WOW! I'm surprised a bit at which was the BMC, GH2 and GH3. I liked all 3 for different reasons, but I could easily live with either in the right situation. I really liked the GH3 and I thought it was the BMC! Go figure. Ungraded you could really see just how great the BMC is in terms of DR and detail. The GH2 and GH3 are no slouches in the detail department.

Another shock to me is that I liked the ALL-I 72 which I thought had a very filmic look. Not perfect in every aspect, but I didn't find it to be offensive in any way that would disqualify it for me. In the last test I was struck by how the actresses skin looked when she reached out and her arm was lit by the strong light. The way the GH3 handled that seemed really smooth and pleasing compared to the GH2 IMO. On the GH3 ALL-I 72 her arm and face looked creamy and not with an unnatural greenish tint. In fact I could still see the flush of blood just under the skin and the outlines of veins in her arm. It just looked more convincing to me. I'm an amateur at this so take that with a grain of salt.

@shian thanks again for putting all this work into such a nice test.

Great tests, shian. I was honestly surprised at how well the GH3 did considering that you used All-I. I find the 50mbs results to be significantly better.

@Jim, Just awesome! No other words than that! Keep em coming!

@Jim, what codec did you use?

Extracted images (no real editing) a documentary during filming (camera GH3).

GH3 25P / 50mbs / 1:50 Standard Profile -1 -1 -1 -1 Voigtlander 25mm Noktor 12mm HF Sanken Sennheiser capsule

Point of view for use documentary GH3 (capture in real time):

• 50 MB is not too bad. Overall the image is correct BUT the camera movements lack fluidity. It poses a lot of problems on some plans. In the end it is not pro at all.

• Intra 72 MB is not ready for professional use. Noise is everywhere. And it is ugly.

• 24 MB AVCHD is basically the same as the GH2. However, preferably the GH2 x1,6 vs GH3 x2.

• Screen GH3 very very bad outside + downright unusable viewfinder for precise focus (inside + outside) = some rushes necessarily go in the trash because of an update or a soft opening diaph impossible to establish accurately exterior condition bright. Ultimately not pro either.

• Sound: Return headset to use the GH3 for a potential TV broadcast provided that it adds a professional microphone.

• Headphone jack behind the screen! The screen can't rotate! This is absolutly so stupid!

• Actually, the GH3 brings nothing more than the GH2.

If I am happy with the purely esthetic images out of the camera, I prefer the overall tone of the GH2 images more beautiful in fact.

@RatLabProductions

There is definitely a cadence issue with the (some?) GH3. The video pros at the dealer where I got mine tested it and they are as stumped as I am. They gave me a full refund and have sent off a report to Panasonic. I noticed the cadence problem in every recording mode but it was particularly bad in 50mbs at both 24fps and 30fps.

I am beginning to see some examples around the net that seem not to have the problem, which is a very good sign.

@Conundrum @From_Paris at present can / should we hope for a hack by Vitaliy - the GH3 is at present no competition for the GH2 "Hack Vitaliy"

@Butt - you do not have the GH3 right? How can "you" measure, and compare the competition between the two camera's without owning/using the GH3. This camera is still very new and only a small amount of people actually have the camera, early firmware, and no hack... yet you keep spewing your obvious opinion that almost seems as to be some sorta masked jealousy or something.

@jimagine: that was beautiful!

I am amazed by all the people raving about the GH3. The current release isn't at all what I hoped for. The firmware is buggy, there are many issues (cadence, noise, artifacts, some crashes), the All-I is crappy and noisy, there is more visual unpleasant noise in the footage and quality issues with the OLED screen.

Not too say that it is a bad camera, but I think the GH2 has a more pleasant and cinematic image quality. The green cast of the GH2 has been replaced by a nice magenta cast of the Sony sensor. Still image quality wise, the JPEG quality is behind the OMD-5 and the RAW quality is about the same (but a big improvement over the GH2). That is pretty disappointing if you take into account that Panasonic had a year to improve upon Olympus' work. Look at Nikon to see what you can do with a Sony sensor if you know what you are doing. Nikon smokes Sony's with Nikon image processing on output from the same sensor.

Down the line, the GH3 will improve and with a hack there is huge potential but right now, I don't see many good reasons to upgrade a hacked GH2 to a GH3, especially with regards to the price of both camera's. I have a strong feeling that most people want to justify their camera purchase but judging from the sample footage I have seen and my own experiments, the GH3 doesn't live up to the hype that Panasonic created. It is amazing though to see what a 1.100 EURO camera can do nowadays.

I will wait for a 1.1. firmware or a hack and have returned my camera for now.

@Butt, I came to that thought based on the fact that all your gh3 post are in response to another users post or video, I have not seen one video, or post where you mention your own experience with the GH3, your only relevant post state your opinion that the GH2 is better than the GH3... never mentioning why you believe so, never providing any support for your opinion other than... GH2 better for video... 3 weeks and no test footage, that Ive seen.