I think a certain reality is creeping in. With all the rumors we had with peaking, xlr adapter etc. most of us build up too much expectation. We thought that Panasonic would have brought a revolution, embrace the gh2 hack followers movement, instead it is more of an evolution that will lack enough things so that it will not cannibalize or overshadow present or some future pro camera. I am sure we will find some of those what we think missing, in a higher end camera like proper 422, peaking, etc

We are getting some proper upgrade like better codec, seems DR and lowlight, better built quality also and surely less Jelo but sometime at the expense of a larger sensor for video. In the end when all the emotion will have died down, the gh3 will still be the nicest dslr for video, but not quite what the rumors have build it up to. I think to find a truly inovative company we will have to look at smaller players like Blackmagic.

@GH2UW

I already rold you that all this going in circles has no foundation.

HDMI output claims are all unfounded by now.

As for encoder, LSI and memory always have certain constrains. And no experts can fix it.

Panasonic is still thinking of just the camera. Blackmagic is thinking about the entire pipeline.

Guess who is going to win this year?

They should have consulted Vitali for their codec engineering team ;)

Or is he already working for them? o_O

@Vitaliy_Kiselev Why not? At least you you represent most if not all "serious" video users of the GH2/3.

I don't know why people keep saying the sensor is from Sony. On Panny's site I read yesterday it said "sensor made by Panasonic." Please don't tell me to find it....but I know what I read.

Also,in regards to the "Genesis" softness issues...I think it was the way they processed it in post. Myhint was the timelapse shot being soft(ish) also. I bet this cam can put out some sharp images.

I am sure that GH3 will have few significant firmware related upgrades.

I think it might be helpful to look back at what we were asking for and mentioning at the point the design decisions were being made, etc.

We asked for 1080P 50P and 60P. We got it. We asked for dedicated audio input and headphone jacks with uncompressed audio. We got it. Battery grip option? We got it. Clean HDMI? Sounds like we got it, but waiting to see the specifics.

None of these are the reasons we are really complaining. If this were the GH2 with those added features, there would be only minor complaints about the price and the community would be embracing the camera as a whole while (quietly) noting the room for improvement.

The primary reasons why we are complaining so much are:

1. The sensor appears to be such a redesign that we are talking about everything from a different FF crop ratio to concerns about the image quality (potentially) having changed completely. Almost none of us expected a single-aspect sensor with more in common with competing products than with the GH2 (and that is how some people are portraying it at the moment, whether true or not). Nobody expected that they might have to worry more about moire or check to see if could do things as well as the GH2, etc.

2. The market has gotten drastically more competitive over the course of the last year. While the established major camera manufacturers have been conservative in introducing new features and functionality, they have been more aggressive in their mid to low-end pricing, creating new competitors. But the bigger competition is coming from new sub-$10,000 dedicated video cameras and cinema cameras. The Sony FS-700 stands out for slow-motion (and promised4k via external recorder in future via paid update) and the BMCC stands out for 2.5K , 13 stop DR offered in RAW or 10-bit codec for ca. $3,000 (with the software to grade it included).

Keep in mind that before NAB this year, the Red Scarlet was the low price RAW released market offering with prices starting at $14-15k for the barest offering (and most people buying options for packages going over $20k from what I read). It also offered 4k using onboard recording, something neither of the cameras discussed could do.

In other words, our desires have expanded, the market has changed a bit and the new camera in the GH line seems to have given up some things we had no idea were even being considered. So that leaves a lot of us treating this camera more like an entirely new camera than a new GH. And for many of us, that is sad.

Here is hoping that the areas that were improved were done to such an extent that we can embrace the camera for it, despite the loss of things that were important to us (and the ones we did not know to ask for yet.)

I would also like to add that for me (personally) the GH2 at the time of release did everything I wanted from a camera at the pricepoint and size. I did not care about MJPEG because I never used it on the GH1. Everything seemed better. The additional things the hack added later on really helped me enjoy it more.

Well, I guess it's Black Magic Camera for me. I was really looking forward to 60fps... but I just can't justify spending over $1000 on a camera without 4:2:2 anymore.

@bwhitz I know right, because there are soooo many $1,000 4:2:2 cameras out there.

For me the increased crop factor is one of the most disappointing 'aspects' of the GH3. It just makes it even harder at the wide end. 15mm is the widest I have which gives an acceptable 28mm based on the GH2's 1.86 crop factor.

If the GH3 does indeed have a 2.1 crop then it appears 15mm will be more like 32mm which ain't so wide any more.

And my Voigtlander 17.5mm now goes from a 33mm to 37mm. It might not seem much on paper but...

In the meantime a 2nd GH2 is on my buying list before they all disappear.

The GH3 can wait for now.

So much of this is either outright speculation . . . or very nearly speculation. Specs and numbers only tell you a little bit about the camera. I'll never buy this or any other cam until it has been widely used and proven to be a good camera. The Gh3 could still very easily turn out to be an incredible tool, 4:2:2 HDMI or no. Cool it a bit, hold your horses and don't prematurely condemn it to suckfestdom.

I just spent the last couple of hours catching up on this thread (crazy right?). I have to laugh at ...um...most of these comments. I recognize that there are a number of people here that was lambasting the GH-2 over a year ago in the exact same way saying things like "it's not worth the upgrade" or "look at this or that in the sample footage" etc. Those same folks now own a GH-2. I can gurantee most of those same folks will "eventually" buy this camera.

Despite a few drawbacks this camera seems to have a lot to offer. It is definitely an all around better camera. Like I said earlier I have confidence that this machine will put out some great footage. The GH-1 was great and the GH-2 even better when it comes to the "final" image. As good as the GH-2 is I don't think Panasonic would skimp out on providing us with a comparable or even better image maker.