So which is better? "GH3" or OM-D?

Hi Louis,

I have been a long time user of both the Oly E 4/3 series and the Leica M series (using these as my main cameras for the last several years).  I try to travel as much as possible, sometimes with groups and sometimes by ourselves but usually to places with extremes of weather.  AFAIC some degree of weather sealing is mandatory, as I have lost several digital cameras to weather (and even just high humidity)  I have been very happy with the E1/3/5 bodies with both the HG & SHG lenses, but the weight has been an increasing issue.  Although I love the size/weight of the M, no weather sealing makes it impractical.  I really love the output/size of the XE/P-1 and ironically this has largely replaced my use of the M9. . . but again no weather sealing.

I bought the OM--D and there are now 4 lenses that are weather sealed. . . O 12-50, 60, P 12-35, 35-100.  I do not own the 35-100 and do not use the 12-50.  I largely use the P12-35 & O 60 and other P zooms in fair weather.  I own several (unsealed) primes.  I have recently been to Iceland with the EM-5 and 12-35 and found the images superb BUT the camera virtually impossible to control with gloves in the horizontal rain/sleet.  Even in good weather many of the controls are just fiddly. . . and move too easily on their own  I use the horizontal portion of the grip routinely with the 12-35 which helps with the overall handling (but raises other issues) and frequently use the small flash for flash fill.

That said using just the grip alone, (not the vertical) makes the EM-5 and GH3 virtually identical in size and weight (w/i 25 grams).  I just recently got a GH3 for evaluation and have been struggling to learn it with the huge manual and rather involved menu system.

In bright light (Florida sun), the touchscreen on either camera is essentially useless and controls must be set via the EVF.

The GH3 in feel (and looks as well) reminds a bit of a half-size E5.  Compared to the EM-5, the controls are larger and once understood (I disagree that there is any difference in difficulty between the Menu systems of either camera) work similarly to my set-up on the E5.   Operational speed is about the same as the EM-5. EVF is similar in quality but a bit different in view. and I think I prefer the EM-5.  Eye position seems more critical on the GH3, but I am still learning to use it.  I do use the large eyecup on the EM-5 but as yet have not needed one for the GH3

The controls appear more rugged and larger on the GH3 and they do not appear to be as prone to moving oin their own so I do not have to shut the camera off when I place it in my case. . . something I had to do in Iceland with the EM-5 as the control wheels moved pretty much if you breathed on them.

I also prefer the ability to protect the LCD by turning it into the camera body as I rarely use it.  I do find the flip out/up screen of the EM5 preferable in street shooting however and my silver EM-5 does seem to draw lesss attention.  The reality is I now use the Fuji for that kind of shooting anyway. Likewise the GH3's built in flash is quite convenient .   fill flash but it does not appear sealed and Panasonic advises against using it in inclement weather.

I am only a casual video shooter so I am trying the GH3 as largely a still camera.  I am not yet sure of the image quality from the GH3 compared to the EM-5.  Still quality is close if not identical in my early use but frankly, I am still trying to optimize settings on the GH3.  Isuspect either4 willo be acceptable, but n either better than the Fuji in its comfort zone

In short, it depends on what you are doing, even as a stills only shooter.  If you are using the larger or weather sealed lenses with the EM-5+grip, there is no weight or size penalty.  Even the cost of EM-5+grip is approximately equal to the GH3 w/o add-on vertical.  Controls on the GH3 are clearly designed to be larger and more solid in feel, but the absence of IBIS is significant. . . if you want a smaller camera you CANNOT take off the grip.  For MY use, the GH3 may be a better choice but both cameras suffer from the inability to effectively use the superb existing 4/3 lenses (but frankly how well could I use the 50-200 or even the 150 w/o IBIS).  The lack of add'l weather sealed lenses still orevents either camera from replacing my existing dSLR systems.

As I usually travel with at least 2 bodies when traveling to exotic locations, I had hoped that an OMD or GH3 could  both partially replace an E5 or serve as a back-up.  Neither the EM-5 or GH3 can IMHO do that yet, so for wildlife in bad weather it still will be the E5.  Hopefully the upscale OMD rmodel will do this.  For now I will sell either the GH3 or EM5, but I do not know which yet.

Ed Rauschkolb