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!

The Ancient GH3

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
The GH3 was forgotten quickly. It's kind of the mirrorless equivalent of the D3X; a bit large, lots of buttons, battery power to last for miles and although not bleeding edge camera technology, a real photographer's camera. Add to that the best video quality this side of $5,000, and it's a rather tempting option for those who are looking for something different.

I found one for 60% of the original price, 6 months old and with 200 clicks on the meter (don't know how much video) and 18 months left of the warranty. After just one day of use, I can only say that it's an impressive camera. Rock solid build and rock solid performance. The buffer rooms 22 RAW files at 6fps or 27 at 4fps. One battery lasts more than 500 shots and with the battery grip and 2 of those, it's more than 1,000. The solid battery power also seems to recycle the flash faster, and that was very useful for fill flash with three active children as test subjects.

Image quality is clearly better than the GH2, but high ISO can't follow the E-M1. Neither can the IBIS obviously, since this Panasonic doesn't have that feature, nor the AF of moving subjects. The plan is to buy the Olympus a bit later, but I have to admit this camera feels very, very right in my hands :)

Here are a couple of test shots from my back yard (that's where test shots are taken, right?):

GH3 with Zuiko 75mm f/1.8 @ f/1.8 and 1/160s, with fill flash



GH3 with Zuiko 75mm f/1.8 @ f/1.8 and 1/40s, no flash

 

donbga

Member
I've been interested in this camera as well but I seldom see used bodies for sale, at least at 50-60% original price.
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
I've been interested in this camera as well but I seldom see used bodies for sale, at least at 50-60% original price.
I was very lucky to find one at my regular camera hangout. My impression is that most owners really love these cameras :)
 

deckitout

New member
When I handled the GH3 I would IMO consider it the best M43 ergonomically handling to date, it does however sway from the small size that M43 is about
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
When I handled the GH3 I would IMO consider it the best M43 ergonomically handling to date, it does however sway from the small size that M43 is about
It's not really much smaller than a D7100, but much lighter and much thinner, which I prefer, since it's easier to hold. So it's not an ideal travel camera, but absolutely great for work :)
 

drofnad

Member
The GH3 was forgotten quickly. It's kind of the mirrorless equivalent of the D3X; a bit large, lots of buttons, battery power to last for miles and although not bleeding edge camera technology, a real photographer's camera. Add to that the best video quality this side of $5,000, and it's a rather tempting option for those who are looking for something different.
...
Image quality is clearly better than the GH2, but high ISO can't follow the E-M1. Neither can the IBIS obviously, since this Panasonic doesn't have that feature, nor the AF of moving subjects. The plan is to buy the Olympus a bit later, but I have to admit this camera feels very, very right in my hands :)
Over in LuLa, there is at least one keen advocate for M4/3 and the GH3
in particular --"BCooter", aka James Russell of RussellRutherford.

cf. New Camera from Olympus

I think digital camera development is interesting.

When I bought my first two 1ds Canons, which I think were the first film quality digital cameras made, in the fact that shot quickly, had little if no artifacts and went to around 600 to 800 iso cleanly. Probably higher today with modern processing.
/.../
/.../
Well now it's been 10 Canons later (approx. $30,000), A leaf Valeo, Leaf Aptus ($30,000), two phase one backs ($36,000), a nikon d2x (when the 1ds Canons had issues : $5,000), Nikon D3, D7000 (oh I don't know 7,000), and now onto video cameras (won't even count the Canons, REDs, etc.); but up to the 43 systems I owned, in still cameras alone, there is over $100,000 in camera capture devices alone, not including lenses and a trillion upgrades on software and enough Apple computers to make me a Apple reseller.

Funny thing is with the 43 cameras I've come kind of full circle. The OMD and the GH3 for stills shoot about the same quality file as the 1ds2. In comparing them to my latest Canon 1dx they are about a stop slower in noise, about 15% less detail (if that). so I assume they equal a 1ds1 or 1ds2 and, yes, they work professionally because I've shot a lot of images with them lately, nobody has said a word, I've been paid, life goes on.

/.../
You have to look long and hard to find any motion camera at any price that does what the gh3 will do and with the Black Magic 43 camera that's just a plus for this format.

They all have some form of articulating viewfinder which doubles as a waist level finder. The 43 ratio is perfect for vertical and in the gh3's case you really don't miss an ovf, in fact your hard pressed to know it's not an ovf in most instances. Maybe the omd1 will do the same.

Then price. For two canon 1ds new at the time I paid close to $13,000. The complete 43 kit with three bodies, 7 lenses, sound, chargers, extra batteries, is around 6 grand.

But bottom line in still image quality, (f you call quality pixel size, detail and noise qualitiy . . . I don't) I'm pretty close to where I was 10 years ago.

---------
---------
Now in regards to the OMD 1. I don't get it. I understand improving the focus, the ability to use the older 43 lenses. But what don't get is the incremental upgrades from every maker.

There is no technical reason that the omd 1 could not have had two sound imports, a headphone jack, shoot a 72mbs intra file making great use of their amazing image stabilization. Actually there is probably no reason it couldn't be hacked to shoot a raw video file like the canon 5d2,3 whatever.
In other words they could make a better gh3 and that is the stuff that stumps me.

And if you don't care about shooting motion, then fine, but the commercial and editorial world does. Terry Richardson just shot a medium production quality video of that strange Milley chick that got something like a million views a day. In three days it probably will surpass all of the views of his print work in the last three years, so yeah video does matter.

/.../
Now the real question is why 43? For me because first it was the video of the gh3 which has yet to disappoint, secondly and a pleasant surprise was how good the still quality is for these little cameras. They kind of look like 35mm film which I like, because they are not glass smooth past 400.

Since I go from city to city, studio to studio (today I'm in London), I can put one messenger bag on the plane, one tripod in a suitcase, and have a camera system I can virtually use on any gig. For heavy production, yes we bring a lot of stuff, but if I want to shoot an editorial here today, I can.

But I see this in a very different way. I'm not a casual photographer or a guy that turns two shots a day. If that was so I'd never have to buy another camera again. We push tons of data, right now I'm looking at about 7 terabytes with motion and stills, to be spread out over 16 videos, don't know how many web and print placements. At that volume, at that post production speed and requirements, they want professional imagery, but nobody is counting a little noise in a shadow or if somebody's eyelash is slightly blurred in a group of 15 subjects.

Others will disagree, others have that right.

//

The only thing not mentioned is the insane menu system. On the gh3 if you make a setting, don't like it return to the menu it takes you back to where you were. On the omd 5 it takes you from start and with 86 layers of settings is maddening.

/.../
Another point is though most functions are user definable which is fine if you remember what f5, f2 etc. stands for. On the gh3 there are three buttons by the shutter you use all the time, wb, iso and +-, for compensation. These are very intuitive and marked as the function they do.

/.../
Once again, not to beat a dead horse, but the hobbling of the video [in the E-M5 & 1] is surprising. It's like Panasonic says we'll do the video, Olympus you do the stills.
-d
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Not much time for photography these days, so here's one from the beach today. Unfortunately, AF with 4/3 lenses isn't nearly fast enough to chase active children, so I'll probably buy the Zuiko 12-40mm to replace the PanaLeica 14-50. The camera also has the bad habit of blowing the red channel on some bright, red fabrics, pretty obvious in the girl's dress here. The GH2 also does this.

GH3 with PanaLeica 14-50mm f/2.8-3.5 @ 50mm and f/5.6



GH3 with PanaLeica 14-50mm f/2.8-3.5 @ 16mm and f/5.6



But clarity and detail for portraits... WOW! This one was 2 stops underexposed btw. No problems getting it back up there without any visible noise or loss of detail.

GH3 with PanaLeica 14-50mm f/2.8-3.5 @ 42mm and f/5.6



GH3 with PanaLeica 14-50mm f/2.8-3.5 @ 14mm and f/5.6

 
Last edited:

nostatic

New member
I just picked up one of these as I'm finally having some time/energy to get shooting again, with some video being a particular target. I played with the GH3 and GX7 and the GH3 won by a mile. Ergos are really quite good. I also looked at the Canon 70D but the inability to use the viewfinder when shooting video was a deal killer. Plus while I have a 6D and a few L lenses, it ends up being too big/heavy to haul around most of the time. I keep the 6D and 16-35/2.8 for when I have to shoot tight interiors for work but beyond that...u4/3 wins.

Now I have to figure out all the damn buttons :D
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Here's one of my assistant trying to show me a photo she took of me with the Nokia 808 :)

GH3 with PanaLeica 14-50mm f/2,8-3.5 @ 40mm and f/3.5

 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Jorgen, does your Leica 14-50/2,8-3,5 autofocus on the GH3? Thanks.
Yes, it does, although slowly. Takes 1-2 seconds, which sometimes feels like 1-2 minutes :rolleyes:
It does produce the most beautiful photos though :)

It autofocuses with the GH2 as well, probably even slower, but I don't have that camera with me, so can't compare. With the E-M1, it focuses as if it were on a DSLR camera. A very nice combination :)
 
Last edited:

benroy

Subscriber Member
First images with GH-3, 25 lux and 45 macro-elmarit...stepped out into backyard in late afternoon...overcast, windy, with rain sprinkles.
 
Last edited:

Ocean

Senior Subscriber Member
Yes, it does, although slowly. Takes 1-2 seconds, which sometimes feels like 1-2 minutes :rolleyes:
It does produce the most beautiful photos though :)

It autofocuses with the GH2 as well, probably even slower, but I don't have that camera with me, so can't compare. With the E-M1, it focuses as if it were on a DSLR camera. A very nice combination :)
Thanks Jorgen! I have an ancient GH1 and it does't autofocus for the Leica 14-50 but does for Leica 14-150. It's good to know both GH2 and GH3 do. I really like the Leica 14-50 Vario-Elmarit zoom lens.
 
Top