GH3 Panasonic GX7 vs GH3 Shootout

The advantages of the GX7 footage seem to be better exposure, less chromatic abberation, and better autofocus. Bluntly claims both cameras were using optically identical lenses (old and new 20mm f1.8), so those sound more like firmware improvements rather than sensor improvements.
 
noirist said:
The advantages of the GX7 footage seem to be better exposure, less chromatic abberation, and better autofocus. Bluntly claims both cameras were using optically identical lenses (old and new 20mm f1.8), so those sound more like firmware improvements rather than sensor improvements.
Click to expand...

and better color saturation, and better detail resolution, and so on. The GX7 stomps the GH3, no contest. The really funny thing is how much better the GX7 is in low light, which quite surprised me - I was expecting the opposite. And btw. I own the GH3, and have no plans to buy the GX7.
 
Not bad. If only they'd put a damn mic and headphone jack on the GX7 I might finally consider the upgrade from GH2.

Waiting for the next generation.
 
OldCorpse said:
and better color saturation, and better detail resolution, and so on. The GX7 stomps the GH3, no contest. The really funny thing is how much better the GX7 is in low light, which quite surprised me - I was expecting the opposite. And btw. I own the GH3, and have no plans to buy the GX7.
Click to expand...
I suspect that the "better color saturation" and "better detail resolution" are illusory, due primarily to the reduced chromatic aberration on the GX7. I'd be very surprised if the GX7 footage captured more detail than the GH3 footage. Has anyone measured the resolution of the GX7 footage yet?
 
What is the point of comparing the image of two cameras with different lenses. Using a different (newer) electronic lens will effect things like chromatic aberration, contrast and colour saturation. Unless Panasonic did nothing to improve the V2 of the 20mm which is unlikely.
 
RatLabProductions said:
What is the point of comparing the image of two cameras with different lenses. Using a different (newer) electronic lens will effect things like chromatic aberration, contrast and colour saturation. Unless Panasonic did nothing to improve the V2 of the 20mm which is unlikely.
Click to expand...

This is what it says in the YouTube description:
"The GX7 had the 20mm f1.7 Mark II Lens (a kit option) and the GH3 had the original 20mm f1.7 lens, Effectively the same lens - Don't spaz out and claim it's "unfair" - yes they're "different" lenses, but - now pay attention - The optical design is UNCHANGED for the "mark II", only the body & finish have been improved (quite nicely for the record... the Mark II is sweet). so the tests ARE fair and equivalent."
 
Thanks for posting this!

The GX7 footage seems to have more contrast than the GH3 footage. To my eye, the GH3 footage looked slightly better in almost all the shots. Less harsh, video sharpening in there. But it's really close, and can easily mix footage from the two without anyone noticing. Also, the lenses shouldn't have been on auto-focus.

That said, it's really hard to tell on Youtube. Their compression is awful. I wish they posted it on Vimeo so we could download the original footage.

Nevertheless, it's interesting to see how they measure up.
 
I can't seem to find anywhere that states what codecs were used in the comparison. Was the GH3 set to 50Mbps MOV, MP4, ALL-I ????

I agree that the lenses should not have been in autofocus. It's hard to compare the two when they are focused on different points.

Why do people still use YouTube for these. It's compression is far inferior to say Vimeo.

And while the GX7 looks pretty good, even if I was looking for a small camera for video use its a non starter for me. No external monitor, no audio inputs......two things you do get on the BMPCC for a start. Oh, and its around $200 more expensive.
 
Last edited:
Jaime Valles said:
The GX7 footage seems to have more contrast than the GH3 footage. To my eye, the GH3 footage looked slightly better in almost all the shots. Less harsh, video sharpening in there. But it's really close, and can easily mix footage from the two without anyone noticing. Also, the lenses shouldn't have been on auto-focus.

That said, it's really hard to tell on Youtube. Their compression is awful. I wish they posted it on Vimeo so we could download the original footage.
Click to expand...

+1
 
Jaime Valles said:
The GX7 footage seems to have more contrast than the GH3 footage. To my eye, the GH3 footage looked slightly better in almost all the shots. Less harsh, video sharpening in there. But it's really close, and can easily mix footage from the two without anyone noticing. Also, the lenses shouldn't have been on auto-focus.
Click to expand...

My favorite web-browser is the free Opera Web-Browser which has a free Flash Video Downloader browser extension available from the official Opera.com website. I downloaded the 720p version of Blunty's showdown, and generally found the image from the two cameras to be very close.

In this test the GX7 has more contrast than the GH3, the GX7 has better color-balance, and the GX7 appears to autofocus better. These differences could be caused by how the cameras were configured, and possibly better multi-coating on the new version II lens.

For me, the take-away from this test is that I could probably swap my GH3 with a GX7 and everything would look still look great.

If I could afford it I would love to have a GX7 as a "pocketable" GH3 camera when I'm not working.
 
The color science is identical, I couldn't see any difference in the way colors are rendered, where I do see a huge difference is in that the gh3 has less contrast, and a bit more de-saturated, it resembles the same look as if you were to raise the "lift" on say magic bullet looks, which in turn appears to change the contrast. Aside from the contrast, I wasn't able to see any more dynamic range from the gh3, they look to be even. The gx7 looks to yield a tiny bit more detail in the highlights even with the deeper saturated colors and darker blacks. I have to say, the gx7 reminds me a lot of the gh2 characteristics.
 
My cell phone has more color contrast and pop than the GX7, is that what makes it a great camera? BTW my GH3 looks nothing like the gamma fogged footage I saw posted.
 
vtwiz said:
I can't seem to find anywhere that states what codecs were used in the comparison. Was the GH3 set to 50Mbps MOV, MP4, ALL-I ????

I agree that the lenses should not have been in autofocus. It's hard to compare the two when they are focused on different points.

Why do people still use YouTube for these. It's compression is far inferior to say Vimeo.

And while the GX7 looks pretty good, even if I was looking for a small camera for video use its a non starter for me. No external monitor, no audio inputs......two things you do get on the BMPCC for a start. Oh, and its around $200 more expensive.
Click to expand...

Why do you say it is far inferior? Except for the bit rate, wherein Vimeo tops out at 10Mbit whereas Youtube tops out at 8Mbit, they use the same encoding scheme. If you move up to more professional accounts, Youtubes bitrate far supersedes Vimeo, by 30Mbps! (50Mbit/20Mbit)

But if you want to upload 1080p to Vimeo, you need a Plus or Pro account. So why not opt for Youtubes higher level accounts and get the superior bit rate.
 
Personally, I've just never seen a YouTube clip that looks as good as most of the stuff I've watched on Vimeo. I also watch Vimeo on my 50" Full HD Plasma and it looks amazing. Even on a regular 27" computer monitor I've never seen YouTube's 1080p quality come close to Vimeo.
 
Last edited:
I want to love Vimeo but it's hard. You can download source video but the streaming and upload is slllooowwww and stuttery.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top