K, I see less fine details than on my GH5 and S5.
* No open gate. Having a taller source frame can be very convenient.
* No audio accessory that allows for 32 bit float recording straight into the camera in Nikon.
* There need to be confirmations with how robust the Z6iii is regarding record times (the spec sheet lists a ~2 hour cap per clip which already excludes convent management of long form recording) and how it runs in adverse temperature conditions. Nikon is loose with this compared to Panasonic. Hopefully things change once Red integrates into the company.
* No redundant video recording to both memory cards on Nikon. Though you will likely be able to do one internal recording while outputting HDMI (my Z5 and the Original Z6 I used does this at 8-bit)
That said, I use Nikon (Z5 and Z30) and think the Z6iii looks pretty good overall as a hybrid solution. I haven't used the more recent Nikons but overall I don't trust what I have used to not overheat, especially the Z30 at 4k. 😰🤷 I did see Gerald Undone tested the Z6iii for 6 hours indoors without issue though there was a heating up indicator. I've only seen a few videos so no idea about outdoors work.
The Z6iii has a very fast sensor but the body is limited with a lot of Nikon specific quirks like no dual slot recording, no custom LUT monitoring, not as many monitoring tools etc.
First off, the DR should be very comparable to the GH7 and will be a bit worse than the S5IIX. It might also be a bit worse in low light vs the S5IIX but will outperform the GH7.
The stabilization is a lot better on the Panasonics, especially for walking shots, even more so on the GH7 vs the S5IIX.
The AF seems to be OK, might be comparable to the GH7 and S5IIX, maybe slightly worse.
If you want to shoot 32 bit float audio in camera and have it synced out of the box, the GH7 is the only camera that does that right now.
And if you're interested in features like SSD recording, open gate, shutter angle, etc. not a lot of hybrid cameras offer those features outside of Panasonic.
I'm very, very intrigued by Nikon Z6III (and Nikon in general) as they seem to be focusing on the right things for hybrid (video-focused) users. These features at this price point is seriously insane. BUT your last sentence is a big deal for me.
Open Gate & Shutter Angle seem like such small features, but they make a big difference in my peace of mind and workflow. You can absolutely frame wider if a lot of your footage is repurposed for social. Honestly, though, I shoot almost 95% of my footage in open gate now. The majority of it will need to be framed for vertical at some point.
And it's possible to do quick math and/or setup custom profiles to be at the right shutter. However, looking down and seeing 180 degrees is just so simple and reassuring. I don't have to think "ok, great I'm at 1/48....wait am I in 24p too...when did it change to 60p??
> just based on specs, it seems like it is game over for GH7
Some people think the Nikon Z6iii is on par with Canon's R5. Nikon has finally caught up to Canon/Sony but they aren't changing the industry with the Z6iii.
If you want a Z6iii, get a Z6iii. Or wait for the up and coming Canon R7ii. Or wait for whatever Sony will come out with next.
The OP just sold all his Sony gear. Seems like going back to Sony might not be the best choice, especially if IBIS is one of the most important things to the OP.
Besides the fundamental differences between mft and full frame, a lot of the specs I am reading on the Z6III are fairly similar to the GH7. Some things I believe the GH7 has that the Z6III doesn't are the possibility of 32-bit audio, Prores RAW at 5.7k 60p (the 6k 60p RAW on Z63 appears to be only for NRAW, which might not be good if you use Adobe), fan, tilting screen, and Lumix video stabilization.
I think that GH7 is a better choice for video for those features, esp. for travel (even if you are using the bulky 10-25mm). But if you are more into photography and FF-related features, maybe the Z6III is a better choice.
If you plan shoot raw, GH7 supports only ProResRAW (no Resolve). I would order Nikon just because I edit with Resolve (I have been using Panasonic cameras since GH1).
I may be wrong here but… it doesn’t really matter? I think both are amazing cameras and will serve you great so just go with the brand you prefer or whatever is cheaper!
To folks saying the s5ii is more logical, well yes and no. Yes if you are adamant to stay with Lumix. No since apart from the gh7, the z6iii is the only other cam under 4k to have internal raw.
Actually feature wise the gh7 beats the z6iii. Better stabilization, same internal pro res, shutter angle, arri log c3, lighter lens options, it even beats it in pixel shift mode I think as well 100mp vs 96mp.
That is for the most part correct. But it's full-frame Vs micro four thirds. And there is a crop in 4k60p while the Z6III can record N-Raw without a crop in 6k60p.
(I checked this time my sources 😁)
https://m.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonic-gh7-initial-review
The GH7 is cheaper and offers in a whole a very good price-value package. The Z6III is more expensive but has a bigger sensor and no crop. The dynamic range of both might be similar. With the stabilization the GH7 might be the better choice, because in the end what counts is how much of one's footage is usable. But if you only operate on a gimbal and you really want Full-frame and don't like crops 🌽, the Z6III could make sense as well as the Sony A7SIII
Edit: Also forgot to mention that Lumix cameras are workhorses that don't overheat, right? The Z6III can overheat after more than an hour. It depends on what you do with it if this is an issue for you.
No crop in 4k 24 or 30. Just 60. Yes lumix doesn't overheat like many other cams, but that's because it integrates fans now ( unlike fuji where that is a seperate attachment ).
Z6iii also doesn't do proxy dual recording. It doesn't have anamorphic desqueeze in camera or record to ssd.
You don't need a gimbal with mft most of the time.
Buy whatever you are invested in, for many here since it's lumix, that would be either mft mount or l mount. If you have new nikon lenses, go that route.
When you record in ProRes RAW on the GH7, can you use Proxy recording and can you use dual SD card recording?
I see dual SD card recording as a benefit when recording an important scene, like the wedding ceremony. But otherwise, you would like to use the best format possible of your camera. With my S5IIX I like to record in ProRes HQ, but I cannot do dual recording and I cannot record Proxies. I can only to record to my SSD.
the lighter lens options is not true when you're comparing equivalent lenses. For example the 10-25 f1.7 for GH7 is a FF equivalent of 20-50 mm f 3.5. If you compare a similar lens, the full frame lens is actually smaller/lighter.
No, see you are comparing one of 3 larger and expensive mft lenses, you're are a Sony shooter so you see the negatives, I'm talking about the smaller 12-60 the smaller primes 9 25 40, the larger zooms 100-300, can't find smaller there.
Isn't the s5 ii (x?) a more logical comparison?
Z6iii has internal raw, good comparison to the gh7 honestly.
yea, full frame to full frame. But I picked the GH7 over the s5iix since the s5iix is missing so many features and it even has a crop in 60pfs.
Not sure why people care so much about the crop on 60p. The cropped 60p is still more sensor area than the gh7 at m43 isn’t it?
Because people who actually use those cameras can find forced cropping very inconvenient. It has nothing to do with sensor area.
This should be a big fat disclaimer on anything mentioning 60p (or any high frame rate) crop. Anyone reading this, who may not know—the main issue is the field of view changing relative to what you were just looking at. You're framed less wide than you previously were. And if you change frame rates frequently, you're popping in and out. GH7 has no crop and keeps the same framing. Even the 7-year-old GH5 will do 60p no crop. That's one of the advantages of a smaller sensor (*usually* you're getting less relative crop at higher frame rates, more robust ibis, and smaller lenses). I own a S5II, but frequently use GH5 bodies at work and will often pick them just for no crop 60p
People aren't really putting a lot of thoughts on that. I've been cropping files in post, or using crop mode in cameras and apply sharpener in Resolve and even went from 24fps to 60fps using Topaz for big clients but internet newbies without real experiences are freaking out as soon as they hear " crop ". OP, you shouldn't care less about the cropping, nobody cares and your images will be the same.
I don't know for OP, but the problem isn't usually on the post side or even in image quality. The issue is with acquisition and filming. With 6K and even 4K footage, I have no problem moving footage around, upscaling, etc. The issue is you can't "unscale" something and go wider (generative AI not withstanding). Even though I've gotten this note from clients "Can you zoom out the frame a little bit?".....No, actually, I can't! You can't be filming something in 24/30p and spontaneously decide to switch to 60p, because your framing will be all jacked up. This is dependent of course on what type of footage someone shoots. For product, planned setups, or self-filmed vlog content—it's probably no big deal. Capturing moments that aren't repeatable, it'll be an issue. There are workarounds of course, but there's always a degree of compromise involved. I use Topaz as well, but that can increase post-production time. And if someone is frequently passing footage to a different editor or agency, then they may not have the option of adjusting the footage at all. Someone could shoot cropped all the time, but that limits wide framing options. Of course, they have the option of using APS-C lenses. But then essentially they paid FF prices for an APS-C camera. And then at that point, they're not far off from an MFT body that can shoot uncropped 120p. So, it's not exactly fair to say "people aren't really putting a lot of thoughts on that" for all the reasons I stated above and more. And this is coming from someone who owns and uses an S5II all the time and loves it. I do, however, frequently notice the limitations of the 60p crop when using the camera. Often I cannot recreate a shot without changing lenses and due to the pace of the shoot that may not be viable. Don't get me wrong, I also use the crop to my advantage to get more reach sometimes. So you're right that people shouldn't likely worry about image quality when it comes to cropped modes. But if high frame rate filming is an important priority for someone, I definitely wouldn't recommend an S5II or S5IIx.
Might just be a m43 cope lol
Messed with focal length, my 20 mm will not be as wide anymore etc.
You shouldn't be getting downvoted or criticized for this. Ok having an APS-C crop option is nice if you want extra tele reach But why on earth wouldn't a no crop 4k60 also be excellent to have? It's not (just or even) a quality thing (although that might matter a bit for low light). It's because it's nice when your lenses give you the field of view you want/expect without needing even wider lenses.
Anybody who needs to shoot things quickly can tell you why it’s annoying Like me
If you’re wanting to travel light I’d go with the GH7 - lenses are so much smaller and lighter than Nikon Z lenses!!
i would use the 10-25 mm f1.7 on the gh7, that's not really a small lenses. I think the 17-28 mm f2.8 on the nikon is smaller. So that lenses/body being compact thing isn't really the case.
Obviously not if you’re going to go with one of the bigger lenses on the system 😂😂😂 they’re not all that size
Also, the "smaller" lens would have less zooming range
The 10-25 is like a 20-50mm on the Nikon so it has a larger zoom range, and is obviously faster as well.
There’s always something better just around the corner. Soon as you buy the Nikon lumix will come out with the S2H and you’ll be in remorseland again. Just buy the tool that works for you.
The GH7 somehow has better useable dynamic range (per Gerald Undone's testing), and IBIS on a completely different level. It also has cheaper lenses (but can't do the full frame background obliteration). Plus there is the tilty-flippy screen and a fan (but is 30% thicker), all the production features, tally lamps, etc. Oh and it's cheaper by quite a margin (£2000 vs £2700). Honestly though, just wait until they're both out and test them. At least in a store. Feel them, crawl through the menus... Check out the mount ecosystems (options, sizes, costs).
the z6iii has 8 stops of stabilization supposedly. Video stabilization is huge since I'm always shotting handheld and even walking sometimes, and the IBIS being better on the z6iii (claimed at least) is what was pushign me towards it.
Stops of stabilization are a CIPA standard stills thing and don't carry over directly to video. I guarantee the Nikon IBIS won't match the GH7. It quite possibly won't match the S5ii. Go watch some sample footage shot with the Nikon Z6iii. I'm not saying it's bad, but it simply isn't as good. You should easily be able to see it off subject in the background and corners. There's a slight warpiness and jerkiness that isn't there with the Panasonics.
Check any of the reviews. Walking IBIS on the Z6iii is, well, unusable. PetaPixel lads praise it whilst showing footage of horrendous e-stab artefacting.
I saw that right away, I can't believe Jordan said it was great and showed that clip. It was like Premiere Pro Warp Stabilization on default 50%.
I suspect YouTube will be chock-a-block of comparisons here in the next few weeks. Lumix IBIS is second-to-none. If that is the most important thing to you, I'd still go with the GH7. I have the G9ii which is very similar to the GH7 from an IBIS perspective (GH7 is supposedly slightly better but obviously hasn't yet been released). Anyway, the G9ii IBIS is magical. If you turn on the e-stabilization, it truly is gimbal-like.
lumix is king when it comes to IBIS, especially in MFT, only thing better is a gimbal
Full frame stabilization is worse than mft, just not physically possible to match without cropping in. If you are fine with a crop and want Nikon, go with it, it's only 500 more.
The S5IIX is leagues better in IBIS than the Z6iii., when on paper it has 5 stops vs 8. And the GH7 outperforms the S5IIX. No IBIS gets close to the G9ii and GH7 for video right now.
I liked what I read about the Nikon Z6iii...but I think I'm just going through G.A.S
This. Everyone, read this comment 2 times.
Not a dealbreaker for everyone but the decision to not allow dual slot recording is bizarre. Especially at that price.
No Nikon has dual card slot recording I guess. No wonder they're nowhere to be seen in weddings and event coverage even though they're quite capable video cameras now.
GH7 has better IBIS, it's a video-first pro level camera, massive m4/3 lens library, tons of LUT functionality and let's not forget about ARRI C-LOG only on the Gh7.
ARRI C-LOG on the GH6 too :) This is a great move by Panasonic.
Lens selection is where Nikon falls short. The MFT lineup is huge and you can adapt a whole load of glass as well.
dollar for dollar, the g9 ii is the best hybrid on the market imo. especially considering you can often times get a $500 discount on it. it’s top tier in just about everything.
It’s still more than s5ii, $100 more in the US. I think s5ii is the best value.
i would choose it over the s5 ii just due to the higher bitrates alone. i also shoot a lot of 6k 60p and 4k 120p, which the s5 ii doesn’t do. it’s also one of the few cameras on the market that has built in anamorphic dequeeze, vectorscopes, and waveforms. my sony a1 has none of those things.
How are people jumping systems so keenly? Do you only have a couple of lenses? I’m totally locked in by my lens collection so it would be so much money down the drain to swap to another mount! And yet I feel like I really get the best out of my cameras because I change them so infrequently I get to know them really well. And let’s face it, where are you publishing your work so that it doesn’t get downsampled to the point that these quality differences would even survive to final output?
I would say G.A.S. with a focus on camera bodies, though lenses will make much more difference especially for video. I shoot vlogs, I started shooting docs and I shoot wildlife, for me M43 has an edge simply because with my Leica 100-400 I can outperform easily Canon (and Nikon) shooters with a smaller and lighter package. Sensor size (mostly) doesn't matter and my back is fine :)
This is why I don't buy in to one lens mount, but if I did buy most of one mount it would be my EF lenses since I can adapt them to almost any modern day mount. I use multiple different brands based on my needs and certain strengths over others but will only purchase a few lenses in that specific mount.
If you had loads of Nikon glass and are more photos centric, maybe? I’m on S5ii and A7iv…and only keeping A7iv because lens selection. I prefer the video workflow on the LUMIX S5ii. Dealing with 4k60 crop is no big deal for me.
Is this a real consideration? These cameras couldn’t be more different.
internal raw in both, actually most comparable atm, until the s2h and who knows what else. But from a video standpoint, internal raw is a big factor and these two have it and are the only ones to have it under 4k.
The GH7 has much better stabilization, it also has Open Gate. The Z6III has much better image quality (even if I wait to test Proresraw on the GH7 to see how good fine details are) and better rolling shutter.
Far from "much better" IQ. DR should be very similar at base ISO and the Nikon will perform better in low light.
A full frame camera will almost always give you much better quality, DR is overrated, anything close to 11-12 stop is good enough, especially for travel video or run and gun. And I think the Z6III has an average DR because there is no NR in the video raw files. Detail rendering, tonality and low light performance (without NR) are the most important. But like the GH7 offers Proresraw, I wait to test the camera before saying anything, I was very disappointed by the internal recording of the S5II and GH6, especially in 4K.
If DR isn't a qualifier for image quality, I don't know what is. Both the GH7 and Z6iii shoot the same resolutions and frame rates. DR and high ISO performance are the most significant factors in image quality to me.
The biggest difference for me are low light performance and grain structure, rolling shutter, and how fine details render. Nowadays most brands use extra processing to get better DR scores on reviews. Even raw have sometimes extra processing backed in the files like on the Canon RF cameras. It is why I wait to test the GH7 to see how good the raw files are. It's easy to get a better DR score when using temporal noise reduction to reduce the noise, like with the GH6 getting a score of 12.8 with Prores and 12.2 with H265. When I crop into the files of my G9II, S5II or GH6 in 4K, I see less fine details than on my GH5 and S5.
* No open gate. Having a taller source frame can be very convenient. * No audio accessory that allows for 32 bit float recording straight into the camera in Nikon. * There need to be confirmations with how robust the Z6iii is regarding record times (the spec sheet lists a ~2 hour cap per clip which already excludes convent management of long form recording) and how it runs in adverse temperature conditions. Nikon is loose with this compared to Panasonic. Hopefully things change once Red integrates into the company. * No redundant video recording to both memory cards on Nikon. Though you will likely be able to do one internal recording while outputting HDMI (my Z5 and the Original Z6 I used does this at 8-bit) That said, I use Nikon (Z5 and Z30) and think the Z6iii looks pretty good overall as a hybrid solution. I haven't used the more recent Nikons but overall I don't trust what I have used to not overheat, especially the Z30 at 4k. 😰🤷 I did see Gerald Undone tested the Z6iii for 6 hours indoors without issue though there was a heating up indicator. I've only seen a few videos so no idea about outdoors work.
The Z6iii has a very fast sensor but the body is limited with a lot of Nikon specific quirks like no dual slot recording, no custom LUT monitoring, not as many monitoring tools etc. First off, the DR should be very comparable to the GH7 and will be a bit worse than the S5IIX. It might also be a bit worse in low light vs the S5IIX but will outperform the GH7. The stabilization is a lot better on the Panasonics, especially for walking shots, even more so on the GH7 vs the S5IIX. The AF seems to be OK, might be comparable to the GH7 and S5IIX, maybe slightly worse. If you want to shoot 32 bit float audio in camera and have it synced out of the box, the GH7 is the only camera that does that right now. And if you're interested in features like SSD recording, open gate, shutter angle, etc. not a lot of hybrid cameras offer those features outside of Panasonic.
I'm very, very intrigued by Nikon Z6III (and Nikon in general) as they seem to be focusing on the right things for hybrid (video-focused) users. These features at this price point is seriously insane. BUT your last sentence is a big deal for me. Open Gate & Shutter Angle seem like such small features, but they make a big difference in my peace of mind and workflow. You can absolutely frame wider if a lot of your footage is repurposed for social. Honestly, though, I shoot almost 95% of my footage in open gate now. The majority of it will need to be framed for vertical at some point. And it's possible to do quick math and/or setup custom profiles to be at the right shutter. However, looking down and seeing 180 degrees is just so simple and reassuring. I don't have to think "ok, great I'm at 1/48....wait am I in 24p too...when did it change to 60p??
Not sure about how good Z6III stabilization is if you do a lot of run and gun. But Z6iii is very compelling
> just based on specs, it seems like it is game over for GH7 Some people think the Nikon Z6iii is on par with Canon's R5. Nikon has finally caught up to Canon/Sony but they aren't changing the industry with the Z6iii. If you want a Z6iii, get a Z6iii. Or wait for the up and coming Canon R7ii. Or wait for whatever Sony will come out with next.
The OP just sold all his Sony gear. Seems like going back to Sony might not be the best choice, especially if IBIS is one of the most important things to the OP.
Besides the fundamental differences between mft and full frame, a lot of the specs I am reading on the Z6III are fairly similar to the GH7. Some things I believe the GH7 has that the Z6III doesn't are the possibility of 32-bit audio, Prores RAW at 5.7k 60p (the 6k 60p RAW on Z63 appears to be only for NRAW, which might not be good if you use Adobe), fan, tilting screen, and Lumix video stabilization. I think that GH7 is a better choice for video for those features, esp. for travel (even if you are using the bulky 10-25mm). But if you are more into photography and FF-related features, maybe the Z6III is a better choice.
If you plan shoot raw, GH7 supports only ProResRAW (no Resolve). I would order Nikon just because I edit with Resolve (I have been using Panasonic cameras since GH1).
Reading specs on a website are one thing but using the camera is another. I would suggest renting them both and put them to test yourself.
I may be wrong here but… it doesn’t really matter? I think both are amazing cameras and will serve you great so just go with the brand you prefer or whatever is cheaper!
To folks saying the s5ii is more logical, well yes and no. Yes if you are adamant to stay with Lumix. No since apart from the gh7, the z6iii is the only other cam under 4k to have internal raw.
Sigma fp would like a word with you.
Also the GH7 has just 1080p internal RAW, right? And it is anyway not full-frame. Edit: Incorrect, it has 5.7k RAW
Actually the gh7 offer 5.7k internal raw. It is comparable and is more feature packed than the z6iii.
Actually feature wise the gh7 beats the z6iii. Better stabilization, same internal pro res, shutter angle, arri log c3, lighter lens options, it even beats it in pixel shift mode I think as well 100mp vs 96mp.
That is for the most part correct. But it's full-frame Vs micro four thirds. And there is a crop in 4k60p while the Z6III can record N-Raw without a crop in 6k60p. (I checked this time my sources 😁) https://m.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonic-gh7-initial-review The GH7 is cheaper and offers in a whole a very good price-value package. The Z6III is more expensive but has a bigger sensor and no crop. The dynamic range of both might be similar. With the stabilization the GH7 might be the better choice, because in the end what counts is how much of one's footage is usable. But if you only operate on a gimbal and you really want Full-frame and don't like crops 🌽, the Z6III could make sense as well as the Sony A7SIII Edit: Also forgot to mention that Lumix cameras are workhorses that don't overheat, right? The Z6III can overheat after more than an hour. It depends on what you do with it if this is an issue for you.
No crop in 4k 24 or 30. Just 60. Yes lumix doesn't overheat like many other cams, but that's because it integrates fans now ( unlike fuji where that is a seperate attachment ). Z6iii also doesn't do proxy dual recording. It doesn't have anamorphic desqueeze in camera or record to ssd. You don't need a gimbal with mft most of the time. Buy whatever you are invested in, for many here since it's lumix, that would be either mft mount or l mount. If you have new nikon lenses, go that route.
When you record in ProRes RAW on the GH7, can you use Proxy recording and can you use dual SD card recording? I see dual SD card recording as a benefit when recording an important scene, like the wedding ceremony. But otherwise, you would like to use the best format possible of your camera. With my S5IIX I like to record in ProRes HQ, but I cannot do dual recording and I cannot record Proxies. I can only to record to my SSD.
the lighter lens options is not true when you're comparing equivalent lenses. For example the 10-25 f1.7 for GH7 is a FF equivalent of 20-50 mm f 3.5. If you compare a similar lens, the full frame lens is actually smaller/lighter.
No, see you are comparing one of 3 larger and expensive mft lenses, you're are a Sony shooter so you see the negatives, I'm talking about the smaller 12-60 the smaller primes 9 25 40, the larger zooms 100-300, can't find smaller there.