After having 2.500 images online i want to start with taking footage now.

I own a Nikon D7100 with Sigma 17-50 2,8 and Sigma 50-150 2,8 plus a Velbon tripod. I love the image quality of this combination but for video i find it very complicated:

- very difficult to find sharpness plane on liveview monitor
- autofocus not usable in reality
- no aperture controll in liveview


I am trying to find a system to substitute my nikon gear which gives me best photo and video quality and i was thinking about

- Canon 70d or 5d Mark II
- Panasonic GH4

Questions:

- i am not sure if getting a Canon DSLR is a good idea for video regarding the better possibilities of DSLM�s like 4K and focus peaking etc.
- i am not sure if the GH4 will get me a image quality near D7100 or 70D (regarding myself as semi-pro because i was a freelance photojournalist once)

Maybe someone has experiences with that systems or a better idea, maybe Sony or some improvements for my Nikon system?

Well, there are many things that go into "quality".

The GH4 can shoot absolutely fantastic footage with amazing detail/resolution that is hard to match for anything close to its price.

Of course, the small sensor has its disadvantages like poor ISO performance over 800. Canon's color science is usually still the best, and Sony will give you some low light monsters (at the expense of overheating issues, low still resolution, low battery life).

A ROUGH breakdown according to my personal experience:

Panasonic GH4/GH5 - VERY nice to work with, can take pretty much any lens on the planet, really good battery life, amazing 4k in the right conditions. Not the greatest ISO and of course the small sensor calls for wider lenses, but is very useful for wildlife. The flipout screen is VERY useful (shame on anyone who doesn't provide one). 10-bit recording in the GH5.

Canon 5D mk II/III - the built-in image quality (codec) isn't great. You would have to use Magic Lantern and shoot RAW to get results comparable to the GH4. The problem is that RAW is a pain to work with... And filming with the Panasonics is much, much more intuitive.

The Sony a7s II - absolutely amazing low light performance and very nice image quality overall. There are issues with battery life, overheating and it can only shoot 12mp stills, making it borderline useful for timelapse. For 4k timelapse 12mp is the absolute MINIMUM but 20+ mp is always very useful in post. No flipout screen... Do a couple of near-the-ground wildlife shots and you will soon regret not having one...

---

Currently, there is NO camera that can do it all (under $15,000 and with a portable size). I have looked and looked for years.

What I would consider the perfect beast:

� GH4/GH5 handling, controls, slow motion, detail. Flipout screen. Lens compatibility. Crop factor for wildlife.
� Sony ISO performance.
� Canon color science.

Equipment doesn't matter much... you could even shoot stock footage with canon 550d.

Don't agree. In this market the buyer will go with the higher quality video especially if there are a lot of videos in that particular category.

Thank you jjneff, some folks are just too amateurish to understand this basic fact.

Talking about the Panasonic GH4 of course

Thank you jjneff, some folks are just too amateurish to understand this basic fact.

Yes, but an Arri Alexa and an iPhone 4 at the same location and time will yield very different results. Light, subject, camera movement, framing etc. are very important but saying that equipment doesn't matter is a bit silly...

I'll just leave this here for an example; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztpX3AO1UtU (Red Weapon vs Iphone 7+)

Yes, I've seen that video (and many others) and I have also filmed with iPhone 7 and Galaxy S8. And I even have a gimbal for them. They are good, but nowhere close to professional cameras... And not that close to a GH4 either. It's nice to have quite good quality always with you though. Even the still image quality comes far behind a real DSLR.

Dynamic range, for example, is a BIG part of making something look really professional, and while you don't need 14 stops in every single shot, as soon as you do it will separate the equipment. Highlight rolloff is a BIG giveaway. Big time. That's only one element. The pure size of the pixels that can gather light is another.

Ever wonder why Game of Thrones isn't shot on an iPhone 7?

---

As with basically anything, talented and experienced people can produce stellar material with cheap equipment, but it will still be much better with professional equipment. That is why professional equipment exists.

Dude, if the equipment doesn't pay off, why investing a kidney for it?

Who said anything about equipment paying off? We're discussing whether an Arri Alexa creates a better image than an iPhone 7 or not. It does. Big difference. Very big.

Ever wondered, how much money they get to shoot GoT and make a whole episode in time? If they would have all the time they wanted, they could also play around and shoot it on iPhone7.

I don't have to wonder, it's public. And if it was shot on an iPhone 7 it wouldn't look as good. That's just a fact.

I think everyone agrees that higher quality (or more expensive) equipment doesn't automatically mean higher quality shots. But saying 'it doesn't matter what you shoot on' probably isn't the best advice... because it does. 

So, it is not the equipment that makes quality video, but the person behind it. #fact

Yeah, that's essentially what I just said! But you need a certain minimum standard when it comes to selling stock. If your advice was for people starting out in video or photography, then I'd completely agree... get the hang of it, learn the settings, work on composition and lighting, see if it's for you. It could be a My Little Pony SD 'my first webcam', as long as it takes video or photos.

But if you're selling stock then it's slightly different. Buy a whole bunch of cheap cuts of meat to experiment with getting the right level of 'doneness' at home? Sure thing. Buy a whole bunch of cheap cuts of meat to experiment with getting the right level of 'doneness' in the restaurant you've just opened, for paying customers? Not the best idea.

That's my point!