skip to Main Content

GH3 gets DxOmarked! Is on par with the E-M5.


The Panasonic GH3 sensor finally got “DxOmarked”! You can read the full test at As you can see from the image on top the GH3 is basically on par with the other 16 Megapixel Olympus cameras. No surprise here. The real killer feature of the GH3 is his video quality which DxOmark doesn’t measure. DxOmark writes: “The Panasonic Lumix DMC GH3 is a very good camera, among the best tested by DxO Mark in this format. It is small and light and will make an excellent camera to travel with and fulfils all of the requirements that a serious enthusiast is likely to have. However, it is pricey for a hybrid and it has competition from several directions.

Meantime the GH3 is still sold out in US and will ship from February 28th only according to BHphoto (Click here). By the way, there is a $30 price drop on the Panasonic GH3 battery grip at Shop Panasonic.

  • JF

    Is it a Sony sensor ?? :D ok, I go out…

    • Duarte Bruno

      I was about to drop the same question.

  • Same sensor? I assume the figures can differ a little from each mesurement and from one sensor to another of the same kind. How many times does DXO labs measure on each camera, and do they use the average result or the best score?

    • peevee

      Their margin of error is pretty wide and can be seen in the tests of E-PM2 and E-M5, which we know have the same sensor. Something like 12% of ISO score. As much as they make out of the minuscule differences is funny. :)

  • joe

    lol sony sensor

    • Miroslav

      Indeed, Sony sensor in both cameras. It’ll be interesting to see whether that’s only a stop-gap measure for Panasonic or they’ve given up on large sensor production completely.

  • Yun

    Congratulate to Pana , finally back to business .
    Considering OMD is almost 1 year older than GH3 , I expect GH3 should edged it in sensor performance .
    Whatever it is , it already over .
    I’m more interest to know the status of Pana’s new generation sensor to be installed , that is what I want to get .

  • Cam Era

    The real question, how is it the E-PM2 edges out both?

    • Garypen

      Flawed test, not worthy of the obsession some consumers seem to have with it? Or, something.

    • _katira_

      Is there any camera out there without a Sony sensor ? Nikon, Olympus , Panasonic ;-)

      • Ryan


      • Miroslav


      • Reggie

        And not all Nikons have Sony sensors, either.

    • spam

      Sample variations explain the differences. DxO doesn’t consider differences of less than 3 as significant.

    • Chris

      Looks like it is time for me to sell my E-M5 and pick up an E-PM2!

    • beautemps

      E-PL5 and E-PM2 have a weaker or no AA-Filter.
      That was claimed by an Oly representant

      • M

        But it was the revealed that the Olympus employee gave the wrong information. It has the same AA filter as the OM-D EM-5.

    • rrr_hhh

      Confidence interval : the difference is so small that it can’t be statistically significant.
      That or Olympus tweaked the sensor a little differently : it has slightly less DR 0-.1 EV, but also a little less noise (-120) but it represents less than a 1/3 stop difference (one stop would push you from 800 ISOs to 1600) very little in this context.

      • hgfr

        I think that in camera RAW files are not as RAW as we think with many if not all cameras doing stuff to their RAW files before we see them , such as NR etc which probably explains the small differences between cameras using the same sensor

  • This is a strong evidence to show that OM-D and GH3 share the same (Sony) sensor. The result is very-very close!

    • He we go again…

      Yeah Right?? Like NO ONE ELSE can make a sensor to match very closely what Sony has.. It’s just not POSSIBLE.

      • Reggie

        It’s not just that they’re similar. Go compare the cameras, and look at the detailed measurements. The graphs are literally ON TOP of each other. It’s not just these topline scores, but it’s nearly impossible for two difference sensors to have the same characteristics across their ISO range in DR, color sensitivity, and tonal range. Typically, two sensors with nearly identical scores as the screenshot, but that have difference sensors (not at all impossible) will have different curves when you view the detailed data.

        These two are basically the same graphs. Strong evidence that it’s the same sensor. That’s not a sure thing, someone will just need to do a tear down to find out for sure.

        • Ignorant Fanboys

          I don’t care if the sensors matched exactly! If you think Panasonic is going to put a Sony sensor in their top camera, then you got to be dumb. That’s just stupid.

          • peevee

            If Nikon can, why not Panasonic? And camera and microelectronics division are separate, Pana camera division losing money, why would they risk their jobs trying to put incompetitive sensor (see G5 for example of what Pana has) into their top-of-the-line camera? They need to sell cameras, not support incompetent boss of another division.

            • Why you mean Sony produce an 4/3 sensor, so Sony not need self ???
              but an sensor by new tech and characterization to Panasonic and Olympus. LOL

              • If you have the specifications and the money (lots of money) and sony has the capability, they would make things for you.
                There are 3 ways of getting things from Sony.
                1. buy it already made. It has Sony design, and intelectual Knowledge and a Sony brand/Logo somewhere.
                2. Go to Sony and ask them to manufacture an Item to your design. It will have your logo on it.
                3. Go to Sony and ask them to modify an already existing Sony design for exclusive use by you. Depending what is added on, changed,the costs and conditions will depend on whose logo it carries
                Samsung makes lots of parts for Apple.

                • Ahh Panasonic is not like this, nice it`s so many cool happy`s so is there in Sony. ;-)

      • SammyH

        The sensor in the Nikon D5200 is Nikon designed and manufactured by Toshiba yet it manages to be better than the Sony 24mp sensor in the A77 in every area|0/%28brand%29/Nikon/%28appareil2%29/734|0/%28brand2%29/Sony

        • peevee

          Within margin of error again. And who said it is “Nikon designed”? The one in D3200 is Nikon designed, not in D5200.
          And something tell me that the D5200 sensor is the result of cooperation between Sony and Toshiba in sensor production.

          • HHGD

            Nikon said it is Nikon designed .Man,you guys here are bonkers lol So let me get this straight Sony were kind enough to help Toshiba fabricate a Nikon designed sensor with no financial gain coming to Sony, that kind of thinking could explain some of their huge losses ,

            • That is not what he said, I don’t know if what he said is correct, nor am I interested. But what you say is not compatible with his comment. Try reading it again.

    • jim

      No I think panasonic will be making this one – they have too much invested – and the Top chip they make they keep for themselves only (GH1,2) so I expect that they are fairly similar production level and technologys as Sony – Hopfully it means Panasonic can make a chip as good as Sony – then we can expect some magic when they add the diffraction filter technology…. that will give the GH3 1 stop over the OMD!!! sweet!

      • beautemps

        Go on dreaming…

      • Stu5

        jim it is obvious that it is a Sony sensor. This would have been too much of a leap of improvement for Panasonic to make based on their previous sensors. Also the graphs are too close match. It’s a Sony sensor.

        • My Gosh

          GIVE ME A BREAK!!
          Have you all ever thought that the Sensor in the EM5 COULD BE a PANSONIC SENSOR? What if someone exposes the GH3 and finds out that its a Panasonic Sensor? Will you all STILL think the EM5 has a Sony sensor??


          • Okympus president Hiroyuki Sasa clearly said the EM-5 has a Sony sensor.

            • fdgduj

              Olympus come out with different statements every other week about this that and the other and lets face it they are not renowned for honesty

              • You do have a point there.

            • He say we use Sony sensor in the last product then 03.07.2012, but day before come Olympus by IX3 so is an microscope, so point is Olympus IX3 use Sony sensor, but i is not interested in IX3 for street photography. :-P

          • Anonymous

            Why don’t Panasonic come forward and defend “their” sensor if the E-M5 sensor is theirs? If it is, so be it. At the end of the day, it doesn’t really matter. I applaud Panasonic for its sensor advancements and commitment if it is theirs.

            If I developed a piece of tech and was very proud of it, and everyone else is saying that somebody else made it, I would be infuriated and aggrieved. I would make sure that people knew that it was my work after all, I would prove that it was so with undeniable evidence, and I would get on with life afterwards.

            It also doesn’t make sense if it is Panasonic’s own sensor, that they would give it to Olympus to use to refresh its entire 2012 m4/3 lineup, including the entry level E-PM2, before Panasonic have their flagship camera the GH3 out on the market with their own best ever 4/3″ sensor. Unless Olympus paid considerably more than the going price for the privilege, and Panasonic said, “Yep, okay!” But I doubt that scenario, seeing the state of Olympus’s finances in the past few years.

          • Rchard

            The reason that many belive that the sensor i EM-5 is made by Sony is that when Olympus used Panasonic sensors they always got old hand me down sensors. Now suddenly Olympus got a sensor that, at that time, was better that anything Panasonic had. Why would Panasonic suddenly give Olympus a better sensor than they had in their own cameras, at that time?

            • Chez Wimpy

              >The reason that many belive that the sensor i EM-5 is made by Sony is that…

              …the president of Olympus came right out and said it was.

            • If Olympus will or can pay right price for sensor is this not problem.

  • hunter

    I think that was expected because GH3 is rumored to be using same sensor. The only interesting thing I see in the E-PM2 has higher score for Low light ISO than both GH3 and OM-D. How is that possible? Isn’t E-PM2 using the same sensor as the other two cameras?

    • jim

      my guess is maybe a slightly diffrent Bayer filter arrangement – for the OMD they used a better arrangement for colour and DR but on the EPL5 they have an arrangement that is less colour data but more light levels… ie diffrent amounts of red, green and blue pixel spots – giving slightly diffrent results. – or it could simply be the amplifiers (if these are not fully digital outputs) or the processing algorythems used to render the image from the RAW data.

    • Fepate

      If you look at other cameras that have the same sensors you’ll notice that the ISO score has quite a bit of scatter in it.

    • Paul

      It’s because E-PM2 lacks low pass filter on the sensor. ;-)

    • Agent00soul

      Sample variation. The difference is totally insignificant.

      • caver3d

        Absolutely correct. As someone who has a long history with scientific instrumentation, those slightly different values are due to inherent variation during analysis – which is always expected. Thus, a score of 71 is essentially equivalent to 72. The three cameras and their sensors are basically EQUIVALENT.

  • MarcoSartoriPhoto

    Now Ican sleep better! Lol! :D

  • Jankoff

    Good reason to buy the epm2.

  • There’s so much more to a camera then a sensor. These tests are silly and have no baring on the overall performance of a camera.

    • Amen!

    • Tron

      Right on… The GH3 has to be used to be appreciated.

      • Totally. I’m waiting on my fourth subject today for an editorial assignment. Every shoot today was at different locations and the looks were all done in camera shot in less then 20 minutes.

        After every shoot I wifi the pick to my phone via lumix link and email them to my editorial client.

        No computer just shooting to my Galaxy S3. I love shooting like this.

        • caver3d

          Hey, Giulio, don;t you have a pimped E-PM1? You need to do the same thing to the E-PM2!

          • I sure do have a pimped out EPM1 but I don’t have a EPM2 so I can’t. I do have a EPL5 though ;-)

  • Finally a Panasonic camera that is better, according to DxOmark, than my GH1.

  • true homer

    Good grief the sensor on either of those cameras is not Sony! SONY DOES NOT HAVE A LICENSE TO MAKE LIVE MOS SENSORS. The site that started the rumor took the page with the rumor down and clarified things got lost in translation! Olympus had not signed with sony when the omd was made!!!! Aaaaaaaaahhh theres no killing a rumor!!!!!!

    • Steve

      Olympus CEO already stated that sensor is from Sony. Also, Live MOS is just marketing terminology. Nothing special hardware wise with Live MOS

      • true homer

        No he didnt, and no it isnt. What he said was mis translated and then taken down by the site who originally published it. And live mos is very different from cmos

        • true homer

          And even if it was the same just using the term would get you into trouble with panasonic. Now dont you think that if sony supplied olympus for the first time they would have plastered exmor all over the place and not a panasonic exclusive term?

          • sgoldswo

            Please explain the differences between Live MOS and CMOS… I’m waiting…

          • Sony Live MOS

            Hey, sue me Panasonic. I made a Live MOS. Better than what you could do too. LOL. That’s ok. We’ll still sell you our sensors for your compacts. No hard feelings. We’ll get the next 4/3″ sensor ready in no time. Don’t call us, we’ll call you!

          • Do

            Since the Four Thirds format is nearly eclusively used by Olympus and Panasonic, it’s quite clear that whoever made this sensor made it for these two companies. So it’s not impossible Sony manufactures them according to the wishes of Olympus and Panasonic and they brand it with their trademarks afterwards. AFAIK Sony even silently provided sensors for a part of Samsungs Galaxy S2 production, while others were made by Samsung themselves, but of course they weren’t marketed differently. You could argue that Olympus was the first company that used this new sensor generation and Panasonic later climbed on the bandwagon (which btw. is also the key argument that it’s at least not a Panasonic Sensor), but I’ve often read that “Live MOS” is a registered Olympus trademark (which is a little bit strange, I have to admit).

          • If Olympus contract anybody to supply a sensor to a turnkey specification. Then Olympus can call it any of their registered names or a new name. The supplier, be it Sony or Woop Woop electronics, has NO right to name it. It belongs to Oly, it is an oly product. If Oly buys a stock part number from a supplier to use in the manufacture of an oly product then its is just an external supply part, like a nut, a spring, a SMT resistor or stock EVF.
            I believe Livemos is Oly not pany.

          • teruetr

            While I am aware that Panasonic developed the livemos sensor it is bizarrely copyrighted by Olympus as a trade mark so they are free to use it

      • Sasa from Olympus say the last producer use Sony sensor, and day before come Olympus by IX3 so use Sony sensor, but if the new sensor from Panasonic is so good the not can use name Panasonic sensor can we call it Leica sensor. LOL :-P

        • true homer

          IT WAS A MIS TRANSLATION! the poeple who posted the rumor said so themselves

          • True homer give up

            This site has been taken over by rabid Olympus/Sony Fanboys who blinded by Sony sensors, Silver Bling and Overpriced Black Lenses dubbed “Limited Edition”.
            There is no rationalizing with them, as some are so blind, that if Solympus told them the world was flat and their sensors were from Mars, they would believe them.
            Panasonic continues to work on sensor technology, yet they believe the GH3 has a Sony sensor. Hahahaha!

            • true homer

              how does it continue to make sense to anyone???

          • Chez Wimpy

            Oooh noes! How can weez translate this?!?! 「OM-D E-M5のセンサーはソニー製」とオリンパス笹社長が発言

  • Robbie

    I think the years of having the same inferior sensor from Panasonic certainly polish up Olympus’ wonderful skills in sensor tweaking.

  • jack sprat

    I bought an E-PM2 on sale over the holidays thinking I would get a bargain E-M5, but the color noise (in RAW) was so bad I didn’t use it above ISO 800. Also, I couldn’t stand holding it with anything but a pancake lens, it has an uncomfortable grip.

    I got rid of it a few weeks ago. I’ve used a friend’s E-M5 and didn’t like the interface, neither hardware nor software, so that was out. I was thinking of going back to a DSLR when I saw the GH3 in stock and ordered it after some quick research (very quick).

    Damn, what difference. The low light score is the lowest of the three, but you wouldn’t know it looking at the files in Lightroom. I find it much cleaner and acceptable up to 3200. More important to me, the dynamic range is firmly in DSLR territory.

    The GH3 is largely being ignored because of the price, but if it can come down to $999 for the body, we will see a surge of interest from stills shooters. This is the MFT body to have right now.

    • Robbie

      Did you leave the auto gradation on?
      I haven’t used a GH3, I am sure it’s a great camera.
      Your description regarding the noise of the Olympus cameras are contrary to my experience though.

      • MarcoSartoriPhoto

        I had no “problems” with my OMD-Em5, and I love to shoot at low light with fast lenses. Anyway, my higher ISO is set to 1200/1600. Maybe lenses do the difference. The first thing I turned off from the camera was “wb auto warm tones” (purple menu). Noise reduction set to Auto. Noise filter set to Low.

        • digifan

          Well, I can afford going to ISO 6400 occasionally and that is also my ceiling setting.
          The noise at 6400 is still very minimal and not at all disturbing in print at all.
          But still I try always to stay at lower ISO’s, so 1600 is normally my highest level.
          And true you have to switch of the warm color for WB and switch off auto gradation.

      • jack sprat

        @Robbie – I don’t recall, but you are probably right. User error is usually the problem. In any case, I’m just glad to have found a mirrorless camera thats suits me, I wasn’t looking forward to returning to a DSLR.

        • rewteryuu

          The biggest problem for the E-M5 is the insane hype that Oly fanboys have given it with all sorts of wild claims apparently it is as good as the D800 LOL. The reality by anyone making an honest appraisal is that it is less than one stop { 0.78} better than the GH2.Set NR off in camera and in ACR or whatever you use and the truth shall reveal itself.
          Now , before the Olyboys get too upset the E-M5 { that’s its name by the way} is an excellent camera with a great feature set especially the 5-AXIS IS, which is the main reason I bought it , as the IS works wonders with the fast primes, if you are shooting static subjects it is amazing how low a shutter speed I can get away with using my 25mm or 45mm it also works very well with macro as long as the subject is not moving. But the hype is way over the top,I use it side by side with the GH2{for video mainly} and for nearly all my shooting you would be hard pushed to notice a difference. Where the E-M5 comes into its own is in specialist areas such as mentioned above and it really shines, buy please don’t get caught up in the hype.

    • rrr_hhh

      The sensors ar virtually the same if you are shooting raws. Panasonic may use a stronger noise reduction in the jpegs (?).
      Choising between the two comes down to features, size and price. But not to IQ.

  • pete

    I don’t care very much about dxomark, but it is nice to see how much better the new mft sensors are. You both make a very good job with very good cameras!

  • Bob B.


    • DxOontheMarkAgain

      Bob who?………. Did someone say something? No, must be just an annoying B. buzzing again. Back to work.

      • Bob B.

        …more like DxO Off The Mark Again……….zzzzzzz

        • DxOontheMarkAgain

          The B. buzzes yet again!………. While DxO is right on the Mark and on the victory march!

          • digifan

            I think Bob is right.
            There’s no way to know their tests are the real deal. They tell us how they do it, but their software is not open and transparant so no way off knowing they don’t miss something etc.
            Their testing method is not an ISO standard etc.
            They are foremost a commercial company that have one goal : make money by selling their software, to as many parties possible.

            • I KNOW Bob is right.

            • DxOontheMarkAgain

              “They are foremost a commercial company that have one goal : make money by selling their software, to as many parties possible.”

              A commercial software company that aims to make money by selling software to as many users as possible….. Is that like a restaurant whose goal is to make money by selling food to as many diners as possible? What a crime against humanity! This should be reported to the authorities immediately: a commercial company wants to make money by selling goods!

              PC and computer hardware reviewers and enthusiasts have used benchmarking software for years. They are useful. Many are free. Some are paid suites. If you test a lot of hardware or have a lot of computers, it is worth getting the full paid suite. They can also help to diagnose problems.

              DxO is a similar sort of deal in the digital photographic world. Use it if you find it helpful. Ignore it if you don’t. It’s just another piece of information that can help those who see some benefit in it. People who complain about DxO and dismiss it aren’t ignoring it at all. They are being bothered by something that they say is irrelevant to them and their photography, yet they get worked up about it when results are posted at DxO. Therefore, it is relevant to them. Just not in a positive way.

              • “A commercial software company that aims to make money by selling software to as many users as possible….. Is that like a restaurant whose goal is to make money by selling food to as many diners as possible? What a crime against humanity! ”

                Not a crime at all, but a motivation to skew results in a to them favorable way. That is not to say they are actually doing this, but, before actually trusting their results I’d rather want transparency and convincing evidence of them NOT doing so. See, neutrality is not a given, but is a requirement for useful benchmarks, and trust in neutrality has to be earned.

                Just seeing the way in which they do lens testing and then come to a conclusion is enough reason to doubt their neutrality, even more so when their conclusions contradict real world results. Comparing lenses between systems is pretty pointless, something which they mention themselves even, yet they produce an overall score that is exactly that, a cross-system comparison.

                Your reference to computer benchmarking software is a good one. Everyone who understands the technology involved also knows that such benchmarks give interesting results for numerical comparisons, and that it is possible often to predict which of a group of computers might be most useful for a certain application, given the differences are pronounced enough, but that benchmarks are also highly artificial, and do not give a real-world representative indication of performance. Real-world applications are too complex for that, and actually proving which system provides the best performance for a specific application is not done with benchmarking software, but with actual real-world applications, representative simulation of real-world use, and profiling.

                Oh, and last but not least, any difference that does not show in real-world pictures is irrelevant unless you are not interested in the result but in the technology itself.

        • Joe Kingston

          Yes .lets ignore rational scientific data freely available with a full explanation of methodology to listen to Oly fanboys.I have used several digital camera formats covering several makers and the DXO results strongly correlate with the real life usage. Ignore the overall score and look at the data in the charts.The O-MD is not even a stop better than the GH2 which is a good advance but certainly not a miracle. It is a great camera with awesome tricks up its sleeve

          • Bob B.

            You say that “DxO is rational scientific data” and in the next sentence you say to ignore that data “ignore the overall score” ???…and then what, draw your own conclusion from the data?
            Joe…the overall score “IS” the DxO data…and it is ALWAYS ridiculous whether it is pro-Olympus, pro-Nikon or whoever. I am better off to just pull a camera from the ether and just proclaim it…based on voodoo…just as meaningful.
            DxO is laughable to this photographer…

            • teruetr

              Joe K is right the overall score is based solely on low ISO performance and thus not fully relevant across the board. The data charts give excellent information which is not difficult to understand or interpret. You seem to be of the “I don’t like the results so they must be wrong” , let me guess Olympus fan ?

              • Bob B.

                Laughable response.

                • fdyhuu

                  Would it really be worth while to give a detailed response to your stupid post.Olympus fans have been bitching about DXO for years.Mainly because DXO results show that larger sensors do better[who would have thought that ?}I guess the guy hit the nail on the head another deluded Olympus fan. Don’t worry you are not alone Olympus fanboys are like cockroaches you let one in and next thing you know they have overrun the place. There are forums all over the net where the same Olympus nutters have destroyed the worth of the forum due to attacking anyone who doesn’t toe the line.

                  • Bob B.


          • Please provide info on this “rational scientific data” Where can it be found? All we get at the moment is rubbish from OXO sorry Dox, or is it Dxo. That just does not correlate to the beautiful images from Robin Wong, Ming Thein and many, many other real people. I am sure both Pany and oly users are interested in your supplier of “rational scientific data”

            • BobMiller

              “Please provide info on this “rational scientific data” Where can it be found? All we get at the moment is rubbish from OXO sorry Dox, or is it Dxo. That just does not correlate to the beautiful images from Robin Wong, Ming Thein and many, many other real people. I am sure both Pany and oly users are interested in your supplier of “rational scientific data”

              The data correlates exactly with the methodology of the scientifically controlled tests on RAW image quality as explained clearly by DXO . You are sadly mistaken if you take the word of paid shills like Robin Wong as fact . There are Olympus fanboys claiming that the E-M5 is on par with the D800 which is clearly nonsense yet you are suggesting that I should trust the views of these “real people “. All cameras from any maker are capable of delivering beautiful images under the right circumstances no one has said otherwise.

              If ,you want a transparent way to compare cameras. Download the RAW files from Focus Numerique for any camera they cover {they are the only review site with consistent illumination} turn off all NR in ACR and look at the honest data. You are clearly another Olympus fanboy working under the premise that the only useful reviews are those which sing the praises of Olympus. I was amused recently when Lenstip the once darling site of the FT/mFT crowd due to them not using LW/PH {which is by far the best way to determine final output image quality camera + lens} which made the FT/Mft lenses look better , becoming pariahs for suggesting the 17mm F1.8 was not all that was claimed. The opinions of users is one of the very worst ways to get reliable data about a cameras performance, especially if it involves Olympus as they have way too many blind fanboys, If I was to belive them the E-M5 is more than 2 stops better than the GH2 { reality less than one } as good as the D800 { seriously lol} and all kinds of nonsense that anyone whop looks at NR off RAW files can convincingly disprove .

              • “Download the RAW files from Focus Numerique for any camera they cover {they are the only review site with consistent illumination} turn off all NR in ACR and look at the honest data. ”

                That is actually a good idea, as long as you also realize that not all noise is equal, and that the effectiveness and impact of reducing noise also depends on the exact nature of the noise.

                Hence, your suggestion is a good start, but not the whole picture either.

              • A picture is worth a thousand words. A picture or photo is made for appreciation or memory keeping.
                A Photo is to be looked at by eyes. The individual then makes a subjective assessment of the picture. Dxo does not fit in here anywhere, unless they make glasses.
                So the image takers and not the measurers are the correct and appropriate test of a camera.

                • HHGD

                  “So the image takers and not the measurers are the correct and appropriate test of a camera.”

                  The problem with that is that some buyers have such a wild need to justify their purchase that they claim that their camera can do miracles {IE:apparently the E-M5 is as good as the D800 with an awesome 6400ISO LOL]which,while amusing to the informed is not so much fun for anyone who naively believes them.For most people in most shooting situations a decent P&S is good enough you just need to look through any of the big photo hosting sites { Flickr etc}to see the truth of that.The further you deviate from typical [ decent lighting etc}shooting scenarios the more important image quality becomes. If you want the best C-AF, best DR, highest resolution best high ISO performance or any other unique feature the more it pays to look at what is available , and controlled RAW test shots will paint you a far clearer picture than the rantings of an over exuberant fanboy or the equally deluded rants of a troll.

                  • The image takers yes.
                    Not the pathetic writings such as you have placed above.

                    The image is the true test.

                    What do you think cameras are for? Well what are they for?

            • DxOontheMarkAgain

              LOL you trust your ageing, failing eyes to judge a camera’s output, watching overcooked overprocessed thumbnail sized images from walking paid and sponsored informercials Wong and Thein and Huff’n’Puff and whoever else. Let’s just trust yours and other WongTheinHuff worshipers’ biased eyepinions from now on.

              Next time I need to buy a computer, I won’t bother researching the proven, industry standard CPU, GPU and motherboard benchmarks that all the trusted hardware testers use. I’ll base my purchasing decisions on some random forum fanboys’ posts who say that a 1GHz Celeron single core CPU with 512KB cache for $5 unopened box on ebay is enough to run all my apps for the next ten years because he reckons it runs awesome on his machine and Notepad and Calculator run superfast no problems!

              • Bloody stupid comparison.

                A picture is made to be looked at. That is its purpose. That is why it was made. The eyes are used for this purpose. Or have I missed something the Americans have not patented.

                A PC is a load of components (controlled by smoke) that are designed to interact with an operating system and some application software to manipulate ones and zeroes over a given time period.

                A picture is for appreciation or the memory of something. A computer is for manipulation of 1 and 0. When I want a picture taking machine I look at images taken by others. When I want a 1 and 0 manipulator I look at what it can do and how fast with its 1 and 0 manipulations, not the case it come in.

                Any one stupid enough to buy a computer on the internet because of the wording used to describe it by the seller without looking around at information on the product deserves to waste their money and should continue feeding the fairies at the bottom of the garden.

                Yes, computers use smoke to work. Once the smoke gets out of any part, that part will not work again.

          • rrr_hhh

            And the E-M5 is the same as the GH3 but was issued 3/4 of year earlier. At the time it was a breakthrough for MFT, hence all the excitation.

  • kavat

    Ok so similar performances to a 1 year-old sensor… Good luck with that pana.

    • you make one year old technology sound like deprecated. Man we live in a surfeited world! :D

    • BobMiller

      @ Kavat
      The E-M5 was announced in Feb 2012 the GH3 in September 2012 7 months apart hardly a big deal when previous Olympus cameras all used a sensor first seen in 2008

  • Nawaf

    So if it’s the same sensor… why is it that Olympus doesn’t have an ISO lower than 200? I mean even if it’s worse in DR I don’t think anyone would mind since we are limited on the shutter speed side.

    • jhdgf

      The e-m5 does have an ISO lower than 200 in fact its 200 ISO is actually 107 and its ISO throughout the whole range is the same stop short of what is claimed. Its a nice simple way to “improve” the camera scores by simply lying about the real ISO , the ISO standards { yes there are more than one !} even allow for this.

      • You are incredibly out of date on that one.

        • fdyhuu

          just because the ISO standard allows cameras to decide from a couple of options to set ISO doesn’t change the influence that this has on results of reviews sites many of whom do not check images at optimum exposure.

          • The ISO standard chosen by a manufacturer can be from a choice of 5. Including one that allows them to pick their own. But they should indicate the one they picked.

      • DXO place neutral grey by 18% black, but Olympus fetch in near 2 stop more in it on the dark side so light side, not bad this.

  • Sum

    If you check SNR 18%, both OM-D and GH3 are not much improved than Pana’s sensor (G3, GH2,..). So forget about the sensor stuff. Pick up your camera and go outdoor.

  • I just ordered GH3, because the movie machine inside it tipped the scale for its favor instead of OMD. I also like the articulated rotating back display of GH-series far better than the OMD, which actually seemed a bit pointless when I was trying it out for a while last spring.

    But now I can rest assured I am not losing ANY still quality either when sticking with Panasonic…although some people seem to bitch awful lot about “one year old OMD yada yada”. One year is still only one year in sensor development. Give it two-three years, then you might actually start seeing some difference…

  • hlbt

    100+ comments and I wonder why everyone’s either anti-Oly or anti-Pana. I own Oly and Pana, both body and lens, and I’m happy with both.

    Additional food for thought:
    The headline “GH3 gets DxOmarked! Is on par with the E-M5”
    can be re-read as “GH3 gets DxOmarked! Is on par with the E-PM2”.


    • QBNY

      This Website and this Website alone has me anti-Olympus. Mark my words, because of the Idiotic Olympus Fanboy nonsense at 43Rumors, I would NEVER, EVER purchase a Olympus Product EVER AGAIN.
      Trust me when I say I was relieved of getting rid of the 45mm Bling-Bling lens on eBay.
      I don’t want nothing to do with that company, nor it’s fanbase.

      Only reason why I still come here is for the Panasonic news, that’s it.

      • Sure QBNY, luckily Panasonic fanboys don’t exist, and those that are around despite this are totally realistic.

        I suggest you buy products because they fit your needs within a budget that you want to afford, and skip them when they don’t. Your response is really just as silly as the responses of those blind Olympus shills.

        (proud owner of both Olympus and Panasonic cameras and lenses)

      • Anonymous

        Why bother coming here then? You can get the same news, even more, from other forums and blog sites. Unless you’re a glutton for punishment or on some vigilante crusade waiting to pounce on anything you deem as pro-Olympus and anti-Panasonic. Enjoy the pain, if you so wish.

        • QBNY

          Name one… Name a couple.. You’re right, I don’t need to be here.

          • Anonymous

            QBNY, a good community to start with is mu-43 dot com. Olympus and Panasonic forums are separated. Good news for you.

    • All my digital camera is Olympus and by Panasonic sensor, so anyway i is for Oly/Pana. :-P

    • ssgreenley

      Thank you! It seems we finally got rid of the equivalence police and now Oly and Panny fanboys are going to start duking it out?!? Eesh. If you want to fight the good fight, let each other be and go take the fight to the other manufacturers! There aren’t too many enthusists that don’t have the Panny 20 (or 25) and the Oly 45 regardless of who made their camera–so how about a truce?

      • QBNY

        I had the 20/45 combo… I do not lie when I say the Olympus fanboys here solidified my decision to sell the 45 (Thanks Guys)… Loved the Bokeh though, But I’ll wait for the new Panasonic one.

        Besides, I’m loving the Canon 6D right now… Enjoying the 40mm Pancake and the 35mm is on my hit list next.

    • I see people being anti or pro Dxo rather than pany v oly.
      I fit the former. I believe that pictures are to be looked at. They are ALL subjective and therefore analysis of the tool is useless just look at what others do with it to see if its for you or not.
      The only technical info I want on a camera is the warranty period and build quality v longevity combination. For the rest I can pick one up in a camera shop to get the feel, I can look at thousands of images on the web so see the output, I can read user experiences.
      But, I don’t need a wall covered in charts of cameras I have not bought because “that line on the left, yes the red one, yes, that’s it. It’s 0.0005mm below the black line for 0.000002%”.

      I picked Oly for 4/3 when the e330 came out. It had things I wanted that NO ONE else had on a camera. I have used Pany video cameras for years still have 3 Great quality and value.

      The better Pany gets the better oly gets the better pany gets the better oly gets and so on. Go for it both and hope Kodak puts out a good product as well.

  • Darryl

    Also worth noting, DxO finally got around to testing the Panasonic 100-300mm. No surprises (resolution is not great, especially at the long end).

    Most interesting thing to me is the resolution global map which shows resolution at 300mm is marginally better at f/8 (right at the diffraction limit for 16 Mpix m4/3 sensors) than at f/5.6.

    m4/3 still needs a 250 or 300mm f/4 prime. Biggest hole in the lineup.

    • Panasonic come by 150mm F2.8 to next year maybe, maybe Olympus come by 300mm F4 close to.

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.