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

jimmykorea said:
Honestly I find the AF100 a joke. Its seems like the main camera companies saw what was happening with DSLR's and just sliced their cameras in half and stuck an interchangable lens connection.
Click to expand...
huh?
jimmykorea said:
Actually what I'm saying is to beef the GH2 up to closer to what the Scarlet was going to be. The form factor of the GH2 is great I just wish they would spend some money on pusing the image, maybe global shutter maybe just a lot faster processing and more expensive sensor. Why is it RED has such great sensors can't the others make something similar? And yeah probably like someone mentioned the GH could split into a pro model and basic model though I guess they already have that with the GX range.

Anyway I'm hoping for a more stable image and better dynamic range in the GH3 i'm not that fussy about anything else though beefed up audio capabilities would be nice along with a headphone socket. In a nutshell I see Panasonic has a chance to fill the gap that the Scarlet Fixed would of satisfied or at least get close to it and if it costs 5,000 for a camera with a sensor that will give the improvements then so be it. It would sell a lot I think.
Click to expand...
clearly you're not the market. the fs100 perhaps fits your style. most of your suggestions makes sense to some of us but not manufacturers unfortunately.

a lot of what you want are being worked on and are being studied so they can manufacture it at a mass market. things arent as simple as they seem.
the camera manufacturers arent a charity. dont expect them not to think of profit first. dont expect them to change. theyre not apple :P
 
Framerate, you are in the wrong post. I am interested in the GH3 requirements, I am not interested in your boring tales.

What are your requirements for GH3? Unhackeable? Any more?
 
framerate has a point if you read between the rant, and he obviously is in the correct thread. What he's saying is the nex 7 has upped the bets, and I agree. Anyone in the market in sept when the gh3 arrives will obviously also be looking at the nex 7 which by that time will be a hundred dollars cheaper and very available, and maybe another nex or two as well. Sony is shrek arriving to the party and panasonic better take heed.
 
kurth said:
framerate has a point if you read between the rant, and he obviously is in the correct thread. What he's saying is the nex 7 has upped the bets, and I agree. Anyone in the market in sept when the gh3 arrives will obviously also be looking at the nex 7 which by that time will be a hundred dollars cheaper and very available, and maybe another nex or two as well. Sony is shrek arriving to the party and panasonic better take heed.
Click to expand...

Nex 7 has many alias and moir! And if you Nex viewfind thats another $400! GH2 still much better.
http://vimeo.com/35827837
 
Russiana007 said:
Nex 7 has many alias and moir! And if you Nex viewfind thats another $400! GH2 still much better.
http://vimeo.com/35827837
Click to expand...
As can be seen in that video you linked to, the NEX-7 has a built in viewfinder (a very good one, by all accounts).

Early days on the video from the Sony; I've seen nothing yet to make me even consider jumping ship. EOSHD is now testing:
http://vimeo.com/36117747

The GH3 will have to compete with the NEX-7 for stills too, a much tougher challenge. Still photography is a massively important market for these cameras. We video fans may even be a side issue.
 
John Caballero said:
The GH2 is still the camera to beat in its category.
Click to expand...


That could be over in a few weeks. The new OM-D Olympus is rumored to have a better hands down image than the GH2 and also has a new 4way stabalisation that is aimed to steady the image. I know its a rumor but it will be revealed on the Feb 8th so won't be long to know if it really is better than the GH2.
 
SiriNeos said:
Framerate, you are in the wrong post. I am interested in the GH3 requirements, I am not interested in your boring tales.

What are your requirements for GH3? Unhackeable? Any more?
Click to expand...


A sensor without glaring defects would be a nice change from the previous GH incarnations.

Has the absurdity of all this never occurred to you?. Picture, if you will, a DSLR rig kitted out with a wealth of gadgetry - a nice matte box, a decent follow focus, some good carbon rails and well machined base plate, an external recorder and a mic, perhaps. All the latest and greatest gear for making DSLR video as painless as possible, expensive to buy, and decidedly impressive to see.

But, sitting at at its heart - a GH2, with its banding issues, its 'noise bug' issues, its woeful inability to work properly in less than decent light, to list only three of its shortcomings.

Does such a set up not make you scratch your head and think, 'What's the point'?

It certainly makes me think in that way.

I sometimes think that the GH2 is a true triumph of hype over reality. It's as if many people have become memorised by the endlessly repeated mantras acclaiming it, to the point where they abandon their common sense and simply join in the ecstatic chorus.

It's not a terribly bad camera - but, honestly, it's not all that good, either.
 
That could be over in a few weeks. The new OM-D Olympus is rumored to have a better hands down image than the GH2 and also has a new 4way stabalisation that is aimed to steady the image. I know its a rumor but it will be revealed on the Feb 8th so won't be long to know if it really is better than the GH2.
Click to expand...

If it is better than the GH2 fantastic! That's what we need, better and better. For a moment I thought Sony's new cameras were going to be real competition for the GH2. But after trying them at Photo Plus I as was convinced that no, they weren't going to be at all. In video functionality alone the new Sony's weren't even close to the GH2. And neither image quality was true competition.
 
Ian-T said:
....but if all we're talking about is video....then.....
Click to expand...

Our priority is video, Ian-T, I agree; but the GH3 will have to compete in the wider world of photography. It could be the best little video camera there is, but if all the Gx and GHx stills shooters adopt the better stills output from the new APS-C mirrorless options then micro four thirds will flounder. A trip to a local newsagents will show you many photography magazines and not one videography magazine. All those magazines (and the new online sites) barely cover video. That's the difference in the size of the markets, and the relative levels of interest.

Micro four thirds has flourished so far because the majority of keen photographers don't want big ugly DSLRs (that mass market is so over). Now they can have a compact Sony or Fuji body (eventually Canon and Nikon) that takes stills that compete with those from a full frame Leica M9. That's the situation that Panasonic is looking at, and unless they've got something amazing up their sleeves in the way of sensor tech, the view isn't pretty.

At this price point, we video types are along for the ride.
 
Only single thing to improve is Sensor ... Panasonic made the choice of micro 4/3 which gives more choice of lenses but less cinematic choices ... I dont mean only DOF but also Low noise floor ... Say i want deep focus in night ... if i drop the f stop to get more depth ... i have to increase the ISO in simillar low light conditions ... well i can light. But with s35 sensor camera and low noise floor they can get away. Same is true for day light and shallow DOF, even with ND filters on, there are less cinematic choices. But still it is not much concern as compared to night shoots. And things go worse with that infamous noise strip at higher ISO's. Now It is not as worse but there is competition and people will prefer the camera which gives more cinematic choices. Lighting is always option for controlled environment but Guerilla Films don't control the envoirement, they go to actual location and shoot. (Hence Form Factor is big plus and should not be changed.) Now micro 4/3 is already less capable of low light compared to larger sensor and Panasonic already committed to micro 4/3 by bringing lenses and other camera's, So i dont see them going back s35. Only thing they should doing is to improve the noise floor and clean (little noise is ok, there is neat video but not that horrible noise strip) signal. I simply mean it should not priority at this price point. Price Point and Hack are the two things which made me buy GH2. Also Panasonic need to look ahead of the competition. And Yes for $800 nobody going to give 4k Raw, but they treat GH2 body as brain (as red do) and keeps options open for professional to updgrade that brain into something that they like, it will be great. S log like option at a cost via HDMI. As such HDMI is not required for that Hack does good job "In Camera" But if it is there, it should be able to give out something very professional. And good thing is that Panasonic can charge for that thing. And for that they have to do lots of planning while designing GH3 sensor and its processor. Modular Design with lots of option to convert GH3 into something really great. And proper scope and space for it in the design of the camera. Second most important thing they can do is to bring out some terrific fast wide angle lenses (collaboration with Leica voigtlander and Olympus is better idea) before release of GH3. If micro 4/3 has to survive ... Superior Sensor and choice of lenses are the two most important factors. Color Management is another. More ability to give cinematographer to choose the curve and options for third party vendors to improve and modify color management of the camera. Something like canon picture profile or may be even better. But that is still minor.

Prority
  1. Better Sensor (with better performance at higher ISO)
  2. Better Processor (with very good IQ to handle a highly professional and futuristic P log )
  3. Modular Design to convert GH3 into a beast
  4. Better Color Management
  5. Better wide lenses (fast and real wide)
  6. Small things (which can make a big difference) like more manual controls and feature like focus peaking and Headphone Jack.
 
Framerate said:
It's not a terribly bad camera - but, honestly, it's not all that good, either.
Click to expand...

You've said something I can agree with, Framerate, after a fashion.

But that doesn't alter the fact that the "not terribly bad" GH2 is the best "not all that good" large sensor video camera there is from out of the mass-market photography scene we inhabit.

Yes, it has faults. Yes, Panasonic should be slapped for not addressing them.

But what else is there, really? You dodged that one before; you claim so as to avoid censorship but I suggest it's because you can't offer a worthy alternative. I don't speak for all the other forum members, but I consider myself deeply fortunate to have such an amazing "not all that good" little device made even more amazing by "foreigners" and Englishmen alike. If there is better out there, then you're a very naughty man for not sharing the secret with us. C'mon, what cha got?
 
John Caballero said:
If it is better than the GH2 fantastic! That's what we need, better and better. For a moment I thought Sony's new cameras were going to be real competition for the GH2. But after trying them at Photo Plus I as was convinced that no, they weren't going to be at all. In video functionality alone the new Sony's weren't even close to the GH2. And neither image quality was true competition.
Click to expand...

Yup. I'm looking forward to Feb 8th then with the Oly. We want it to blow away the GH2. That will guarantee the GH3 will be even better. Panasonic announced the terrible financial news recently with their above Billion dollar loss. How do you think this affects the GH3?
 
I've dumped my Canon t2i at last.

For the moment I am enjoying my wonderful hacked gh2's.....

... and I'll dump those too... if someone comes out with a camera that is significantly better... be it Sony or Canon.

I'll always want to use the best and affordable tools available to me...
 
lpowell said:
Oh really?

Click to expand...


I'm not quite sure what you expect me to say.

What is so remarkable about that footage? To my eyes, it could have been taken with just about any camera currently on the market - in fact, I've got footage from a humble Canon GH10 that equals or suprasses it in terms of colour, clarity, and general 'niceness' (taken, if I recall correctly, at a modest 13 Mbps)

So the GH2 can take decent video in broad daylight?

So can an i-phone.

Are you sure that you're not being carried away by the hype? :happy:

It's worth remembering that (imo, at least) there is still no GH2 footage that beats Andrew Reid's 'Longchan's People', shot on an early hacked GH1.

As I said previously, the GH1 hack was a revelation of what a higher bit-rate could offer. Since then, it's been piddling at the edges, tinkering largely for the sake of it - with scarcely any further improvements to show for all the nonsense.

In my opinion, of course.
 
berylium said:
I've dumped my Canon t2i at last.

For the moment I am enjoying my wonderful hacked gh2's.....

... and I'll dump those too... if someone comes out with a camera that is significantly better... be it Sony or Canon.

I'll always want to use the best and affordable tools available to me...
Click to expand...

Well, yes. Of course. Competition is always good, so I say, Oly, bring it on. But. It's not quite so simple. I'm as willing to jump ship as the next guy, if something better comes along, the only allegiance I owe Panasonic is to buy their product if it fits my needs better. The complication is that it's not just the camera body you're buying. You're buying everything else, and some of it represents a much bigger investment, and a more long lasting one than the body. Like lenses. Now, if you buy a ton of m4/3 lenses, what are you going to do if f.ex. Canon finally wakes up and blows it out of the water? You can't simply buy the Canon body, because you're going to be needing lenses, and your investment in the m4/3 format is a sunk cost. Sure you can sell and rebuy the other format lenses and accessories, but it starts getting expensive, if you have to jump ship every 6 months or so as a better body comes out (I'm exaggerating a bit, but technology is accelerating, and soon, there will be musical chairs of great bodies coming out of Nikon, Sony, Canon, Pentax, Oly, Pana, etc., etc., etc., so it's quite possible for there to be the "latest and greatest" every six months soon enough).

So how to handle this? That is the whole point of this thread. The way to handle it, as I see it, is to find a camera body that works for your needs RIGHT NOW, well enough. By this I don't mean "the perfect camera", because there is no such thing, and probably never will be, but that you can use the camera right now without *deal-breaker* compromises. That's why I asked "isn't the GH2 enough for narrative work right now?". That was my point, you can stop hunting, if there are no deal-breakers, just use it. Go ahead and buy into the ecosystem (in this case the m4/3), because it's working for you right now. Sure, we all understand there'll always be the next better camera, perhaps the GH3, but there's no need to wait, and perhaps even we'll say to Panasonic "you'd better have x, y, and z for me to jump from the GH2 to the GH3"... and what would that be?

From my point of view, GH2 is ready for narrative work. That may not be true for you. So what do I see as the "must have" of the GH3?

1)Reliable output signal. I want clean HDMI and I want to trust the LCD, that what I'm seeing is what will be recorded - at a glance, without my having to go through hoops. This is fundamental. And it can be done - after all, the AF100 has that. I don't think it should push the cost up, as I suspect this is mostly a software issue, not a hardware one (though I could be wrong, I'm not a camera engineer).

2)1080-60p - doable without pushing up cost

3)Bugfixes so we don't have to go through hoops moving through ISOs with weird quality drops unless you do odd sequences

4)Less sensor noise overall, at all ISOs

5)Better low light and DR - dreaming a bit here :)

And really, that's it. Yes, I hear people on audio, but to me, this is not a dealbreaker for narrative work, because you always get better quality doing separate sound anyhow. And other stuff, sure, but I'm afraid it would push the cost up over the $1K mark. The suggestion floated here about segmenting the market into GH3 and GH3pro might be a good suggestion, and maybe then having the GH3pro go up to $1500 (max) with all the goodies, but I'm a bit worried that the market may not be big enough to justify such fragmentation to sustain separate lines of GH3 and GH3pro to justify the R&D and marketing costs on smaller runs.

Anyhow, that's my 0.2 cents. I see the GH2 (personally) as ready for prime time. But I'm interested in your opinions, hence the thread. I can already see that there are quite a few who want to see a lot more from the GH3 before committing, and others yet looking to Sony or Canon or somebody else as they don't want to lock into the m4/3 because they either don't think Pana can deliver or think it's too limited a format. Interesting discussion! Still listening :)...
 
Framerate said:

What is so remarkable about that footage? To my eyes, it could have been taken with just about any camera currently on the market...
Click to expand...
No difference to your eyes, eh? That's too bad, it's no wonder you're exasperated with the rest of us.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top