GH3- any experience/owners yet?

<p>Just read the review and I have to say I'm intrigued<br>

<a href="http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonic-lumix-dmc-gh3">http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonic-lumix-dmc-gh3</a></p>

<p>I think I can probably pick a body in Shanghai for around 9,000 RMB, or slightly less than the cost of an EM5. It seems mad to have such a large body supporting such a tiny sensor but my experience with the GX1 has been very positive ad I am still learning its limits.<br>

Opinions?</p>

<p>I've had the GH3 for a couple of months and the EM-5 almost a year. Camera size is very subjective. The EM-5 is too small for me without an optional grip. The GH3 is noticeably bigger, which works for me with larger lenses like the 12-35 and 100-300.I do tend to use the EM-5 more for hiking, along with smaller lenses.<br>

I like the jpegs better from the Olympus, the video better from the Panasonic. If you're not also interested in video, the GH3 may not be worth the additional money and size over some other Panasonic cameras.</p>

<p>Several aspects of the GH3 appeal. According to dpreview the stills output is on a par with the D5100, slightly behind the NEX-6. Certainly there should be few complaints for me as a hobbyist who also likes to print occasionally and has sold <10 enlargements this year. I like the idea of being able to get into video and the output from the GX1 is much much better than I ever expected it to be so I m sure I will be very impressed indeed with the video output of the GH3. I also like the reported build quality, form-factor, customisation and the fact that it is basically designed for professional videographers. Seems like a leftfield choice, but an intelligent one. The OMD and NEX bodies feel all wrong to me and using the Panasonic lenses I will have bought by the time I am up for buying the GH3 is of course another factor.<br>

I don't know man, I am really pleased to see Panasonic coming out with this. The GX1 seems unfairly sidelined in many SP/MFT discussions and I am a big fan...I expect this is another "sleeper" model which I might gain great satisfaction from owning. </p>

<p>I've had one for about two months, and it's been a very positive experience for me. I don't shoot action sports any more, and had no need for the speed you can get from some high-end DSLRs, so there was no need for continuous AF speed. That said, the continuous AF speed is actually very good. Single shot AF speed is excellent. I preferred the larger size of the GH3 body to some of the smaller m4/3 bodies, like the OMD. I also own a GX1 and have since converted it to IR.</p>

<p>Image quality from the GH3 is very good/excellent. While it won't match the best FF DSLRs, the IQ will suffice unless you plan on making huge enlargements of landscape photos. Noise is well controlled up to ISO 1600, and after that it ramps up, but is still usable for small prints up to ISO 6400. Above that you can use it for reduce size web shots, but that's about it.</p>

<p>Controls are, well, numerous and you'll need to get used to them. The only button I've pushed accidently during normal shooting is the "display" button that seems to fall under my right thumb every so often. The more I use it, the less this happens. The quick menu provides easy access to the most used functions, and the menu system takes, well, some getting used to. Like any menu system on a modern camera.</p>

<p>The EVF on mine, despite some whinings from 'net users, is quite good. Clearly not a match for better optical viewfinders, but it's not bad at all. I've never had a problem using it even in bright sunlight. Having that level in there is nice, too.</p>

<p>So far, no regrets at all with this cam. Great lens selection, plenty of accesssories, and some nice features built-in. Like the intervalometer. I'm still learning how to make good time lapses, but so far, it's been fun.</p>

<p>Thanks for your input. I will need to get out there and try one. I assume the ISO performance is noticeably better than that of the GX1? I find the character of the noise is just as important as the amount of noise, especially since I go monochrome most of the time, and even in low light, if not oversharpened I find the tone of ISO 2,000 in the GX1 to be quite pleasant. I am getting rid of my fear of noise since learning how to deal with it.</p><div></div>

<p>The GH3 sensor seems to be on par with the Sony 16mp sensors in the Olympus cameras, which is about a stop better than the GX-1 sensor. (Mine, and others, hands on experience with GX-1 and Olys.)</p>

<p>That's very encouraging. I do really wish they had enlarged the sensor to APS-C size, though this is a) un-neccesary for most users and b) problematic with regard to lenses. But could you imagine the IQ?<br>

Regardless, the GH3 is definitely on my radar.</p>

 

<p>Shooting video with the GH2 I found continuous AF to be a problem that the moment the subject moved away from the AF Target area it rapidly changed focus .... Urrgh!<br>

I am glad it has a M4/3 sensor becuase if it was bigger one would need bigger lenses and the whole point of MFT would be lost.<br>

There would be a GH3 in my stable now but it was about a month late coming out for me as I left the States so I bought the GH2.</p>

<p>The GH3 actually has *more* video resolution than the 5DmkIII and D800e FF bodies. A lot of this has to do w/ how the sensor reduces the higher resolution down to 1080p. The 5DmkIII/D800e seem to only produce 720p effective resolution even in 1080p mode which is pretty bad :-(<br>

They'll never stick an APS-C sized sensor in a GH3 body...they're fully committed to 4/3rds...</p>