@bleach551 From the other point of view, crop 2x gives you possibility to turn normal, cheap primes into great tele lenses under dirty cheap price, true? And there are also many wide FX primes which are unexpensive because of the lesser IQ in their corners and with GHx we don't worry about that, we use only centre of the image where soooo many lenses are just great. And with GHx we can use ANY lens, not only expensive Nikkors. None of us knows what GH3 really can, and it was the same with GH1 and GH2 before VK hacked them. 2 years ago there were many people who doubted GH2 will ever reach the level of hacked GH1 and look now! GH3 is very exciting new camera, we will see soon what it really can.

@bleach551 I'm confused, a tokina 11-16 is the same price whether it's mounted to a D600/7000 or a GH2/3. Look, I'm done rewarding manufacturers who put shit codecs in their 'Pro' models or require $1000 recorders to get acceptable output. VK and the PV community developed better bitrates for the GH2 and it influenced Panasonic to follow their achievements with factory-supported high bitrate iterations on their latest model, the GH3. If I wanted to go back to 24Mbps I would jump all over Nikon's latest fluff, but that jazz is old and unwelcome now. The 72Mbps ALL-I is less than half what pro-res takes up for storage, yet delivers footage free of visible artifacts (as far as I can see). It is a nice archive format and good starting point for importing to my NLE workflow, so I see no reason to buy external recorders that will deliver footage I cannot distinguish as superior when pixel peeping... But to each their own.

@Tron,

I have owned a Nikon D7000 and I didn't see Moire nearly as bad as you referred to. It looked as good as some gh2 footage but with slightly more moire but I always controlled that with a shallower depth of field. The internal video recorded codec was good enough for me. And, so far, I am seeing moire on the GH3, although I know that it has not reached it's final version yet. Add to that a 2X crop factor and 4:2:0 hdmi out and the $700 dollars difference between the GH3 and D600 doesn't look so bad now.

I know that the 4:2:2 hdmi out for the d600 has a black border around it now but I believe so did the D800 initially until firmware fixed it.

I didn't want a full frame sensored dslr because of the really shallow depth of field and that was why I wanted the gh3, however, I just don't think I can live with a 2X cropped sensor camera and buying expensive wide angle lenses.

@bleach551 The D600 is definitely intriguing for it's ability to record 4:2:2 uncompressed to a Ninja or Shuttle, however Nikon's downscaling method has resulted in some of the worst moire I've ever seen on any DSLR. I'm sure Mosaic will come out with a filter for the cam eventually, but when you add up the cost of a $300 filter plus Ninja you're looking at about $3400 just to get going. You could almost buy (3) GH3's for that kit price or a BMC camera. And both the GH3 and BMC already have high quality codecs implemented without the need for additional add-ons.

@mpgxsvcd group4: people who are completely satisfied with their GH2 footage and want gh3 a big success. Then they will not be forced to upgrade because they dont care other people perceive them as having inferior equipment regardless of whether those things really make a difference or not.

my group :-)

I just got finished looking at the difference between the size of the bodies and size of the sensors of the GH3 and the D600 and just thought it would be interesting to show. Also, just knowing that a 16:9 image would be coming from a 4:3 image sensor on the GH3 and a roughly 16:9 image sensor of the D600.

@sicovdplas

So "unhackable" = "unusable" now? Just curious about what bit rate you plan on using that will take the GH3's stock options from not worth buying to better than "ok".

Like many here I have a Canon T2i, A few nice Camcorders from Canon and Sony, GH1 and a couple of big JVC DV GY500U Video Cams. Even if the GH3 ends up having an intermittent issue with Moire and Aliasing, there are aspects of the camera that would still be very useful for me as part of my toolkit. The thing is that i'm not convinced that the Moire and Aliasing are going to be as big a problem as some are suggesting. If it's a real big problem then that could change my calculations. However i've seen some really nice looking footage that gives me some confidence in the GH3.

People seems to be either in one camp or the other. Until we see final footage from production camera I will await any judgement. But everyone has the right to complain. Most of the gh1 and gh2 users on this site came because it offered some special qualities. The main difference compared to its fellow DSLR was the lack of moire/aliasing and true 1080p resolution.

Now if the gh3 has the same level of moire/aliasing and lower resolution of the other dslr. I think they are in there right to be upset. In my case, I will await final production version of the gh3 to make a choice. As a Nikon shooter (who also bought Canon for video) who made the move to the gh2 because of its image quality. If it is the same as my D800 with moire/aliasing, I will just buy a moire filter and hyperdeck shuttle for my D800 as it will cost me less than buying a gh3 for now. The BMC could be next and bye bye gh line. The reason is simple, I don't feel any attachment to any brand and fanboyism as I smell in the last post.

@mpgxsvcd I'm in the 1st group and really looking forward to this camera.

People complained when the GH2 was released how it wasn't an upgrade and how it wasn't as good as hacked GH1 and now the same thing continues with the GH3. Relax folks it might not be a worthwhile upgrade for everyone but that doesn't mean its not a worthwhile upgrade.

@svart fearing not you become your enemy in the instant that you whine

@svart

It is quite simple. Some people will buy it day one because it has unique wireless capabilities, a silent shutter option, still has top notch video for its price, and they know that they can work around the issues that we have seen with the pre-production models.

Then there is a second group of people who want to buy it but are skeptical about several of the issues we have seen with pre-production firmware. They will wait for the first round of testing on a production model before forming a firm opinion.

Then there are the people who are completely satisfied with their GH2 footage but they are scared that someone will come along with another camera that the general public thinks is better. Then they will be forced to upgrade because they don’t want to have other people perceive them as having inferior equipment regardless of whether those things really make a difference or not.

The 1st group of people will buy the GH3 right out of the gate because they can really use the new functionality and they know that the footage will be good enough. They will test it so that the second group will be able to make an informed decision on whether it will be a good purchase for them or not.

There is nothing that can be done for the 3rd group because they are going to continue to disparage it even after all of the testing on a production model is complete just because they don’t want to be forced to upgrade.

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.