skip to Main Content

(FT5) The new GH2 has a 18 Megapixels multi aspect sensor (16 effective Megapixels)


It took a long time to get reliable infos about the upcoming Panasonic GH1 successor. We already told you that the Panasonic GH2 will be announced on Tuesday September 21 (the first day of Photokina).

And finally we know the resolution of the new sensor!
The GH2 will have a new 18 Megapixel multi aspect sensor. Like the Canon 7D and Canon T2i (550D) this is the highest resolution sensor available for non-fullframe cameras (APS-C or FourThirds). But because it is a multi-aspect sensor the effective resolution will be 16 Megapixel. It is the highest resolution sensor ever used for a (Micro-)FourThirds camera. The new Olympus E-5 (to be announced on September 14) will not use that sensor.

We need your help to confirm the other GH2 camera specs we received. If you know something feel free to share your knowledge using the contact form on the right sidebar (you can avoid to give me your name or email address if you want to keep yourself anonymous). Or contact us at Thanks!

In the meanwhile the GH1 is becoming cheaper and cheaper almost eveywhere (Click here to check the current price). But keep in mind that the Gh1 hack doesn’t work anymore with the newest Panasonic firmware!

Follow 43rumors until the September 21 announcement! We will update this website with all last minute rumors, leaks and camera reviews!

Follow us on Facebook and Twitter. Subscribe our RSS feed.

  • Robin Lobel

    16MP… doesn’t sound a good news when low light is concerned !

  • marilyn

    thats the real deal guys great sensor ang has a high megapix

  • Alberto


    GH2 better sensor than E-5, Olympus must find another sensor supplier right now.

    Too much Mpx, we will see about ISO noise , uhmmmm

    • Inge – M.

      Is we trick by Olympus or other?
      But Panasonic go pixel war.

    • MAkeeNooN

      lol E-5 is a joke man.

    • Alfons

      Better? We’ll see :D

  • ANGRY Olympus Owner

    so, if this thing comes with the new features in the G2 plus this plus more new features

    I am keeping my E3 and getting this, even if low light is bad with the 16mp

    I wonder if they will sell body only or with a kit lens only. Hopefully that $800 14-140mm is not mandatory like with the GH1

    Is it possible to roll back the firmware on the new GH1s so the hack can be applied???

    Asking because if this GH2 is not to overpriced I was thinking about getting it as body only and getting a GH1 with the 14-140mm for like $999. Since the lens is $800 might as well pay an extra $200 and get the GH1 with it

  • Stig

    Well if this rumour is true AND the E-5 specifications are also true, then Olympus might as well give up and stick to endoscopes.

  • Bill

    More pandering to the “megapixel morons”. Up go the megapixels, down goes the image quality.

  • Boooo!


    * The E-5 has the GH1 sensor

    * The GH2 sensor will blow the GH1 sensor out of the water

    * Olympus will get the GH2 sensor two years from now, when its imaging division is closed and out of business

    RIP Oly :(

  • ecle

    The Multi Aspect Sensor is just pixel and size waisting. I want a true 3:2 Sensor.

    • spam

      If you want a 3:2 sensor then 43-rumors might not be the ideal place for you.

    • Archer

      Why? 3:2 is a compromise from the early days of Leitz in order to use cinema film. You only like it because you are used to it. It has a lot of disadvantages in compositional terms, and also for printing.

  • spanky

    While the resolution number is certainly impressive, and jawdropping (was expecting 16MP sensor with 14MP effective), I agree that we need to see what else Panasonic is doing to help boost the SNR of the sensor. If it has the new full-coverage microlenses and backside illumination, or at least some improved manufacturing process that reduces noise, it’ll rock! Can’t wait to see the new camera as it comes out.

    I agree that Olympus is barely hanging on, and hanging on to a past that only appeals to Olympus die-hards. To release a traditional DSLR like the E-5 when the world around them is going mirrorless is an interesting choice, but I’m sure it was driven by engineers and not marketing. MFT needs Olympus to be healthy, so they better get it in gear with some fresh new products soon.

    • ANGRY Olympus Owner

      a mirror-less pro or E5 is fine

      Away with the mirror
      contrast af on the GH1 is not that bad and with work & time it can be made better

      I would rather no mirror, it brings auto-focus to movie mode and face tracking to C-af while taking pics, I think it would be a wise move for oly to do it. Sony A55 is pretty unchecked right now

      They Better do it before canikon brings their E.V.I.L. cameras out of the closet

  • I’m causiously optimistic about this.. unfortunately I found the latest pany releases in the fz100 and lx5 didn’t improve, in fact regressed on low light ability while trying to stuff too much into the sensor… can this be the same issue?

    • Dun

      Right. An other example is that Panasonic TZ10 has much worse image quality than old TZ7, so TZ10 does not sell well. Panasonic should have understood that people have started ask higher quality, not higher pixels count.

      • Do

        Even in the comments here there are enough people who ask for higher pixels count, although they should know better. Of course , they are asking for better high iso perfomance as well. More agressive noise reduction is likely to be the answer.

        • “More agressive noise reduction is likely to be the answer.”

          that would be a disappointment, to say the least.

    • spam

      LX5 has the same pixel count as LX3. FZ100 has poorer high iso perforamcne than FZ38 because of the swithc from CCD to CMOS (or whatever Panasonic call their CMOS sensors). It’s sensor size that’s all important for high iso performance. Pixel count is fairly irrelevant, but more pixels can have a slight negative effect because more pixels increase the amount of sensor surface used by support electronics/non-pixel area.

      • Dummy00001

        > (or whatever Panasonic call their CMOS sensors).


        > It’s sensor size that’s all important for high iso performance.

        No. It is the pixel pitch aka dot pitch aka distance between pixels.

  • Dun

    That’s a very bad news. I hope it is not true. Even if GH2 sensor has been improved over GH1, it seems like GH2 will have similar or worse ISO performance than GH1 due to higher pixel count. We want better ISO at low light! Not more pixels!

  • Seriously – who needs 16 MP? Just two words: Noise, Diffraction. Should’ve stayed with 12 and improved the design. Add a thinner AA filter or even dump it completely. Use backside illumination. Etc., etc.

    • spanky

      One of the previous rumors was saying that the GH2 might indeed dump the AA filter altogether, and do Moire and other correction only in software. We’ll see if that comes true.

    • Gabi

      “Seriously – who needs 16 MP”
      Panasonic, since they also sell SDxx cards! ;)

  • The low noise performance of this sensor will be catastrophic – unless Panasonic has found a way to negate the laws of physics when creating this sensor. The pixel density of this sensor can be compared with sensors in Point&Shoot cameras.

    Let’s wait and see what Olympus has to offer with the E-5. I don’t trust any of these rumors at all.

  • AL

    Does it mean it will be capable of 1:1 aspect as well?
    I’m also fine with current Mpix count – in fact, keeping all these RAW files is already space consuming. But let’s wait for first tests though!

    • Inge – M.

      Well if we go bak to Olympus E-10 soon 10 year since, so have 2/3″ sensor and 4 mp.

  • Zonkie

    The E-5 is not direct competition of the GH2. They are different kind of cameras for different kind of users.

    Panasonic is surely happy to sell its sensors (you know, they are a company that wants to make money, sell what they make and all those things). So I don’t think they’ll “protect” their new sensor from being used in the E-5.

    Things that would explain the E.5 not having this sensor:

    – Not enough supply yet so it would make the E-5 ship even later (but then this camera is for the next 3 years, no need to rush with an old sensor instead of waiting a 3 months to ship with the new one).
    – Too expensive (but the E-5 is a high-end camera, no need to save in using an older sensor).
    – Olympus tried it and didn’t like it as much as the one from the GH1 (this is possible, maybe too many MP cannot be well digested by a 4/3 sensor, though the improvements in signal processing, backlight illumination, microlenses design, etc… should make up for it and even improve it).
    – Olympus will use a new sensor made specifically for them, with the improvements in the new one but with fewer megapixels (this would be a great option, but not sure it’s possible for economical reasons).
    – Olympus is giving up 4/3 so they don’t give a shit. The sensor in the E-5 will be the one in the E-620, not even the one in the GH1.

    NONE of the reasons above make much sense to me, so we will see what happens. Really soon :)

    • TempTag

      Maybe Olympus has no interest in a multi-aspect sensor?

  • NativeFloridian

    Can someone explain to me what a multi-aspect sensor is and what the benefits are? Thanks in advance.

    In regards to Olympus… seems to me like a square sensor would be good for a professional camera (PEN pro or dSLR) where post-processing is done almost all of the time. It would also have the marketing advantage of being able to claim more megapixels.

    • ANGRY Olympus Owner

      multi-aspect sensor:
      You can shoot pictures in 3:2 4:3 16:9 and 1:1 ratios

      3:2 ratio which is the same ratio of full-frame sensors
      4:3 ratio which is 43rd standard ratio
      16:9 ratio which is what HDTV’s ratio is (1920×1080 wide screen)
      and 1:1 which is a perfect square

      Multi-aspect not just one aspect, like the e3 which can only shoot 4:3 images which is one aspect ratio

    • spanky

      Multi-aspect is one of the key differences between the GH1 sensor and all the other MFT cameras out there. It allows for a constant angle-of-view regardless of aspect ratio, whereas the other MFT cameras are constrained by the dimensions of the sensor itself, which affects the AOV of the photos. There’s some graphics explaining the difference on the Lumix global website and I think on DPReview as well for the GH1.

    • Dun

      It allows wider view of sight at 16:9 with the same lens. I use it very often. It is very good. Other cameras just crop the pixels of a single size sensor to emulate different aspect ratios.

      • ANGRY Olympus Owner

        Good point dun,
        this is one of the major key advantages natvieflorida

        it just doesn’t crop pixels to get the other aspect ratios

    • spanky
    • NativeFloridian

      Thanks… your explanations along with the graphical explanation makes sense now. Appreciate your help.

  • Radi

    OMG, hoped they stay with the 12 Mpx as they did with 10 Mpx on LX3 -> LX5.
    We want better ISO at low light! Not more pixels!

  • fta

    please let the low light and high ISO noise be better than the GH1.. That’s all I ask for. A nice kit lens would be good too. Well, in exactly 2 weeks we will find out everything… I think I will stop visiting 43rumors for the next two weeks, this is nerve wracking :) I’ll take all the news at once :)

  • AL

    There’s no 1:1 on GH1, so doubtful it will be on GH2 as the sensor area would need to be much larger, no?

    • spanky

      My GH1 has 1:1. It’s not a square sensor if that’s what you’re implying (I don’t know of any digital camera with a square sensor), but you can take 1:1 aspect ratio shots with both the GH1 and I’m pretty sure with the other MFT cameras. You get slightly lower resolution in 1:1 over 4:3, which is where you get your max resolution, but on the GH1 1:1, like the other aspect ratios, maintain angle-of-view.

      • spam

        Spanky is correct, you don’t need a bigger (or multiformat) sensor to get 1:1, you just crop more. The advantage compared to cropping in post processing is that the viewfinder show you exactly what you get. GH1 and other MFT cameras have 1:1. So does LX3/LX5 and a number of cameras made by other manufacturers.

      • DroppingBy

        Actually the GH1 1:1 aspect ratio does not preserve angle of view like the other multi-aspect modes. It is just a crop of the 4:3 mode and thus does not preserve diagonal angle of view like 4:3, 3:2 and 16:9 modes.

        It useful to do in camera though as it makes it easier to compose. But that is about it.

  • you know my name

    should that sensor be 17.3 x 13.0, not 18 x 13.5?

    • spanky

      No, the sensor is larger than regular 4:3 sensors, just like on the GH1. It’s the only way they can implement the constant angle-of-view feature. That’s why it’s an 18MP sensor with an effective 16MP resolution in 4:3 aspect ratio (the highest resolution aspect ratio). In 3:2 and 16:9 mode you actually get a wider horizontal FOV from a sensor like this and the GH1 than you would from a traditional MFT camera.

  • Jason

    @Clark- the LX5 does not have as impressive of an LED screen as I expected. However, the shot to shot performance is quick, the images (even on auto) are phenomenal, the size and feel is excellent and the AVCHD lite is exactly what I needed for an occasional video clip here or there. Overall, I would say the LX5 improves on the LX3 in many ways (still it is overpriced, but that is really because it has no direct competition).

    • I suppose we’ll have to wait and see then. I bet no-one 2 or 3 years ago could’ve expected aps-c to reach 18mp by now, so yeah why can’t an oversized 4/3 sensor go 16mp effective?

      Anyway image quality is the absolute concern, so upping the resolution with all else remaining equal is not promising.

  • I have no objections to the higher resolution sensor as long as image quality is not compromised. The GH1 has excellent image quality for its sensor size and that was the primary reason I got one. If the higher resolution sensor results in significant image quality loss, then it is no longer viable for me. However if Panasonic can pull this off without significant loss of quality then more power to them.

  • ANGRY Olympus Owner

    Can some one help with my question

    Is it possible to roll back the firmware on the new GH1s so the hack can be applied???

    • kaine

      Nope. Unhackable. Currently there is no solution for the newer GH1’s regarding hacking. :(

      • ANGRY Olympus Owner

        are you serious?

      • ANGRY Olympus Owner

        Does the unhackable version firmware fix the 60i issue or is it left crippled?

        • kaine

          The newer firmware 1.34 is unhackable and is exactly the same as the old version except it is just not hackable. It still has the 60i problem. New GF1’s also have an unhackable firmware. Way to screw your own paying customers PANASONIC and attempt to kill a movement promotoing your products. I think Canon is the only company that gets it.

  • ken B

    If this GH2 has the same or better noise than than my EPL1 then i will be buying it.

    I am fully Micro 4/3 and i am lucky enough to be satisfied with the excellent IQ especially with my Pany 20mm F1.7 lens ( its a real cracker).

    All i need, not want, but need is a camera body like the G1 shape with a 0-90 moveable VF (like my Oly VF2) as this is good for low level macro work and a flash bracket for my fl-20/ flash ext cable.

    The full HD video is just a bonus for me.


    • spanky

      In all fairness you can get better noise performance from the current GH1 over your EPL1, so you don’t need to wait. Prices on GH1s are dropping all over the place.

  • stonebat

    anamorphic ratio 2.35:1 support would be super.

    • maxuser

      You can crop it from 16:9.

      • stonebat

        thats one way. but why another hassle? hate to buy anamorphic lens. automatic cropping at the sensor makes the framing so much easier.

        • have already asked for this 21:9 aspect ratio, I currently have one of the guide lines pulled down to aid composition then crop from 16:9, but 21:9 aspect ratio as native would be awesome (hope to see in the E5 and/or GH2)

  • Henrik

    Thanks for info. Glad to scratch that cam off my wish-list after reading the pixelcount.

  • yosemite

    Is there any experience based on past announcements when the camera will be available for sale? Does a sep 21 announcement mean it will be available from that day on, or could it be week or months later until we can get our hands on one?

  • Jason

    I still think the E-5 will beat the GH2 in image quality, among other things. Here’s a pop quiz for all you hot shots: How do you take good macro shots with an electronic viewfinder? Easy, you don’t, you need an optical viewfinder. The GH2 will surely be a great camera, just not on the same level as a true SLR. (If they can make an optical viewfinder that works on a MFT camera, then we can talk, until then it’s Fourthirds for me.)

    • Boooo!

      Erm, you take macro photos using live view and manual focusing.

    • spanky

      Erm, what does an EVF have to do with taking good macro shots? I’ve been taking great macro shots using my GH1 for the past year, as have many others. What’s the advantage of having an OVF to macro specifically?

    • hd72

      I prefer an electronic viewfinder with my manual lenses, especially for macro work, as the depth of field in your preview is exactly what you get in the final image.

      • ANGRY Olympus Owner

        Ture, you have the button to show the DOF on final image on a DSLR but it makes the image darker

  • calxn

    Thanks for the news. I’ve been waiting on GH-2 info to decide on staying with u43 or not. The noisy, tiny u43 sensor looks to get even noisier. Not at all optimistic for u43 now. Olympus needs to look for another sensor maker. Panasonic doesn’t know how to make sensors. When you can’t improve the performance, bump up the megapixels! Some sucker will buy it. Too bad all the good sensor makers (Sony, Canon, maybe Nikon?) are making APS-C sensors.

    • Dummy00001

      Have you missed the comparison where Sony NEX 5 was wiped floor with by GF1? First.

      Second. If read the rumors here for sometime, you might know that Oly routinely testing sensors from other manufacturers. Apparently nobody can beat Pannay at price/performance.

      Third. I have old Oly E-520. My friend has D90. Colleagues have 400D and 1000D. My Oly wipes them out simply because of superior lenses. Oly’s kit lens is above average. And my 12-60 at its price simply has no competition. What is the point of the larger more expensive APS-C sensor if most affordable lenses out there are crap?

  • Jason

    Clarification: The Live View or Electronic viewfinder works for some macro shots, but not for reflective pieces as well. Jewelry and watches is so reflective that an optical viewfinder is necessary for production shots. You will have such a hard time eliminating glare if you use the electronic viewfinder to compose a macro watch shot. I guess if you’re on a tripod it doesn’t matter as much, but handheld, the OVF is the only way for me (it’s faster and more accurate representation of the shot and the reflections especially).

    • ‘O_O’

      Noo.. problem at all with reflective jewellery or watches. The camera will adjust itself for the exposure on the lcd screen and EVF to compensate over exposure or glare. With magnified view, precise manual focus can be achieve.

    • Boooo!

      1) Meet your good buddy, the circular polarizer

      2) It is almost practically impossible to shoot macro handheld, because your DoF – even at f/11 and beyond – is a couple of millimeters at best, even on 4/3

      3) You aren’t even talking about macro, but closeups

    • I shoot hand held macro shots of jewellery all the time without any problems on my L10’s and GH1

  • Why do you guys always compare the two systems? It is sooo silly…

  • ANGRY Olympus Owner

    Away with the mirror

  • Inge – M.

    I belive GH2 sensor have better DR. so GH1 sensor.
    (GH1 sensor is 2 year old soon)

  • mmm, I really like the shape of 4×3 … its one of the things that got me into FourThirds

    I guess you don’t have to use the 16×9 (just like you don’t have to use the video camera bit), but I would hope that the viewfinder masks to the size rather than having a viewfinder with both 16×9 and 4×3 lines

    but, as every, another body with a FourThirds or mFourThirds mount is always good news :)

    • ANGRY Olympus Owner


  • dMS

    It seems that Olympus is now The only company to say that 12 MP is enough

  • Be careful when comparing those Panasonic plastic toys to any Olympus E-3 successor. The E-3 successor will be

    * sturdy and sealed – which is must have feature for people taking their gear into rough environments or backpacking
    * much faster in terms of supporting the already fast autofocus of Zuiko Pro lenses
    * having in body IS – which is why I will probably never invest into Panasonic bodies

    Panasonic cannot and will not offer this for MFT, at least not within the near future.

    So, any comparisons solely on a new Panasonic sensor whose pixel density practically implies it will perform crappy at higher ISO values is pointless.

  • iMikl

    Aren’t there any advantages….?
    In the last week I read people were complaining about E-5 specs. Only 12 Megapixels?!?!?!
    In this thread I read the total opposite.

    So tell me guys: What’s the truth about Megapixels?

    • PeterP

      Megapixels are in truth only effective for printing large-scale pictures while limiting the amount of scaling needed to do in order to achieve a print that can [say] be large enough to be a mural.

      In terms of the quality of a sensor, supposedly, the magic number is 12 MP as it allows for better dynamic range, better low-light ability and colors to be accurately represented per pixel over a sensor that may be 18+ MP and that is because the light the sensor takes in has to store the same amount of color in more pixels. At least, that’s what I assume, I could be completely wrong, but unless the camera is some sort of full-frame, or some medium-format SLR with 50+ Megapixel, in the more consumer based cameras a larger megapixel count could infringe on the key elements of photography.

      Last I recall, the Nikon D3s (12 MP) was quite a success in its low-light formula over the 16 MP 1D Mark IV and was able to capture more vivid images because of its smaller sensor.

    • spanky

      The truth is that there is no simple answer to the megapixel question. Keeping technology constant, generally speaking decreasing the pixel size means lower SNR and more noise. However, technology is not constant, and there are things manufacturers can implement in order to make smaller pixels have higher SNR and lower noise. The question remains to be answered for how Panasonic will deal with making the new sensor better. We’ll find out soon enough.

  • Psynoma

    Here’s a thought if you follow me here:

    1. The problem with increasing Megapixels is an increase in sensor noise due to wiring on the “front-illuminated” sensors. Right?

    2. Panny has been developing “back-illumiated” sensors for some time that dont have this problem.

    3. We have a solution to the sensor noise problem

    4. Throw in the new dual exposure sensor and what kind of genius do we have?
    i. Increased Resolution. (more megapixels)
    ii. Decreased noise. (Backlight tech)
    iii. Massively increased light sensitivity (Dual exposure sensor)

    Could it be as good as all this?

  • Psynoma

    “It’s difficult to apply backside illumination technology to large image sensor for comsumer model like MFT. There are some problems about heat and yield ratio.”

    So they would need something like that heat dissipation patent that has been filed then? Eh.

  • Mike

    Aren’t the naysayers a bit ahead of themselves when the pixel count isn’t confirmed from an official company announcement and nothing is known about the quality of the new sensor?

    I’d also rather have zero increase in pixel count from the GH1 but rather DR and noise improvements only but until I see something official and images from the new sensor, I’ll hold any praise or consternation.

    • PeterP

      Definitely agree with you there. I would be happy with even a low MP sensor as long as it was able to boast some amazing DR and extremely good low-light performance.

      12 MP is good enough for my purposes any who, if I need higher I’d probably get my feet wet with a PhaseOne or a Hasselblad.

      I do hope that they did make some changes in the stills department as far as the sensor. I wouldn’t mind a GH2 with the ability to capture same-quality images, if not better, than the 7D coupled with better video performance.

  • Jason

    Boooo! – I shoot macro shots all the time handheld, generally at f/4.0 or f/8.0 (depending if my flash is on or not). I have also tried a polarized (and even a low-light indoor polarize sucks for macro). And yes I mean macro, life size 1:1 or 1:2, depending if the adapter is on or not, and depending how you calculate the ratio (2x or no 2x).

    An EVF or Live View is ok, depending on the system, but the lack of image stability and OVF really make it hard to shoot macro on any MFT system. Although I have used my Zuiko glass on a MFT from Olympus and it worked ok, but I still prefer Four Thirds.

    What you guys must be talking about is non-glare macros or close-ups. I’m talking about items with glare, namely watches which have both a crystal and metal to compensate for. I shoot em handheld with an Oly and Zuiko 50 f/2.0 with or without flash and with or without extension to increase magnification (and the Zuiko is far better than the Leica MFT macro lens, that said Leica makes phenomenal lenses, just not the macro for MFT).

    Overall, this pro or semi-pro type of shooting is far better on something like an E-3 or E-5 or even a E-620, as opposed to the GH1. Obviously the GH1 is the current video leader and has a number of other nice features, including ergonomics, light weight etc…

    What the GH1 needs, is:

    1- More durable body
    2- Optical viewfinder
    3- Built in Image stability
    4- Battery Grip Add-on
    5- A Zuiko built macro lens

    MFT is dead!!!!!!! Long live FT!!!!!!!!!

    • spanky

      Do you own a GH1 that you’ve actually tried using for shooting macro? You don’t know what you’re talking about. Certainly there are limitations to the EVF, but the OVF likewise has limitations as well, so it’s a push. Macro isn’t one of those limitations for the GH1. I’ve shot objects with glare and whatnot, with no issues.

      Putting an OVF on the GH1 means bringing back the mirror. Good riddens! Now to get rid of the mechanical shutter and we’ll have a real camera that’s ready for the digital age.

      • Tom

        I, too, wish for the death of m4/3 as it’s taking priority away from the 4/3 system >:(

        • yugoslaw


          • Chris


    • ANGRY Olympus Owner

      It sounds like you need a e620 in your life, it fits perfect
      making some of those changes to the gh1 would defeat it entire purpose of it

    • Boooo!

      DoF on the 50mm at minimum focusing distance (and the 50mm is not a real macro lens, it only does 1:2 35mm equivalent) is 2.2mm total at f/4, and 4.4mm total at f/8. And you shoot that handheld? I have found that even heartbeats can be enough to throw the camera out of focus when doing macro.

      • mgs

        I see no problem in handholding that kind of macro shoots. I use E520 and sometimes flash – but only when using f12 and higher or when the light is bad. The IS in E520 is very helpful.

  • Jason

    @Spanky, and what are the limitations of an OVF? Do you even own a four thirds camera? It sounds as though you don’t know what you’re talking about. And you obviously have not shot watches, and definitely not handheld. Using an EVF or the Liveview screen is fine for some things which is why I like using the LX5 for a lot of situations, and why even an iPhone can be fun, but neither are for semi-pro or pro use.

    • ANGRY Olympus Owner

      OVF= you cant have focus tracking, you cant have face recognition, you cant have AF during video, when using live view there is delay while mirror moves out of way, the image on the EVF on GH1 is almost as big as the Can-1D

      I feel like an EVF would be great for a pro, I dont seem to understand how it is worse with glare next to a OVF.
      I thought EVF’s main problem is contrast AF frame rate in low light

      There have been many times when the photo I take looks slightly different then how it looked in the OVF on my E3.
      I thought a EVF would bring a more accurate representation of the photo before taken

      I think your issue might be with the lens, not the VF
      you cant really compare the 50mm zuiko to anything, its pretty much the best in it class

      I just dont understand

      • four thirds photo

        Because most pro’s know how to focus manually.
        Face recognition??? I think a pro knows when he is photographing a face. I really don’t see any use of face recognition on a pro camera. Especially when using very fast lenses, you should focus on the eyes.

        As long as we can shut those functions down, I do not mind having them on a camera.

        I have been photographing with manual focus for 15 years. Now I use the 4/3rds AF, for many occasions like portrait photography, manual focus is still the best way (for me).

        • ANGRY Olympus Owner

          not really for taking photos, but for video.

          not saying it will replace manual, just saying with a mirror its not really possible, It would be nice to have it on a pro for video

          Personally i am not much of a manual guy unless its during live view and i can crop in on the photo

          you are right
          I use the shoot wide open with the 35-100f2 alot an there are times when a neck and ears will be in-focus but a face wont, but I mastered how to use AF on certain parts of the face to get the best focus, then move the cam back to where i want the frame for the photo, its even harder with alot of motion

          I DO NOT believe face recognition will fix this, maybe with time and good programmers, but not with what they write for P&S cameras

          But still I think its something good to have and its only possible with an EVF

    • spanky

      +1 to what ANGRY wrote, plus with an EVF you get to see 100% of the image, not just a portion of it, you get to see the actual image as captured by the sensor not just a reflection on a mirror, AND you can overlay other information like histogram on an EVF that you can’t do with an OVF, meaning you don’t have to take your eyes off your composition.

      I may not own an FT camera, but I do own OVF cameras of all types, so I speak from experience having used both. Without turning this into a debate between OVF vs. EVF, it’s still clear you don’t know what you’re talking about when you’re discussing the GH1 EVF for your work. Perhaps you’re used to some older version of EVFs that haven’t worked very well in the past, but with good lighting there’s no issues, glare from sapphire glass included.

      Moving on… we’ve digressed quite enough from a discussion on the new GHx sensor.

  • TempTag

    If this rumor is true then I certainly hope Panasonic found some magical way to improve the DR and low light performance of the GH1 sensor. If not then this change is more about sitting on a store shelf next to the Canon 550d and 7D then image quality…

  • Jason

    The Zuiko 50 f/2.0 with or without macro extension tube is phenomenal, but I always use the OVF. I’m saying that the optical is the best way preview your shot with this particular lens. I don’t have any problem with it, I’m just arguing in favor of FT and optical viewfinders, at least for this kind of shooting. Handlheld macro shooting of watches with the Zuiko 50mm that is….. I’m saying an EVF cannot beat this style of shooting. And for this reason, I prefer FT until I find a better solution.

    If I was shooting on a tripod a lot, I would not care as much. But I seriously think my work shooting watches would be much harder with an EVF in place of my trusted OVF. I have a much easier time finding the correct angle, to keep glare of the sapphire glass of a watch, if I’m using the optical viewfinder.

  • Dan #2

    Strange findings keep popping up here. It wasn’t long ago that folk were hinting at a much improved 18mp sensor for the 4/3 system. Given that I will stand by my prediction (published quite some time ago) of a stacked sensor array similar to the Foveon design. But given the unlikely scenario that Olympus would go down the much debated Sigma Foveon sensor route I would put money on a Fuji EXR sensor with the possibility of a Fuji S6 Pro in the 4/3 mount. It wasn’t long ago deals were discovered about some kind of Fuji step into the 4/3 world. Perhaps? Food for thought. I am hoping for a stacked sensor myself. So so so many benefits.

  • Cliff

    It’s possible that megapixels can be increased and better noise performance can happen, it’s seen in aps-c and full frame sensors every generation (beside the jump from 6mp to 10mp back in the day)

  • Jason

    Spanky, it is obvious you don’t know what you are talking about. The EVF is not good enough for what I do, only OVF. You clearly, clearly, clearly, clearly, clearly, clearly, clearly, clearly , clearly don’t know much….

    Yes the EVF on the GH1 is very good, for an EVF that is. But it does not give the correct view for handheld macro shots where glare is a problem. Yes you can use it to avoid glare, but not as accurately as the optical. Don’t you understand how it works??? Obviously not, so let me explain, it is an electronic image, not the actual image, it is digital, whereas I want the optical view (I want what is really there and then based on experience I can get a much, much, much, much, much better shot with the true optical view than the digitized view. Then what I see optically becomes digital after pressing the shutter, but again it needs to be optical first.

    Ask anyone who knows anything, you are either confused or wrong or both. YOU CLEARLY HAVE NO CLUE WTF YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. CLEARLY

    • I’m no expert

      Jason, I am no expert, I don’t have a camera with an EVF, but I am thinking of getting one so could you clear something up. When we talk a photo, aren’t we ultimately taking an electronic image rather than an optical image? It would seem to me then, to be considerable benefits in seeing an electronic image through the VF. The question would then be: how accurate is the EVF in showing the final electronic image that will be captured? If a digital camera can take good macro photos with reflections, why can’t a good EVF show pretty much the same thing?

    • Voldenuit


      EVF is especially good for macro photography because you are seeing exactly what the sensor sees. Even the best OVF can suffer from backfocus problems because of unavoidable manufacturing and assembly tolerances in the mirror and lens assembly. At macro distances, these errors are magnified and can become evident even if the lens+body combo is perfectly adequate for other tasks.

      For most applications, OVF is better than EVF (less lag, faster AF). But for things like macro and astro-photography, EVF/Live View is hands-down better and they are the main reason Live View modes got implemented in DSLRs in the first place.

  • Psynoma

    Jason seems like he deserves to be ignored like a small child desperate for your attention.

  • Voldenuit

    Speaking as a m43 owner, I can say that more megapixels is *THE LAST THING WE NEED*.

    We already have a system that is rubbish at low light, and with the narrow DR, requires careful metering and composition in bright light so we don’t overexpose highlights. Increasing the pixel density only makes this worse, and whatever clever gimmicks Panasonic may have used to increase high ISO and/or DR, would have been doubly effective if they’d kept or lowered the MP count.

    I think I’m out of this format.

    • Dummy00001

      > I think I’m out of this format.

      It’s only a goddam rumor… Wait for the reviews.

  • This is certainly great news, since it indicates that Panasonic is rolling out their new semiconductor process, which with thinner gate widths allows Panasonic to further integrate more functions into the sensor, while preserving or increasing the actual light collecting photodiiode area and capacitor.

    This is a milestone in moving the Analogue/Digital interface closer to the photodiode itself, which will improve the signal-to-noise ratio, as well as increse the readout performance of the sensor.

    This is great news for the videographer, as well as for the still photographer.

    I don’t remember if the multi apsect ratio sensor is patented, but it’s an important feature for the FT & mFT applications.

  • Jason and Spanky, get a room. Or why don’t you both publish 10 macro shots each and we can all vote while you bash each other to death with your handbags.

  • Inge – M.

    Yes right, nMOS technology have room to big photodiode on every pixel area so CMOS.
    But i hope Panasonic star produce sensor by sensor partent so Panasonic advertise on 14 mai 2007 so use, lowpas higtpas and AA filter in every microlens so also is UV safe.

  • Jason

    Voiceoverman – this is a good idea, because what Spanky is arguing, is really that MFT is better than FT. He is not really experienced in macro photography, but he loves to argue for his beloved MFT system and EVF. Over 90% of what I do is macro and close-up product photography. He just doesn’t understand that OVF is best for the macro work I do. To say an EVF is better than an OVF (for what I do) is pure ignorance by anyone who thinks this. Really it is people trying to defend MFT, which I think is a fine system. However, FT is currently the better system for my type of work – no question.

  • MK

    trolltastic… you guys are e-thugging to the maximum right now. unfortunately its impossible to prove whose opinion is more informed on the matter so why keep trying? the world does not understand your genius

  • abas

    multiaspect sensor is a huge thing for video. in 16:9 22.5mm wide is wider than the canon aps-c (22.2) that means for video our lenses get 1.6x.

    • ANGRY Olympus Owner

      very good point

  • Inge – M.

    The is 22,5mm across sensor, but wide is ca.19,85mm in 16:9 aspect.

  • Jason

    MK – I agree and would provide samples to backup my claims, however, I probably should not reveal the my name, or more importantly the name of the site I work for. In an effort to stop the arguing, I will agree that the Live View is alright for macro, except in certain conditions where finding the exact angle is your only choice. (I think this is sort of why right angle finders are optical).

    • Tim

      Jason, forget this argument. Tell us more about the E-5. :)

  • Jason

    It will be revolutionary in many ways… It will rejuvenate the FourThirds system. It will be the basis for all future Four Thirds development. Excellent video, perfect glass optical viewfinder, remote flash control (without the need to pop-up the flash), horizon indicator, low noise, high dynamic range, multi-aspect ratio 16:9, 4:3 3:2 and 1:1, magnesium and titanium body (for lightness, strength and water-resistance), durable shutter, very unique sensor design, super high-res OLED 3.5″ articulating screen, 6 stops of built in image stability, 1080p/720p up to 60 frames AVCHD, super fast Live vIew autofocus – like GF1/GH1, dual memory slots SD and Compact – with custom write functions, more intuitive pro interface/layout on back and top of camera, studio Liveview for direct connect to computer…..and last but not least – free pack of stickers that says “My Oly crushes your Canikon!!!”

    • Tim

      Jason, that almost sounds too good to be true. I’m waiting with checkbook in hand. If you do know anything thanks for letting me know.

      The two things you probably can’t talk about are the sensor and the body style. Hopefully it’s robust but a little smaller than the E3.

  • yosemite

    Any idea about when the GH2 might be available, I mean how many weeks or months is it typically from announcement at photokina to arrival at the sellers?

  • Nyenyi

    Jason! Wake up!
    If that will be the GH2, what should be give to you the upcoming GH3 for change to it? :P

  • Skeptikal

    If that’s going to be the GH2 my hacked GH1 will still produce a much better video image with AVCHD @ 60 mbps (instead of the GH2 24 mbps bull**it).

    Why do you think Panacomic paniced and locked the firmware!

  • Rob lauren avenue additionally one of many globe’s nearly all sought after corporation

Back To Top

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,, 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:
Google Analytics Cookie Usage on Websites: Addthis cookies:
Disqus cookies:
Vimeo cookies:
Youtube cookies:

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.