Me, too. I use Neat Video (very lightly applied) if I have to go over ISO 800, but that's not an ideal solution (though the software's pretty impressive...). If the GH3 really can do 1600 cleanly, that ALONE would be a great feature.
GH3 Another Winner For The GH3
- Thread starter larrys
- Start date
Me, too. I use Neat Video (very lightly applied) if I have to go over ISO 800, but that's not an ideal solution (though the software's pretty impressive...). If the GH3 really can do 1600 cleanly, that ALONE would be a great feature.
Thomas Smet
Veteran
um, wow! Is this the first comparison between a GH2 and GH3 we have seen? Yes BM looks amazing but I was also surprised just how well the GH3 did compared to the GH2. ISO1600 seems to be much cleaner on the GH3. I have to download the full res and really check it out.
Thomas Smet
Veteran
Forgot to mention how much in love I am with the GH3 due to being able to actually dial in detail levels that make a difference. Many have always had an issue with the GH2 shooting with native lenses where the video is just too sharp. The GH3 seems to solve this problem by being able to dial down the detail giving a much flatter image without having to use vintage lenses. Could be a huge deal for the GH3 and the one reason why I am now thinking of selling off my GH1 and GH2 to buy a GH3. Detail settings and clean ISO at 1600 may have just sealed the deal for me.
I can just imagine the conversation...
Patient: "Hey Doc, these new glasses are too good. I can see everything! You got anything less sharp?"
Optometrist: "I'm sorry, are you saying you want to have less than 20/20 vision? You want things to look less detailed, more fuzzy and indistinct? Why on earth would anyone want that?!"
Patient: "You haven't met my mother-in-law."
Last edited:
Erik Naso
Veteran
If 1600 is cleaner than 800 and no need to denoies that would be very cool!
Many have always had an issue with the GH2 shooting with native lenses where the video is just too sharp.
Thats funny!
The "it's to sharp" thing always makes me laugh. We are so crazy! Nothing is ever right with anything!! LOL!
Erik Naso
Veteran
The 5D MKIII just doesn't look good but that darn BMDCC is so gooooooood. Why cant Panasonic put that sensor in the AF-100!!!!! Grrrr.
GH3 looks pretty darn good. I'm excited!
Ian-T
Veteran
Well…before getting spoiled by reading some of the other comments here I just want to say that this is the very first video from the GH-3 that makes me like it. In fact I think the images here look better than what I’ve seen in similar type of GH-2 footage. There is something (IMO) different about it. I was (and still am) considering holding outfor the BMC camera but…..
...almost reminds me of Sony footage. I just can't place it. but it's nice and clean.....very HR.
...almost reminds me of Sony footage. I just can't place it. but it's nice and clean.....very HR.
There's a difference between real resolution and perceived sharpness. I personally hate edge contrast sharpness and its haloing.
Thomas Smet
Veteran
The over sharp stance has nothing to do with native detail which everybody likes but the slight electronic sharpening that seems to take place with native m4/3 lenses. The eyeglasses thing really is no comparison to talking about an aesthetic look somebody is trying to go for. There is a reason why most pro cameras allow a fairly wide range to dial the sharpness up or down. At highly levels the raw data get a bit of electronic sharpening. With the detail all the way down or off you get a raw native output of what the sensor sees. This is what the BMCC does when it shoots raw. It gives you the untouched raw data and it is up to you to decide how much sharpness you want to add back in if any at all. Now of course the GH3 isn't shooting raw but some people really do prefer that look. For compositing I really prefer to work with the sharpness off and add it back in when my compositions are all finished.
I think this is what's confusing to say, people who shoot Canon and other cameras where the term "detail setting" is called sharpening.
I've never heard of anyone wanting softer lenses because the inherent camera they were using had too much detail (read: resolution to most shooters.)
We've always have sharpening shut off on all our cameras because that job is always better handled in post with real horse power.
Having never used a GH2 and now about to add a couple of GH3s for 60p slow mo, I had no idea Panasonic didn't allow for reduced sharpening on previous models...pretty archaic.
cyclone
Well-known member
I know we are talking 4/3 sensors here, but this is exactly the discussions that would often happen between Panaflex lenses and Zeiss lenses. Actresses often requested Panaflex lenses because there was never a doubt that Zeiss was the sharper lens and showed too much in facial closeups.
Right, and we've used net filters...vaseline, whatever. But it's 2012 <g>.
I wasn't meant to be. Just something amusing that popped into my head, is all.
Fresno Bob
Well-known member
No one knows until it is actually released.
Form factor.....
The GH3 is a better designed camera with a Better screen, evf, weather sealed body, stills department, codec, frame rates, audio, the list goes on....
As soon as it's available I will be buying the GH3.
terra1
Well-known member
yep i second that
the GH3 is a very attractive package. a well designed all in one stills/video capturing device. il be buying one asap will be great getting a hold of GH with a magnesium body, after skipping the GH2 for a 5D2 i doubt i could go back to a plastic body.
Thomas Smet
Veteran
Lets add:
the ability to dial down sharpness to -5 instead of -2. This means getting a similar soft organic look that we typically have to use vintage lenses for. No longer will the m4/3 lenses seem over sharp for some people. You want to shoot sharp go ahead. If you want softer the option is there as well.
What appears to be less noise in ISO 1600.
A crash proof 50mbits with perfect 100% playback.
perhaps a cleaner HDMI output.
headphone jack.
The option of doing 40% slow motion at 1080p when you have a client or the need for it.
Basically the GH3 is about options and not just being forced as much as we are with the GH2. The GH2 is great but it does have its limits. The GH3 is truly future proof because of the new image control enhancements and expanded frame rate options. By the way the BMCC can't do 60p at all. If the film world switches to 50p or 60p or whatever at least the GH3 will still be viable.
the ability to dial down sharpness to -5 instead of -2. This means getting a similar soft organic look that we typically have to use vintage lenses for. No longer will the m4/3 lenses seem over sharp for some people. You want to shoot sharp go ahead. If you want softer the option is there as well.
What appears to be less noise in ISO 1600.
A crash proof 50mbits with perfect 100% playback.
perhaps a cleaner HDMI output.
headphone jack.
The option of doing 40% slow motion at 1080p when you have a client or the need for it.
Basically the GH3 is about options and not just being forced as much as we are with the GH2. The GH2 is great but it does have its limits. The GH3 is truly future proof because of the new image control enhancements and expanded frame rate options. By the way the BMCC can't do 60p at all. If the film world switches to 50p or 60p or whatever at least the GH3 will still be viable.
If I understand you correctly and you're asking what does the GH3 have that the GH2 doesn't, just off the top of my head the things I'm looking forward to are:
3.5 mm audio jack
3.5 mm headphone jack
Separate remote and audio input, so I can have both a remote trigger and external mic. attached
Separate dials for aperture and shutter
OLED LCD and EVF
Weatherproofing
Larger battery
Panny battery grip
Larger body