GH3 GH3 - How much better is it in low light than GH2?

W

WielkiCzarnyAfgan

Member
Hello. I want to hear some honest opinion - of those who owned GH2 before and now own GH3 - is the GH3 really better in low light than GH2? I heard opinion that GH3 is one ISO increment better than GH2 ( I mean - GH3's has the same amount of noise at 6400 as GH2 at 3200 ) Is that true???

I am thinking about changing my gh2' to gh3' and that's why I am asking.
 
So far, I can tell you this. It is night and day when taking photos. So much better than the GH2 and better in lower light.
 
I have both. I would use 3200 on the GH2 (and higher if I could get good exposure over all the frame that way) but at 3200 I would see some noise.

A few nights ago I shot several tests with the GH3 at 2500 (both stills and short video clips) and got no noise. I have seen clean ISO 6400 and very usable ISO 12,800 shots from both the GH3 and the Olympus OMD E-M5 from others.
 
Yes it's better but still behind the Canon 5d Mark III. For the price though you can buy the GH3 with a 25mm Voigtlander and it would still cost less though....

GH3 - $1300
25mm Nokton - $900-$1000
---------------------
= $2300

5d Mark III go for $2500-$3000


Overall though I would say GH3 is a great camera that will improve once it is Hacked (hopefully soon).
 
WielkiCzarnyAfgan said:
Hello. I want to hear some honest opinion - of those who owned GH2 before and now own GH3 - is the GH3 really better in low light than GH2? I heard opinion that GH3 is one ISO increment better than GH2 ( I mean - GH3's has the same amount of noise at 6400 as GH2 at 3200 ) Is that true???

I am thinking about changing my gh2' to gh3' and that's why I am asking.
Click to expand...

For video, at least, the difference is quite dramatic. Especially in the GH3's ability to render shadows with a clarity that was nearly impossible with the GH2. Instead of ugly color noise you get...actual black. It's a no-brainer to update from GH2 > GH3, especially since you can sell that GH2 body for at least $400 still.
 
J.F.R. said:
Yes it's better but still behind the Canon 5d Mark III.
Click to expand...

Well yes and no. At any given ISO the MKIII is cleaner BUT that doesn't take the DOF difference into account. You would shoot 2+ stops wider on the GH3 to get the same shallow DOF which negates the MKIII low light advantage. The MKIII also has ugly fixed pattern noise that I've yet to see reviewing GH3 footage.
 
ras815 said:
For video, at least, the difference is quite dramatic. Especially in the GH3's ability to render shadows with a clarity that was nearly impossible with the GH2. Instead of ugly color noise you get...actual black. It's a no-brainer to update from GH2 > GH3, especially since you can sell that GH2 body for at least $400 still.
Click to expand...

I second this opinion. In my previous post (#5) I described shooting at ISO 2500, tonight I went to the same location and shot tests with both video and stills at ISO 6400. Night sky above the buildings went pretty solid black, underexposed mid tones (with lens stopped down as far as f8) showed some minor noise in stills but the motion in video probably covered it up. Deep shadow areas also went fairly solid black. Areas that got proper exposure even at ISO 6400 showed no appreciable noise.

ISO 3200 and 6400 will obviously give best results under low light conditions if shot with "fast" aperture lenses. For both evenings tests I used the Lumix 20mm f1.7.

Stills shot at 12,800 did show noise, enough to the point that I would use this ISO setting only in emergencies, but the high limit on ISO in motion picture mode is 6400.

When evaluating noise you need to insure that you have no "oversharpening" going on with your monitor. Often monitors come out of the box with Sharpening, Contrast, and Brightness set too high (one of mine had all three at over 80%). The slightest degree will take very minor color artifacting and turn it into noise where there is little or none present.
 
Roberto Hapsad said:
You sound optimistic about a GH3 hack! Do you have inside info? ;-)
Click to expand...

I really don't get this - I see no reason whatsoever that I'd want a hack on the GH3. I'm perfectly satisfied with the stock capabilities of the camera, and Panny basically fixed all of the drawbacks of the GH2 that warranted a hack in the first place. As for peaking, Panasonic has said that there just isn't the processor power to allow it. What more is there to want?
 
....the kitchen sink dangit!! :)

I kind of agree...but am still curious about what we can do with a hack. It's fun to explore.
 
ras815 said:
As for peaking, Panasonic has said that there just isn't the processor power to allow it.
Click to expand...
And we all know that is bollocks, it takes no more power to do peaking than it does to apply one of the many effects in the camera.

Panasonic were implying they might put peaking in a firmware update, if they knew that was impossible they shouldn't have even hinted. I can't say I'm surprised though, that's why I invested in a SmallHD DP4, but I'd much prefer not to need a workaround.

To answer the original point I definately see less noise in the GH3 video (I've used GH2/GH3 at once), I do genuinely prefer the GH3 for image as well as the other functionality that comes with it. I'm still happy enough with the GH2 to keep it as well mind you.

One thing that doesn't get enough mention is the sound from the internal mics, whilst ideally you wouldn't want to record from the internal mics, the GH3 is much better, especially where you have loud noise (say a live music event), even on the lowest setting the GH2 would peak where the GH3 can be taken down to be a lot less sensitive which I've found useful.
 
Last edited:
ras815 said:
I really don't get this - I see no reason whatsoever that I'd want a hack on the GH3.
Click to expand...

I agree.

I expect Panasonic will have learned from previous GH hacks and what users wanted to achieve.

Largely though, they have had produced a reliable consumer camera with zero known bugs and able to record to most SD cards.

Pro users are prepared to accept a hacked camera's known limitations in return for advantages such as no recording limitation, faster bit rate and perhaps changing the menu from Japanese/NTSC to English/Pal.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top