Professional image quality testing has been done, and the verdict is in. This camera beats the Olympus OM-D EM-5... just barely. Image quality off both camera sensors is fantastic and nearly identical, but the GH3 edges out the EM-5 by just a little bit of dynamic range. The EM-5 is a little cheaper, though. Right now, the GH3 is fairly expensive, but what you pay for is the best camera in this format money can buy, and I'm not just talking about image quality.Other reviews cover a lot of things about image quality and technical specifications, far more in depth than I'll go here. What I want to talk about is handling, video, and the general advantages of the Micro Four Thirds format.
Chances are, if you are considering the GH3 at all, you fall under one of three categories. You are either a serious enthusiast, a professional photographer, or you want to make movies. This is probably not going to be your very first system camera, and it's definitely not a point-and-shoot camera for amateurs. That's not to say the GH3 is overly complicated or unapproachable if you're new to photography, but I should think a cheaper camera would fit your needs fine.
The GH3 is a very special camera, with lots to love for those who love cameras. If you're a serious enthusiast, you should consider the EM-5 as well as the GH3. There are pros and cons for both cameras. I'll let you go read up on the EM-5 on your own, but for the GH3, it has a lot in its favor. Top of the list is handling. The GH3 is the largest camera in the format, this is true, but what you gain in bulk and weight, you also gain in ergonomics. There are lots and lots of physical buttons, five of them customizable, and nearly all of them usable one-handed without any awkwardness. The software is fantastic, too, giving you additional programable buttons on the touch screen, as well as Panasonic's fully configurable Quick Menu. There are tons and tons of options to set to get your camera working just the way you want it to. Everything is very well laid out and fairly intuitive. The dials and control wheels feel solid and work great. Even the largest of lenses balance very well on the GH3, thanks to its weight and best-in-format grip. Don't let its size fool you though, it's only a little heavier than the EM-5. Along with that size comes a very large battery. Technical specs I think are conservative on the lifespan of a charge, too. This is the best camera battery I've ever encountered, letting me shoot far longer than I am used to. All-in-all, the GH3 fits wonderfully in the hand, is very easy to shoot with, and gives you a huge amount of control. If you're an enthusiast photographer or serious prosumer, the GH3 will not disappoint. As an enthusiast, though, you've got plenty of options in the format and you should look carefully at many other models that may be cheaper but still quite satisfying.
If you are a professional, I think you'll appreciate much of the same things enthusiasts do, like what I mentioned above. But there's more in this camera that seems intended just for you. The Wi-Fi "Lumix Link" will let you upload images directly from the camera as you shoot, letting your customers see immediately what you're doing. You can also use it to trigger the shutter remotely or change settings. If wireless isn't your thing, there's an HDMI port and AV port. I have to believe the fully articulated touch screen will let you make difficult shots easy, such as doing macro on a product at a weird angle. The DSLR-type body will be very familiar to you, as well, though this is a mirrorless camera which means it's a much lighter camera than you're probably used to (more on this later). If you work with video at all for hybrid products, the live electronic viewfinder during movie recording will be a welcome change from optical viewfinders. As I mentioned before, the battery is quite large, but if you need more juice and don't want to switch batteries, there's a (sold-seperately) battery grip that will improve handling with portrait shots and give you even more endurance on a shoot. You will probably get some use out of the flash synchro socket and/or hot shoe. The buffer seems to be quite huge, and with a fast card shooting RAW in burst mode, it's very difficult to slow the camera down. There aren't more than a handful of weatherproof lenses for Micro Four Thirds so far, but if you have any the GH3 is weatherproof and will give you a seal to protect your system while you're shooting in wet environments. The camera is built with high quality, solid materials. All-in-all, the GH3 is perhaps the first Micro Four Thirds camera aimed squarely at the professional market, whether or not you've been tempted by the format before. It gives you enormous control, but gets out of your way when you're working. If you are a professional photographer, you are sure to appreciate the design considerations Panasonic made to make this a camera you can get serious work done with.
If you are a videographer, why are you even reading this review? There is simply no better camera for the movie-maker in this price range, and the video quality you'll get off of this camera will surpass hybrid or video-only cameras that cost considerably more. That said, video was one of my primary reasons for getting this camera, so I'll give you the most important details. Of all the codecs you're most likely to use, the six big ones are 1080p 24fps 50Mbps, 1080p 30fps 50Mbps, 1080p 60fps 50Mbps, 1080p 24fps 72Mbps (ALL-INTRA), 1080p 30fps 72Mbps (ALL-INTRA), or 720p 60fps 72Mbps (ALL-INTRA). You have a full-sized 3.5mm (1/8") microphone port, no need for an adapter like with the GH2, and a 3.5mm (1/8") headphone port for sound out while shooting. Of course, the GH3 has a stereo mic build-in. You can set mic levels right on the camera. There's all kinds of options for time code. As a videographer, you may still want to consider the GH2. Video quality is better on the GH3 in testing, even compared to the hacked GH2, but the GH2 is considerably cheaper and the difference in quality may not be enough. If you're a small budget indie filmmaker, choose carefully. All-in-all, if you can afford one, the GH3 out of the box is truly a fantastic video camera and competes at a much higher level for the price. It really puts other cameras to shame, even dedicated video cameras. If you are a videographer, or even a professional filmmaker, this camera has pretty much everything you want.
Which brings me to an important point. This is a hybrid camera, not merely an excellent still camera. For the price of one professional-quality camera, you're really getting two. If you happen to like taking still pictures AND video, the GH3 offers tremendous value. If you're creating hybrid products as a professional, there's really no other single camera that can do as well as this. If you're a hobbyist with interest in both pictures and video, this can save you a lot of money. The GH2 was good, this is better. Micro Four Thirds has finally arrived at the next level, not for stills-only, but for stills and video. If the EM-5 made Micro Four Thirds a serious format for still photography, the GH3 ups the ante and makes the format a viable platform for a whole new market.
Micro Four Thirds is the only truly mature mirrorless camera system. There are other mirrorless systems, to be sure, but Micro Four Thirds has a huge selection of first-party and third-party lenses, low end and high end, covering a huge range of focal lengths and apertures. The diversity of bodies from Panasonic and Olympus means there's probably a good camera for you no matter who you are. When you buy a system camera, it's reassuring to know that you're making a good investment. Micro Four Thirds is not going away any time soon. There's lots of great lenses available, and many more coming out. There's also adapters for many other lens formats, so there is almost limitless legacy glass available for any need, provided you don't mind manual focus. Mirrorless means thinner and lighter camera bodies, and Micro Four Thirds lenses need only half the focal length to achieve the same field of view as full frame cameras which means smaller and cheaper lenses for the same zoom factor. With two companies competing in the same format, there is a lot of innovation and a lot of options for users.
We'll see what happens over the next year from Panasonic and Olympus. New models are due out from both companies, as is the endless march of progress. For the time being, at least, the GH3 is a fantastic camera, and depending on your needs, it may be the best camera in this format for you until the GH4 comes out. Certainly for the moment, it has the best image quality available, and is a great camera to actually use. If you don't need the best that Micro Four Thirds has to offer, there are a lot of other great cameras to choose from in the format.
Happy shooting!
Enter the GH2 and 2 issues were somewhat solved at once. The 1st problem was bulk and the other being image quality. The stills of the GH2 was a major step up to my Oly E-620 and the video quality was also significantly upgraded as a result.
Now finally to the GH3 {while comparing to the GH2... I say that the GH2 feels and looks like a toy, yet is quite a serious tool under the hood so to speak. The advantage of looking like a toy was the incognito factor. In contrast, the GH3 has an excellent form, feel and look to it. It fits like a glove for me when operating. As a photographer our camera is like an appendage after all. The GH3 with a 12-35mm attached is light and remains relatively compact.
The location of levers and buttons are logically placed. I initially thought the lever to change from AF to MF was in a bad place and hard to turn. I was trying to make the adjustment with my forefinger (because I almost always have it mounted on a tripod) but it was clearly designed to be turned with the thumb which is stronger. I appreciate the ability to open the battery compartment and not have to remove my quick release tripod plate. I used to always accidently press the WB button of the GH2 and even change settings. The WB and ISO buttons are now on top. No more accidents.
Another major improvement is the speed. The burst shots are very responsive with no lag writing to the card until after 30 shots or so. I use a San Disk 95 mbs write speed which shines now. I was amazed of the processor speed of the GH3 when I would finish doing a burst of 5 shots or so (always RAW) and then press the video button and start recording right away. I have missed many key moments in video on the GH2 because I was waiting for it to finish writing to the memory card.It absolutely destroys the GH2 on this.
The electronic shutter is not virtually silent on a AF lens. You will hear the lens (not the body) make a small adjustment sound. This is still perfectly acceptable even in places demanding silence. One of the serious problems with Electronic Shutter is the bands / electronic stripes (like video of a CRT screen) that ruin images in certain artificial lighting.
As a so called hybrid shooter I welcome the advantages of the GH3 over the GH2 in speed and ease of transition between the mediums. The 1st thing I noticed was the manual Movie Mode which is not placed after all the C (Custom Settings) but right after M (Manual). I often shoot in A (Aperture) Mode and switch to manual Movie mode so I have 3 less turns to do now. The other thing is when recording video on PASM in the GH2 it would default to the lowest Bit Rate 17 mbps. Now it records in whatever mode you have set up like the MOV 1080 60p @ 50mbps without having to switch to manual.
I have a couple of gripes I am having a difficult time accepting though. The 1st is the EVF compared to the GH2. It now has a more "digitized" look to it. The noise (grain) is excessive in many cases. The EVF eye piece is much smaller also for some reason. A missing feature (that I miss anyways) is the "My Menu" found on the GH2 which lets you quickly access the last 5 menu features you used. I would use this to access things like formatting the memory card (instead of digging in the menu).
I just finished a weekend of shooting multiple events related to Art Basel Miami and I found myself thoroughly enjoying the shooting experience even though I just received the camera a day prior. The excellent Lumix 12-35mm has a lot to do with my positive experience. A fellow video shooter with a Canon 1D was impressed with the Continual AF speed and accuracy of the GH3 via the rear view monitor. I like the extras like Level Gauge, Intravalometer and WiFi to name a few useful features added to the GH3. The battery life is greatly improved too. I took 100's of stills and video clips the other night and it still showed 2 bars left. The GH2 has aweful banding on video especially with clear blue skies. I shot a beach scene w/ the GH3 (with bright blue skies) at 7mm on a Lumix 7-14mm and saw less banding. Many of the strong points of the GH2 made it to the GH3 like EX TELE Convert feature though it has it's quirks.
This hybrid is the best we have yet available, but it is not perfect. With present technology we could have had an even better solution by now IMO. Yet at $1300 I think this is a good value and worthy tool to produce excellent images. BTW we may have some significant updates via next firmware for the GH3 relatively soon.Having now spent a few weeks with this camera I feel I can provide an honest review of the GH3 and how it compares to it's well-regarded predecessor, the GH2. What seems clear from the onset of testing is that Panasonic has listened to the feedback it sought from photographers and videographers alike prior to designing a GH2 replacement. The body is much more solid and refined in it's ergonomics and controls. This camera now feels as professional as it's larger/heavier full frame and APS-C competitors (especially with the battery grip), but retains a nimbleness those cameras will never be able to match. The user interface is much more straight forward now and no longer requires a decryptor ring in order to select video shooting modes. In fact each menu option that is highlighted can now describe in detail what it's purpose is before it is activated, deactivated or changed.
The new OLED screen is simply stunning and accurately displays color and exposure, even in bright outdoor shooting. I find myself leaving an external monitor at home for my outdoor shoots because it just adds weight to my kit without really improving functionality. The viewfinder is nice as well, but I've noticed it can suffer from some image smearing around the outer edges if your eye is not perfectly aligned to it's center. WiFi remote control works great on the Samsung Galaxy and Asus Transformer, but I have not yet tested it on iPads or iPhones. The 50mbps IPB codec is excellent and can be pushed further in grading and recovery than previous hacked GH2 codecs I've used. Dynamic range, noise/grain, low light performance and ISO color shift (no more green tinting at higher ISOs) all seem improved over the GH2.
Raw still images have much better highlight recovery now as well. Where the GH2 has maybe 1/2 a stop of highlight recovery, the GH3 seems more like 1 to 1.5 stops of recovery which makes exposing for shadows much easier and is great when working in timelapse. Speaking of timelapse, the new electronic shutter feature and built-in intervalometer are brilliant. With the battery grip added you can take literally thousands of pictures in electronic shutter mode without killing the batteries. The only downside is that exposures greater than 1 sec in this mode are not (yet) available, so you will need to change over to the mechanical shutter for longer exposures. The camera can also be set to go into sleep mode when timelapsing in long intervals, further saving it's already outstanding battery life. To date I have yet to run into any video moire problems, which appears to be a much more inflated issue online then is justified in the real world. My preferred video settings are Contrast -5, Sharpness 0, Saturation 0, NR -5.
In conclusion, this is the camera I have been waiting for as a professional videographer and photographer. It does everything I need it to do in a light weight kit and does it exceedingly well given it's price point.I have been an avid user of the GH series since the GH1. I use these cameras mostly for video, because I shoot Canon DSLRs for most of my stills. The GH series cameras are optimized for video and produce crisper video than the Canon DSLRs, whereas the Canon DSLRs have more dynamic range and color depth and less noise at all ISOs. I have been following the GH13 firmware patches by Russian hacker Vitaly on Personal View since the beginning and have applied the hacks to the GH1 and GH2 with mixed results.
The GH3 now has a more solid weatherproofed build and the buttons are laid out like a true DSLR. It's like the GH2 has grown up to compete head to head in the DSLR market. But can it really compete with the big boys? You can read about the improved build and other new features in many reviews, but I'm going to focus here mostly on image quality.
While the GH2 was an improvement over the GH1, the advertized gains in low light (noise) and dynamic range performance were a disappointment*. Still photography images were virtually the same, but the quality of motion video was improved considerably, particularly if the hack was applied.
My first test of the GH3 was taking still photographs in controlled studio lighting. First impression of the JPEGs out of the camera is very good. Although at low ISO the difference from the GH2 is hard to see at first, upon examination there is significantly more detail in the shadow areas, the reds are richer, and the overall tint is more accurate. The GH2 images appear to have a green cast by comparison.
Moving up into the higher ISOs, around ISO 3200 the differences are stark. Here the GH2 has blotchy noise, a muddy green cast in the shadows and the colors are muted. The GH3 retains finer grain all the way up to ISO 6400, the colors are bright and the images are actually usable. At 100% the GH3 has some mosquito JPEG artifacts evident as random pinpoints of noise vs. the GH2 which has dark blotches and smeared details.
After upgrading ACR to handle the new RAW files, I took another look at the same set of photos in RAW. The RAW files reveal the fact that the JPEG engine in the GH3 is doing a heavy amount of noise reduction. Even at the base ISO of 200, quite a bit of noise is present in the RAW images, more than I would like to see. With an aggressive amount of noise reduction applied, the RAW files can be made to look as good and then a bit better than the JPEGs out of the camera. But the conclusion is that the JPEG engine has already been optimized to make the images look as good as possible, and RAW processing is not gaining a whole lot, except for the ability to fine tune and fix any white balance errors.
The still photos are pretty significantly improved over the GH2, and those already heavily invested in Micro 4/3 lenses will be glad to know that the investment will be put to good use on this body. But what many are dying to know is how much improvement there is in the video. What videographers are looking for is more dynamic range and a reduction or elimination of macroblocking and pixelation in heavy motion scenes.
There is good news here too: The GH3 pulls moderately more detail out of the shadow areas than the GH2. It's subtle but it's there: there is a bit more detail and less pixelated busyness in the grain. Again at high ISOs the difference is more drastic. The new All-I MOV codec is much more solid and easier to grade and edit without the image falling apart, without resorting to hacking the firmware. The other significant change is that the new menu allows for setting sharpness, contrast, and noise reduction in five steps up or down rather than three. Even with the sharpness turned to -3 on the GH2, the video looked unnaturally sharp with halos and aliasing. Now, with the sharpness turned all the way down to -5, the video looks more natural and the halos and aliasing are gone. Sharpening can now be adjusted in post more tastefully. Unfortunately, Panasonic removed two of my favorite photo styles for shooting video: Smooth and Cinema. In fact, they renamed all of them except for Standard and now there are only five instead of seven. The new styles Natural and Portrait are good choices for video. There are also many scene and creative control styles that have major effects on the overall look.
I have one main issue with this camera and that is the fact that the base ISO is 200. I didn't like it when they changed the base ISO from 100 to 160 on the GH2, and a base ISO of 200 is even worse. A base ISO of 200 on a micro 4/3 camera has about the same signal to noise ratio as ISO 800 on a full-frame DSLR**. That is hardly a very clean ''best'' setting. Smaller sensor cameras should be allowing us to begin at a LOWER base ISO, not a higher one, in order to have the finest grain and least amount of noise possible. And especially for video you really need to be able to shoot at lower ISOs in bright light, otherwise you are forced to have to use neutral density filters. The camera has an extended ISO that allows you to shoot at 125, but in manual movie mode it forces you back to ISO 200. Ideally I would like to be able to shoot at ISO 50 but at least all other digital cameras allow you to shoot at ISO 100. This is very frustrating and I don't understand why Panasonic doesn't allow this.
My second problem with this camera is the cost. This Micro 4/3 camera now costs TWICE as much as a good consumer grade DSLR such as the Canon T41. Even after adding on a few standard lenses, the DSLR becomes a less expensive solution while producing superior still images.
The loss of the multi-format sensor is a mixed bag. On the one hand, the 3x2 and 16x9 photos have lower resolution, and for video all your lenses are going to be slightly cropped compared to the GH2. On the other hand, this could be a positive if you are using legacy lenses such as B4 mount 2/3" lenses which have soft corners; some of the offending corners are cropped off. In the end, the improved image quality of this sensor wins out over the loss of the multi-format oversized sensor.
The new WiFi feature is the most sophisticated of any camera. It allows you to remotely control the camera's functions from your smartphone, immediately play back pictures on your phone or TV, immediately send pictures to your PC as you take them, and send stored pictures to your smartphone/pc/cloud service/web service/printer. I have not yet tested the WiFi features.
Here are the pros and cons of the GH3:
Pros:
Excellent JPEG Engine
Increased dynamic range
Improved low light/high ISO performance
More accurate colors
Wider control over contrast, sharpness, saturation, & noise reduction
Video quality exceeds most DSLRs
Sturdy build
Better button layout
Better, larger LCD
Longer lasting battery
Robust video codec that does not require a hack for pro editing
Fast and very accurate auto-focus
In-camera HDR works well
Silent electronic shutter option
Sophisticated WiFi features
Cons:
Base ISO of 200 is restrictive & frustrating
RAW files reveal that true levels of noise are high even at base ISO
Very little gains to be had shooting in RAW
No Smooth or Cinema picture styles
Considerably more expensive than many DSLRs
Still photography still inferior to most DSLRs
Loss of multi-format sensor could be a complaint for some.
My overall impression of the camera is very good, and I will probably be getting rid of the GH2 and finally giving up on the frustrating exercise of trying to get the 'perfect' hack settings out of it. The GH3 doesn't need the hack, with the robust 72 mbps MOV codec it's reliable and ready out of the box for professional cinematographers and hobbyists. The only thing that bothers me about it is not being able to shoot below ISO 200 in manual movie mode, but I will have to learn to live with that. The cost remains a big issue; for the same amount you could buy two GH2s and have some money left over to put towards the 12-35mm f/2.8 lens. GH2 hackers who already like what they have will probably want to wait until the cost comes down, and most photographers who don't shoot video will get more quality for their dollars with a DSLR.
*DxOMark actually gave the GH2 sensor a lower rating than the GH1 in all three categories: Color Depth, Dynamic Range, and Low Light ISO.
**I compared the RAW files. At ISO 200, the grain or noise from the GH3 is actually slightly WORSE than the Canon 5D Mark III at ISO 800.THis is my 2nd GH3. The first one was defective. The leveler was off and 20% of the shots were out of focus. This one is perfect perfect perfect. I'll begin with the things I like about it 1) AWB is the closest AWB achieved. I have a Canon Mark III and Nikon D800. None come close to how accurate Panny's AWB works. 2) size and weight. Perfect for me since I do a lot of architectural shooting and going up and down stairs is much easier at 70 years old. 3) the swing out touch screen LCD!! Keeps me from having to stoop over for hours looking at the viewfinder. 4) Touch focus on the LCD!!! OMG!! Perfect! 5) Photo quality.....up to 800 ISO. After 800 I do notice some noise. 6) Customizable buttons!! A LOT!! 7) The feel in my hands. Perfect. Now what I don't like 1) I wish the timer would auto bracket the shots when set. The Nikon and Canon both do that. I had to buy at remote shutter release cable. An inconvenience to carrying around for those twilight shots. Finally what everyone else has said about the camera is true. After another motnh or so, I may end up selling my Nikon D800 and Canon Mark III. Oh I'm using the Panny with a Oly 9-18 lens. I tried the Panny 7-14 but horrible flare problems.
Update: After having the 2nd camera for less than a month I've discovered a few issues. I was using my Canon external flash and it worked fine for about a week then the hot shoe became slightly loose and the flash wouldn't fire. It worked perfectly on my Canon Mark III and still does. I tried another flash on the Panny and still no luck. Defective hot shoe. I had to return the 2nd GH3 but got another one....I liked it that much!! The new one seems to be working fine with the external flash. Another issue has been occasional out of focus shots. The camera would beep "in focus" but after downloading the photos, several were out of focus. I had this problem as well with the previous GH3. I was using single point focusing. Then I tried a different focus setting...pinpoint. It zooms in quickly and you can see whether or not it's truly in focus. Some registered "in focus" but weren't so I had to move the focus point to a good contrast area to achieve true focus. Ever since then, all my photos have been in focus. Every camera has it's quirks. Getting to know them is the key to getting good shots. One thing I'm concerned about is the longevity of the camera. I'm a working photographer and put about 8,000 to 10,000 shutter clicks on my cameras per month. I had a Nikon D700 for years and ran it up to 300,000 shutter clicks with no problems. I also had a Sony SLT A77 that started to fail after 8 months. It was in for service twice. I love the GH3. It's light and gives me results in the easiest way possible. I don't invest in cameras unless it makes my job easier. The GH3 feels solid for what it is but only time will tell.
Update: After 2 months, I found that this is the ONLY camera I have ever used that has a truly amazing AWB. It is very close to being perfect. If not, at least it makes it much easier to correct in PS or other photo programs. However, in difficult situations such as colored walls, etc... I still manual white balance and it brings it to almost 95% perfect.
No comments:
Post a Comment