The end of multi-aspect ratio sensors?

Bob,

First, I am not arguing that the G5 definitely uses the GH2 sensor rather than then GH3 sensor (or yet another design), just raising some doubts about a conclusion based on what could be a single copying error in a spec sheet (total pixel count)

As I have said several times: if that spec is correct, they are different, but I have some doubts about it being correct rather than a copying error, due to deliberate hobbling of a useful sensor capability that it implies.

Wrong comparison: I think we know those two have different sensors of different widths; it is the G5 that is in question. Are there clear images of the G5 sensor width to compare to the GH2 or GH3? I have not yet found a "full frontal nude" of the G5 and its slightly mysterious sensor.

If the GH3 instead has distinctly better DXO results, the case is closed: Panasonic is recycling the old GH2 sensor in the G5 (and also now advertising that sensor for sale as a component), perhaps to keep costs down by getting the most out of existing fab. setup -- though strangely not using its full "wide-screen" potential in the G5. But if the GH3 sensor also scores similarly to the GH2 and G5, it could be that Panasonic has not made progress in its per pixel performance, which in turn could help to explain why Olympus no longer uses those Panasonic sensors. The fact that the GH3 has not increased its maximum "official" ISO speed beyond the 12800 of the GH2 is a hint of a lack of significant progress in sensor noise.