The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

GH3... the one to get?

V

Vivek

Guest
I must say that after seeing the Which review and getting an impression of the size of the GH-3 I am a bit disappointed.


LouisB
Now there a few more samples available on the web at high ISO. ISO6400 is just horrible.

Definitely not a camera for me!
 

Knorp

Well-known member
PS: I just have to add that the Lumix 100-300 is one of the worst 100-300 lenses a person can buy. $100 models from almost all other makers beat it by my tests. Definitely a lens to avoid IMO.
Well well, that's what I call a bold statement ... :thumbdown:
I'm sure there's a story to it ?

All the best.
 

henningw

Member
I'm with ya bro! Honestly tho, it's not just your hands... Most of the µ4/3 cameras are too small for everyone's hands (unless they're like under five feet tall or something). I guess it's just that most people are willing to learn to deal with it because they think they're saving space or getting a lighter kit - and true or not that's more important to them than handling. At least that's my guess from following all the posts since the first µ4/3 until now...
I'm 6'-2" with pretty decent sized hands and the OM-D is just fine for me. I don't want a bigger camera. I have some FF stuff were I'll accept the size because that's all that is available, but the Olympus is just fine for me. I really like the handling, except for the rear screen which isn't nearly as handy as Panasonic's.

I think for still photographers the OM-D will still be the camera of choice in m43, because it's decently responsive, customizable to a very high degree and with good image quality. The multi-aspect thing doesn't really matter to me as I have been used to shooting for commercial projects for decades where the final crop and aspect rations aren't decided until well after the shoot. So I lose some pixels. There are enough left, as long as I have decent glass.

The GH3 is clearly aimed more at videographers, and for my purposes I really can't see much benefit over the GH2 other than weather sealing, and the size puts me off.

Henning
 

henningw

Member
PS: I just have to add that the Lumix 100-300 is one of the worst 100-300 lenses a person can buy. $100 models from almost all other makers beat it by my tests. Definitely a lens to avoid IMO.[/SIZE]
Well, I have found some lenses that are better as well. For example, the Leica 280/4 Apo-Telyt, and the 180/3.4 Apo-Telyt. But generally, it's quite serviceable. I think you'll just have to stop beating your dog with that lens, because without abuse like that it's quite decent. :poke:

That was meant as a joke - no offence intended...
 

Tesselator

New member
Hehe,

How come everyone always wants to defend that Lumix 100-300?
Maybe just cuz it's the only 100-300 with AF for µ4/3?

It's only "decent" from 100 to about 180 or so... After that it takes a total dump. I'll put a $50 tokina from the 80's up against it any day blow it outta the water. :)

"Lens Wars", the sequel - coming to a theater near you!. hehe. :D
 
Last edited:

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Very interesting interview with some Panasonic executives about the GH3 here:

Q&A with Panasonic: The story behind the new video-centric GH3 and other compact system camera tech advances - Imaging Resource

Apparently, the lack of focus peaking is due to software development capacity at Panasonic. The realize that 80-90% of users want it. My guess is that it will be available with a firmware update, possibly even before the camera is available. My dealer in Bangkok has told me December or maybe even January, so they have time to work on this.
 

jonoslack

Active member
WEX aren't usually a rip-off. But they do make mistakes. I suspect that's the price with tha 14-140 kit lens in error.
 

biglouis

Well-known member
WEX aren't usually a rip-off. But they do make mistakes. I suspect that's the price with tha 14-140 kit lens in error.
I actually use WEX a lot (probably too much!) so I know they are price competitive but if you think the body price is high, check out the prices for the body plus lens combinations. I sincerely hope the prices are a mistake.

LouisB
 

jonoslack

Active member
Hi Louis. I see what you mean!
I might give them a call (bollocking) tomorrow. Still, I'd rather have an OMD anyway.
 

biglouis

Well-known member
Well I was a bit down on this camera given some of the early examples of high iso work but I must say the review at CNET UK (posted via 43rumours) has set me thinking again. As one of my main interests is backyard birding the samples are better than I am getting out of my GH-2, so maybe there really has been improvements to noise in this version.

LouisB
 

Tesselator

New member
Nice review. I'm still reading it but I thought I would "help them out" so I made a few changes to their first page of the write-up:






:D
 

Craftysnapper

New member
Well I was a bit down on this camera given some of the early examples of high iso work but I must say the review at CNET UK (posted via 43rumours) has set me thinking again. As one of my main interests is backyard birding the samples are better than I am getting out of my GH-2, so maybe there really has been improvements to noise in this version.

LouisB
Has it has the same Sony sensor has the OMD I would expect high ISO shots to be good.
 
Has it has the same Sony sensor has the OMD I would expect high ISO shots to be good.
Except the sensor is not from Sony... imagine a joint press conference of Sony and Olympus after Sony invested money to get a share of Olympus' medical imaging business... they also used that opportunity to tout how Olympus will be using Sony sensors... what a good avenue to tell us about Sony Semiconductor' sensors in Olympus cameras and they did... except it was not the EM5 :ROTFL: ... but =




never ever EM5 was mentioned.
 
Top