M. Gilden
Canon DSLR Moderator
If I were buying a new camera now, I'd go with a GH3. But even still, when the GH3 came out and the GH2 stopped to sub-$400 used, I sold my GH1 B-cam and picked up a second GH2 body (so now I have one silver and one black to tell them apart on a shoot).
When I'm not being asked to shoot with a Canon, my two GH2s perform splendidly. Sure, I wish it had 1080 60p. I absolutely wish it had a better display and would love to have audio monitoring. But at the end of the day they both perform admirably and noticeably better than my colleagues still shooting Canon. I've toyed with the idea of dumping one of my GH2s for a GH3, but I really REALLY enjoy having two identical bodies that don't require any image matching in post before applying a grade. And right now, I can't justify buying two GH3 bodies (Wife is on maternity leave so I don't really have the extra cash anyhow).
I think for the money, I can live without the 60P and bells/whistles of the GH3. It's a nice upgrade, but I'll wait for the price to come down a bit. Meanwhile, someone shopping for a new camera I would hands-down recommend a GH3.
Understand that many satisfied GH2 users haven't been going around saying "man, I wish I didn't have to hack my GH2". We just did it. And the display? Many folks either learned to live with it or invested in a good external (something I recommend anyway). The low light stuff is nice, but again- not everyone is shooting unlit with slow lenses. Those are nice selling points to someone who doesn't already have a GH series camera. But as an upgrade to someone who already has it? I'd like to point out that there are folks making kick-@$$ features on a GH1 around here still!
By the way- my GH3 experience has been admittedly more limited than I'd like, but weren't there reports of more moire/aliasing than the GH2? I don't see anyone talking about that here. Was that my imagination?
Also- what about the multi-aspect ratio of the GH2 giving a slightly wider-than-normal M4/3 field of view? The GH3 went back to a normal sized m43 sensor if I'm not mistaken.
When I'm not being asked to shoot with a Canon, my two GH2s perform splendidly. Sure, I wish it had 1080 60p. I absolutely wish it had a better display and would love to have audio monitoring. But at the end of the day they both perform admirably and noticeably better than my colleagues still shooting Canon. I've toyed with the idea of dumping one of my GH2s for a GH3, but I really REALLY enjoy having two identical bodies that don't require any image matching in post before applying a grade. And right now, I can't justify buying two GH3 bodies (Wife is on maternity leave so I don't really have the extra cash anyhow).
I think for the money, I can live without the 60P and bells/whistles of the GH3. It's a nice upgrade, but I'll wait for the price to come down a bit. Meanwhile, someone shopping for a new camera I would hands-down recommend a GH3.
Understand that many satisfied GH2 users haven't been going around saying "man, I wish I didn't have to hack my GH2". We just did it. And the display? Many folks either learned to live with it or invested in a good external (something I recommend anyway). The low light stuff is nice, but again- not everyone is shooting unlit with slow lenses. Those are nice selling points to someone who doesn't already have a GH series camera. But as an upgrade to someone who already has it? I'd like to point out that there are folks making kick-@$$ features on a GH1 around here still!
By the way- my GH3 experience has been admittedly more limited than I'd like, but weren't there reports of more moire/aliasing than the GH2? I don't see anyone talking about that here. Was that my imagination?
Also- what about the multi-aspect ratio of the GH2 giving a slightly wider-than-normal M4/3 field of view? The GH3 went back to a normal sized m43 sensor if I'm not mistaken.
Last edited: