Lets Discuss, where the GH3 Falls Short

[Ernesto Mantaras]

[quote name='sanveer' timestamp='1351843256' post='20852']

There is Quite a bit of noise in your video (on the staircase, and the seats, etc etc). I just saw a few seconds of the start, and there was already a lotta noise (strange artefacts).

[/quote]

Those "strange artifacts" were the shitty YouTube compression trying to intepret the grain I added. Big mistake on my part (it's the first time I added it in a whole video). I looks great uncompressed, but it looks quite bad on YouTube, didn't take that into account. Will upload a bit of the video in DNxHD so you can see what I'm talking about.

Anyways, those "shooting star" artifacts are nowhere to be seen. Did you continue to watch beyond those first few seconds?

[sanveer]

[quote name='charlie_orozco' timestamp='1351847083' post='20856']
Those "strange artifacts" were the shitty YouTube compression trying to intepret the grain I added. Big mistake on my part (it's the first time I added it in a whole video). I looks great uncompressed, but it looks quite bad on YouTube, didn't take that into account. Will upload a bit of the video in DNxHD so you can see what I'm talking about.

Anyways, those "shooting star" artifacts are nowhere to be seen. Did you continue to watch beyond those first few seconds?
[/quote]

hahaha ... i must confess, that, I didn't watch the video, maybe, beyond 15-20 seconds. I already found noise, and so,I stopped viewing :P

[Germy1979]

[quote name='KarimNassar' timestamp='1351761912' post='20773']


I call it the "shooting stars artifact" because it is rays of brighter color that travel from the top left to the bottom right part of the image, looks like shooting stars.

They are visible in dark parts of the image, mostly visible in very dark parts.
It is very visible when you push the image in post, if you want to see it download the dynamic range comparison I posted in my gh3 quick handheld comparison thread.

More subtle but clearly visible here (not my work):
[url="https://vimeo.com/47358813"]https://vimeo.com/47358813[/url]
At the end of the video on the wood behind the bea hive.
Watch in full screen you won't miss it.
[/quote]

I don't know if anybody picked up on this, but there seem to be a couple of issues in Flowmotion like a weird rain looking like pattern in dark areas, and flickering issues. Digging for a link while you're on your phone is a p.i.t.a. so i'll just tell you to look up a guy named "Roman Legion Films" in Vimeo. He points out an issue in one of his videos with it.. Maybe it's the same thing you're seeing as it seems like a common issue now popping up.. I didn't really see it in mine.... But i didn't really look for it either. Another issue was a lowlight shot with my new voigtlander and my 5 year old. I did a slow push from her full body sitting up in her bed watching tv up to her face. I wanted "eerie" with just the tv light reflections. The wall behind her bed is big, empty, and white right now so it looks creepy as hell. Try as i may adjusting shutter, and frame rate, i could not fix the fact that the light reflection was flickering consistently like i was shooting in PAL land or something. So i ditched the shot and put her to bed, lol.

The thing is, I didn't check it on my computer. I know the Gh2's lcd is awful with gamma shift, refresh rate, & such.. So maybe someone can chime in if they've seen something similar. I know Flowmotion is great in almost all other aspects, but i'm back to Sedna. It's an All-i patch and that could've had something to do with it as well even though FM is only a 3gop patch.. Who knows..

Point is, others have seen the problems you're talking about. I thought Flowmotion was the last patch I'd ever need until these little issues. Now i'm fairly certain a high bitrate, all-i patch is about as good as the gh2 can get.. All of these matrix adjustments to simulate 4:4:4 characteristics on a 4:2:0 camera are really indiscernible to me.. I can't see a difference in any of them anymore. Sanity was awesome regarding noise in lowlight.. I didn't have any hardly.. Until i saw it only pushed 17mbs in the scene and thus, just smeared it out along with blocking in the highlights of all things.. Lol. Bad.
Sedna and CM night seem to be the best from what i've seen... But then again, they're 150+mbps all-i patches that require the 64/95 card or forget reliability.

[Julian]

[quote name='KarimNassar' timestamp='1351760452' post='20769']
the gh3, based on what we have seen so far from preproduction models with firmware 0.5 is nothing short of a failure imo.

Not only have not upgraded but they have regressed from the gh2.

Regression:
- apparently less detail rendition
- mo more multi aspect sensor
- apparently from the user guide there is no more video extended tele mode
- introduces moire an aliasing

And all of this for more than twice the price of the gh2...

We can use caution and wait for the final production models but it is definitively not looking good at all.
[/quote]
According to Panasonic firmware 0.5 is representative for the final product.

EXTC is there, it doesn't work in 72mbit movie recording, only at lower bitrates.

Don't forget the GH3 isn't a video camera. I remember a quote from a Panasonic guy saying the GH3 is 50/50 photo/video, while the GH2 was more like 40/60. Watch the official [url="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_m-Iwpc_qdg"]promo-video[/url] for the GH3. It starts with a landscape photographer, then Macro, then people, and then Cinema...

The stills quality is greatly improved over the GH2. I think Panasonic went for a Sony sensor (if they did make it in-house it'd probably still have mutli-aspect at least) to be able to keep up with the rest (OM-D, Sony NEX etc) in the stills market. And because of this they couldn't do the same magic as with the sensor in the GH2.

It is a hybrid camera, the big improvements are in the photography department. Yes, it sucks for us... it's not what we want, but the GH3 is a major improvement over the GH2 overall.

[Germy1979]

It has 1080, 60p & a body that doesn't feel like a toy. The screen is much better. The processors are killer. From what i understand an important aspect in the video department that the Gh2 didn't have is an 8x8 matrix.. (Someone else can explain its significance, i just know it was a desirable trait in the gh2 they tried to emulate with a patch.) i don't know how "log" style you can get it to shoot, whether it is confirmed or not to have aliasing/moire issues as some videos have shown it while others have not.. Mainly the razor sharp sterile hand held 12-35x videos that keep popping up with what looks like everything shot on soccer mom mode. (Soccerball on the dial, lol.)
What the hell is the "high dynamic range" sensor doing differently here exactly... It doesn't look any different in terms of latitude & that was a huge, huge deal with the highlights and noise on the gh2..

Alas.. It will be hacked more than likely, and hopefully regardless of whether or not panasonic release another firmware addressing some of these concerns, Personal View does.. Just sucks that they may have to.

[Julian]

[quote name='Germy1979' timestamp='1351856458' post='20863']
What the hell is the "high dynamic range" sensor doing differently here exactly... [/quote]

It delivers photos with a much higher dynamic range than the GH2. Does the Nikon D800 provide 14 stops of dynamic range in video? I doubt it. It does when you shoot raw pictures at base iso.

[Germy1979]

Ok. They didn't specify where that applied, my bad.

[sanveer]

[quote name='Julian' timestamp='1351854415' post='20860']
According to Panasonic firmware 0.5 is representative for the final product.

"[b]EXTC is there, it doesn't work in 72mbit movie recording, only at lower bitrates.[/b]"

Don't forget the GH3 isn't a video camera. I remember a quote from a Panasonic guy saying the GH3 is 50/50 photo/video, while the GH2 was more like 40/60. Watch the official [url="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_m-Iwpc_qdg"]promo-video[/url] for the GH3. It starts with a landscape photographer, then Macro, then people, and then Cinema...

The stills quality is greatly improved over the GH2. I think Panasonic went for a Sony sensor (if they did make it in-house it'd probably still have mutli-aspect at least) to be able to keep up with the rest (OM-D, Sony NEX etc) in the stills market. And because of this they couldn't do the same magic as with the sensor in the GH2.

It is a hybrid camera, the big improvements are in the photography department. Yes, it sucks for us... it's not what we want, but the GH3 is a major improvement over the GH2 overall.
[/quote]

Where did you get, that the ETC mode doesn't work at lower bit rates. It is disabled completely for video, and also for higher resolution pics.

Read Kassim's Post:

[url="http://www.freeimagehosting.net/e3i28"]http://www.freeimagehosting.net/e3i28[/url]

and

[url="http://www.freeimagehosting.net/ipsgx"]http://www.freeimagehosting.net/ipsgx[/url]



I think, we should have a shootout, between the GH2 and the GH3. I think the difference in stills will be very little, and the GH2 may be, a tad better, at video.
Suddenly, I am wondering, whether getting a Sony sensor, was such a great idea.

[Ernesto Mantaras]

Here's a small sample video in DNxHD of a few shots from the Distant Project music video. I had to divide into two parts.

http://www.mediafire.com/?8n6ahoafda16f

And about Flow Motion, I don't know if it's that patch that introduces the "shooting star" artifact or what, but from I tried it once and thought it was garbage, mainly due to this:

[img]http://www.eoshd.com/comments/uploads/inline/17754/5093e413b66fc_Lows_Comparison.png[/img]
Flow Motion v2 on top. Sedna Q20A below it.

[img]http://www.eoshd.com/comments/uploads/inline/17754/5093e2c36a3dc_Lows_FlowMotionv2.png[/img]
Flow Motion v2

[img]http://www.eoshd.com/comments/uploads/inline/17754/5093e36b99022_Lows_SednaQ20A.png[/img]
Sedna Q20A

[Germy1979]

[quote name='charlie_orozco' timestamp='1351869527' post='20877']
Here's a small sample video in DNxHD of a few shots from the Distant Project music video. I had to divide into two parts.

http://www.mediafire.com/?8n6ahoafda16f

And about Flow Motion, I don't know if it's that patch that introduces the "shooting star" artifact or what, but from I tried it once and thought it was garbage, mainly due to this:

[img]http://www.eoshd.com/comments/uploads/inline/17754/5093e413b66fc_Lows_Comparison.png[/img]
Flow Motion v2 on top. Sedna Q20A below it.

[img]http://www.eoshd.com/comments/uploads/inline/17754/5093e2c36a3dc_Lows_FlowMotionv2.png[/img]
Flow Motion v2

[img]http://www.eoshd.com/comments/uploads/inline/17754/5093e36b99022_Lows_SednaQ20A.png[/img]
Sedna Q20A
[/quote]

Hey!! Quick question about Sedna:) i've only used AQ1... From what i understand AQ1 is the better of the 2 but i'm not really understanding the difference.. Benefits, etc.. What the hell is "Q" anyway, lol? ...

[GravitateMediaGroup]

The people trying to come up with things the GH3 is lacking is really just trying to convince their self they have no need to upgrade from GH2. If you are a real fan of the GH2, how can you NOT love the GH3, for the most part they have kept the same monster in a tiny box with the addition of all the features the GH2 was missing to make it some what a semi-pro camera. You get what you pay for people, as with anything, if you look hard enough you will find flaws. If you want a perfect camera, rent a RED or take out a loan for an Alexa. As far as the price and the improvements made from the GH2, I couldn't be happier.

[GravitateMediaGroup]

I am with germ on flowmotion, I thought it would be the last patch I use as well, but I have jumped ship on it.

There is only so much you can do with the GH2, and sedna is the best way to get all of the "only so much" out of it.

Flowmotion is still a good patch, and Lpowell is currently working on a new version, I'm guessing FM 3.0?, that hopefully will address some of the issues I have with it.

[Axel]

[quote name='gravitatemediagroup' timestamp='1351878729' post='20886']
The people trying to come up with things the GH3 is lacking is really just trying to convince their self they have no need to upgrade from GH2.
[...][/quote]

Reasonable, isn't it?
Why should I pay for something I don't need?
I have a history, I bought a lot of cameras as time went by. I am quite modest and like to keep a low profile in appearance but with high expectations to quality. Every now and then I am teased to buy new equipment, because I feel one or other handicap. Past experiences made me smarter. Never go shopping when you're hungry. Wait if a better solution turns up.

[quote name='gravitatemediagroup' timestamp='1351878729' post='20886']If you are a real fan of the GH2, how can you NOT love the GH3, for the most part they have kept the same monster in a tiny box with the addition of all the features the GH2 was missing to make it some what a semi-pro camera.[/quote]

I have a good camera for photos (Canon), I don't need another. The GH3 is neither fish nor fowl. Maybe MFT is a dead end altogether. Better use it now.

[quote name='gravitatemediagroup' timestamp='1351878729' post='20886']You get what you pay for people, as with anything, if you look hard enough you will find flaws.[/quote]

You mentioned love. You fell in love with that gizmo, unfinished and multiple flawed as it is? Then buy it.

[Ernesto Mantaras]

[quote name='Germy1979' timestamp='1351876546' post='20885']
Hey!! Quick question about Sedna:) i've only used AQ1... From what i understand AQ1 is the better of the 2 but i'm not really understanding the difference.. Benefits, etc.. What the hell is "Q" anyway, lol? ...
[/quote]

According to Driftwood the AQ1 has a more detailed matrix, and AQ2 is kinda overkill. And I'm not sure, but that extra detail (quite unnoticeable in the few silly tests I made) also makes the data rate go up, so you need a really fast card. Q20 is more manageable and comes in three purposes: A, B and C. I tried A since it was supposed to have the most detail, but in 720p my card couldn't keep up (I tested everything in my backyard on a windy day... LOTS of unpredictable high detail), and then I tried B (the "Q20B" I talked about) and it has never failed me since, not even in the most detailed scenes. This one reads "[b][color=blue][font=inherit][size=3]B = Good allround detail matrix[/size][/font][/color][/b][color=#000000][font='lucida grande', 'Lucida Sans Unicode', tahoma, sans-serif][size=3] Great all round wide / mid shots." [/size][/font][/color]in the patch forum page([url="http://www.personal-view.com/talks/discussion/3454/driftwood-settings-series-5-cluster-v6-ultra-reliable-mysteron-crossfire-quantum-9b-sedna.../p1"]http://www.personal-view.com/talks/discussion/3454/driftwood-settings-series-5-cluster-v6-ultra-reliable-mysteron-crossfire-quantum-9b-sedna.../p1[/url]).
Perhaps if you have cards faster than 45MB/s like mine you could go with Q20A. Still, Q20A will do just fine, I think. Amazing clarity.

[quote name='gravitatemediagroup' timestamp='1351879101' post='20887']
I am with germ on flowmotion, I thought it would be the last patch I use as well, but I have jumped ship on it.

There is only so much you can do with the GH2, and sedna is the best way to get all of the "only so much" out of it.

Flowmotion is still a good patch, and Lpowell is currently working on a new version, I'm guessing FM 3.0?, that hopefully will address some of the issues I have with it.
[/quote]

Like the horrible blurred shadows? I talked about this with LPowell when I tired the patch (it was v2, no 2. something) and he explained why this was so from the technical side, all very nice, but it didn't take away the fact that it didn't look good (like you can see in the screengrab from my latest post).
But of course, the GH2 has limitations inherent to its design and hardware, and the point with the patches is to squeeze that potential as much as possible. We have seen the top, I think. Sedna is great, the rest of the patches have subtle differences (to me at least) and what I like the least is that there are versions designed for wide shots, middle shots, skin tones, etc. I don't want to be installing patches in between takes. Sedna Q20B is the best all around to me (and for the speed of my cards, 45MB/s).

[Ernesto Mantaras]

And about the GH3, I agree with Axel. Though I do feel there are good improvements (while some things stayed the same) the moiré problem kills the GH3 as an option. That's a step back. It can have its quirks, like the GH2 and any other camera out there, but the one thing it couldn't fail in was that. The GH2 lacked moiré, it became the ONLY option in this budget once I heard about it, and I'm glad I found about it. I'm really happy with the camera.
Panasonic managed to improve the banding in the lower end, ISO performance (apparently) and it even has a little more resolution (judging from the head to head comparison that KarimNassar did), and then there are the bigger body, more dedicated buttons, 3,5 mic in, etc, etc. Those things are improvements but it's on each one of us to decide whether they're worth the jump. GH2 would still be a contender with all those improvements.
But they become futile if you have to step back in the main reason that makes this camera so lovely: image quality.
Moiré is unacceptable. All the other advantages lose tremendous weight next to it.

[sanveer]

Lets make a genuine analysis, rather than play favorites.

Key improvements on the GH3:

1. Weather Sealing.
2. 2.5mm to 3.5mm mic in.
3. Sound Monitoring (through headphone jack).
4. Colours are slightly more flat (though not flat enough).
5. Longer lasting battery, and grip option available.
6. Better LCD and EVF. Though, the screen, suddenly, look very blue. Even the grass and everything that is green, has a strange hue of blue.
7. Bluetooth and Wi-fi (one works, at a time, though, the GH3 has, apparently, both).


Where it doesn't seem to have improved, or not improved enough:

1. Video quality (still visible noise, under certain conditions, though slightly less).
2. Comparatively Low Dynamic.
3. Picture Quality is improved, marginally, though not really enough.


Where it has deteriorated:

1. Sudden appearance of noticeable Moire and Aliasing.
2. Video doesn't seem as sharp (though, in some videos, people state, that, it appears to be, almost, equally sharp. I am not sure I agree with it being sharper, or even close to, as sharp as the GH2).
3. The sensor is not Multi-Aspect Ratio, anymore.
4. The ETC has gone from Video (Completely), and is available, ONLY for photos, of low to mid resolution.
5. It is suddenly bulkier, and a tad heavier (marginally).
6. Cost of the camera has gone up, substantially.
[The GH2 did cost around $ 1300-1500, but, only at launch time, and, with the 14-140 lens. Also, since it was Not available, for a long time, and there were series of offers, on the camera, the price was about $899 for the body only, or so. I am not exactly sure, but, sometime around mid to end of 2011, the GH2 + 14-140 lens cost around $ 1155 (on offers) or $1300 (without offer). I am not absolutely sure, of the exact pricing, because most prices, seem to have been removed, from their relevant dates, and the one, that I found, don't seem completely accurate.]

Please feel free, to add, to this list, or post you opinion or feedback or corrections.

[Julian]

EXTC does work. At least on my firmware 0.5 test sample it does. Here you go:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xgG2v0Gq6ms

For your list:

1080p60
Substantially Improved photo quality
72mbit mov
Time code display

I don't think bulkier/heavier is a complaint for most people. It's much better built quality.

[sanveer]

Julian, did I notice you changing from 72Mbps to 50Mbps bit rate, for video,before using the ETC? Does the ETC work with the 72Mbps?
I've added your points to the list.


[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]Key improvements on the GH3:[/font][/color]

[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]1. Weather Sealing.[/font][/color]
[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]2. 2.5mm to 3.5mm mic in.[/font][/color]
[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]3. Sound Monitoring (through headphone jack).[/font][/color]
[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]4. Colours are slightly more flat (though not flat enough).[/font][/color]
[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]5. Longer lasting battery, and grip option available.[/font][/color]
[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]6. Better LCD and EVF. Though, the screen, suddenly, look very blue. Even the grass and everything that is green, has a strange hue of blue.[/font][/color]
[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]7. Bluetooth and Wi-fi (one works, at a time, though, the GH3 has, apparently, both).[/font][/color]
[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]8. [/font][/color][color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]1080p60[/font][/color]
[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]9. Substantially Improved photo quality (this has to be verified)[/font][/color]
[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]10. 72mbit mov[/font][/color]
[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]11. Time code display[/font][/color]


[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]Where it doesn't seem to have improved, or not improved enough:[/font][/color]

[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]1. Video quality (still visible noise, under certain conditions, though slightly less).[/font][/color]
[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]2. Comparatively Low Dynamic.[/font][/color]
[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]3. Picture Quality is improved, marginally, though not really enough.[/font][/color]


[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]Where it has deteriorated:[/font][/color]

[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]1. Sudden appearance of noticeable Moire and Aliasing.[/font][/color]
[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]2. Video doesn't seem as sharp (though, in some videos, people state, that, it appears to be, almost, equally sharp. I am not sure I agree with it being sharper, or even close to, as sharp as the GH2).[/font][/color]
[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]3. The sensor is not Multi-Aspect Ratio, anymore.[/font][/color]
[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]4. The ETC is not available for 72Mbps video. And ONLY for photos, of low to mid resolution. Also,it has been reduced from 2.6x to 2x.[/font][/color]
[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]5. It is suddenly bulkier, and a tad heavier (marginally).[/font][/color]
[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]6. Cost of the camera has gone up, substantially.[/font][/color]

[galenb]

You should edit that added bit to say, "72mb all-I codec" that's kind of the important bit in my mind.

As far as "[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]Substantially Improved photo quality", I would disagree with this. All of the test photos I've seen have a [/font][/color][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif][color=#282828]strange lack of clear focal plane. This might be down to the photographer dialing down the sharpness to -5 but I find that hard to swallow. Also, there are some images that i've seen that display odd "Salt and Pepper" noise. But most annoying to me is a lack of detail in things that should look detailed. There are a ton of photos here: [/color][/font][url="http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/panasonic_lumix_dmc_gh3_review/sample_images/"]http://www.photograp.../sample_images/[/url] If you look at these images at full res, you'll see what I'm talking about. There are a bunch of images of a book case. Look at the book titled "Arizona highways". look at the tiny image of the water fall. It's all soft and mushy. Now go and check out other camera reviews. In some of them you'll see the same bookcase images. Look for the same book and notice the detail in the waterfall image. Crazy isn't it! And it's not like it's just a little less sharp on the GH3. The waterfall is totally lost.

So far I have not seen any images coming from it that display good image quality. Maybe over the GH2, but as we all know, that's not saying much.

[Julian]

@Sanveer: No, like I said, it only works with lower bitrates. Not in any 50/60 fps mode either.

@galenb: I don't know what you're comparing it to, but it seems to be on par with the OM-D, which has the best m43 sensor so far. It doesn't lag behind apsc sensors anymore.
http://www.ephotozine.com/article/olympus-om-d-e-m5-vs-panasonic-lumix-gh3-part-3-20502

Also, There isn't any proper raw support from the GH3 yet, I don't like judging quality on jpg.