Jorgen Udvang
Subscriber Member
I saw this airplane today. I think it's Russian.
GH3 with PanaLeica 14-50mm f/2.8-3.5@ 21mm and f/5.6
GH3 with PanaLeica 14-50mm f/2.8-3.5@ 21mm and f/5.6
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!
hmm, wonder how well this lens would focus say on a Olympus EM1?Yes, it does, although slowly. Takes 1-2 seconds, which sometimes feels like 1-2 minutes
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
The GH3 is comparable to the EM-1 and EM-5 at high ISO. It also focuses faster in low light than the EM-5.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
The PanaLeica 14-50 works very well on the E-M1 and focuses much faster thanks to the phase detect AF, plus AF-C works as well.hmm, wonder how well this lens would focus say on a Olympus EM1?
The only reason I would choose an E-M5 over the GH3 is the IBIS, and that's rarely needed with wide aperture lenses. It's also a bit smaller. I'm afraid I don't understand your argument about image quality with Olympus lenses. I don't see any difference between the GH3 and the E-M5. I don't own and E-M5, but I have access to one on a regular basis.The GH3 is comparable to the EM-1 and EM-5 at high ISO. It also focuses faster in low light than the EM-5.
I really only choose my EM-5 over my GH3 when I want to use either my 75mm f1.8 or 75-300mm Olympus lenses. The EM-5 quality just seems a bit higher with these lenses. Also, since they are on the longer side and not internally stabilized, the IBIS is helpful.
Enjoy your GH3.
Best,
Bill
Just an observation.I'm afraid I don't understand your argument about image quality with Olympus lenses.
fwiw I just sold my E-M5 and have been shooting the GH3 for a few weeks, and just picked up the GM1. I also briefly flirted with the GX7 and while I still keep looking at it (especially with the $200 off at the moment), I find the GH3 just works ergonomically. Also, it is the only one of any of the usual suspects that will shoot video non-stop for long periods of time (e.g. up to two hours, AVHCD). The GH3 is perfect to put on a tripod, focus, hit the red button, and leave it alone to capture an event.The only reason I would choose an E-M5 over the GH3 is the IBIS, and that's rarely needed with wide aperture lenses. It's also a bit smaller. I'm afraid I don't understand your argument about image quality with Olympus lenses. I don't see any difference between the GH3 and the E-M5. I don't own and E-M5, but I have access to one on a regular basis.
What the GH3 does offers over the E-M5 are:
- Better ergonomics
- Much better video quality and functionality
- Larger battery
- More useful movements of the LCD
With the E-M1, that changes a lot due to this cameras superior AF and comparable ergonomics.
Very interesting comments... I agree with the above, kind of sums up my experienc, I totally agree with the last paragraph....'I haven't bonded with a camera this well in awhile.' statement.fwiw I just sold my E-M5 and have been shooting the GH3 for a few weeks....... I find the GH3 just works ergonomically.
The GX7..... Depending on your hand size and how you like to shoot though I can see the attraction.
I loved the EM5 but had to run the grip on it to be comfortable. The IBIS was great, but video was pretty lacking
I keep coming back to the GH3 though. That body with the 12-35/2.8 and 35-100/2.8 is an incredibly versatile package that fits my hand perfectly and is way smaller/lighter than an equivalent APS-C or FF. And I can still slap a prime on it and work that way. I haven't bonded with a camera this well in awhile.