Personal View site logo
GH3 user reviews and opinions
  • 1089 Replies sorted by
  • Personally I wanted to see the ungraded version, before making judgement. Watching now

  • Got 'em right :)

  • @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.

  • Part 2 is live now -

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

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • 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.

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

  • @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.

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

  • @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.

  • 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.

  • " 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.

    Thanks..

  • i have to agree that the 50mbit setting is looking better than the all-I setting, in general. it seems to average-out the noise a bit. the difference is not as great in bright lighting conditions, however. when the hack-masters dig into this i bet we'll have usable options under varied lighting conditions. has anyone done a high NR setting test with all-I mode?

  • also- i do see sharpening artifacts at the 0 setting. i see edge rolling and ropiness. when i get to -3 or -4 it looks better to me.

  • @Tron I disagree that -5 is 'artificially' softening the image. all of these digital imagers have birefringent optical low-pass (blurring) filters in front of the pixel wells. that is where the softening initially comes from. the sharpening setting uses a digital filter to recover the image detail while minimizing moiré. i'll bet that if the sharpening had an on/off setting it would be softer than the value @ -5.

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

  • "Well, "0" on the GH3 is adding a lot of in-camera sharpening no matter what lens is on the camera. The generally accepted approach is to handle sharpening in post with a better processor and more subtle control. It's how we shoot all our cameras no matter what lens is on them."

    @jimagine I see no sharpening artifacts on the GH3 at the 0 setting, and I don't even see any artifacts after adding 25% sharpening in post. Your personal opinion on what constitutes a good image does not equate to a known fact, especially considering the fact everyone shoots with different lenses that affect the final image differently. If you want to get a Panasonic engineer on this message board to corroborate your beliefs, I'm certainly willing to listen to supportive technobabble, otherwise I will relegate these types of opinions to the GH pixel peepers mythology file. It is entirely possible that -5 is artificially softening the image on the GH3 which will actually result in sharpening artifacts developing to a greater extent when added in post.

  • Agree, right now I'm working with -4 -4 contrast and sharpening to see how it holds up as a base image, and I'm liking it. And it isn't about pixel peeping or obsessing over details. This is a new creative tool and it's so great that a place like this has people testing and interacting in real time as we sort the best settings out.

    Of course the best settings are, like all things creative, ultimately subjective. But a lot of us work from a common standard whether it's an F3, 5D, RED or GH - a wide DR negative that allows us to pull a great grade in post.

    But there's also nothing wrong with establishing a look that you love in camera and shooting with that all day long. Sometimes the latter is better depending on your schedule.

  • Small tangent - Like everyone, I've settled on .MOV 50Mbps 60p/24p for the best results. However, when I briefly switched to AVCHD to see what the results looked like, the resulting MTS only turned up to be 720x480 resolution? I'm thinking I didn't set something right in the menus but was wondering if anyone else saw this?

  • Yes it's been known that sharpness setting 0 does add sharpening.

    The settings range should have been from 0 to 10 to avoid confusion. But it is what it is.

    Some said the lowest setting does add sharpening, too. That's not a bad thing.

  • "thanks! have you seen noise problems in all-intra footage? because it looks good to me and the low-overhead to decode it makes the workflow easier, so far, from what i've tried."

    Yes and from everyone that I know that's tested it, the All-I concept is a fail. AVCHD gives a cleaner image than 72MB (probably due to the compression masking artifacts.) 50mb .mov seems to be the sweet spot.

  • You're right about the 20mm being very sharp. I's the first MFT lens I've used. My shelf is filled with Canon L glass, as well as Nikon AIS primes and lenses like the Sigma 50mm 1.4 which is as sharp as a full frame lens gets - even sharper than my Canon L 1.2.

    My point is that if the Lumix is somehow sharper than my best glass, I'd still set the camera up the same way and just add a bit more sharpening in post if necessary.

  • @jimagine Thanks for the tests and results. I'm definitely going to try those settings when I get back from vacation. One note though is that I think you did your tests with the Lumix lenses correct? I've found them to be sharp out of the box and I only mention that because I use the Voigtlander 25mm which is a softer lens already so it may affect the settings somewhat.