GH2 Why do we need a GH3? Isn't the GH2 enough? What should Panasonic do for GH3?

Inprogress said:
It is simplified, and don't over think it. Just know, Jill uses the GH2 and its perfect and accessible and works for now. Jack uses the GH2 but wants the GH3 because he can't do it with the GH2, he needs the RED Scarlet. It's they way things are. It's the way we are. It's the way we differ. It's the way we both expand our expression. It is the way we both broaden the story telling craft.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but when do we get to see them go up the hill and then tumble down again. That's the best bit. :Drogar-Happy(DBG):
 
For starters it would be nice to have a camera that doesn't have 20 pixel line running through it's image.
 
FIVE PAGES IN ONE DAY - WOW! this may be the fastest populated thread in dvxuser history!

i havent read all the responses. so my answers may be redundant:

in order of personal desire:
1. global shutter!!!
2. better audio control
3. real timecode
5. larger, more weather resistant body
4. more intuitive menu system

if it had any one of those, id scoop up two on day one.
 
THE JELLO AFFECT IS NOT A FAULT OF THE CAMERA! IT IS CAUSED BY THE PERSON DOING THE FILMING. WITH PROPER FILMING TECHNIQUE THE JELLO AFFECT IS NOT AN ISSUE.
Click to expand...
BULL-CRAP!

its not a "fault" - its an "artifact" or a "quality" or even a "feature" - call it what you want.

AGREED that its a known behavior of these cameras and shooters should manipulate their cameras accordingly. but saying its a non-issue is just flat out WRONG.

people coming from the ENG /CCD world never really had to address it previously. and its not unreasonable for those shooters to want to use DSLRs as well.
 
Last edited:
Yes 1 in 10,000 movies might use a DSLR. But anecdotely It seems 50% plus of indies are shot on RED or something of that quality. If you go to all the trouble to make a movie wouldnt you have enough for a RED rental? or Scarlet X. In this case being in the 1% is not to be encouraged.


As a Documentray camera the DSLRs can work but need a serios amount of rig attached. And Jello is a fault of the hardware anyone who says it isn't shouldn't bother contributing strong opinions until they learn a few things. Global Shutter or a serious attempt at producing without loads of post processing a more stablised image is nessecary for this camera to be used for serious work. Have anyine ever looked at the GH2 footage though a TV???????????
 
For the last time.

THE JELLO AFFECT IS NOT A FAULT OF THE CAMERA! IT IS CAUSED BY THE PERSON DOING THE FILMING. WITH PROPER FILMING TECHNIQUE THE JELLO AFFECT IS NOT AN ISSUE.
Click to expand...

There you go. The problem is non Panasonic GH dedicated lenses are way more difficult to control. Focusing and avoiding jello is a juggling act. That's why I stay the hell away from them. Pana lenses are fantastic with the GH1/GH2 cams.
 
My GH3 wishlist:
*1080p/60p
*Clean, recordable HDMI output

Honestly, without those two, I wouldn't really have a need to upgrade. Anything else would be nice, but not essential for me.
 
jimmykorea said:
But anecdotely It seems 50% plus of indies are shot on RED or something of that quality.
Click to expand...

I think a lot more Indies are going to be shot on the Sony F3 because of the low-light ability, the overall image quality, and the relatively easy work-flow. ( same goes for the Canon C-300 )

The GH-2/GH-3 will be the big savior of the no-budget films.
 
the thing about all this that kind of embarrasses me is that even today, you could mount a landmark production with an old vhs camera if your idea and composition and acting were dialed in. so all this back and forth we go through, niggling over latitude and noise and such (yeah, jello as well) often boils down to an exercise in exercise.

entertaining one though it is.
 
The GH2 is noisier and has worse aliasing than my Canon Camcorder. Hopefully, they can fix that.
 
I'm noticing a lot of people are asking for global shutter. How exactly could Panasonic implement that at this price point? I mean, even the Alexa and RED One have a rolling shutter, right?

Just to note, I'm not asking this to be condescending, I'm just wondering if this is actually a plausible request.
 
Just to note, I'm not asking this to be condescending, I'm just wondering if this is actually a plausible request.
Click to expand...
only reason i bring it up is that it was mentioned on another site as a possible feature... may be horse crap, who knows?
 
TheDingo said:
I think a lot more Indies are going to be shot on the Sony F3 because of the low-light ability, the overall image quality, and the relatively easy work-flow. ( same goes for the Canon C-300 )

The GH-2/GH-3 will be the big savior of the no-budget films.
Click to expand...



Who knows but I respectly doubt it. Red has a filmic image that is tried and tested and has become the camera of choice for so many award winning movies. So far we don't know aboout the Scarlet X but lets not forget its the same image quality as the EPIC which is being used for the New Spiderman/Hobbit movie. You look at the movies made with the Red Cameras and its reads like the top 100 movies of the decade. You got to give Red its due its made real movie quality available at never seen before prices. However I still feel the pain of them not completing the 2/3 road map. I forgive them but I can't forget. ;) I think the RED 2/3 system would of brided the gap between the big boys of RED and Alexa and what we are talking aout now the GH2's and DSLR shooters. I can understand why Red dropped it cause they could see the next level of cameras coming out like the GH3, 5DIII etc. Its ironic but if the whole DSLR movement hadn't happened then my hunch is RED would of continued on and produced a DSLR scarlet camera in some form. Oh well.....

Maybe this will annoy some people but I think the C300 is the most overrated camera I have ever seen. The image to me is just a slightly more stabalised 5D. All I see is clean video, not indie movie makers going to choose its image over RED. Its also looks like the bastard child of a DSLR and Camcorder and its not cheaper really than a Scarlet X give or take a few thousand dollars. And if I have to see another video shoot out with that annoying Bloom guy I'll shot myself. saying that I am curious about the 4K DSLR Canon has in the pipeline though. And the F3? its been around for a while hasn't it? I'm not aware of any MAJOR use of it in theatre released movies, I could be wrong.
 
P-log
1080p/60
Tethering control for Still/video (external control of shutter, aperture, iso)
Higher res display
Record meta data for video!!!
 
I am just about to buy a GH2 after owning a GH1 for the last two years. As for a GH3, I suppose the biggest feature would be 1080p50 at a decent bitrate. All standard frame rates from launch - 24p, 25p, 30p, 50p, 60p. Also the ability to act more as a video camera and less as a stills camera would be nice - ie. plus and minus gain, image peaking, timecode, proper audio in and out (as most audio is shot in-camera these days, unless you are shooting a specialist doc or drama and going sep mag). Gobal shutter - I would doubt will happen so soon, and weather sealing will only cause overheating a la Canon - get a decent wet weather cover instead!
 
Panasonic has a pro camera division. They aren't going to have the camera division build a camera that will compete with their pro camera division.
 
I don't know about that. Panasonic makes way more money with their consumer pocket camera then the pro lines.
The gh2 is a very interesting camera in that it offers semipro features, in a cheap consumer package.
I can't foresee anyone using a GH2 for the pro level of work...even though image wise, it's already in the running. But, there is so many features it lacks that it won't directly compete with their high end line no matter the improvements with the GH3.
I see a bigger growth in the Indy areas with its presence. And possible field work in remote circumstances.
Higher bitrates, more advance features (frame rates, audio, controls/interface), and tools would be inline with the evolution of these HDSLRs rather then an ecrouchment of the high end industry. (iPhone on a bumpy bus ride, excuse my typing)
 
jimmykorea said:
Maybe this will annoy some people but I think the C300 is the most overrated camera I have ever seen.
Click to expand...

...That's what I thought at first, but then I started to think about all the people that just want to pick up a camera, turn it on, and start shooting. For someone who does not want to spend any time learning the workflow of a complex camera system, the C300 should be much easier to use. I have no problems with complex workflows if the results justify it, but I know lots of non-techy people that want something easy to work with, and these are the folks who will love the C300.

BTW, I am not denigrating RED, I just think it is NOT the only camera around, that there are many different brands that produce professional results. I am just sick and tired of the RED fanboys who think that RED is the only game in town. ( the same way that Mac fanboys have been acting for the past 20 years ) In the end it's all just a bunch of tools you use to make something. Art is the "painting" itself, not the brushes or the canvas you used to make it.
 
With noise in the shadows, banding in the skies and the 20 pixel high band I get in low light situations there is no way I could use my 2 GH2's for pro productions. I need to be as close to 100% reliable as possible. It can't just yield good results "often", it needs to be able to deliver clean output I can count on all the time. By that same token however, I cannot say that RED is much better. Which is why I don't own one - yet. I think P. Bloom was absolutely right to have reservations. When I go on a long shoot, I cannot simply turnaround and say "Sorry, the camera just stopped because the hack was unable to deal with all the detail in this scene" for instance, or geez maybe that's a bug RED hasn't dealt with yet. For most clients time is money.
What would I want in a GH3? Clean output I can count on. No banding, mysterious lines, noisy shadows at low iso's, and maybe a little less skew. I think that's reasonable don't you?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top