Personal View site logo
GH3 user reviews and opinions
  • 1089 Replies sorted by
  • " Your personal opinion on what constitutes a good image does not equate to a known fact'

    I don't know what this means Tron. This is, of course, my opinion, but I'm not pulling it out of a hat. I'm basing it on years as a creative director, producer and owner of a production company and studios. It is certainly common knowledge within the film making community that cameras like the 5D and GH3 have exaggerated sharpening as defaults and dialing it down gives the best image to grade and sharpen in post. Many professional editors and colorists expect to handle these tasks with expensive computers and software capable of doing a much better job in post than the small processor in-camera can provide. That's just our opinion and you certainly should be comfortable with yours.

    But please read my post above and my opinion regarding the subjectivity of all creative decisions.


  • Beautifully shot and edited footage, Jim. Have you compared the 50 mbps MOV files from the GH3 with any of the GH2 "hacks"?

    Thanks Scaper, I've never shot with a GH before...or a MFT camera for that matter so I can't compare them.

  • @jimagine

    Personally I do not like recording so flat with neutral settings. Many professional dp's I work with get their look in camera and this is a style I adopted. Shooting at such negative settings introduces more noise into your footage, then adding de noise can soften image.

    Unless your camera is recording Raw, I feel you should get the look in camera you are going for. Recording at -5 saturation is very difficult to bring back the colors without running into other problems.

    If you feel sharpness is to high at 0, the lowest I would go is -1, the same goes for all settings.

  • please, who are these dps and what work have they done?

  • @christianhubbard

    I'm not here to make this a pissing contest and definitely not here to say wow I worked with this guy or that guy. Point is many dp's I worked with, seen work and have been on many sets get their look in camera.

    Yes major budget movies and shows will generally have a professional colorist working on the project, this is very different though than purposely recording flat with a dslr camera though. Red, Arri, f3 are very different compared to a Dslr.

    Run your own test, no need to even read what I am posting. Go and shoot your saturation and -4 and try to bring it back in post, you're going to run into certain colors popping more than others.

    Back on topic, my opinion though is I never like to record with such flat settings as you lose a lot of information.

  • I think it is good to use any of existing topics discussing flat image approach.

  • I think it would be almost impossible for me to get a great in camera image in some of the theater and night club shooting I do. I've gotten some really great results and then some absolutely awful results. I think that the entire idea of shooting with a more Neutral or Flat image is to be able to have the latitude to make changes whereas if I bake it in that makes it super hard to fix problems and end up with great results.

    It's kind of like the issues I had with Mastering Audio projects that were mixed poorly and in the end that limited just what I could do to fix the problems and end up with a great finished product. Anyway From what i've seen none of the videos looked like super flat picture profiles we see in high end cameras. I think there was a nice balance struck. So far I really like the GH3 footage i've seen with things dialed down a bit. Not all the way on sharpness, but -3 or -4 seems to be enough. Everything else can come all the way down IMO.

  • Vitaliy- can you suggest where we take this discussion on flat image? i forgot the topics and i would like to respond to @FilmingArt because i think he makes a valid point. there is a need for both approaches, imho.

  • Im not sure if my Gh3 is faulty. EVF Preview image in in low light is very noisy. it looks like on ISO 12000 or more even when actual ISO is set to 200. EVF adjusting does not help (brightens etc.) Actual recorded mov its clean. Its only in lower light conditions in good light preview looks good. Can someone confirm the same thing in EVF in low light or my unit is faulty. Tell me please as I have last day to send GH3 back and cant check it anywhere around.

  • @konjow - we had the same thing going on with our cam. Hopefully it'll get fixed in a firmware update

  • Part 2 is live now -

  • @Shian thank again, for releasing the cams, that's exactly what some people including me thought, to me GH2 is a winner overall, can work with the highlights to make it look like GH3, I think. BMC looks nice with DD, holding highlights, but resolving power seem to lack something, skin tone seem to miss some chroma subtleties.

  • Got 'em right :)

  • Personally I wanted to see the ungraded version, before making judgement. Watching now

  • thanks @shian. So no point to replace...

  • @shian Very informative comparison, appreciate your efforts... looking forward to Pt 3. Appears AVCHD is a no-brainer on the GH3, but I imagine the ALL-I codec could become formidable if it were hacked into the 150+ mbps range... I wonder if the intent by Panasonic was to throw hackers a bone and allow tweaking in true ALL-I space.

  • I got GH3 and 2 flipped around. All in all GH3 footage looked better than 2 for me.

    And of course Blackmagic looks several miles ahead of the rest. REally strong tell at the end, GH3 looks over-sharpened in comparison and overall color depth lacks.

    But so far if I were in the market for either a GH2 or 3 it looks like 3 would be the logical choice. Glad that people finally realized ALL-I is not good. Bigger number does not mean better footage.

  • @shian Does the 5D MKIII really give those vertical streaks at low iso and low light, or was something off in the settings?

  • I would think the 50Mbit QuickTime will give the best overall image in low light on the GH3. All-I might do good in good light with moving camera or action.

  • Interestingly, in the blind "taste" test, I was very biased towards the GH2, with the 5DMII and BMCC both coming in second pretty equal to each other. However, I understand that some settings on the GH3 were messed up, so I'll wait for the next couple tests before forming any strong opinions on that cam. I think this test does go to show just how good the little GH2 is in the right hands. I for one am sticking to my GH2 until I am able to move up to (an as-of-now-non-existant) S35mm RAW mirrorless camera with global shutter.

  • @konjow, I don't have that problem. The EVF is fine in low light.

    @John_Farragut, I just got my GH3 and I like the 50Mbit quick time much more than the All-I.

  • All-i at 72mbps isn't going to be brilliant. But when (and if) the quicktime .mov modes can be hacked its natural to expect an improvement...

  • Wow Gh3 improved DR a lot. Skin tone looked nice, too. BMC seems worth the money. Gh2 the sharpest but the worst DR and the greenish skin tone in shadow. 5DMk3 the worst noise. I like Gh3.

  • From blind test my preference was : 1 cam1, 2 cam4, 3rd cam3. Hmm in order of decreasing price...

    I was wrong from choosing the cams...So I give here my personal marks : BMC : 19/20; GH3 : 17/20; GH2 : 16/20 That is for the very first test of the lady face (only for these 3 cams)