Panasonic GH3 real-world test (pre-production firmware)

[Julian]

Yeah the dynamic range was crushed in the previous video. This one is correct, same as the original files, also the screenshots are correct and in higher contrast.

I like the natural profile. Usually I leave sharpness at -2. The difference between -5 and +5 is not that big by the way.
Color at -5 is also pretty 'strong', maybe somewhere around -3 or -2 is preferable.

[galenb]

AWESOME! Thanks so much Julian! You are my hero. Yeah, I would be inclined to agree here as well. It does seem to produce a slightly more flat profile. Nothing like LOG what what do you expect? ;-)

[sanveer]

Yeah the dynamic range was crushed in the previous video. This one is correct, same as the original files, also the screenshots are correct and in higher contrast.

I like the natural profile. Usually I leave sharpness at -2. The difference between -5 and +5 is not that big by the way.

Color at -5 is also pretty 'strong', maybe somewhere around -3 or -2 is preferable.

You prefer sharpness at -2 or -3, as compared to -5.

I didn't get the color bit. Are you saying, that color seems more flat, at sharpness, dialed down to -2 or -3, as compared to -5?

[sanveer]

btw. the test is very good. Its highlighted how FLAT the profile suddenly becomes.

[Tembrock]

Just wanted to say thanks for all this detailed information. I'm a long time reader and haven't posted that much. I'm currently shooting a documentary about my father on the GH2. I've pre-ordered the GH3 and plan to hang on to the GH2 for a while to see how things develop.

[MaxAperture Films]

Shadow detail looks darn good in the screengrab w/ Natural mode and -5 contrast. The noise/grain seems uniform and not at all muddy in the darks. What ISO was that shot at?

Edit: I see now it was shot at ISO 800... damn that looks really good for 800! Also pays to remember that dynamic range drops off dramatically the higher you crank the ISO. Great tests, Julian!

[hoodlum]

GH3 review just posted.

http://www.digitalcamerainfo.com/content/Panasonic-Lumix-GH3-Digital-Camera-Review/Conclusion.htm

"While the Canon 5D Mark III has been the go-to option for these shooters in recent months, our video tests show that the GH3 shoots superior video across the board. The smaller sensor may not provide the extreme shallow depth of field effects you can get from the 5D Mark III, but the GH3’s video looks sharper and stands up better to aggressive editing. And despite the fact that the camera costs almost $2000 less, you get far more compression and codec options."

http://www.digitalcamerainfo.com/content/Panasonic-Lumix-GH3-Digital-Camera-Review/Video.htm

[FilmMan]

@hoodlum,

Thanks for posting. Better video at $2000 less in price. I wonder if Canon is listening?

[XXX]

"The GH3 required just 4 lux of light to produce an image that crossed 50 IRE on a waveform monitor. We use 50 IRE as it’s a standard norm for broadcast brightness, and that result puts the GH3 in some solid company. While larger full-frame cameras perform well here as a matter of course, the GH3 holds its own, even if the final image is a bit of a noisy mess."
http://www.digitalcamerainfo.com/content/Panasonic-Lumix-GH3-Digital-Camera-Review/Video.htm

I just need good lowligt. If it´s worse than Canon APS-C then help us gawd... But, I guess more visual tests will follow, from dedicated video guys, so still patience... ;)

[Julian]

You prefer sharpness at -2 or -3, as compared to -5.

I didn't get the color bit. Are you saying, that color seems more flat, at sharpness, dialed down to -2 or -3, as compared to -5?

Sharpness -5 looks a bit too unsharp for my taste, so I leave it at -2. But the difference is very subtle.

Color at -5 takes out a lot of color, so I'm not sure if it's the best to always have it at -5. Maybe also better to leave it around -3 or -2, so you don't loose to much color information.

I have to admit.. I just bought a GH2 second hand. If the GH3 would be actually available right now I might have considered it. I really like it. Going on holidays soon and planning to use it, so I didn't want to wait for the GH3. Also the price difference is big.. Bought the GH2 body for a bit more than 1/3 of the GH3 body price.

[andy lee]

I finally got my hands a GH3 today at the BVE North Exhibition today
CVP had one on their stand.
I got to try out the GH3 and record onto my SD card
Moire was quite noticable on the shots!
rolling shutter was improved over the GH2

[Andrew Reid]

I have to say the GH3 may be a backward step in some ways from the GH2 having now done a direct comparison outdoors and in low light. This says a lot about how good the GH2 is!

However the stills, features, design and body are a nice step forward.

[andy lee]

I agree Andrew its a agood stills camera and has some nice new features
the artificial horizon line on the rear screen was a nice touch so you can keep the camera level

I was shooting some metal grills (criss cross shape) on the ceiling of the exhibition centre and the moire was very noticable on the GH3
the good news is the rolling shutter is vastly improved over the GH2 , I would say its similar to my Canon 550d - no worse !!

I do think the GH2 has a unique look and is a very good camera

[foggyflute]

It's a very good still camera IMO, more button than I actually need, good AF, and a body that feel good in hand.

Picture shot before send it back to Pana:



But I'm not gonna miss it. Hah.

[sanveer]

Just got back from a very hectic trip, so seriously zonked. Pls excuse the typos n d abbreviations/ truncations

Check the lines of resolution on the GH3 (within the 'headin Video Sharpness').

http://www.digitalcamerainfo.com/content/Panasonic-Lumix-GH3-Digital-Camera-Review/Video.htm#motion

[larrys]

I have owned the GH2 since it was first released and I remember that this conversation about moire is an exact repeat of the conversation people were having about moire and the GH2 before the camera was released and after it was widely available. Some owners found it had a lot of moire, certainly more moire than on the DSLRs and they showed their video proof on Vimeo, Youtube, etc. Other owners found that the GH2 had little or no moire, certainly less then on the DSLRs and they showed their proof online. Both camps were very confident that they were right. After I got the GH2, moire was never really an issue for me at all, but then, I never really hunted to find it. And in feedback on my videos, no one ever mentioned it.

In going back and looking into this, I have seen some GH2 videos online with a lot of moire, yet, in my own shooting it never really occurred. I am not a professional videographer and I never tried to produce moire as a test, but here is an early test video I did with the GH2 that has the opportunity to show moire and there is none to be found (look at the fences at around 1:30) (When my GH3 arrives, I plan to go back to this same waterfront and shoot the same test video.)

So, here we are again with the GH3. I have seen some videos where you can see a little moire, and even more, where you can not see any moire even when the person shooting was trying to produce moire specifically.

Here's one example of a video where the filmmaker tried to produce moire and there is none:

Here's an example of a video where the filmmaker did not try to produce any moire yet - if you look for it purposely - you can see some on the zipper of the jacket:

So, after all of the talk about it and all of the videos now available, (and I am sure the debate will continue) personally, the moire issue in the GH3 is a total non-issue for me. Under certain shooting conditions, I may get a little moire and in most other conditions there will be none. Isn't it really as simple as that?

[XXX]

It's a very good still camera IMO, more button than I actually need, good AF, and a body that feel good in hand.

Picture shot before send it back to Pana:

But I'm not gonna miss it. Hah.

Are you gonna post some footage...?

[Julian]

So, here we are again with the GH3. I have seen some videos where you can see a little moire, and even more, where you can not see any moire even when the person shooting was trying to produce moire specifically.

Here's one example of a video where the filmmaker tried to produce moire and there is none:

[video]

So, after all of the talk about it and all of the videos now available, (and I am sure the debate will continue) personally, the moire issue in the GH3 is a total non-issue for me. Under certain shooting conditions, I may get a little moire and in most other conditions there will be none. Isn't it really as simple as that?

First: overall I completely agree with you.

I also did some clips trying to produce moire and I had much more succes in finding it (in real life situations) than the clip you mention. Yes, it all depends on the situation and moire probably creeps in only with fine details.

And yes, this was filmed with the 12-35 X which everyone seems to blame for the moire. But I don't really believe these shots would have no moire with any other lens, unless you would shoot with something really unsharp or at a much wider aperture.

[andy lee]

I shot a GH3 with a panasonic 14-140mm lens today and it still had moire so its not the 12-35mm lens people are blaming

[nahua]

I got a chance to use the GH3 too. I did a very limited test, and I didn't see any moire, see the guy's sweater at the end. I'm confused like larrys, in what situations does the moire show up? I guess I won't really know until I have a GH3 in my hands.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TTXo1HLOX6o