Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: GH-4 vs GH-3 for stills photography

  1. #1
    Senior Member biglouis's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,128
    Post Thanks / Like

    GH-4 vs GH-3 for stills photography

    As some of you will know I was an enthusiastic m4rds owner for many years.

    I kept my GH-2 + 100-300 specifically to have a portable long zoom capability.

    Alas a few months ago I suffered some kind of brain [email protected] because I stupidly sold both.

    Now, I will admit the GH-2 had limitations. Above iso1600 for bird photography it was poor.

    If I am going to buy back the 100-300 (which goes for silly prices on e-pray) then I also need a body.

    For purely stills photography - I have absolutely no interest in video - can anyone tell me if there is much difference in IQ between a GH-3 (heavily discounted on ebay) versus the GH-4 more expensive?

    Just to anticipate some responses. I have no interest in an Olympus body - too small, imho.

    Thanks in advance for any responses.

    LouisB

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    776
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: GH-4 vs GH-3 for stills photography

    Quote Originally Posted by biglouis View Post

    I have no interest in an Olympus body - too small, imho.

    LouisB
    Before you discount Olympus bodies, I can tell you I have large hands and I had the same concern. The E-M5 with the battery grip make for a nice, large camera body that fits me well.
    -Dragos
    Panasonic GH1/G1, Canon FTb(n)/F-1, Mamiya C330F/RB67 Pro SD, Chamonix 45N-2, Nikon F5 + Assorted Lenses
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  3. #3
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Knorp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    4,003
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: GH-4 vs GH-3 for stills photography

    What about the GX8 ? Certainly not small and comes with in- body stabilisation and is cheaper than a GH4
    Bart ...
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  4. #4
    Senior Member f6cvalkyrie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    1,643
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    29

    Re: GH-4 vs GH-3 for stills photography

    Louis,

    Bart's idea is certainly a very good one !

    The GX8 will give you dual IS (body and lens working together), being practically as efficient as the Oly 5-axis.
    Long exposure noise performance of the GX8 is said to be better than Oly E-M1. Important for night cq star photography ...
    20MP instead of 16 might allow you to crop you wildlife photo just that little bit more, if needed.
    Perfectly silent electronic shutter may make a difference when shooting shy animals ...
    4K Photo mode (8 MP jpg at 30 fps)may give you the picture right at the moment the important thing happens, which is difficult to achieve even with HS
    The weather sealing will definitely make a difference in nature photography !

    http://www.mirrorlessons.com/2015/10/15/panasonic-gx8-review/
    http://www.mirrorlessons.com/2015/09...4k-photo-mode/
    http://www.mirrorlessons.com/2015/08...panasonic-gx8/


    Although I am in the Oly camp right now (5-axis ibis was a game changer for me using my collection of vintage glass), I would nowadays seriously consider the GX8 as well !

    Good luck with your decision,
    Rafael
    E-M1/GH2/G1 Full Spectrum & lots of lenses
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/f6cvalk...th/9226689839/
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  5. #5
    Senior Member biglouis's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,128
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: GH-4 vs GH-3 for stills photography

    The only problem with the GX-8 is cost - although some discounters are selling it for about the same price as a GH-4.

    What I wanted to know was whether there is much of an IQ difference between the GH-3 and GH-4. There are many GH-3s on sale at very affordable prices at present.

    LouisB

  6. #6
    Senior Member biglouis's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,128
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: GH-4 vs GH-3 for stills photography

    Another thought.

    It is winter and a lousy time for photography at present (for me at least).

    I think I am going to wait until spring and then decide what to do.

    I'm still thinking a GH-3 or 4 but also I am told the recently announced 100-400 may be available.

    That would make a big difference.

    Thanks for the responses.

    LouisB
    -----
    My new book "Whitechapel in 50 BUildings", Flikr Stream, www.louisberk.com
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  7. #7
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Knorp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    4,003
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: GH-4 vs GH-3 for stills photography

    Quote Originally Posted by biglouis View Post
    Another thought.

    It is winter and a lousy time for photography at present (for me at least).

    I think I am going to wait until spring and then decide what to do.

    I'm still thinking a GH-3 or 4 but also I am told the recently announced 100-400 may be available.

    That would make a big difference.

    Thanks for the responses.

    LouisB
    Louis,

    since my 100-300 got stolen I'm dying for long glass and desperately waiting for either the Oly 300/4 or preferably the PL 100-400.
    Mind you: that's over a year now of patiently waiting ...

    Kind regards.
    Bart ...
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Washington D.C. region
    Posts
    82
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: GH-4 vs GH-3 for stills photography

    Quote Originally Posted by biglouis View Post
    As some of you will know I was an enthusiastic m4rds owner for many years.

    I kept my GH-2 + 100-300 specifically to have a portable long zoom capability.

    Alas a few months ago I suffered some kind of brain [email protected] because I stupidly sold both.

    Now, I will admit the GH-2 had limitations. Above iso1600 for bird photography it was poor.

    If I am going to buy back the 100-300 (which goes for silly prices on e-pray) then I also need a body.

    For purely stills photography - I have absolutely no interest in video - can anyone tell me if there is much difference in IQ between a GH-3 (heavily discounted on ebay) versus the GH-4 more expensive?

    Just to anticipate some responses. I have no interest in an Olympus body - too small, imho.
    In addition to the GX8, there is the only slightly smaller GX7, which one might also say is going at silly prices. IMO, I like its natural grip as much as --if not a bit more than-- the E-M5's add-on (landscape) grip (the battery part of which I have but don't use). IIRC, the GX7 had a newer (also 16mpx) sensor than the GH3? (But IQ debates seldom resolve to evidence from actual prints ... .)
    And the GX7 also has stabilization.

    -d.

  9. #9
    Subscriber Member Jorgen Udvang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Pratamnak
    Posts
    9,347
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2157

    Re: GH-4 vs GH-3 for stills photography

    The image quality differences between the GH3 and the GH4 are minimal, and I don't think you will notice. What the GH3 is lacking is peaking, if you plan to do much manual focusing. Since the GH4 more popular among videographers due to 4K and peaking, the GH3 is much cheaper on the second hand market, and a real bargain. Still, I'm surprised how well it's kept its value since I sold mine a year ago.

    Both cameras are build from solid rock, with large batteries and ergonomics comparable to any pro camera. You can even get a vertical grip for it. Apart from the E-M1, they are the only m4/3 cameras I would consider for my own use. I used the GH3 as my main camera for a long while (2 years?), and I still miss it. It's a rock solid performer, plain and simple. Unfortunately, sensor size kills it for me, but I'm still looking for excuses to buy one
    Things I sell: https://www.shutterstock.com/g/epixx?language=en
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    28
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: GH-4 vs GH-3 for stills photography

    Quote Originally Posted by biglouis View Post
    The only problem with the GX-8 is cost - although some discounters are selling it for about the same price as a GH-4.

    What I wanted to know was whether there is much of an IQ difference between the GH-3 and GH-4. There are many GH-3s on sale at very affordable prices at present.

    LouisB
    I've shot the GH series since the 1. Sold my GH3 earlier this year (and GH2) and got the GH4, never looking back.

    For someone really familiar with the GH3, yes, there is a difference in image quality between the two, w/the GH4 (to my experienced eyes) being better.

    From the GH2, you'd be light-years ahead.

    Get the GH4. I cannot imagine you ever being disappointed by it.
    Last edited by Tanngrisnir; 12th December 2015 at 15:41.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  11. #11
    Senior Member mediumcool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    South Australia
    Posts
    1,491
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: GH-4 vs GH-3 for stills photography

    As an ageing and increasingly wobbly person, I am finding stabilisation to be of great utility nowadays.

    For that reason, in January I purchased a very well-priced new E-M5 (just before the Mk II release) to use with my 11–22 f/2.8–3.5 Zuiko 4/3, 20mm f/1.7 Lumix, 14–54 f/2.8–3.5 Zuiko 4/3, 30mm Sigma f/2.8, and 50 macro Zuiko 4/3 (no stabilisation in any of them).

    After two Lumix bodies (GF1, since stolen, and the still-with-me G3) the E-M5’s sharpness at low shutter speeds is gratifying (1/10 anyone?), though the highlight rendering is nowhere near as snappy and separated as with the G3, but this makes for better results (more latitude) in live music photography and other long tonal range stuff like some recent architectural work (samples).

    I will be outfitting myself with the Lumix 25/1.7 (replacing two current lenses, the 20mm and 30mm), and later the 42.5/1.7 and the 15/1.7, to have a set of fast primes with good bokeh, and will use the zooms for everything else.

    I reckon the GH series are a bit bulky so as to to cater for video work, and as such are less compelling for stills.

    0.02.
    Last edited by mediumcool; 16th December 2015 at 19:35. Reason: clarification
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  12. #12
    Subscriber Member Jorgen Udvang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Pratamnak
    Posts
    9,347
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2157

    Re: GH-4 vs GH-3 for stills photography

    Quote Originally Posted by mediumcool View Post

    I reckon the GH series are a bit bulky so as to to cater for video work, and as such are less compelling for stills.

    0.02.
    They are less bulky than my D810
    Things I sell: https://www.shutterstock.com/g/epixx?language=en
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  13. #13
    Senior Member mediumcool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    South Australia
    Posts
    1,491
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: GH-4 vs GH-3 for stills photography

    Quote Originally Posted by Jorgen Udvang View Post
    They are less bulky than my D810
    Not exactly a surprise there!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •