"Filmic" & "cinematic" seems to be Visual's equivalent of Audio's "warm" & "analog"

@jjj_ri_usa Thanks a lot, man! I'm very flattered by your words. :) @driftwood Thank you! Glad you liked it.

@andrevanberlo Thanks! Yes I think the GH3 works best with sharpness dialed down to -5 and using more refined unsharp mask or similar filtering in post, because the radius is a wee bit too large I think for that filmic "sharp but soft" feeling you will achieve if properly applied in post.

As for the ungoing moiré and aliasing discussion... it has to stop! I have yet to see any evidence of potential issues with moiré from my own GH3 footage from day one with a pre-production unit. The images we've seen with heavy moiré have been processed very poorly in post or using weird settings in camera. I am not concerned at all from what I've seen. I attach some screenshots from chart footage from the GH3 and older one I shot in the GH2 and also some examples from the new Canon C100 which costs about 5 times more. :)

The chart was shot with Natural -5 -4 0 -5 with the GH3. It will be a tad softer with -5 but -4 is pretty good example of the GH3 image. It is extremely well balanced and reminds of the GH2 but better and more controllable! The low contrast at -5 is also very nice.

There's an image comparing the OM-D sensor and GH3 in Lightroom RAW... The GH3 image was a tad shaky but compare the shadow/noise/colour etc. ;) And there's a sample showing a long exposure at ISO3200 and 5 minutes, it's unbelievably clean for an m43 camera. I also attached some grade tests and smooth gradation etc. Very limited time to post so putting out these random files and ideas, hope it gives you some nice input on the shiny new GH3...

Let me know if the attachments don't work, trying to upload from my jailbroken iPad :)

@cablefreak76 thanks for the chart test. I agree that the gh3 is better than the gh2 in that test. Did you use any hacks for the gh2? Based on those charts I would say the C100 is the winner, but not 5 times better than the gh3 ;)

keep on coming with tests :)

The OMD vs GH3, hmm, can you make the original raw's available and maybe a few more, of the same image off a tripod or ie guaranteed steady image, as it is the OMD seems some way ahead from this? not just sharpness but detail?

@cablefreak76 in the OMD-GH3 image comparison i must say i like the look of the shadows better in GH3 but the OMD has in this test much more detail. You said it was shaky, i would, like @adventsam, like to see a tripod comparison so the shaky bit is out of the equation...

@VK Thanks for the invite but im neither crying or imagining anything? Thanks though.

Gh3 looks to be a great cam for both stills and video. Moire can be worked around that is true. Still its a pain in the butt sometimes!

@endotoxic "Part of having more detail in capture (sensor wise) is having more moire on colors on prossesing."

Nah, I'm not sure this is the reason. Remember the sampling theorem; f < 0,5fs. In any sampling system there must be a anti-alising filter to avoid aliasing as f comes close to 0,5fs. A picture is sampled both in the horizontal and vertical domain (and video in the time dimension as well). The optical low pass filter in front of the sensor is designed to to this, but in order to get optimal sharpnes for most source material there is trade offs...

"THEY COULDNT MAKE BETTER IMAGE WITHOUT INCREASING BIT RATE, SO THEY CHOOSE BETER SENSOR FOR IT."

The chose a sensor and optical filter which is more tuned for details in stills versus an more effective optical low pass filter sutaible to blurr the image enough to avoid the most side effects in video.

A better version than previously but Vimeo seems to have encoding problems...

Is the 14-42 X Lens good enough to use with the GH3 for stills and videos? Around that price range is there any better?

@PhilMyself, that looks amazing. Great job!!

@JDN, did you download the video from vimeo? And I never played with fs100 or any sony footage so I can't compare the two.

@JDN Bokeh rendition is a lens feature.