GH2 Hack vs GH3

[Lucian]

Anyone have an opinion on how these two stack up?

 

my current understanding is that the advantages of the GH3 are a higher bit rate, more dynamic range

and the ability to do 1080p at 60fps. 

 

 

[nahua]

The other thing is stability.  My GH3 has yet to lock up.  My GH2 has locked up often, no matter how "stable" a hack is.  And then there's also the dreaded "out of space" or numbering error, where the camera says it can't record but there's still lots of space available.  Oh and also the inability to play back clips.  ISO bug too.  There are a lot of frustrations with the GH2.  Sure you can get great video, but there are compromises that you have to live with.

 

If you're shooting anamorphic, remember that the GH2 is a 1.86x crop, GH3 is 2x crop.  This does matter on how wide you can shoot with an anamorphic.

[andy lee]

search through this forum there are threads on this

The hacked gh2 is better then the gh3

Im running Driftwood Quantum 9B Updated hack

its stable plays back in camera , no lockups at all

and is kicking out 170mb/s

gh3 is 70 mb/s max....

I shot both cameras side by side and GH2 looks alot better

Gh3 has different sensor and lot more moire I dont like it at all

the GH2 sensor is amazing they messed it up by switching to a new sensor in the gh3 it lost 'the look'

[nahua]

@ Andy: I know you're a long time user so I'm not going to argue too much.  I used to run Quantum 9B too.  Very stable.  But I think at the very least you need to run a hack on the Panasonic V1.1 firmware.  Much more options, much better matrix.  So Quantum X is good, but I think Flowmotion is one of the best.  Of course there's Moon, etc etc, too many hacks to count now.  But in my 2 years working with hacked GH2s, none are completely stable.  Even Quantum 9B crashed on me.  Reason I switched to Flowmotion, with much more consistent results at a lower bitrate with almost no loss in quality and better spanning too.  But time has moved on.  The GH3 is just so much more the camera that works in a production environment.  I just can not afford to have a camera crash on me.  It's happened, and it's embarrassing to tell a client "sorry the camera crashed and I lost the data".  I really like the look from both cameras, but really it's nitpicking to think that the GH3 isn't a good camera.  It is good and it works.

[andy lee]

I just prefer the look of the GH2 compared to the GH3 from all the tests Ive done with both cameras

I works for me!

[Sean Cunningham]

I just prefer the look of the GH2 compared to the GH3 from all the tests Ive done with both cameras

I works for me!

 

I guess it depends on what you're shooting.  He's shooting in front of a client so it's safe to say he doesn't need cinematic results, just nice looking video.

 

I've yet to see any GH3 footage that looks as good as (and by "good" my definition is not immediately like videocamera output) the best non-hacked GH2 footage I've seen.  I think you're right, Panasonic somehow lost their recipe in the GH1 and GH2 sensors, similar to how Canon never really were able to repeat the secret sauce in the 5DmkII with anything else.

 

Once the BM pocket version hits the streets the GH3 will be rendered pretty much irrelevant.  Panasonic would need to price it like a GoPro to try and keep it in the game.

[Lucian]

Interesting that so many people prefer the GH2.. this person has done a pretty good comparison article with videos, he seems to think the GH3 is better... He mentions the GH2 has a lot more micro jitter, can anyone confirm? 

 

to me the side by side comparisons in this articl,  the GH3 does look atleast as good, with the ability to handle

more low light conditions. There is also alot of talk that the GH3 leaves a lot more room to grade in post.

 

I have not seen non compressed footage from either though...

[tony wilson]

a used gh2 with a hack is the best investment now.

i think the images look more analogue less nasty.

gh1 and gh2 without hacks gave supreme moving images for size and cost.

rough waters ahead it is going to start getting ugly why waste money on new gh3.

it may not be the black magic that wins.

dalsa had the best 4k movie camera better pictures than red who remembers them.

red had it for a while until alexa stole the show.

black magic rocks the boat enough for sony,fuji or panasonic to reply.

gh3 sensor looks like video if you like the look of last years camera get it.

[Lucian]

Thanks for all the info guys, you have convinced me to give the GH2 a try based on this. I'll use the saved cash

to get some extra gear!

[tony wilson]

get a good one used do not buy anything new until the dust has settled.

also sticking money down on future cameras is a sucky idea.

go back and look at the hype from a year ago for bmc some of those customers still have not had cameras.

 

invest hard earned or stolen money in optics digital cameras come and go.

[andy lee]

there is so much marketing PR flying around right now especially this week at NAB

Go with something tried and tested and available now

you are in a forum full of hacked gh2 users......we all do this for a reason ....

the gh2 produces very good looking images - thats the bottom line

[odie]

i think once a camera is hacked it because very valuable because you don't know what else it can do

[bzpop]

hack is good,

hack is like releasing hidden powers, is like overclocking your processor, i wish there would be a hack for a human brain, like in Matrix, so i can learn After Effects, or Resolve from A to Z in 5 seconds, or i wouldn't need to sleep so i can shoot and edit 24 hrs a day

Hack is really good,

and as to a GH2 vs GH3 - i got rid of GH3 after couple months, but i still shoot with my GH2;

but that's me :)))

[Rudolf]

For me the GH2 was absolutely great! I never had any quirks and it was always reliable (I used the "Vanilla hack") Image is also very good "out of the box" for my taste. I sold it (bad idea) and bought the GH3 therefore. There are things which are also great about that camera:

Get rid of AVCHD! 25/50p! Much better feel and weatherproof! Better photos (for my taste)! I prefer 2x crop (better/wider with anamorphics)!

Dynamic range of the GH3 really is that much better over GH2. I recently captured video in very foggy conditions and later during grading I could make things visible my eyes couldn't see when I was shooting - that was really astonishing. But at first glance I preferred the image of the GH2 (still not sure what "cinematic" really means? I always thought for many it means "get as shallow depth as you can" but that is not my cup of tea because that is not so filmic)

[Sean Cunningham]

For me the Sony heritage in the GH3's chip reveals itself in how it handles highlights as well as biasing towards a "cold" image compared with other sensors.  You can remove the cold feel or any color bias in your grade but there's nothing you can do about electric, harsh highlights.  

 

Both the GH1 and GH2 don't feel as harsh and electronic.  Pre-grade, the color and tonality can feel quite photographic and decidedly not camcorder-like.  For almost a year before ever purchasing my GH2 I reviewed shoot-out after shoot-out, with the GH1 in the mix with 5D2, 7D and other cameras and my eye always favored the image of the GH.  I lusted after the ridiculously sublime shallow DOF you could get more easily with the 5D2 but it's color (we're talking pre raw here) never spoke to me and even on YT/Vimeo streams it was easy enough to see other cameras didn't have as much detail as the GH.  The GH2 only seemed to improve Panasonic's position compared to all comers.

 

When I saw the GH3, before finding out Panasonic had outsourced its sensor, I could tell right away that something was rotten in Denmark.  The secret sauce wasn't there.  Detail, sure, but that's it.  The Sony revelation made everything clear.  Top to bottom, from the VX1000 to today's F65, I just don't really like the way their sensors look and top to bottom it usually has to do with electric highlights.

 

Anyway, Driftwood-patched (take your pick) GH2 is still king of the hill AFAIC if you have to shoot compressed.

[Lucian]

I agree, for my last shoot I ended up only using the gh3 for very specific shaded foliage/wide dynamic range shots and 60fps shots. 

 

That said the gh3 has a much sturdier body and balances on a glidecam much better, but I always end up

reaching for the GH2 as I trust it to give a better image.

[Matt Kieley]

Gh13. The footage I've seen from the 2 and 3 is great, but I think I'm in the minority of people who still prefer the GH13. Whenever I get gear lusty, I look at stuff I've shot with my current set-up and I'm always surprised by how well it holds up, at least for my own personal aesthetic taste.

[itzleo94]

Sorry to bring this topic back up 

GH2 Hack vs GH3

 

But since its 2014 and the GH4k is coming out in a couple of months do you think a new filmmaker (Myself) should get the GH4k, GH3, or buy a used GH2 and hack?

[Sean Cunningham]

Buying a new camera, now, I'd get a Blackmagic camera.  Take your pick.  I'm not getting rid of my GH2 but I'll never buy another camera that only shot compressed.  There's just no excuse for it and no reason to settle anymore, buying a new camera, unless your budget is something like $350-500.  For that, a used GH2 or GH13 will be a fantastic value.  Closer to $700-800 or so, a toss up between a used GH2 and something like a used 7D to get into raw shooting (and the new All-Intra options for Canon).  If you've got a grand or so to spend, Blackmagic all the way.  That's what I'd do at least.

[Julian]

I'd get a G6 over a hacked GH2 or GH1. Better codec, 60 fps, focus peaking, cheap!

 

I love using it besides my Canon 5D Mark II with Magic Lantern raw when I don't want to deal with the huge files.