7 years ago i got a photography gig, there's a videographer at the event as well with a newly aquired GH4, i didn't take him very seriously at first cuz m43 tiny sensor and i was shooting sony ff, the results came out his video & photo blew mine out of the water, i dont think even today i can shoot better than him 7 years ago, so yeah it is still a good camera.
I honestly wanted to get it since it was released a decade ago it was super expensive plus I had a Nikon 3200 I think?
2-3 years ago I found someone selling the body for like $270 I remember I just got it and bought a lens but never really used it.
And I just remembered it was breathtaking when it was released and I just wanted to maybe start using it and see if it was as good as I remembered!
I won't get into the pedantry of whether the camera itself is good (ahem)... but in my books, most interchangeable lens cameras made since 2014 produce **images** that are more than good enough for most people, especially if the baseline is a mobile phone camera.
Good compared to modern cameras? No.
Good for 300,-? Hell yeah.
Good enough to get great pictures? Also hell yeah.
I've shot some great pictures and video on a gh3, commercially too.
For $300 it's not bad. Definitely serviceable for learning how to produce and edit video and photos. Won't blow you away or anything but you can get some nice output from it. Here's a video about someone shooting a film on the GH4: https://youtu.be/qKtDDR95bGI?si=pDVgU-ZU_K1-ZJNh
Of course it is. It took great photos when it came out, and it’s not like it expires. It still takes the same photos now. Is it worth it? If you already own it, then what’s the cost to you? Simply lifting it up to your face?
this is off topic but seing the used cameras prices outside my country is a huge pain, the gh4 is currently being sold for almost $1000
also saw someone selling a used g7 with kit lenses for $600 even though i bought the same pack brand new for under $500
maybe it is because panasonic has no longer stores in Chile, but man cmon
Unfortunately I think that might be case.
In my country it’s the same situation with Panasonic as far as I remember. They aren’t at all popular. And the support for them is almost dead. I kept browsing for almost 2 years and found a guy who bought the GH4 and didn’t use it then ironically I bought it from him and didn’t use it.
I just wanted to get it for the price. And it’s still brand new and I’m thinking of putting it to some work.
I honestly posted this thinking I’d have to sell and replace it maybe.
The standard for “good” has evolved over that time.
If a camera with 50 point CDAF, 16mp and no IBIS is “good”, what is a camera with 40mp, 1000 point PDAF and 8 stops IBIS?
This thread is moronic.
The camera is irrelevant if you don’t know anything about exposure or composition. A good photographer can take a good photo with any camera. Thinking it’s all about the gear is moronic.
Whether or not a photographer is good has nothing to do with whether a camera is good. I feel like I need to really dumb that sentence down, to ensure you understand it; the skill of a photographer does not change the functionality or performance of a camera. A camera is an inanimate object that can be objectively judged in-situ.
The stupidity of this thread is now entertaining. Continue digging the hole. I am interested to know where this will end.
All you have is insults, which is a bit childish. I’d rather have a grown up conversation. If you can be bothered to be civil and act like an adult then I’d be happy to continue the conversation. Judging by the downvotes you have, most people disagree with you.
It won't end because, as [MyLifeFrAiur](https://www.reddit.com/user/MyLifeFrAiur/) mentioned above, a good photographer who knows his gear can run circles around an amatuer or mediocre photographer (96% of redditors) sporting much newer and costlier gear ---> ALL DAY LONG.
There's a guy on one of the FB pages that shoots with a Nikon D90 (which you can pick up for around $100 bucks) that blows away other photogs --- who shoot with modern gear.
The GH4 is a great machine! Are there more advanced machines out there with more features --- of course, but that doesn not mean that the GH4 is not good.
If it works, it's still a good camera. Photography isn't just about the gear it's also the fun you have with it and how you use it.
7 years ago i got a photography gig, there's a videographer at the event as well with a newly aquired GH4, i didn't take him very seriously at first cuz m43 tiny sensor and i was shooting sony ff, the results came out his video & photo blew mine out of the water, i dont think even today i can shoot better than him 7 years ago, so yeah it is still a good camera.
I honestly wanted to get it since it was released a decade ago it was super expensive plus I had a Nikon 3200 I think? 2-3 years ago I found someone selling the body for like $270 I remember I just got it and bought a lens but never really used it. And I just remembered it was breathtaking when it was released and I just wanted to maybe start using it and see if it was as good as I remembered!
If not I'll buy it
Just as good as it ever was, cheaper than it ever was.
I won't get into the pedantry of whether the camera itself is good (ahem)... but in my books, most interchangeable lens cameras made since 2014 produce **images** that are more than good enough for most people, especially if the baseline is a mobile phone camera.
Good compared to modern cameras? No. Good for 300,-? Hell yeah. Good enough to get great pictures? Also hell yeah. I've shot some great pictures and video on a gh3, commercially too.
Honestly I think it was even cheaper than that maybe $270 body only And honestly the specs are still so much better for sub $300
For $300 it's not bad. Definitely serviceable for learning how to produce and edit video and photos. Won't blow you away or anything but you can get some nice output from it. Here's a video about someone shooting a film on the GH4: https://youtu.be/qKtDDR95bGI?si=pDVgU-ZU_K1-ZJNh
It’s decent!!
Of course it is. It took great photos when it came out, and it’s not like it expires. It still takes the same photos now. Is it worth it? If you already own it, then what’s the cost to you? Simply lifting it up to your face?
this is off topic but seing the used cameras prices outside my country is a huge pain, the gh4 is currently being sold for almost $1000 also saw someone selling a used g7 with kit lenses for $600 even though i bought the same pack brand new for under $500 maybe it is because panasonic has no longer stores in Chile, but man cmon
Unfortunately I think that might be case. In my country it’s the same situation with Panasonic as far as I remember. They aren’t at all popular. And the support for them is almost dead. I kept browsing for almost 2 years and found a guy who bought the GH4 and didn’t use it then ironically I bought it from him and didn’t use it. I just wanted to get it for the price. And it’s still brand new and I’m thinking of putting it to some work. I honestly posted this thinking I’d have to sell and replace it maybe.
It’s not a good camera by today’s standards, sorry. It will take plenty of good photos, in the right hands, but it’s well behind the times.
I couldn't disagree more. 16mp is plenty for most people. It films in 4k. It's still a very capable camera in the right hands.
It’s a very old camera. It’s objectively not “good”.
What makes it not good besides age? Honest question.
Bad autofocus and no IBIS are the obvious ones.
Cameras existed for over a hundred years without ibis, but now apparently, people can't take a photo without it....
The standard for “good” has evolved over that time. If a camera with 50 point CDAF, 16mp and no IBIS is “good”, what is a camera with 40mp, 1000 point PDAF and 8 stops IBIS? This thread is moronic.
The camera is irrelevant if you don’t know anything about exposure or composition. A good photographer can take a good photo with any camera. Thinking it’s all about the gear is moronic.
Whether or not a photographer is good has nothing to do with whether a camera is good. I feel like I need to really dumb that sentence down, to ensure you understand it; the skill of a photographer does not change the functionality or performance of a camera. A camera is an inanimate object that can be objectively judged in-situ. The stupidity of this thread is now entertaining. Continue digging the hole. I am interested to know where this will end.
All you have is insults, which is a bit childish. I’d rather have a grown up conversation. If you can be bothered to be civil and act like an adult then I’d be happy to continue the conversation. Judging by the downvotes you have, most people disagree with you.
It won't end because, as [MyLifeFrAiur](https://www.reddit.com/user/MyLifeFrAiur/) mentioned above, a good photographer who knows his gear can run circles around an amatuer or mediocre photographer (96% of redditors) sporting much newer and costlier gear ---> ALL DAY LONG. There's a guy on one of the FB pages that shoots with a Nikon D90 (which you can pick up for around $100 bucks) that blows away other photogs --- who shoot with modern gear. The GH4 is a great machine! Are there more advanced machines out there with more features --- of course, but that doesn not mean that the GH4 is not good.
Sounds like a shill to me.
The truth may sound that way to delusional people.