First GH3 ISO samples…

FacebookShare


ThatNikonGuy posted a set of GH3 image smaples taken at different ISO (Click here to see them on Flickr). I will leave any comment to you guys! I usually don’t care a lot about extreme High ISO but certainly those images do look fine to me. Keep also in mind that the firmware isn’t final yet! (Thanks Duarte for sending me the link!).

Do you lihe these first GH3 image samples quality?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

P.S.: GH3 spanish hands-on at Quesabesde. French presentation at OpenPN.

Special GH3 page at Amazon (Click here) and a full Olympus presentation page at Amazon (Click here).

FacebookShare
  • amweber21

    Although it’s way too early to tell, especially without a side-by-side comparison, it looks to match the em5. Looks a stop better than gh2 but colors dont fall off after 3200 like the gh2 which is great. Was kind of hoping for even better performance though…

  • RobertCop 2

    There looks to be some in camera noise reduction applied to those images.
    It would be nice to see it with the reduction at the minimum, although my main interest is seeing it in video mode.
    It doesn’t look to horrendous even at max isos. There’s at least some detail in the image.

    • Esa Tuunanen

      With the way Dpreview is now publishing reviews in parts it probably doesn’t take very long to have RAW image quality comparison available.
      (unless Panasonic forgot to work with Adobe for RAW support)

  • Mar

    They look fine, but there’s so much light available.

    Just look – f3.5, ISO3200, 1/3200s!

    Hardly low light scenario. :)

    Although I’m pretty sure they’re using same Sony sensor like in the OMD, obviously Panny cannot compete there any more and they’ve yielded.

    That would explain why there’s no multi aspect sensor anymore (I don’t buy Panny’s official statements).

    • QBNY

      Do you own a OM-D? Trying to Justify your purchase? The GH3 was just announced. Give it time to get to reviewers hands and find out that the GH3 is the better camera.

      • Fan

        GH3 is different, not better, due to the lack of IBIS.

        • dau

          IBIS code for I Bought It Syndrome (so im gonna post about iton every panny pice of news on this website forever)!

          • YA KNOW???

            Panasonic can introduce an Alarm Clock on Engadget, and you wouldn’t be surprised if some Olympus Fanboy chimes in: “WHAT?? No IBIS?? Display shows 3 different Time Zones?? -Must be a Sony Sensor!”

            Give. It. A. Break!!!

          • BB

            IBIS on the EM5 is code for:

            I Bought Inexpensive Steadycam.

            Handheld video on the GH3:

            Jello-like crap

        • agachart

          whai is IBIS about you,you are drunk !!! IBIS will fuckin your mother.

      • mooboy

        “The GH3 was just announced. Give it time to get to reviewers hands…”

        Oh, that makes sense, let’s wait and see what happens when people do proper reviews.

        “…and find out that the GH3 is the better camera.”

        Oh, you’re just a fanboy.

        • And you’re just upset, being that you can’t bring nothing to the table.

          Anybody can quote:

          “Oh, that makes sense, let’s wait and see what happens when people do proper reviews.”

          Why not? They’ll have it in their hands before we do. Then we can see how proper stills/video are. In the end, we have the final say, with our cash.

          “…and find out that the GH3 is the better camera.”

          SOMEBODY has to retaliate with all the “What, no IBIS/It is/it’s not a Sony Sensor??” Garbage. Panasonic isn’t doing IBIS, get over it.

          “Oh, you’re just a fanboy.”

          Yeah, a Fanboy of M43’rds if you want to call me one. I have Olympus lens as well. But with all the GH3/G5 hate, I feel like eBay’n it!

          • Fish

            Someone has to retaliate??? WHY?
            “with all the “What, no IBIS/It is/it’s not a Sony Sensor??” Garbage.” I see only one person, out of 36 comments so far, who mentioned the GH3’s lack of IBIS – and that was a big mistake because it seems to have triggered an outbreak of pre-menstrual syndrome among a couple of the other posters. Time to tone it back a bit.

            If you are OK with not having IBIS, that is awesome! But if so, why be so hyper-sensitive about it. Who cares what someone else prefers as long as you are happy with it? It seems like it’s acceptable to have an OIS preference, but if you prefer IBIS you’d better keep your comments to yourself, or people will spaz out.

            Kind of the ostrich approach to critiqueing camera gear:
            “Panasonic isn’t doing IBIS, get over it.”
            “Olympus doesn’t do focus peeking, don’t talk about it anymore”.
            “Micro 4/3 doesn’t do fast telephotos, stop asking for them”.

            • agachart

              exactly.

              explain about IBIS, when someone want to buy a cam.
              they will get suitable cam to their style,work or job.(stock ,portrait, cinema …)
              i mean all canon fan,nikon fan or sony ect.

              they don’t call of IBIS and they still buy …
              what the fuc… IBI??S is only for fuc “”‘ Oly fan boy not all.

            • CobyD

              Fish, you can’t have been paying attention to the forum. The point is that EVERY fricken’ thread about a Pany camera inevitably gets vapid IBIS comments – usually within the first 3 or 4 posts. The fact that it took a few more posts than that in this thread doesn’t make it any less ridiculous.

              • Esa Tuunanen

                Take those OIS eyeglasses off.
                About every Olympus lens news gets at some point very loud demands of Olympus adding stabilization into lens and complaints about lack of it.

              • Rep96st

                +10!!

                Is getting tiring. I remember just before the GH3 was officially announced, some here just chimed in instantly: “if it doesn’t have IBIS like the OMD, then no Buy!”

                We get it!

                • dau

                  Perhaps ill start commenting on every olympus news story: no built in flash, no articulated lcd, poor ergonomics and convoluted menu…
                  Nah just thid once, otherwise i think i can restrain myself!

      • ColinH

        Could we stop the Olympus vs Panasonic thing? It’s like the Canon vs Nikon boys. Can we just be happy that we’ve two great manufacturers who are producing some great camera’s and lenses?

        It’s getting like DPReview here, which isn’t a good thing.

        • +1

          The constant attacks and bickering just prove how low self esteem and social IQ some people have.

        • ph

          +1

    • homer

      Mar, You dont buy OFFICIAL statements? you believe statements coming from people who have never even held the camera? smart fellow aren’t you?

      • Fish

        I don’t think Mar’s skepticism of an “official statement” is enough cause for anyone to make conclusions about his intelligence. Particularily in a situation like this where the official statement doesn’t make a lot of sense.

  • leov74

    Despite the lot of light, the color was retained very well, even at ISO12800

    • Duarte Bruno

      Yes, color retention has little to do with what I expect from the GH2, it’s steps beyond.

      Detail is fantastic up to ISO1600 but we can also observe how DR falls dramatically (both in highlights and shadows) as ISO rises.

      But don’t forget this was obviously an uncontrolled series as not only the aperture isn’t fixed (resulting in different exposures) but there is also some wild focus shifts.

  • Dummy00001

    Well, that’s confirms it: Sony sensor in GH3.

    OR … we should really congratulate the Panny engineers. (Just in case: congrats, people, good job!)

    OR … Panny simply bought the tech from the Sony.

    Anyway, high ISO and all is good, but I want to see how much RAW headroom is there. Fixing exposure in PP is my most common (and often) task (as I after all the years still can’t get hang of configuring the metering on the fly).

    P.S. Where is the login button? Pressing Enter also doesn’t work.

  • Incessant Troll

    why is there a spotlight 2 feet away from the lemon, pointed directly at it? can you put up some daylight tests at 6400+ ISO?

    • dau

      If there was an excess of light the images wouldve been much more washed out at higher isos no?

  • dau

    If there was an excess of light available, wouldnt the images be a lot more washed out at the higher isos? These images still retain there depth of colour at high isos. Looks pretty impressive to me…

  • V4Vendetta

    I like a lot. It seems certain that Panasonic improved the performance in the photo still, its the unic weakness in my GH2, my camera dont give those colors even in dreams.

    I will buy the GH3 in the future, the problem is that the price is too high, for my body + kit lens (14-42) I only get the half of cost of the GH3 body.

    PS: Sorry, my english inst good.

  • Looks great, I’m getting two!

  • Rinaldo

    Interview with Yoshiyuki Inoue, Senior Engineering Planner for the Panasonic GH3 on EOSHD

    EOSHD: Is it a Panasonic sensor? So it is not a Sony sensor?
    Inoue: Ah no comment!

    So it is a Sony sensor! ;)

    • Maybe he is using reverse psychology?

  • Just bear in mind, those are SOOC JPGs, and Panasonic tend to pile on the noise reduction. It would be more scientific to look at the RAW files.

    • Anonymous

      That’s true, but we don’t have raws to look at yet. And even the high-iso shots, with the NR “piled on,” as you suggest, retain a lot of detail.

    • Bob

      While raws might be more scientific, this is all we have for the moment. Even the high ISO files retain a lot of detail, so if these have NR “piled on”, the NR works very well.

  • Mark

    I’m not a pixel peeper and rely on others to tell me how the sensor compares to others. I look forward to some analyses as well as some real world testing.

    • Esa Tuunanen

      You don’t need to go pixel peeping of test charts and DxO’s synthetic benchmarks.
      Dpreview’s camera reviews offers excellent and very easy to use comparison tool which you can use for comparing JPEG and RAW performance of reviewed cameras.

  • I’m happy with those results.

    …but can it record at those ISOs? That’s something that could put this camera well ahead of many others which are capped during video recording.

  • sounds promising, but the video proofs nothing

    • homer

      Thats why theres a link to flickr with the full size images right below it.

  • There are still a lot of misinformation about some specs of the GH3 and some other reports that the sensor is actually multi-aspect but it’s not active in the firmware and that it would have something to do with heat, some other reports says that it’s not a multi-aspect.

    In a interview the senior engineer didn’t answer whether it was Panasonic’s or Sony’s, I guess it’s Sony’s. Why would they deny if it was Panasonic’s?

    There are reports saying that the HDMI is 4:2:0 and that it cannot be upgraded, some other reports says it’s not definitive yet.

    Panasonic hit bullseye in so many aspects, it would be sad to see these things slipping like that. I hope that soon enough Panasonic makes a statements clearing all these doubts.

    • Mau

      Regarding the s nsor, who care who made it the image quality its all we need to assess, don’t you think so? It doesn’t matter the sensor manufacturer at all!

  • Scott

    I just ordered another omd instead of the GH3 because of the IBIS. I think it is worth it. GH3 for video for sure

    • homer

      IBIS has given me more problems that it has solved

  • Ab

    Looks good to me, and I may even buy it :) It is however a big problem for me that is doesnt have the new IBIS… Having said that it is a big problem for me the my OMD doesnt have a headphone out! I guess nothing is perfect :)

    I am going to hang on a bit to see is Olympus can get close to this video in their next body, if not, I may buy this… The only thing that would sway me for sure, is if the new Olympus focused my 43rds lenses as fast.

    But this is looking good, and will do very well. I mean think about it, this is pretty excellent video for a fraction of the cost of a lot of the options from Canon, Sony and Nikon.

    Ab

  • Zass

    You guys may want to check out this website that can make comparison between cameras in term of sizes. I made comparison between GH3 and other full frame and Leica S just for fun. Check it out. http://camerasize.com/compact/#381,378,290,391,312,ha,f

  • ckmaui

    I bought a OMD just a week or so ago knowing stuff would come out but the IBIS is unique and works insane good !
    also I might buy the GH3 ! both have pros cons one is not better on its own but I am sure each one can do certain jobs better than the other ! since I make my living doing photography they are nice tools and the OMD size with smaller lens are easier to carry than larger format glass ! and that’s a huge thing the M4/3 have going for it I am glad they are different would love to have the GH3 on the tripod or for video and the OMD for other stills in hand etc..

    trying to slowly dump big heavy L glass and larger FF bodies and work down to one FF body and a few choice lens and use both the M4/3 and the Fuji X series and FF each for its abilities !

  • Scott

    Why is the FF sensors not out performing these 43rds. I thought bigger was always better

  • Labalbi

    IBIS…IBIS…IBIS….its a never ending argument….I wish my toaster had one so the toast would fly out much more steady…

    Like the pics…I have a Gh1 hacked….the gh3 will be such a huge upgrade for me …

  • Ken_A

    Must be Sony’s sensor.

    Once again….SONY rules !!

    • homer

      trooooooooooooll!

    • Dummy00001

      > Once again….SONY rules !!

      Well, I do not like that. Pure Sony sensors actually were not much better than the Canon’s ones. It’s the addition of the Nikon sensor expertise which boosted the performance to the current levels.

      Cooperation is good: Sony + Nikon, Oly + Panny. And we consumers can reap all the benefits. :)

      P.S. Still no login button is visible in the login form.

  • Sqweezy

    I think we may be at a point where the only way to get significant improvement in image quality over the best micro four thirds sensor is to invest in full frame equipment. APS-C and m43 are basically at a point where it’s close enough to call it even. For substantial gain, only stepping up to full frame is worth doing.

    That said, the only camera that could pull me away from the presumed quality of something like the GH3 would be a significantly larger sensor, or something with an overall better and more complete system. Sony is getting there with it’s NEX line, as that system is becoming more complete with their new lenses.

    But a true game changer will be the mythical full-frame, mirrorless interchangeable lens camera–that’s also compact and yet somewhat affordable (sorry Leica). In a few years, I’m sure we’ll see exactly that. A 35mm sensor hybrid camera that shoots stills and 4k video at 120fps with a global shutter. Hopefully either Panasonic or Sony will step it up to this level one day, as they are the most likely of candidates. It’s only a matter of time!

    • NO, NO, NO, NO and NO!

      The image quality can be improved by making easier the mass production of ultra bright lenses. Thiss will happen by better glasses and better computers/softwares – both for designing and precision shaping. That is: soon!

      Just don’t forget: if you make the equivalent lenses roughly the same size as the “original” FF lens (a 45mm MFT as big as a 90mm FF) you’ll get same DOF and same low-light IQ due to the larger F-stop!

      So time is on our side! :D

      • homer

        your reasoning behind the designing of lenses is completely wrong

        • Why?

          What else could be a stopper on making cheap ultra bright lenses than the poor glass quality and the lack of ultra-precise, computer-aided shaping?

          • Dummy00001

            For example the physical limitations of how even one can make the glass surface?

            Glass polishing is pure mechanics and there are hard limits on precision at the moment which can’t be addressed even with a huge lump of money.

            The innovation doesn’t stop (nanocoating being the most recent one), but there are no prospective research applicable to large(r) sensor cameras. Small sensors (thanks to the smallness) get more of the optical innovation – near-flat lenses, flexible/liquid lenses – but I haven’t seen anything but glass when it comes to covering a large image circle.

            • Bart

              Using plastics for covering a larger image circle has been possible for decades now. Plastics can much easier be molded into any desirable shape and size, eliminating part of the restrictions on what surfaces can be created. Additionally, tolerances on surface imperfections are relative, larger lens with a larger image circle can allow for bigger imperfections (in absolute terms) while still providing lower tolerance (in relative terms) which can actually make creating larger lenses with acceptable special surfaces easier

              We are seeing aspherical lenses that are much more affordable now then they used to be.

              In the coming years, Canon’s patent on technology for grinding diffractive optics will expire.

              Add those things together, and lets see what our Japanese, Chinese and Korean friends can do with it.

              One thing is clear, you have a point regarding the difficulties of creating glass covering a larger image circle, but things are moving, to the advantage of all kinds and sizes of optics, not just for the ‘smaller’ optics.

              My background in this? Oh, I just happen to be one of the people responsible for making hardening and anti-reflective coatings for such plastics a commercially viable possibility (at HOYA in the 1980s)

              • Esa Tuunanen

                If your background is that then why are you advertising Canon’s Fresnel lens elements?
                Diffractive optics is just Canon’s marketing bullshit name for those and even they haven’t used that tech since initial two lenses because fresnel lenses don’t go well with goal of high image quality.

                • Bart

                  I think you don’t really understand the point of hybrid refractive/diffractive optics. Canon never exploited the possibilities much, and creating something that is indeed good enough for photography isn’t trivial. That said, it doesn’t just allow for flat lens elements, but it also allows creating optics that are essentially free of chromatic aberrations. No, Canon never went that far, thats why I said “let’s see what our Japanese, Chinese and Korean friends can do with it”.

        • Bob

          homer wrote:
          “your reasoning behind the designing of lenses is completely wrong”

          So is his reasoning on “equivalence.”

          • homer

            That’s what I mean, you can make the lens as big as a trash can, and f2.8 will remain f2.8, with f2.8 dof and light gathering characteristics.

            • Oh, my God!

              Assume you make a 50mm lens for MFT as big as a 100mm lens for FF. Specifically, you make the diameter of diaphragm roughly the same in both cases, by example 25 mm.

              In this case, the FF lens will be F4, while the 45mm lens will become F2!

              Same DOF and same low light IQ!

              Q.E.D!

              • homer

                No, it wont. itll remain f4 even if you put a 1.2/3 inch sensor behind it. Learn the physics

    • Martin

      “In a few years, I’m sure we’ll see exactly that. A 35mm sensor hybrid camera”
      I am not so sure. As there is nothing canonical at all to the 35mm format, its main attraction is for manufacturers who have legacy glass on the shelves helping them in rapidly setting up a comprehensive system at low development cost. This applies to the SLR lines of Nikon, Canon, Sony (via their Konica-Minolta heritage) and to the Leica-M rangefinders, all of which build on pre-digital era legacy lens systems. But as no manufacturer has ever had a pre-digital mirrorless line featuring exchangeable lenses with AF, there is no real incentive to go for exactly that format in the mirrorless segment.
      My guess would be that eventually some manufacturer would go slightly beyond 35mm format in order to bother those customers engaging in FF-DSLR pride with an even larger sensor in a mirrorless, putting that hypothetic mirrorless system above FF-DSLRs in the perceived hierarchy. Note that such a step would be economically more sensible in the mirrorless market, as such a system would come at only marginally higher development cost than an -also completely new- mirrorless FF system, whereas in DSLR territory, it would require replacement of the legacy glass lines. Hence, if FF-mirrorless development is economically attractive at all, then a slightly super-FF might be even more.

      • Miroslav

        We’re yet to see how legacy glass performs on FF digital sensor… I’m eagerly awaiting the first tests of that NEX FF camcorder, but have a feeling that corner issues will take several generations of sensors to resolve. Besides, I assume that overall image quality of legacy lenses will be way behind modern ones due to the technology used for their production.

        I’ll just wait and watch early adopters get burnt ;).

        • Martin

          Why do we have to wait and see? The only reasonable modern legacy FF glass around (except for the M-Mount lenses) is from the various SLR lines. And we do know quite well how this performs optically on FF sensors, as it is in extensive use on FF DSLRs. It won’t perform any different in the optics chapter (corner sharpness, vignnetting, etc.) just because it becomes mounted to a mirrorless. AF is another issue, but optically everything stays the same, as these legacy lenses can’t take advantage of the reduced flange distance (which anyhow helps only in producing compact lenses, but -when exploited- worsens issues like corner sharpness and vignetting due to the inclination angles).

          • Miroslav

            According to Sony’s actions (no NEX FF lenses in the foreseeable future), I have a feeling that their FF mirrorless is aimed at legacy SLR and rangefinder lens owners ( beside Alpha FF lens owners ). And those legacy film lenses are small and therefore most interesting for use on FF mirrorless. But how will those perform on digital sensor is unknown. That’s why I’ll wait and see what happens.

      • Arkersaint

        Full frame legacy glass will continue to weight high on the pro market, that is for sure and therefore manufacturers will find some way of providing a way to use them on a new generation of mirrorless FF camera, exactly as Oly fans expect Oly to provide PD plug enhancement on m43…
        I don’t know exacthly how it will happen but I bet it will !

        That said, I believe that lens size and weight added to sensor technology enable m43 (and maybe APSC) to strongly challenge future mirrorless FF …

  • At least definitely much better than my G3 (also not that bad, BTW).

  • Miroslav

    ISO 1600 looks excellent to me, ISO 3200 tolerable, while 6400 can be usable. I’d go up to 3200. Nice job, Panasonic!

    We’d have a better comparison if the guy could decide whether he wants to focus on the lemon or on the orange ;).

  • happy1

    I find it funny that people are making the assumption that the GH3 is using a Sony sensor. I’m betting these are the same people who ASSUMED that the OMD sensor was a Panasonic one (even though Olympus wouldn’t say right away who it was). Why would Panasonic be using a competitor’s sensor when they’ve shown that they are fully capable of making their own sensor (which they happen to use in ALL their own m4/3 cameras)?? Olympus on the other hand has always had to rely on another manufacturer to make sensors for their cameras, so for them to jump ship with Panasonic in favor of Sony doesn’t seem surprising if they are trying to jump ahead of Panasonic. They could never really do that before as they always used the same sensor from a Panasonic months after Panasonic already implemented it in one of their cameras.

    • Agree, but it’s hard to explain why Pana wouldn’t opt for developing a multi-aspect sensor.

      Still waiting for a plausible argument.

      • Martin

        I can see two reasons: read-out rates and power consumption. That additional sensor area would come at a price in the battery life department is obvious. I can imagine that the current design also is so close to the limits of achievable read-out rates that the additional address decoding etc. necessary for the multi-aspect setting may be out of scope.

      • happy1

        A Panasonic representative said that the sensor was maximized for longer video recording. I’m guessing that a larger sensor would make it more difficult to achieve this due to heat and power consumption. Just my own theory, but I am highly doubting that Panasonic would use a Sony sensor based on their track record for making their own sensors. Just because noise characteristics look similar to the OMD, doesn’t mean Panasonic’s sensor R&D couldn’t have just seen what their competitors are doing, and try to best it on their own. A non-multi aspect sensor isn’t necessarily a downgrade. Would people rather have better DR and higher ISO capabilities or a multi-aspect one where those aspects are only slightly better? Panasonic probably opted for the former based on the positive reception the OMD received for it’s higher DR and high iso comparison.

      • homer

        The sensor is multi aspec.

  • Vdaffyduck

  • Me

    ISO samples look very similar to what the G5 produces. Unless the opposite is proven by RAW samples, I bet the GH3 uses the same sensor as the G5 (which isn’t bad, as somehow people have missed how good the G5 is due to all the GH3 roumors).

    • dau

      Do you (or anybody else) know of any g5 reviews? It would be interesting to see how the g5 compares with the omd and gh3

    • The (unverified) consensus is that the G5 has the GH2’s sensor with tweaked output, while the GH3 has a new sensor. The G5 looks like a cracking little m4/3 body. I am especially fond of the electronic shutter and the apparent ergonomics (Need to confirm hands-on).

    • DxO Mark results for G5 make presumable that the G5 uses a tweaked GH2 sensor.

      • dau

        Does that mean the g5 has the much desired multi aspect sensor?

        • It’s not enabled.

          • Martin

            No, it’s not there. Take a G5 and a G3 and look into the bodies through the lens mounts. The geometry is the same, hence either the G3 also has a disabled multi-aspect sensor or none of the two has.

        • homer

          the G5 has a revised version of the GH2 sensor, without the multi aspec. The patent was posted here

    • Bob

      The specifications for total pixels and usable pixels are different between the GH2 sensor and the GH3 sensor. Photographs of the sensor through the lens mount of each don’t look the same either.

      It seems very unlikely the GH3 uses the same sensor as the GH2. Whether it’s made by Panasonic, Sony, or another 3rd party I couldn’t care less. I do care how it performs.

      These shots show that the GH3 at least has the potential to be a significant improvement over the GH2. But they’re clearly not well controlled, they come from a camera with very pre-production firmware, and we shouldn’t jump to too many conclusions. I think they look very promising, though. Time will tell just how good this sensor is, or isn’t. In the mean time, it’s fun to look.

  • Frosti7

    I lihe it a lot!!! ;)

  • what exactly is the reason to set 200 as base ISO anyway?

    • ISO 200 offers the best all-around performance with this sensor when it comes to in-camera image processing.

      True ISO (however it is determined) is likely a little lower. Nobody is keeping you from shooting RAW at a lower ISO (via exposure compensation). For example, my E-620 has base ISO 200, but I get better results shooting RAW at ISO 125 or 160.

    • Bob

      The market is currently rewarding cameras with better high ISO performance. There seems to be a tradeoff, and it’s hard to make a sensor, especially one this small, that performs very well at low ISOs and at very high ones. So most manufacturers have abandoned low ISOs.

      Some DSLRs have extended low ranges, just like the extended high ranges, but they sacrifice some IQ in exchange for being able to use wider apertures or slower shutter speeds. You can do basically the same thing by overexposing in camera (+1 stop = ISO 100, +2 stops equal ISO 50), and pulling back in post, but you risk blowing the highlights. It will be interesting to see how much headroom images with this camera have.

  • Ad

    These files obviously are processed, they seem to show some smearing of details. The full-size files don’t look too sharp either, but that isn’t surprising because the dimensions are 6000×4000 px so they must have been upscaled from the original JPEG/raw size; the maximum pixelcount is 4608 at the long side for the GH3 according to its specifications.

    In other words, these files are not very useable to judge the sensor’s performance by itself. Personally I always shoot raw, so I’m not interested in processed JPEGs.

  • DJS

    I doubt it’s the Sony EM5 sensor or any other Sony unit. The total pixel count is different.

    No Multi Aspect Sensor
    Panasonic have to complete with the IQ of Olympus et al. There are clearly some compromises to achieve multi aspect. I assume they have chosen to drop the feature in favour of slightly better overall IQ.

    It’s probably a fair compromise, what would you choose: better IQ or multi aspect sensor?

    • Bob

      Overall pixel count is exactly the same as the new EPL5 and EPM5, and usable pixels is basically identical (16.1 vs. 16.05). Actual resolution is the same as on the new Pens, so I suspect the difference in how each company rounded.

      Everyone seems to believe the sensor in the new Pens is from Sony, so this one could be, too.

  • Hello just wanted to give you a quick heads up. The words in your
    content seem to be running off the screen in Safari.
    I’m not sure if this is a format issue or something to do with browser compatibility but I thought I’d post to
    let you know. The design look great though! Hope you get the problem fixed soon.
    Cheers

  • Wow that was strange. I just wrote an extremely long comment but after I clicked submit my comment didn’t show up. Grrrr… well I’m not writing all that over again.

    Anyhow, just wanted to say superb blog!

  • I visited many blogs except the audio quality for audio songs current at this site
    is in fact wonderful.

  • Hello every one, here every person is sharing
    these kinds of knowledge, thus it’s fastidious to read this blog, and
    I used to visit this webpage all the time.

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.

What are Cookies?
A cookie is a small file of letters and numbers that is stored in a temporary location on your computer to allow our website to distinguish you from other users of the website. If you don't want to accept cookies, you'll still be able to browse the site and use it for research purposes. Most web browsers have cookies enabled, but at the bottom of this page you can see how to disable cookies. Please note that cookies can't harm your computer. We don't store personally identifiable information in the cookies, but we do use encrypted information gathered from them to help provide you with a good experience when you browse our website and also allow us to improve our site. You can watch a simple video from Google to find more information about cookies.

Cookies used by our Website
The 43rumors website, 43rumors.com, uses the following cookies for the collection of website usage statistics and to ensure that we can . These are anonymous and temporary. By using our website, you agree that we may place these types of cookies on your device.
Read how Google uses data when you use our partners' sites or apps: http://www.google.com/intl/en/policies/privacy/partners/
Google Analytics Cookie Usage on Websites: https://developers.google.com/analytics/devguides/collection/analyticsjs/cookie-usage?csw=1#cookiesSet Addthis cookies: http://www.addthis.com/privacy.
Disqus cookies: https://help.disqus.com/customer/portal/articles/466235-use-of-cookies.
Vimeo cookies: http://vimeo.com/privacy.
Youtube cookies: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/171780?hl=en-GB

Disabling/Enabling Cookies
You have the ability to accept or decline cookies by modifying the settings in your browser. Please note however that by deleting our cookies or disabling future cookies you may not be able to access certain areas or features of our site. For information about how to disable cookies in your browser please visit the About Cookies website.

Close