GH3 Just curious

tjuster1 wrote:

panolympus wrote:

Mike Ronesia wrote:

ekramer51 wrote:

I just purchased a GH3 to replace my OMD and I'm surprised to find so few posts on this forum about the GH3. The GH3 seems to be such a revolutionary camera I would think there would be more discussions??

Is it because it attracts more professionals more than hobbyists?

I don't post much on this forum because any Panny thread ends up with the rabid Oly fan-boys telling you why Oly is better even though no-one asked. I'm not talking about all Oly members, but there sure seems to be more rabid Oly fans then I'd like. It's just not worth the trouble and was like this even before the EM5 from my perspective. When the GH2 was head and shoulders above any other M4/3's camera you'd here a lot about how it was for video people and you need IBIS to shoot stills, yada, yada, blah, blah, blah. It gets very old and keeps a lot of us away from here. It's the nature of the beast when you put two manufactures in the same forum.

I love my GH2 and my GH3 and no, I don't shoot any video. I just find the features and functions of the GH line better for me as a stills shooter. I also find this forum all but useless as an owner of Panasonic cameras. No worries though, I'd much rather be taking pictures then talking about how my camera is better then yours.

Last night I did a 4hr "Engagement" shoot and took 500 shots and the battery still read full. I did use my flash to trigger 2 off camera flashes for about half of those shots. The GH3 preformed very well and i think my client will be very happy with what we got after I get a chance to let the cream rise.

-- hide signature --

Mark James
A.K.A. Mike Ronesia

Summed up very well ekramer51. Most of the Oly fan boys have never seen a GH3, let alone tried one out enough to form an opinion. I own an OMD and a GH3 I can tell you the GH3 is much more professional. The only real benefit of the OMD is it's smaller. But the downside of that is that the buttons are cramped. Also the buttons don't feel as good when you push them. The GH3 has an easier menu system and also has many more features I'm not going to list.

The battery life on the OMD can't hold a candle to the GH3, but I get more life when I don't use the viewfinder.

I bought the OMD as a travel cam, it's small and cheaper. My GH3 is home right now safe and sound, while my OMD is in my bag, under the plane as I wait for my boarding call. If anything happens to the OMD, I have my main camera waiting my return

The problem with this post, and the one by Mike, is the assumption that anyone who prefers the Olympus is a "fanboy". If I've never seen a GH3 then I'm a fanboy. If I don't find the buttons cramped, then I'm a fanboy. In fact, it appears that anyone who can't recognize that the GH3 is a "more professional" camera is, in a nutshell, an Oly fanboy.

Please. Stop it.

The OP asked why the GH3 isn't garnering more attention. I think there have been many thoughtful responses, none of which were based on the premise that the GH3 sucked. People brought up the OMD because it was implicitly being compared to the GH3 (and, apparently, does receive the attention it deserves). Somehow that stirred the outrage of the GH3 defenders, who have no turned the thread into another "over-hyped OMD" thread. That's just pathetic.

And how does this post even answer the question? So you and Mark prefer the GH3--great. Seriously, great. I hope it makes you happy. But what the hell does that have to do with why the GH3 isn't getting enough attention? It seems you're suggesting that there's some kind of conspiracy by the "Oly fanboys" to suppress any discussion of Panasonic cameras (though not, apparently, Panasonic lenses, which are both highly regarded and discussed), which explains why there are too few threads about the GH3. If only those Oly fanboys would stop creating thread after thread about the OMD so those GH3 threads could bubble to the top!

Very well said! So true!