GH3 GH2, GH3 and G6

C

Carlos_E._Martinez

Well-known member
Unfortunately I discovered the GHs when the 2 was in its way out, and I don't know why everything I read about the GH3 from then on didn't describe it as a step forward from the GH2, quite the opposite.

Price wasn't as inviting either, and alternative firmware such as those that made the GH2 into the superb camera it was seemed not to be available, at least back then, maybe that has changed.

On top of that the GH3 could only be NTSC or PAL, and I needed both.

And now comes the G6 Panasonic has just released, and it seems to have some of the good things the GH2 had:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/indepth..._-Body_Indepth_Lumix-DMC-G6-Mirrorless-Camera

Am I wrong?

Bitrate is not specified, so there's no way of comparing the G6 to the GH3 or a hacked GH2.
 
carlmart said:
On top of that the GH3 could only be NTSC or PAL, and I needed both.
Click to expand...

None of the stock cameras can be switched.

carlmart said:
And now comes the G6 Panasonic has just released, and it seems to have some of the good things the GH2 had...

Bitrate is not specified, so there's no way of comparing the G6 to the GH3 or a hacked GH2.
Click to expand...

The bit rate of the G6 maxes out at 28Mbps. The GH3 has much higher rates, as do hacked GH2s. Also both the G6 and the GH3 have lost the multi-aspec sensor of the GH2 and both viewfinders are worse than the one on the GH2.

Other than those two issues, I don't understand how you arrived at the conclusion that the GH3 was a step back from the GH2. Clearly it isn't.
 
You might want to do some reading over at the Personal View forums. I've been shooting on a GH2 hacked with Moon T7. I just got a GH3 and feel it IS an improvement, and despite some initial grumbling I think most of the internet has come to agree. There may be some scenarios with a lot of motion in an image that the bit rate of the GH2 wins through, but otherwise the GH3 has a more advanced encoder, a better build, more DR, etc. Plus it's next in line to be hacked.

By all accounts the G6 is a good camera, on par with an unhacked GH2 but with a few new usability extras. It's not first in line to be hacked, so it kind of depends on what your priorities are. Not quite at the image quality peak, but solid nonetheless, for a good price.
 
Well, it wasn't me that said it first that the GH3 was a step back from the GH2, but several people in these forums.

Of course I am not talking of a standard GH2 compared with a standard GH3, where several things in the later model surpass the former. I am talking of a hacked GH2, which is what really got me interested in any of these cameras.

No, none of the stock cameras could be switched for PAL or NTSC, which is a MAJOR issue for me.

Of course my comments on the GH3 might be "old" by now, as I stopped reading about the GH3 when the BM Pocket was released.

The Pocket seems to have some limitations too, particularly files maximum length and battery life.

As I expect the Blackmagic to start a new wave of DSLR or mirrorless cameras, I pay attention to new models that might come by.

As it is it should cost less than 1K for the body and have at least all that the Pocket comes with. Improving on it, of course.

Sorry if the G6 is not what I thought it might be.
 
Having shot with the GH2 for the past 2+ years and a GH3 for the past 10 months, overall I would honestly say that the GH3 is definitely a step-up from the GH2.

GH2 PROs
- Multi-aspect sensor is 7 percent wider than standard m4/3 format
- Hacked camera can be set for both NTSC and PAL shooting standards
- Hacked camera has no recording time limit
- Very little mono-chromatic moire in all shots

GH2 CONs
- Limited dynamic range ( 8+ stops )
- Color reproduction not as good as GH3 ( very noticeable with both still photos and video )
- Image problems when shooting over 1600 ISO ( I never shoot higher than 800 with the GH2 )
- High bit-rate recording only available through hacking the camera
- Lower quality still photos compared to GH3 camera ( I would only use it if I had no other options )
- Internal batteries only last 90 minutes
- HDMI output only useful for monitoring, not recording
- Small body size prone to accidentally pressing camera controls when trying to hand-hold the camera


GH3 PROs
- Better dynamic range ( 9+ stops )
- Better color reproduction ( very noticeable with both still photos and video )
- Better high ISO performance ( video is quite usable at 1600 and even 3200 )
- High bit-rate recording is standard
- Higher quality still photos ( finally a GHx camera that I can use for professional still work )
- Internal batteries last 3+ hours
- HDMI output good for monitoring and recording ( not sure if there's much benefit to this )
- Professional battery grip doubles battery capacity and makes shooting hand-held verticals a charm
- WiFi remote camera operation ( mainly for stills functions )
- Bigger body size, no more accidentally pressing camera controls while trying to hold the camera

GH3 CONs
- Standard m4/3 sensor size ( GH2 multi-aspect feature was handy )
- Still waiting for camera hacks
- Slightly buggy firmware ( still waiting for Panasonic to clean this up )
- Moire pops up from time to time, so you have to be careful to avoid it


...I've never used a G6 camera, but from what I've read the main PROs for the G6 are:
- Usable focus-peaking while shooting video
- Usable ETC mode when shooting 1080 60p footage
- Better EVF than GH3 ? ( will have to confirm this )
- Half the price of the GH3 body

And the CONs are:
- No HDMI output while recording ( this is a huge one for me, but I might end up getting a G6 body to use as a B-camera )
- Same limited battery as GH2


I do most of my work with my GH3, but I am hanging on to my GH2 just in case I need it for an extra wide shot or something where I have trouble with moire.
 
carlmart said:
No comparison of the GH3 with the BM Pocket by any chance?
Click to expand...

Two different beasts. Image wise the pocket certainly has an edge but much will depend on the optics on both.

As to ergonomics, the GH3 is hybrid camera that covers most basses and has a more mature operating system (although people complain about the information display disappearing). The pocket has some very rough edges when it comes to its operating system.

So, if the IQ is of the upmost importance, then the pocket wins. But at an operating cost that can be quite substantial - memory cards, batteries to name just two.
 
carlmart said:
No comparison of the GH3 with the BM Pocket by any chance?
Click to expand...

The new BM Pocket Cine camera looks like it will be a great addition to anyone already owning a GH2 / GH3 / G6 camera kit, but I don't see it replacing any of these Panasonic cameras for general purpose video production.

BMPCC PROs
- 13 stops of dynamic range
- Active electronic m4/3 lens mount ( most electronic features will work )
- Low compression 4:2:2 ProRes 220 Mbps CODEC
- CinemaDNG RAW recording ( with a future firmware update )
- Uses common Nikon camera batteries
- Compact design
- Low cost for a camera with these features

BMPCC CONs
- Super 16mm Sized Image Sensor ( 3x crop instead of GH3 2x crop )
- Eats batteries for lunch ( expect to get 20+ min of recording per battery )
- REQUIRES expensive high performance SanDisk SDXC 95MB/sec memory cards to function
- Will use up memory cards 4x - 8x faster than any of the Pansonic m4/3 cameras ( it will be even worse with RAW recording )
- No 1080 60p recording
- No ETC mode
 
TheDingo said:
BMPCC CONs
- Super 16mm Sized Image Sensor ( 3x crop instead of GH3 2x crop )
- Eats batteries for lunch ( expect to get 20+ min of recording per battery )
- REQUIRES expensive high performance SanDisk SDXC 95MB/sec memory cards to function
- Will use up memory cards 4x - 8x faster than any of the Pansonic m4/3 cameras ( it will be even worse with RAW recording )
- No 1080 60p recording
- No ETC mode
Click to expand...

No audio meters
No media management on camera (can't delete clips)
No photos
Auto focus with Panna lenses is spotty at best

But it can capture some amazing images.....
 
This discussion is becoming interesting. I went have a look with google at direct comparisons between the Pocket and GH3, as the GH2 is not available anymore. Two Pocket/GH3 comparisons are interesting, one of them in the Pocket forum itself:

http://wolfcrow.com/blog/which-is-t...lackmagic-pocket-camera-or-the-panasonic-gh3/

http://forum.blackmagicdesign.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11800

Many arguments mentioned above agree to what is mentioned there. So I wonder what path should I choose.

Better image quality is adamant for me. I am thinking something that might be accepted to be broadcast in HD and also could be screened in medium sized theaters. My comparison pattern would be that of Super 16 film, which was used in "Leaving Las Vegas" for instance. That is an image where compromises are well handled.

At the time I discovered the GH2, my "camera of interest" was the Blackmagic 2.5K, which had just been released and was quite similar to the GH2. As the investment would be less, I thought I could get a GH2 right away and eventually share some of the lenses with the BM. But the GH2 was being replaced by the GH3, and the new model could not do NTSC and PAL, which the hacked GH2 did.

The GH3 PAL or NTSC limitation should continue until a hack comes around, which I don't know when will that be.

I am aware of the Pocket's memory cards and battery limitations, and I wonder if an external solution for battery & recorder is being cooked somewhere.

What it looks like to me is that Blackmagic designed the Pocket with limitations on purpose, not to replace their larger cameras but to complement them on short length shots or maybe as a risk camera.

The question is if someone will take the lead and make it into a high quality low-budget camera.
 
stoneinapond said:
The GH3 has much higher rates, as do hacked GH2s. Also both the G6 and the GH3 have lost the multi-aspec sensor of the GH2 and both viewfinders are worse than the one on the GH2.
Click to expand...

Actually, I heard the G6 has the GH2's sensor. Might have been mistaken, but I was under the impression it was basically the multi-aspect sensor that we loved so much in a new body that now supports 60p and full 1080 (like the GH3).

Also, another big pro with the GH3 that was left out of the list earlier:
AUDIO

The GH2's audio was actually quite decent in camera, but with no way to monitor it, you were taking a gamble. The GH3 solved that with built in monitoring as well as standard sized audio jacks. I've never used a G6 yet (I really want to), but I think it lacks the audio as well.
 
The G6 has the GH2 sensor, but it doesn't use the multi-aspect-ratio feature. So it's a 2x crop like the GH3 and most other m4/3 cameras.
 
...if you need 1080/60p, then the g6 , esp now on sale, is hard to beat. As well, it offers so much for so little price, it's a steal. The bmcpc is a work in progress. I'll personally be waiting for v.2.
 
carlmart said:
I am aware of the Pocket's memory cards and battery limitations, and I wonder if an external solution for battery & recorder is being cooked somewhere.
Click to expand...


No one has announced that they are working on any such solutions specifically for the BMPCC. Now if you mounted the camera in a cage on a tripod, or with some sort of shoulder mount rig, one could right now mount things like a big bulky external battery and an external HDMI SSD drive recorder. But that would add greatly to your costs, and make for a big bulky setup.



carlmart said:
What it looks like to me is that Blackmagic designed the Pocket with limitations on purpose, not to replace their larger cameras but to complement them on short length shots or maybe as a risk camera.
Click to expand...

I'm doubtful that is really true, but if your theory here is indeed correct, then that would be a real good reason to avoid the camera. For that would mean that Blackmagic intends to keep the BMPCC as being a second rate backup system.

My main complaints with the BMPCC are:

1) Greatly larger file sizes.

Even shooting in the ProRes HD format, file sizes are almost 4 1/2 times that of the GH3's 50 Mbps MP4 option. Now if one does not shoot much, it might not be much of an issue. But i you do, you are going to need to buy a lot more hard disk storage. And you will definitely want to have a very fast computer, to more quickly process such large files.


2) Greater 3x crop factor due to the BMPCC's much smaller sensor

This is a deal killing issue that the original Black Magic Cinema Camera does not have, as it has a standard m4/3 size sensor. The cinema industry is moving towards larger sensors, not smaller sensors. It would really make all of my m4/3 and Nikkor lenses a lot less versatile and useful.

It is quite a pronounced difference, as one can easily see in this video:




3) Poor image quality, especially in low light.

The BMPCC does not hold up well in low light, in my opinion. I've seen a number of noisy examples. I think that its smaller sensor size is hurting its performance in this aspect. Plus, there have been numerous problems reported with sensor blooming.


4) Rolling shutter and lack of 1080/60p support

I really like having the option to shoot in 1080/60p. It is not a feature that I would like to give up


5) No audio level meters.

This is really quite inexcusable, especially when one considers that this is a dedicated video camera. Of course, one can solve that by using an external audio recorder. But again, that means more cost, and a heavier and more bulky configuration.



carlmart said:
The question is if someone will take the lead and make it into a high quality low-budget camera.
Click to expand...

If Blackmagic themselves are not going to do so, I doubt that any third party could or would do it.

Besides, a new generation Panasonic GH would probably become available before that would happen.

.
 
Yes, I agree with many of the things you mention.

It's quite likely that I get back to the Blackmagic 2.5K cinema camera, which now even went down in price.

If a hack for the GH3 comes around solving the NTSC or PAL limitation, then I might consider Panasonic again.
 
for plus you said the GH2 hacked has no recording limit. The Regular GH2 has no recording limit, and the fact that the hacked GH2 is such a higher bit rate i have chosen not to hack my GH2 because its recording limit will be a lot faster since it will fill up a memory card quick... or am I missing something?
 
PegLeg Media said:
for plus you said the GH2 hacked has no recording limit. The Regular GH2 has no recording limit, and the fact that the hacked GH2 is such a higher bit rate i have chosen not to hack my GH2 because its recording limit will be a lot faster since it will fill up a memory card quick... or am I missing something?
Click to expand...

Unless you are using small cards, the GH2's battery would give out long before the card would be filled. A 32 GB SDHC card should easily give you 3 hours of recording at the highest quality setting on a non-hacked GH2. My GH2's battery usually only lasts around an hour and a half of recording.

Now if you hacked your GH2, then you might want to get a SDXC card. For example, if you used a 100 Mbps hack, a 64 GB SDXC card would give you 85 minutes of recording time, which is near the battery's limit.

GH2's sold in the USA had no recording time limit. But I know that in Europe they still imposed a time limit of 29 1/2 minutes.

I'm not sure about other parts of the world.
 
Time limit in european dslr style cameras is due to different taxing for photo and video cams when imported to the EU. Somewhere in the sewerage of Bruxelles sits the ministry "pour la producion de la difficulte totalement superflue" where the bureauc-rats meet and derive such things like the 29.5 limit (Denmark is said to have opted for a 32.74 solution for cultural reasons unknown to non-Danish citizens).
 
LanceOregon said:
Unless you are using small cards, the GH2's battery would give out long before the card would be filled. A 32 GB SDHC card should easily give you 3 hours of recording at the highest quality setting on a non-hacked GH2. My GH2's battery usually only lasts around an hour and a half of recording.

Now if you hacked your GH2, then you might want to get a SDXC card. For example, if you used a 100 Mbps hack, a 64 GB SDXC card would give you 85 minutes of recording time, which is near the battery's limit.

I'm not sure about other parts of the world.
Click to expand...

Thanks, thats not so bad. I just watch IndyMogul on youtube and they said they go through a hacked GH2 memory card in about 15 minutes. I wasnt sure if they used a 16 or 32 gig card.

I havent hacked my camera b/c I film long presentations and interviews so want to be able to record for an hour at a time. If I get a 64g card and can film that long I will have to look into the hacks.

THANKS
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top