yabokkie: this looks the same as BSI but with possibly lower cost.
it underscores Pana's move to m4/3", that Oly's original 4/3" looks just stupid. probably the worst design in camera history except one part, the f-number cheating which is part of Pana's current strategy.
You clearly show your ignorance by this statement. There is no perfect sensor size or design methodology in photography. There never has been, and there probably never will be. I use a D800 for work because of the high Megapixel required. I use my GH3 for creative work, size, features and ease of use. Do I wish my GH3 had sensor specifications (but with the same 4/3 size) as the D800? Sure! Do I wish the D800 was as easy to use and as flexible as the GH3? Absolutely. They each have their strengths and weaknesses. Technology does change perspective. The GH4 can outperform a D300s from 2009 in all aspects. As technology improves, the difference between larger and smaller sensors decreases, and the advantage of a WYSIWYG digital viewfinder start to outperform an optical viewfinder. Somethings will never change because of physics. Want shorter depth of field with the same f-stop? Go with a larger sensor. Want smaller more capable and manageable lenses? Go with a smaller sensor.
emilclick: Of corse GH3 is in the top of image quality and in the top of the top of video quality, but what is impressed for me is a feature that nobody tolk about it. The high level of wireless control. Everysings of the camera body control can be remotely controlled wireless by Wi-Fi from about 10-20 m inclusive lifeview monitor image in a big screen of a tablet. And can tuchfocus and zoom from the tablet screen. Imagine all of this features with a motorized pan&tilt head. May be that will change the wildlife shooting style in the future. May be will no need the 10.000$ big lens to capture from big distance, while we will can do camera and lenses control wireless from the distance.
I only wish it had an app for the new Windows Phone and tablets.
With some help from our dog I managed the drop my G5 a week before my daughter’s wedding. Other than my depleted checking account, I have been thanking my dog ever since. I haven’t found any aspect of this camera that I don’t like. The focus is ultra fast and accurate, the 1.7 million dot OLED viewfinder clearly surpasses the Olympus MD-5 and previous Lumix viewfinders. (It is so good in fact, that I far prefer this WYSIWYG viewfinder to my wife’s Nikon 5100 optical viewfinder.) The Color and dynamic range are equivalent to the Nikon. … and the Video is just unbelievable.
The body is about the same height and width as the 5100, but the depth is much smaller. Along with its wide selection (Count them, there 53) of much smaller excellent quality silent focus lenses, it is truly the “Goldilocks” camera for serious photographers and videographers. There is no other camera like it! I can’t see me ever going back to full frame or APS-C cameras.
dfswan: Forgetting about opinions for a second, Does anyone know if the wireless flash on the DH3 is compatible with the Olympus Wireless Flash allowing the use of wireless METZ Flashes? All indications are yes, but I haven’t gotten any clear answers. It would nice to have a broader selection than just the one DMW-FL360L flash unit that has wireless capability. Thanks,
Here is a link that the GH3 will be using the Olympus Wireless Flash protocol. (http://fourthirds-user.com/forum/showthread.php?p=86718#post86718) It will be interesting to see if the built in flash can also contribute vs. just being a commander.
Forgetting about opinions for a second, Does anyone know if the wireless flash on the DH3 is compatible with the Olympus Wireless Flash allowing the use of wireless METZ Flashes? All indications are yes, but I haven’t gotten any clear answers. It would nice to have a broader selection than just the one DMW-FL360L flash unit that has wireless capability. Thanks,
We will know just how exceptional the GH3 is when see come comparison shots to the larger sensor APS sensors. The pictures that Lumix is publishing on their global site (http://panasonic.net/avc/lumix/dslm/gh3_special/gallery/index.html) are really quite exceptional. If the GH3 can produce pictures equivalent to the D7000 with its great color depth, and still maintain its smaller footprint with smaller lenses, and great features, how can you argue with that? The Lumix and Leica/Lumix lenses are already first class! Even if the sensor is manufactured by Sony, it certainly has great siblings. If the only weaknesses for the M4/3 cameras were the sensors, and that issue has been handled, we are certainly in for a treat.
Remember when APS sensors couldn’t compare to the Full Format Sensors. That gap has closed, and now the M43 gap appears to be closing as well. Let’s just hope the gap is closed and no more luging around oversized cameras and lenses!
pumeco: While some dislike the idea that Sony made the sensor, I have to say that being a fan of both Panasonic and Sony cameras, I think it's actually very good news.
My three main issues with the GH1 and GH2 were:
1 - Price2 - Whiteouts due to dynamic range limits of the Panasonic sensor3 - Designs looked weak and a bit girly
I quite like this new camera so far, in fact very much so. For starters, a Sony sensor is almost certainly going to improve the dynamic range. Secondly, it looks far better than the previous designs, much more meaty than the previous toy-like aesthetics of the GH1 and GH2.
Panasonic seem to excel in their ability to 'tune' and 'tone' whatever dynamic range they have to play with, and to get a very detailed image. If they manage that same sharpness out of the Sony sensor as well, the image will be amazing.
The only thing that concerns me is what the price will be, because as far as I'm concerned, the entire M4/3 format is a blatant rip-off, always has been.
To Francis,I you are of the mindset that “Smaller” should be “Less Expensive” as compared to a larger format DSLR I won’t be able to change your mind, but I can assure you that you are not paying much more. Usually you get more specifications and features in a smaller package and that is what it is all about. I know, my wife has a D5100 and it compares very favorably with my G3 specifications. (And mine is $100 less) In addition, I found lenses of similar quality and speed, are pretty equal in price. M43rds might be slightly more, but they usually have better specifications. The GH3 will retail for $1299 and that compares pretty favorably with the D7000 Magnesium body with water and dust resistant enclosure. The GH3 has loads of features (Particularly Video) that the D7000 just doesn’t have.
The real reason you get Micro Four Thirds, however, is size. For a serious photo shoot, I have more lenses and a smaller case as compared to hers. Big heavy clunky vs. small light and compact.
I always get a kick out all these comments. Yes the lens is a little pricey, but in order to get the 2.8 constant f-stop in a zoom certainly raises the price as it does with any 24mm – 70mm equivalent. I love my 25mm Leica/Lumix 1.4 lens, but I sure would love a zoom with some more speed than the present 3.5-4.0 variety. This is on my wish list for sure.
Yes you do lose some DOF with smaller sensor cameras, but you can’t change physics. You want a lot of DOF the get a full format sensor camera and lug around a large suitcase full of large lenses. I can carry a camera, a 200-600mm (equiv.), a macro, a fast 50mm (equiv.), and a 28-240mm (equiv.) all in a small over the shoulder camera case. My camera and my 300mm are just about the same size as my wife’s Nikon 5100 with its standard 18-55mm lens. That is what M4/3rds is all about!
The real trade off is the lack of color depth with the smaller sensors. Hopefully future technology will fill this gap. (GH3?)
simon65: It all looks great, but what is the IQ of that new pancake 14-42mm I wonder?
Panasonic are making an enormous contribution to photography with the constant innovation, but if they want the GX1 to treated seriously they need to demonstrate the lens is up to standard. I for one was disappointed that it wasn't a Leica.
In this case it couldn't be a Leica. It uses electronic modification to correct lens distortions. This concept is brand new in the industry and may be the wave of the future. Leica uses pure, but considerably more expensive, multiple element fine optics.(no distortions to correct) I have the 45mm Leica lens and my next one will be 25mm Leica. That being said, I’m looking with great interest at this new lower cost, high quality technology alternative.
whtchocla7e: I'm actually starting to feel sad for the m4/3 guys.I thought they would eventually get their nex-7 competitor but this is a disappointment..
Agreed. I don't understand the direct comparison between the NEX7 and the M43 cameras. The M43rds sensors are 30% smaller meaning comparable lenses are 30% smaller. My camera with 200mm (400mm equivalent) zoom is about the same size as my wife’s 55mm Nikon (82mm equivalent). Understandably the larger sensor in the Nikon has some dynamic range advantage, but I have better focus and much smaller comparative size. The NEX7 is a small body with huge lenses (compared with M43rds) If I wanted larger sensors with corresponding larger lenses, I would go with a full DSLR.
jaykumarr: panasonic says : "you want flip LCD and RAW? ok.. take this FZ150 and get hell out of here.. no manual focus or manual zoom..no FZ60. Such manual zoom, manual focus FZ60 will screw sales our G series. We prefer G sereis getting screwed by Fuji HS30 "
You really need to try the G3. It really does handle all the weaknesses of the FZ series but obviously with a larger sensor, you don’t get 24X zoom. Fujitsu is a nice camera, but it will never compete with the G3.
John McCormack: Love the Freudian slip in the PR release:"A new 12-Megapixel High Sensibility MOS sensor..."
Good job, Panny. What more could want. This baby has got all the bells and whistles and what appears to be quite good image quality.
GPS would be nice, especially since this camera is so good for travel. Panoramic Stitching can be done with the included PhotoFunStudio software. The manual focus ring would be fabulous. Manual focusing on the FZ100 was a bear. My new G3 has wonderful Manual Focus ring. That is truly a weak point that should have been handled with his release. Of course the other weakness is the low resolution viewfinder. Again, my new G3 viewfinder is great.
coastcontact: After driving the same old cars for 10 years I rented a near new vehicle for a drive from JFK to Monticello. Although the car was not an outstanding model the difference between that rental and my old cars was stark. Within a year I had bought a new car. The difference between the new car and the following year’s model was so negligible that there really was no justification in buying yet another new car.
Thus Panasonic’s 2011 models vary little from last year’s models. In fact new cameras have not experienced any significant improvements over the past few years. It’s not just Panasonic. Tweaked improvements are mostly cosmetic and do little to improve photo quality. Unless DPR or some other organization can resoundingly say that the FZ150 has made some serious leap, there really is no justification for a new camera.
I had the FZ100 and found it to be an incredibly fast, versatile and compact camera worthy of all the praise it received in its many reviews. Its demise however, was the sensor. I just couldn't get the picture clarity that I wanted. The FZ150 picture gallery indicates that the clarity has been improved making it a very worthwhile replacement for the FZ100. It might just be the best “Bridge Camera”
Tom K.: The viewfinder is still a low-res POS. Stupid.
Agreed, I had the FZ100 and admittedly, the viewfinder was very limited. Unfortunately, they stayed with the same viewfinder in the FZ150. My new G3 however, has a wonderful electronic viewfinder. I actually prefer it to my wife’s Nikon optical viewfinder.