Personal View site logo
Make sure to join PV on Telegram or Facebook! Perfect to keep up with community on your smartphone.
Official Panasonic GH3 topic, series 2
  • 1024 Replies sorted by
  • Resolution is not everything when in comes to the GH2. I'd be happy to trade a little resolution for more dynamic range any day.

  • I think this camera will please some and disgust others. If it is a Sony sensor like 99% chance from the info that we have it will have some aliasing and moire but better low light and dynamic range. So some will really like the image even with the added moire/aliasing because they might get 1 or 2 stop better low light and DR. For example the latest EBU camera test, also referred to the BBC test, rated the Nikon D800 at about 12 stop of DR. For me it is too what level of alias/moire vs Low light/DR that will be the deciding factor.

    Contrary to many, I think crap test shots are good example to see the true quality of a camera because with some good prepared and well plan shot, everything can look amazing.

  • @Tron

    This example was shot at neutral, which i take is 0,0,0,0

    "I’m not sure, but I think the GH3 doesn’t have the same picture profiles as the GH2 (vivid, nostalgic etc) and therefore I couldn’t work with my familiar settings. I used all settings on neutral, and I find that the GH3 1080p25 at 72Mbps Intra all i frame H264 codec (all footage was shot with this setting) is very noise free and has plenty of room for extensive grading, albeit a 4:2:0 codec.

    http://www.workstation.nl/gh3eng.html

    Disclaimer : All footage (except the title-sequence) was shot with preproduction model of Panasonic GH3 (firmware 0.5). Production models are subject to change. Settings: 1080-25p - 72 Mbps H264 in a quicktime wrapper (.mov) Camera settings: 200 ASA and standard picture profile Lens: Voigtlander 25mm/0.95 with variable ND filter."

  • Canon has announced the release of its output 4:2:2 5DmIII for April! Everyone expects the first images of the mount BBMC in 4/3. Panasonic GH3 and will be very bland next to competitors as efficient. I'm ok with you, of course, we must wait for the first real tests by real filmmakers with the final firmware. I'm also ok that current judgments are more passionate than realistic. BUT, let's be sure if Panasonic does provide an 8 bit 4:2:0 with return of aliasing and moiré, and an image that looks like for the moment the Canon mid-range (that I saw for the moment reminds me of the tone images 7D or 550D!) = the GH3 will be a total flop. Hack or no hack. I love these comments passion. They reflect an expectation full of hope. Hot and love for the GH2. Passion: "Shit, it's true, the images of GH3 are currently vraiments ugly." And they are! Even those of Philip Bloom for some. Realistic: "Wait and see." What we all do. No choice! In the end, in both cases, it is the passion that speaks. But if you are objective, Panasonic would never have released a camera if it was not 95% of its potential already. We have reason to believe that the final adjustments are necessarily trivial. Unless Panasonic announces new release of its time camera. Canon has put a kick in the ass to Panasonic. BBMC when we will also see that it's still royal to have images in 12-bit 4:2:2 for Postprod. So continue to shout loud and clear that the GH3 seems to be shit for the moment!

  • "This example was shot at neutral, which i take is 0,0,0,0 "

    Looks to me in this video, that it's about GH2 level of detail. Aftermarket 3rd party lenses (the Voightlander) look really really good on the GH-line. I dunno, but there has always been something with Panasonics lenses that just doesn't look right. Anyways, the over-sharpened crushed-detail look, is from lens issues or picture profile issues. This video shows that it does have the detail when used properly.

  • @bwhitz, the amsterdam video doesnt compare gh3/gh2. Yes gh3 seems to be a good cam. For sure there are a lot of improvement in this cam (wifi, color, DR, 1080@60p, etc...) But I agree with danyyyel about crap videos telling more than elaborated ones. And the crap clip shown by amateur tells me more like a shild who never lies speaking to me:-)

  • For the japanese who are reading us :-) We are very pleased with your work and we know it is hard to create new devices like gh3. Thank you.

  • @magnifico

    he amsterdam video doesnt compare gh3/gh2.

    This doesn't matter and it doesn't have to. I've certainly used the GH2 a great deal... I know what the detail I'm looking for looks like. Some of the GH3 clips have it. Some don't. But once ANY SINGLE GH3 video comes out and shows it has the detail level of the GH2... then it's an indication that they ARE ALL capable of it. Mushy over-sharpened garbage has been shot on the GH2 too... it doesn't mean that just because some people use the wrong lenses and settings that ALL videos fallow suit. Last I heard, the GH3 doesn't have an "operator error" prevention feature.

    I don't see what you're getting at here?

  • I see that there have been enough really good looking videos from the GH3 so far to be confident that it will be possible to get great looking detail from it. It's certainly not in the Canon level of lack of detail as some have been suggesting.

    I'm encouraged by the statements from those who say it handles grading very well and they're seeing less noise. We won't really know the full story until multiple users get them in their hands and we see some really serious testing and real world use.

  • The camera suffering moirè effect

  • The camera suffering moirè effect

    Believe me, camera is not suffering :-)

    Most of them not even born yet :-)

  • I hope to get my hands on GH3 pre-production model this Thursday afternoon for an hour during a training demonstration at a mate's workplace. So far I'm liking the look of the encoder (High Profile Level 5) based off test mov files. All being well Thursday will allow me to give a personal opinion of the rest of its capabilities.

  • @driftwood Best of luck with that, Nick. :)

  • Be interested to hear what you find out. On the other end of the scale, Sony have just announced their F5 and F55, which will put some real pressure now on the other players at the top end of the scale.

  • @driftwood

    Sounds good. Have fun with it and let us know what you think about it. Will you be trying it with m4/3s lenses or just legacy ones?

  • @bwhitz I whish for gh3 the best success.

  • Okay. The GH3 is still in pre-production, the version of firmware is 0.95 But if I see that video shows a marked moiré, I can deduce that nature is it. In other words I want to say that if the Nikon D800E had to remove the optical low-pass filter with a consequent improvement in the moiré, do not see why they have not been able to do with the panasonic GH3. Already with the GH1 had a net improvement in the moiré than the Canon 5D, but with the GH3 seems the moire is worsened.

  • So what exactly makes the GH2 so good at avoiding moire and aliasing? Was it just dumb luck or is it something about that sensor that minimizes it?

    As for the GH3, I too would really like to have a less noisey stills camera than my GH2 and I also really like the wi-fi possibilities for my bird photo hobby. I'll sit on the fence until July or August and see what happens. No hurry.

  • I've seen some really promising looking video from the GH3. There's no rush to go and get it before we see more definitive proof of just what the GH3 is like. I think it's entirely possible that Panasonic struck the right balance between Video and Stills quality. There may be certain settings or lens combination that lead to Moire and Aliasing, but it's clear that its not a constant issue. Some video looks clean.

  • @ragnar I have a little idea about this... Here maybe is the secret of gh2 : 1920x1080x9=18662400 is about the resolution of gh2 : 18.3 Mpix. We would have a binning of 9 !! 9 pixels for one point of video : there you can define a center (the one in the middle of the 9 points) and ponderate the others (by distance, etc) in an efficient way.

  • The GH2's 16:9 still resolution is 4976 by 2800, not nearly enough for an exact 3x downscaling. The pairs of correlated stuck pixels in the RAW data suggest that the sensor is probably doing something like 2x2 binning on-chip for video, with further scaling after read-out. I suspect that just a simple 3x downscaling won't work very well anyway; downscaling directly to the final image size without some sort of more sophisticated pre-filtering tends to cause plenty of moire. For example, check out http://bvdwolf.home.xs4all.nl/main/foto/down_sample/down_sample.htm

  • @bg2b, ok thx I was wrong, I should have googled : 16:9 still resolution is 4976x2800 as you said.

  • BW 4976x2800 is not 16:9. 4976x2799 is :-)

  • wow so many negative comments about the GH3 here. Its almost as if some people are trying to get others to turn away from the GH3 so they dont feel left out because they cant make up their mind on weather to get it or not. If you dont like it, dont complain or whine about it. If you're so satisfied with the GH2, then why bother even commenting on the new camera if it's such a disappointment to you. You're now just trying to justify you're reason to stick with the GH2 and get people to agree, because you're scared to get to pre order the new camera.

    Like the great's say, the camera is a tool. If you cant work around the problems of the GH3 like how we have done that for the GH2 or 5D and all, then work on your fundamentals first. Sheeshkebab!

  • We just comment footages with the not-born-yet-gh3. Having in mind that the chain is this one : gh1->gh2->gh3.

    It is not a question of buying or not buying, or fundamentals... It is not about photography or cinematography. It is, as far as I am concerned, just a geek question.

This topic is closed.
← All Discussions