Jump to content

Close
Photo

Lets Discuss, where the GH3 Falls Short

GH3 Panasonic Issues Problems
- - - - -

  • Please log in to reply

#1
sanveer

Posted 01 November 2012 - 08:39 AM

sanveer

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 364 posts
  • LocationTravelling
Panasonic is making Huge losses, right now (almost US$ 10 Million, and 2nd year in a row. Actually 2 years with similar losses, and 5 years of losses). :

http://www.adelaiden...u-1226507969975


It needs to turn around the company.

As good samaritans (or customer), lets discuss, where the GH3 falls short, and what it needs to address.

We could Exclude things like Global Shutter and other stuff, since, that's not possible, at this stage.

I would begin, by suggesting better handling of details, in low light (or very high contrast scenes), instead of that strange banding and those artifacts.

I find it curious, that the GH3 is not actually an improvement on the GH2, in firmware, but, most likely, only in hardware. At this rate, they could have just transferred the old GH2 sensor, board, wiring etc etc, along with the firmware, right into the GH3, done (or left it as it is) a few tweaks to the Firmware, and Voila !!!

#2
KarimNassar

Posted 01 November 2012 - 09:00 AM

KarimNassar

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 240 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland
the gh3, based on what we have seen so far from preproduction models with firmware 0.5 is nothing short of a failure imo.

Not only have not upgraded but they have regressed from the gh2.

Regression:
- apparently less detail rendition
- mo more multi aspect sensor
- apparently from the user guide there is no more video extended tele mode
- introduces moire an aliasing

And all of this for more than twice the price of the gh2...

We can use caution and wait for the final production models but it is definitively not looking good at all.

What is sad is that if they simply kept the strong points of the gh2 without even improving on them. and we still got rid of the shooting stars artifact that is now gone on the gh3, with the weather sealing, headphone jack and battery grip and 72mbps all i mov files that it has now it would already have been a great camera.

But those small improvements were traded for a loss in image quality that simply does not make any sense.

The only logical justification I can find for this weak upgrade is that if, just like canon on the markIII that did not get the expected upgrade so that it didn't compete with the c100, they are practicing product segmentation and will announce a higer end video camera soon.

vimeo / vimeo channel

- karimnassar.ch / homepage


#3
markm

Posted 01 November 2012 - 09:01 AM

markm

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 640 posts
Its a shame really Panasonic were the first with a large sensor video camera the AF101 All it needed was a few tweaks to make it as revolutionery as the EX1 I guess they only have themselves to blame in my opinion.

The GH3 is most definately an improvement with the ability to use a monitor in crop mode and HDMI 4.2.2 out. They are fantastic improvements to an already very filmic camera. Just a shame they decided to price to a level where S35 sensor camera that do the same thing are almost within reach. If they sold the GH3 at about £700 -800 that would be about right to hit the sweet spot for them.

#4
sanveer

Posted 01 November 2012 - 09:10 AM

sanveer

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 364 posts
  • LocationTravelling

the gh3, based on what we have seen so far from preproduction models with firmware 0.5 is nothing short of a failure imo.

Not only have not upgraded but they have regressed from the gh2.

Regression:
- apparently less detail rendition
- mo more multi aspect sensor
- apparently from the user guide there is no more video extended tele mode
- introduces moire an aliasing

And all of this for more than twice the price of the gh2...

We can use caution and wait for the final production models but it is definitively not looking good at all.

What is sad is that if they simply kept the strong points of the gh2 without even improving on them. and we still got rid of the shooting stars artifact that is now gone on the gh3, with the weather sealing, headphone jack and battery grip and 72mbps all i mov files that it has now it would already have been a great camera.

But those small improvements were traded for a loss in image quality that simply does not make any sense.

The only logical justification I can find for this weak upgrade is that if, just like canon on the markIII that did not get the expected upgrade so that it didn't compete with the c100, they are practicing product segmentation and will announce a higer end video camera soon.


You mentioned the 'shooting star artefact' in your previous post, regarding the video you posted. Do you know any other videos on Vimeo, or even youtube, which show it. What exactly does it look like?

Maybe you're right about saving the better features, for the next (higher) segment. Especially considering, that, the AF100 didn't do as well , they were hoping.

#5
KarimNassar

Posted 01 November 2012 - 09:25 AM

KarimNassar

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 240 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

You mentioned the 'shooting star artefact' in your previous post, regarding the video you posted. Do you know any other videos on Vimeo, or even youtube, which show it. What exactly does it look like?


I call it the "shooting stars artifact" because it is rays of brighter color that travel from the top left to the bottom right part of the image, looks like shooting stars.

They are visible in dark parts of the image, mostly visible in very dark parts.
It is very visible when you push the image in post, if you want to see it download the dynamic range comparison I posted in my gh3 quick handheld comparison thread.

More subtle but clearly visible here (not my work):

At the end of the video on the wood behind the bea hive.
Watch in full screen you won't miss it.

vimeo / vimeo channel

- karimnassar.ch / homepage


#6
KarimNassar

Posted 01 November 2012 - 09:31 AM

KarimNassar

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 240 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland
this is the video comparison where it is extremely visible because the image was pushed heavily in post.
On the right of the vid the gh3, as you will see it is now gone:

http://www.postprod....d/montage_2.zip

vimeo / vimeo channel

- karimnassar.ch / homepage


#7
sanveer

Posted 01 November 2012 - 01:27 PM

sanveer

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 364 posts
  • LocationTravelling
Karim, thanks for posting the links. Its some strange noise pattern.

#8
Ernesto Mántaras

Posted 01 November 2012 - 01:57 PM

Ernesto Mántaras

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 237 posts
  • LocationSanta Fe, Argentina
Wow. Not once have I seen that kind of artifacts in my footage. Lucky me!

Sites:   @Vimeo   |   @Facebook   |   @Twitter

SIGNATURE_THIN.gif

 


#9
markm

Posted 01 November 2012 - 01:59 PM

markm

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 640 posts
Is it possible something else caused it rather than the camera?

#10
sanveer

Posted 01 November 2012 - 02:05 PM

sanveer

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 364 posts
  • LocationTravelling

Wow. Not once have I seen that kind of artifacts in my footage. Lucky me!


Did u ever shoot, in the dark? With a not-so-fast lens?

#11
kirk

Posted 01 November 2012 - 03:53 PM

kirk

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 137 posts
Haven't had anything even close to the shooting stars on my unhacked GH2's either. And I shoot a lot of unlit interiors of old buildings and the like. A little color noise at 1600 ISO, but nothing like that for sure.

#12
KarimNassar

Posted 01 November 2012 - 04:46 PM

KarimNassar

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 240 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland
I wondered if it was my camera that was faulty but then I saw it in others people footage like the vimeo link I posted.
Maybe you guys should try to pull the shadows all the way up and see if it's there?
or maybe it is specific to the flowmotion hack?

vimeo / vimeo channel

- karimnassar.ch / homepage


#13
aaronmc

Posted 01 November 2012 - 05:34 PM

aaronmc

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 22 posts
Thus far, I'm unhappy, but I'm withholding judgment on the camera until a 100% full production model gets the review treatment.

If the reduced detail level, combined with the significant moire, remains, my depression will be complete.

And has Panasonic admitted to having/not-having focus peaking?

#14
sanveer

Posted 01 November 2012 - 07:12 PM

sanveer

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 364 posts
  • LocationTravelling

Wow. Not once have I seen that kind of artifacts in my footage. Lucky me!


Could you please upload footage, in High Contrast, and low light videos?

thanks

#15
kirk

Posted 01 November 2012 - 09:05 PM

kirk

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 137 posts
Here's a couple of very dark, contrasty places. The first has some noise to the left in the beginning... it was shot with Nostalgic mode, the other is in Vibrant mode, which works much better for this kind of situation IMHO. Both shot unhacked at 1600 ISO and no Neat...

http://vimeo.com/47927412

#16
Matt

Posted 01 November 2012 - 09:18 PM

Matt

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 47 posts
It's great that you post a topic to stimulate a debate.

But in the article you have linked to the losses mentioned by Panasonic are $10 Billion not $10 Million.

Getting the GH3 "right" isnt going to save the day.

Like many others who visit this site I was so excited to see the release of the GH3 but it's all gone a bit flat now.

I hope the full production model sorts out some of the issues people have with the GH3 and it really is a great camera.

#17
Ernesto Mántaras

Posted 02 November 2012 - 12:23 AM

Ernesto Mántaras

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 237 posts
  • LocationSanta Fe, Argentina

Did u ever shoot, in the dark? With a not-so-fast lens?


Yes, I have. And I have pushed the footage. Never seen it.

Sites:   @Vimeo   |   @Facebook   |   @Twitter

SIGNATURE_THIN.gif

 


#18
Ernesto Mántaras

Posted 02 November 2012 - 12:24 AM

Ernesto Mántaras

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 237 posts
  • LocationSanta Fe, Argentina
I always shoot in the top row ISO settings, never above 2500ISO. Could that have something to do with it?

Sites:   @Vimeo   |   @Facebook   |   @Twitter

SIGNATURE_THIN.gif

 


#19
Ernesto Mántaras

Posted 02 November 2012 - 12:27 AM

Ernesto Mántaras

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 237 posts
  • LocationSanta Fe, Argentina

Could you please upload footage, in High Contrast, and low light videos?

thanks


This is what I have at hand. The shots of the guitar player and picking the guitar up and playing it with the skylight behind is an example. I had to lift the lows quite a bit in all of those shots.

EDIT: it's exactly the thumbnail shot that I'm talking about, and all those shot from the same angle.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZ44i0Woa6E

Sites:   @Vimeo   |   @Facebook   |   @Twitter

SIGNATURE_THIN.gif

 


#20
sanveer

Posted 02 November 2012 - 08:00 AM

sanveer

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 364 posts
  • LocationTravelling

This is what I have at hand. The shots of the guitar player and picking the guitar up and playing it with the skylight behind is an example. I had to lift the lows quite a bit in all of those shots.

EDIT: it's exactly the thumbnail shot that I'm talking about, and all those shot from the same angle.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZ44i0Woa6E


There is Quite a bit of noise in your video (on the staircase, and the seats, etc etc). I just saw a few seconds of the start, and there was already a lotta noise (strange artefacts).


I wondered if it was my camera that was faulty but then I saw it in others people footage like the vimeo link I posted.
Maybe you guys should try to pull the shadows all the way up and see if it's there?
or maybe it is specific to the flowmotion hack?


Naah, i don't think its got to do with the FlowMotion Hack. All settings, with very high contrast,and very low light scenes have it. I saw it in the 5D videos too. All cameras with 4-2-0 have it (maybe even with the 4-2-2 have it, though,it may be less noticeable).

Though, the noise on the GH2, IMHO,seems to vary,under different circumstances.

There are good ISO settings, and there is the ISO bug, and, I also suspect, that, in low light, certain shutter speeds also govern the level of noise.

Check this out:




Its not a big deal, I guess. Everything comes with its limitations. We just have to learn, to work around it.

Btw, i realised, that the GH3 has a strange update, on the continuous shooting rate/ high speed burst mode. Whereas, the GH2 shot 4MP pics, at 40 fps, for exactly 1 second, the GH3 does 4MP pics, at 20fps, for 2 seconds. Doesn't, then, the processor power, seem similar? ;)
  • KarimNassar likes this




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users