GH3 Advice on purchase GH3 or Black Magic?
- Thread starter Blutarski
- Start date
The final export at 1080p might be comparable, but the image quality isn't. When you shoot 2.5k RAW, you have so much more 'room' for grading and reframing. And even if the amount of detail of the 2 camera's in 1080p mode is about the same, the BMCC has more dynamic range and better colours.
If it wouldn't cost 3000$, besides the camera, to make it work optimally, I would go for the BMCC. And that's why I didnt. Lenses, rigs, SSD hard disks, battery solutions, heavy computer upgrade, were additional costs and workflows I dont want to have.
pulpfiction007
Veteran
Some things to consider
1. Are you familiar with raw workflow..because to get the most of the BMC you would want to use that option.
2. The BMC has additional costs of operation, such as a viewfinder, a battery solution, storage solutions
3. Also think about lens options and the costs of those.
The way I would look at it is this- For about $2000 or even less(all depending on lens choice) you could be off and running with the GH3. $3000 on the BMC is just the beginning
1. Are you familiar with raw workflow..because to get the most of the BMC you would want to use that option.
2. The BMC has additional costs of operation, such as a viewfinder, a battery solution, storage solutions
3. Also think about lens options and the costs of those.
The way I would look at it is this- For about $2000 or even less(all depending on lens choice) you could be off and running with the GH3. $3000 on the BMC is just the beginning
Everybody would love having a BMCC, but good luck finding one in the next 6 months. For the time being, the GH3 is really the only option if you want to upgrade. I would recommend waiting, though, until CES in January to see if the other manufacturers have anything interesting up their sleeves first.
Melvin Harris
Black Flag Member
I have ordered the BMC but am also getting the GH3 when they get here in a couple of weeks. Frankly, I am already a GH shooter. I love the systems, but 2.5k Raw was too much to pass up on. However, the wait is... difficult. If you want to get started now, go GH. If you don't mind waiting and have storage and power to accommodate all of the footage and it's storage and grading needs, go BMC. IF you can, and you can make your money back, do both. Actually, the money thing goes for both.
pulpfiction007
Veteran
I don't think anyone doubts the BMC is an awesome image..but considering what someone can afford, how comfortable they are with the workflow are questions that should be visited. The BMC would most likely be a $5000 investment on the low end...which is fantastic for what it offers, but if you are in the $2,000 range budget wise, maybe look at other choices.
Bern Caughey
Veteran
I have zero buyers regret with the GH3, but may look to add a BMCC if an Active m4/3 mount becomes available.
They're different tools for different needs.
They're different tools for different needs.
dustylense
Veteran
Hey Bern, any footy to share yet from your Gh3? I went for a ride yesterday with my wife's car club and shot some stuff that I'll post here when ready. I did however get a bit buzzed on Bloody Mary's...
stoneinapond
Veteran
Shots after shots........? :bath:
Bern Caughey
Veteran
Only shot B-Roll that I'm not at liberty to share.
After viewing the dailies I wish the AF100a had received the same sensor upgrade. Properely packaged, & with an optimized OLPF, it would be a powerful tool.
terra1
Well-known member
i was in two minds myself yet i decided to go for the GH3, mainly because the form factor, i wanted something small, subtle and easy to use, without lugging around all sorts of heavy kit.
if you go for the BMCC you will probably need an external monitor as the BMCC has the fixed screen on the rear, i shot with a 5D mark II for a couple years and i really cant state how annoying fixed screens are! total nightmare if you want to shoot down or up at something, you have to get down on your belly to expose/maintain focus. and if your down on your belly you cant move around from that angle, it pretty much has to be a locked off shot. GH3 has a beautifully functional swivel screen which sorts all of that lying in the dirt i've done in the past
it really depends what level you are at and what you are used to shooting with? if your just starting out and wanna make short films, sketches, music videos, adverts, home movies etc. id go for the GH3 every time! great all round camera for pretty much everything at the "new to cams" level, great camera for first time and serious film makers alike, the GH3 can compete with the big boys
the BMCC is a belter of a camera too tho that does kick the GH3's butt! yet i feel it needs alot of time and money on accessories and such to make it easier to use.
Last edited:
wgzn
Veteran
two different cameras for two different people / situations.
right out of the gate - you can get a GH3 and a couple of better quality lenses for the cost of the bmcc body alone.
and the bmcc body alone is useless, youre still going to need another few of grand worth of external gear just to use it. so the actual price is closer to $5000-$6000
and as others have said, if you often have the need to snatch up your camera for a couple quick shots, the GH3 would be better suited to that (not to mention the ability to take stills). but if you intend to exclusively (or at least primarily) shoot more controlled, narrative / cinema type work. the bmcc is simply a more capable tool. and at 3x the price youd certainly hope it would be.
seems to me, once you detach yourself from pure pixel-peeping, it comes down to two (and a half) questions:
1. what can you afford? is the extra few grand for the bmcc and required accessories going to put you in a financial bind?
2. what kind of work do you do? do you have frequent need for ENG / run and gun / small footprint shooting?
2.5. can your computer system effectively support a RAW workflow?
i know this wont help, but i stumbled across this side by side between a bmcc and 5d3. the difference was pretty surprising - wish someone would do a bmcc and gh3 in the same scenario... http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=9665.0
right out of the gate - you can get a GH3 and a couple of better quality lenses for the cost of the bmcc body alone.
and the bmcc body alone is useless, youre still going to need another few of grand worth of external gear just to use it. so the actual price is closer to $5000-$6000
and as others have said, if you often have the need to snatch up your camera for a couple quick shots, the GH3 would be better suited to that (not to mention the ability to take stills). but if you intend to exclusively (or at least primarily) shoot more controlled, narrative / cinema type work. the bmcc is simply a more capable tool. and at 3x the price youd certainly hope it would be.
seems to me, once you detach yourself from pure pixel-peeping, it comes down to two (and a half) questions:
1. what can you afford? is the extra few grand for the bmcc and required accessories going to put you in a financial bind?
2. what kind of work do you do? do you have frequent need for ENG / run and gun / small footprint shooting?
2.5. can your computer system effectively support a RAW workflow?
i know this wont help, but i stumbled across this side by side between a bmcc and 5d3. the difference was pretty surprising - wish someone would do a bmcc and gh3 in the same scenario... http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=9665.0
Denis Haineault
Well-known member
You should state what is your intended use. Then people will be in a better position to make a recommendation.
Short Version:
1. Can you afford to invest in Blackmagic? Forget the RAW because you do NOT have to shoot RAW to get an image that still kills any DSLR, the ProRes and DNxHD will get you there easily. But, can you afford the SSDs and a solid battery solution on top of the three thousand? I've seen people get by with very little, so you could easily spend a total of 4,000 to 4,500 and have a solid ProRes/DNxHD shooting camera.
Shoot RAW later when you're ready. People skirt this ability for some reason, it's completely valid.
2. Are you willing to learn how to color? Until BMD gives the camera a better "Video" Gamma, you're gonna have to color stuff.
3. And of course, how fast do you need/want a camera? As mentioned, they aren't shipping in massive amounts right now.
I was going to buy a GH3, even as a stop gap until MFT Blackmagic came out, but once I got my hands on Blackmagic... nah. It may not be that much money, but I'd rather just wait. There really isn't a camera out sub Epic or Alexa that can match what this thing is doing. Does it have flaws? Absolutely. I've run into some NASTY moire/aliasing so far, the kinda stuff that nightmares are made of. Wish there was at least 60P but that's not there either. For me, though, it's worth it.
All of these tools have SOME catch, hitch, gotcha or black marks and you just kinda decide which set of trade-offs works for you. I'll keep the GH2 to fill the 60P void and continue to shoot Epic when I have to, Blackmagic when I get an MFT camera or when I can find one.
1. Can you afford to invest in Blackmagic? Forget the RAW because you do NOT have to shoot RAW to get an image that still kills any DSLR, the ProRes and DNxHD will get you there easily. But, can you afford the SSDs and a solid battery solution on top of the three thousand? I've seen people get by with very little, so you could easily spend a total of 4,000 to 4,500 and have a solid ProRes/DNxHD shooting camera.
Shoot RAW later when you're ready. People skirt this ability for some reason, it's completely valid.
2. Are you willing to learn how to color? Until BMD gives the camera a better "Video" Gamma, you're gonna have to color stuff.
3. And of course, how fast do you need/want a camera? As mentioned, they aren't shipping in massive amounts right now.
I was going to buy a GH3, even as a stop gap until MFT Blackmagic came out, but once I got my hands on Blackmagic... nah. It may not be that much money, but I'd rather just wait. There really isn't a camera out sub Epic or Alexa that can match what this thing is doing. Does it have flaws? Absolutely. I've run into some NASTY moire/aliasing so far, the kinda stuff that nightmares are made of. Wish there was at least 60P but that's not there either. For me, though, it's worth it.
All of these tools have SOME catch, hitch, gotcha or black marks and you just kinda decide which set of trade-offs works for you. I'll keep the GH2 to fill the 60P void and continue to shoot Epic when I have to, Blackmagic when I get an MFT camera or when I can find one.
