ASK & DISCUSS INDEX

10 years, 8 months ago - Matt Jamie

Thanks Paddy. I think my specific question is whether there is something out there compatible with my Canon lenses which will give me more in Low Light - I know the 5D II / III has full frame, but should I be looking to get more additional features for the money than I'd get with a shift to the 5...?

10 years, 8 months ago - Nora Jaccaud

Hi Matt, I have been doing some research the past few days about choosing GH4 or SONY A7S.
For low light as you understood SONY is winning and what I discovered is that Sony might be releasing soon a new version... let's see if they fix some small problems it has ( some people mention WB problem, some ergonomy with the buttons not being perfect for filming...)
I might wait a little and see for myself.
However those two GH4 and SONY A7S seem to be the new talk of the town for sure!

10 years, 8 months ago - aaron trinder

The GH4 is absolutely fabulous in most everyway. In low light its certainly not the 'best out there' (thats definitely the Sony A7S) but is more than usable up to 3200 ISO. The key thing is not to underexpose below -2 or -3 stops as noise increases dramatically. Also, be aware of not playing around with the master pedestal (just leave it at 0) and don't 'over flatten' the image.. If you've got Canon Lenses then you might want to get a EOS to M43 speedster adaptor from Metabones, which gives you an extra stop of light and adjusts your field of view closer to a super 35 sensor size. I'd be happy to suggest settings if you take the plunge. I really recommend it!!

10 years, 8 months ago - Matt Jamie

Thanks for all your replies. From here and a look on another thread the Sony A7s looks like the best option (a C300 is a bit out of my budget!). Assuming there are adaptors for Canon lenses for the A7s...

10 years, 8 months ago - Paddy Robinson-Griffin

It's not a direct correlation (rather it is, but different brands can compensate better) however low-light response varies with sensor size and inversely with resolution. Think purely in physics terms - a smaller sensor or higher resolution sensor needs smaller receptor 'pixels' to fit on the chip. That means light rays coming through the lens hit a smaller area, so fewer excitations per second, so harder to tell from stray noise on the sensor (in daylight the stray noise is efficiently overwhelmed!). Yes, some companies do manage to compensate better, but it still comes down to the number of photons hitting an area at any time.

10 years, 8 months ago - Matt Jamie

Thanks Nora. Yeah I've heard rumour about new version. They just brought out a new A7II but that's really a stills camera and doesn't have the lower res sensor and video capabilities of the A7s, so I wonder if a new A7s is on the way or not. I think if the A7s could record 4k internally it would be a no brainer; but even without that the full frame sensor, narrower depth of field and better low light sensitivity make it a winner anyway for me. Though more expensive once converters and the like are needed. I'm considering whether a manual converter (i.e. with no electronics) might be enough, since most video is manually set anyway. Difference of £25 or £250 is quite a lot for a converter!

10 years, 8 months ago - Tom Kelly

GH4 is leagues ahead of the 7D in every way imaginable including low light. However if low light is your main concern then there are other new cameras which are even better such as Sony A7S and or Canon C100/300 and Sony FS100/700.

Also the speed of the lenses is just as important as the size of the sensor so if your happy using primes then you should be fine with most modern large sensor cameras.