The GH3 is sill lighter than the Oly EM5 is it not?
No need to be rude about it. Yes, it's twice the size. Not twice the weight. It has a lot more plastic, while the OM-D is mostly metal. But yes, "bulk". I understand the definition of the word volume well. The reason I chose not to use it is because I'm not saying it would displace that amount of liquid. What I'm saying is the effective space it takes up is that size. Big protrusions matter if you're comparing cameras. The OM-D body actually fits easily in a front pants pocket. Have you ever tried to do that with a DSLR? The GH3 is the size of a mid-range DSLR.
As for "going around measuring cameras", mine was sitting next to me on the desk. The ruler was in a drawer. I didn't get up from my chair, & it took me all of about ten seconds. I take 100s of photos a day. Camera is getting plenty of use.
No, it doesn't matter much. But someone did suggest that the GH3 was smaller & lighter than the OM-D. So I cleared that up.
It looks great, but it IS a DSLR-sized camera. End of story.
Jay Jenner: I really like the look of this. It could replace my E3 and my Sony HDR-HC1E video camera.To all those people whinging about the size of it - same size as Canon this or Nikon that....okay maybe it is. But those are entry level toy cameras. Plus, do they have compact constant f2.8 zooms? No, they do not.
Me, too. What it does with videos looks pretty stunning, and I'm sure it will be a great still camera. Rather big for what it is, but I also hope it does well.
marike6: If you haven't seen the Bruce Logan (Director) and Philip Bloom (DP) short called Genesis, it's definitely worth checking out as the camera performs superbly and the crew did a superb job with it.
And for a more informal, street shoot video done also done with the GH3 that also looks fantastic, see the next link.
Wow. VERY nicely done. This camera looks like a real beast in the videography department!
I'm sorry, but this just isn't true. They are clearly nowhere near the same size. I have the E-M5, and a Canon T2i, as well. The Canon is easily twice the size of the E-M5, and it appears to be about the same size or a little smaller than the GH3 (and the exact same weight). But the E-M5 body is almost exactly the same size as the Panasonic GF3, which I had but returned. Only difference is the additional viewfinder hump, which takes it in one small spot in the middle from about 67mm to 89mm. And discounting the depth of the EVF on the E-M5 also brings the thing down to about 34mm thin. Both of these cameras have areas that protrude to give you these numbers, not just the GH3's grip. In fact, the GH3 has more body mass given over to these protruding areas that inflate the numbers, as it's not just the EVF but also that massive grip that stick out. It's quite clear that this GH3 is the size of a mid-sized DSLR, while the E-M5 is that of a large pocket camera, plus that EVF hump.
Prices I'm seeing for this look like they're going to be in the seriously expensive range. $1299 for the body alone, according to Amazon. Other stories indicating that the standard bundle will be with the very nice 35-100mm lens, and that the package will be around $2000. Wow.
Edit: Although, now I look at it, if the body goes for $1299, I'd be surprised if the bundle is as low as $2000, since the two weathersealed, high quality Lumix lenses are about $1400-$1500 each. So maybe more like $2200? This is, of course, just a guess.
Fair points indeed. I think the real area of comparison here is the OM-D E-M5. And it might come down to a size vs. video capability trade-off, depending on one's needs. For stills, edge would likely go to the OLY (even if the GH3 is ultimately able to match it in IQ, the faster frame rate, IBIS, and fact that it's less than half the size should win out for most). But if videos matter to you in a serious, professional sort of way, and size is not a concern, I'd imagine that the GH3 would be the no-brainer choice if picking between these two.
I see that the specs are posted here for the GH3, as well. The GH3 is noticeably heavier and 2.17 times the bulk of the E-M5. Here's the comparison:
GH3:550g133 x 93 x 82 mm
E-M5:425g122 x 89 x 43 mm
No. The GH2 and the E-M5 are almost exactly the same weight, and the GH3 is noticeably larger and likely much heavier (n.b. = although the GH2 is listed on dpr as 33g lighter, the E-M5 weight includes the battery, and the GH2 does not). And bulk-wise, the GH2 is almost TWICE the size of the E-M5 (124x90x76 vs. 122x89x43, respectively). The only reason they're a similar weight is because it's plastic vs. metal construction. Then factor in the Oly's ability to use lighter lenses at longer focal lengths, since the E-M5 has IBIS, and the package is ultimately even smaller (although admittedly only in the super-tele range, and then a difference one can certainly live with).
In sum, it looks from here like the GH3 must be both noticeably heavier than the E-M5 (especially with the weathersealing added), and at least 2.5 times the bulk of the E-M5.
Not that this means the GH3 is the wrong camera to get of the two, especially if you're shooting video. Just to make the size difference clear.
No post processing, other than watermark added in PSE9. Jpeg straight out of camera (Large, Normal). Not cropped. Just resized for web use.
Shot at f/4.0. No post processing. Jpeg straight out of camera (Large, Normal). Not cropped. Just resized for web use.
Not quite wide open at f/2.8. No post processing. Jpeg straight out of camera (Large, Normal). Not cropped. Just resized for web use.
Underexposed a touch to capture blue sky well. No post production. Jpeg straight out of camera (Large, Normal). Not cropped. Just resized for web use.
Underexposed to capture blue sky well. Shadows brought up just a touch in about five seconds in iPhoto. Jpeg straight out of camera (Large, Normal). Not cropped. Just resized for web use.
That's blue sky, mountain range, and forest in the background. No post-production. Jpeg straight out of camera (Large, Normal). Not cropped. Just resized for web use.
No post-production. Jpeg straight out of camera (Large, Normal). Not cropped. Just resized for web use.