Personal View site logo
Official Panasonic GH3 topic, series 3
  • 1137 Replies sorted by
  • The GH3 has arrived in Norway. I'll get mine tomorrow.

  • @jasonp I just finished editing a concert, being filmed with hacked GH2, GH1, D7, DVX-200 and some XDCam based, HD broadcast camera. Sorry, I do not remember the model number of the broadcast camera, some PDW-FXXX model. Maybe F800. I was also one of the cameramen. Differences in terms of resolution and color rendition were much greater between GH2/D7/DVX-200 than between GH2/PDW-Fxxx. The GH2 had more contrast in nostalgic mode, not so much details in black, but even during editing I sometimes forgot, which take was from a GH2 and which was from the broadcast camera. To make a long story short: If you are the editor, the proof will be up to the client that your footage is insufficient to broadcast standards, because you will deliver the edit in a broadcast format anyway, and will probably have exposed and white balanced very carefully while shooting in order not to stress the codec with heavy color correcting in post. But If you deliver raw footage, the GH3 might be your choice.

    Even missing (or worse) 1080/25/50p in PAL countries is not necesarily a problen of GH2 versus GH3. GH 2´s best quality 23,976 FPS could be conformed to 25FPS without transcoding when the edit is finished. (Audio has to be sped up by 4% to stay in sync) They are doing this with film transfers since the beginning of (Pal) Television.

  • Absolutely nothing to apologize. I wished the GH3 would have become a better camera in terms of picture quality. But besides WiFi, mov containers, magnesium cabinet, 1080p50/60, the GH2 is probably sufficient. I built sturdy solutions for adapting and monitring external XLR audio to it and and external 9800maH batteries. So no benefit with a headphone jack and longer battery life.

  • @Vitaliy_Kiselev

    Yes...but I was explaining the need for my question. It is impossible for me to test the color banding on the GH3 for many weeks (no stock) and I need to decide about getting an alternative camera asap.

    Although for many the 8 bit color banding issue of the GH2 is not so important, underwater it is much more of a problem. Unless it's completely fixed in the GH3 it is an issue I will no longer put up with. I've just used the 12 bit raw Blackmagic Cinema Camera for the first time yesterday...and it is simply stunning image quality with no banding nonsense.

  • For me, the banding problems are also a very big issue ! If GH3 is free of banding : Ill have it !

  • The GH3 didn't look any sharper/better resolved than the Canon. Is it because of Vimeo compression? The tests I've done with my GH2 vs Nikon D800 show the GH2 to resolve noticeably better.

  • The GH3 is clearly sharper than the Canon.

  • However, the Canon still tends to look a bit more like film, probably due to the full frame.

  • GH2 seems to resolve details better...but it could be due to the fact that AF was used. Look at words "Rendition Chart". GH3 focus seems to be more on the background; GH2 focused on foreground? Or is it simply that the GH2 resolves better?

  • @amateur. Wow. Thanks for posting the links to those bird pictures. I love the fine grain of the GH3. And, those examples show the amazing ability of the "Mega OIS" in the Lumix 100-300 mm lens. If you open up the EXIF data for the ISO 1600 shot you find:

    Camera Panasonic DMC-GH3 Exposure 0.003 sec (1/400) Aperture f/5.6 Focal Length 300 mm ISO Speed 1600 Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Digital Zoom Ratio 0 Focal Length (35mm format) 623 mm Scene Capture Type Standard Gain Control High gain up Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal Lens Model LUMIX G VARIO 100-300/F4.0-5.6

    Notice that! 35 mm equiv=623 mm, SS=1/400. That sure breaks the 1/(focal length) rule, so, clearly these must have been taken with a tripod? Similar values with the ISO3200 shot.

    From examples like these it is clear that the GH3 sure is a lot better stills camera than my old GH1. Of course, that lady appears to be an excellent photographer, and could probably take good shots with just about any camera?

    As far as the AF test with the 20mm/1.7: I'm not sure it tells us much. That lens is so slow and variable in how it focuses, it could be random chance that it looks to focus faster on the GH3? I'd like to see a similar test with a lens designed for CAF (14-140, 12-35, 35-100, any 'HD' branded Panny lens), but, the focus might be too fast to tell any differences. Did everyone notice the firmware update to the 12-35? It uses 240 fps to acquire focus? Wow. I wish I had one of those new zooms. Maybe next Christmas.

  • The GH3 looked pretty good in that comparison video. There are times when the 5D3 looks pretty darned good and I think people are sometimes a bit too harsh on the 5D3. It's not the greatest in terms of detail, but with good sharpening it's more than capable IMO. I liked the colors on the GH3 in that they didn't look too bad next to 5D3 footage, considering the quality of 5D3 color which is one of it's strong suits.

    For the life of me I don't know how anyone could not notice the clear edge the GH3 has in terms of resolution of detail over the 5D3 tho. Just look at the fences in many of the shots or the distant thin tree branches and you see so much more detail in the GH3 and soft mush on the 5D3 footage. I would really consider a 5D3 for shots that don't require fine detail and low light stuff. GH3 seems like a solid choice for high detail shots where it would really show up if the image lacked detail.

  • @Manu4Vendetta I am guessing that you shot the resolution tests above at 1080p. The file that you uploaded was 720p. If you get a chance, can you upload the video at the recorded resolution? Resolution tests mean nothing when the image has been resized.

  • @GH2UW, I dont trust these tests as you notice it yourself testers don't know about a good focusing...

  • @fredfred27

    He just shared for the communauty he didnt film it ;) i am sharer too BTW :D

  • Thanks @amateur . Very sorry @Manu4Vendetta , I thought it was your test. Well, I still want to point out that the uploader resized his resolution test, and therefore it is not a proper presentation of the results. To the Vimeo comments!

  • Sorry, I should have checked the Vimeo comments first. Here is a link that the uploader shared in the comments for the full res test.

  • @amateur thanks for that test. Auto focus looks great and it was pretty great with the gh2 to begin with.

    Oh, the lack of ETC support in 1080p60 is just killing me. Why oh why do they not have that feature? I'd love to use it with autofocus for bird work. Of course I'd also love for someone to make a 200-400 lens for m43rds and I can't get what I want all the time.

  • Wow. The lady who took the bird pictures replied to my question. She did take those bird shots hand held with the GH3 + Lumix 100-300 (at 300 mm). Shutter Speed=1/400 and sharp as a tack. Wow

  • is it me or does the GH3 still look very videoy. I don't have a GH3 but the GH2 and the recent settings such as Apocalypse Now Boom look much more filmic than before. The GH3 (prob with the Sony sensor) looks very videoish. I hope to see some more examples on here soon from some cinematographers.

  • @Manu4Vendetta thank you for comparation.

  • @Manu4Vendetta Thanks for sharing comparison. A great starter test!

    From above link, GH3 didn't look nearly as sharp as GH2 in last test, and the blacks weren't as dark as in GH2 (not sure if that matters, that can be adjusted in post). However, I'm not sure from what I've read that pulling sharpening all the way down is best setting for GH3, and the test was down with the 12-35mm, where the GH3 might be having issues with lens compensation. I would like to see the same test done with manual lenses.