Author Topic: G3 or GH2 for better still photos, or will there be a diff? (Read 1136 times)

tanngrisnir3 · « **on:** October 18, 2011, 01:28:35 PM »

Sorry if this has been asked here before, as I haven't been to the forum in a long time.

I've read a bunch about both, but thought I'd put it out there for folks who possibly have used both. I've also posted this same query on another board.

Big fan of Panasonic (I've used my LX5 to death), I don't care whatsoever about video performance, and am thinking of moving into m4/3 for an interesting change from that LX5 and a Canon 7D.

Are they basically equivalent for stills, and I'd be wasting my money on a GH2, paying for vid capability I'd never use?

Lastly, I only ever shoot RAW, and don't care a bit about .jpeg rendering capabilities.

I also have very large hands, but have never had any problems using that LX5, so are the ergonomic differences between the G3/GH2 really that substantial?

Thanks in advance,

T3

Em5 Pete · « **Reply #1 on:** October 18, 2011, 02:09:55 PM »

Lisandra has a GH2, I gave a G3...
According to Lisandra, The G3 is a marginal Increase in IQ... That means, you might or might not see any difference...
But, at higher ISO's (1600+) the G3 may, ... may have an edge in finer detail. The main difference is that the GH2 has a larger sensor so when you use 3:2, 16:9, 1:1... the camera does not crop to achieve the ratio selected.. it uses more of the sensor. My G3, crops the sensor to the Ratio if it not 4:3.

Also the GH2 has much larger grip, that makes a bit easier for one hand picture taking... (I miss the my G1 Grip)

I won't mention video... other than the GH2 has better video features than the G3 in a few areas.... that all...

voyager · « **Reply #2 on:** October 18, 2011, 02:37:05 PM »

What do you mean by the GH2 using a larger sensor?

lisandra · « **Reply #3 on:** October 18, 2011, 08:23:33 PM »

Quote from: voyager on October 18, 2011, 02:37:05 PM

What do you mean by the GH2 using a larger sensor?

Panasonic multi aspect sensors are slightly bigger to allow aspect change without crop. The gh2 actually has a multiplication factor of 1.9 instead of 2. It's also why Panasonic ie so certain the gh3 will be much less noisy, the slightly smaller g3 has a again slightly better signal to noise ratio at the sensor than the gh2, so incorporating that technology plus a newer one will easily bring a 1 stop improvement.
Or so they say at least...STAY AT 16 FREAKING MEGAPIXELS!!!!!!

voyager · « **Reply #4 on:** October 19, 2011, 12:51:07 AM »

Does that really make a difference? Canon is 1.6x whereas everyone else who uses APS-C is at 1.5x.

Em5 Pete · « **Reply #5 on:** October 19, 2011, 04:26:35 AM »

Quote from: lisandra on October 18, 2011, 08:23:33 PM

Quote from: voyager on October 18, 2011, 02:37:05 PM
What do you mean by the GH2 using a larger sensor?
Panasonic multi aspect sensors are slightly bigger to allow aspect change without crop. The gh2 actually has a multiplication factor of 1.9 instead of 2. It's also why Panasonic ie so certain the gh3 will be much less noisy, the slightly smaller g3 has a again slightly better signal to noise ratio at the sensor than the gh2, so incorporating that technology plus a newer one will easily bring a 1 stop improvement.
Or so they say at least...STAY AT 16 FREAKING MEGAPIXELS!!!!!!

I believe that is the context of my statement.

lisandra · « **Reply #6 on:** October 19, 2011, 07:26:10 AM »

Quote from: voyager on October 19, 2011, 12:51:07 AM

Does that really make a difference? Canon is 1.6x whereas everyone else who uses APS-C is at 1.5x.

in terms of IQ? panny seems to be able to squeeze more out of them...

G3 or GH2 for better still photos, or will there be a diff?