GH3 in San Diego

[Andrew Armstrong]

Recently made a trip out to San Diego and I thought it was a perfect place to learn the functionality of the GH3 I just bought. Overall, I'm very impressed with the camera. I just wish I could have brought a tripod with me.

GH3
Panasonic 12-35mm
Panasonic 45-200mm
Gitzo Monopod with a Manfrotto 701head.
Gorillapod

San Diego on Vimeo

[Joe Bowey]

I am soooo amazed at the quality that comes out of this camera. When I look at videos on you tube This camera blows everything I see away. Excellent. What are this settings you used and what did you edit with. I use vegas pro.

[Andrew Armstrong]

I've been very impressed with the camera so far. I think it's the most versatile camera on the market. It's a swiss army knife and that's the main selling point IMO. Many will pick at different features and name off other models that do one thing a bit better. To me that's missing the big picture. Between the great stills, 1080 60p, high bit-rate, built in wireless, built in intervalometer, and light weight its an amazing package of features. All of that for a great price. Many are already dismissing it for the BMC pocket camera but I think it's premature. If you need an all in one solution it doesn't get much better.

As far as my settings it's the factory natural picture profile. Most of it is shot at 24p 72mbps with a few 60p for slow mo and of course a few raw time-lapse shots with the intervalometer. No real grading just a few exposure tweaks.

[Les Wilson]

I don't want to pay for any of the stills capability in a video camera. Why get the GH3 over the BMC for a couple hundred less?

[Andrew Armstrong]

If you don't need the stills functions then the pocket camera might be a better option for you. Personally being able to create timelapse videos with the still side and the built in intervalometer was something I wanted for my productions. 60p@1080, and built in wireless were the other features that I found very helpful that I would not have got with the pocket camera. Like I said before, name a feature on the Gh3 and "x" camera might do that feature better. But for the price I don't think there is a camera on the market that is as versatile a tool as the GH3. If you need a video production swiss army knife the GH3 is the one IMO.

[Corey Graham]

Great video Andrew. My GH3 will arrive today, and I can't wait to play around with it.

[Joe Bowey]

Just saw Blackmagic pocket camera and it looks great but your footage looks more crisp an clear. I seem to be drawn to this footage as moe pleasent to watch.

[Bill Koehler]

Originally Posted by Les Wilson

I don't want to pay for any of the stills capability in a video camera. Why get the GH3 over the BMC for a couple hundred less?

1. Because the BMD PocketCam isn't really less. Every penny that you save on the camera itself will be spent on large & fast SDXC cards. To shoot the same amount of time means the BMD PocketCam is going to create roughly 5x - 10x the amount of data. That's comparing 220 Mbps ProRes (BMD PocketCam) to 25 - 50 Mbps AVCHD/MPEG-4 (GH3).

2. When you get back to the edit bay you are going to then spend that much more time ingesting the BMD PocketCam footage. You better have both large and fast storage to hold it all. With the GH3 you can fit a good size project (2 hour concert, 5 cameras) on one 256 GB or 512 GB SSD. You are going to need a good deal more for the same project using the BMD PocketCam.

3. One of the byproducts of the high-res raw stills capability of the GH3 means you can put together time-lapse sequences that leverage off both the raw/wide exposure latitude of the GH3 and the ability to crop/reframe into the picture severely while still preserving a FullHD window. You can't do that with the BMD PocketCam. It doesn't have the native resolution to allow it.

Now if you have no problems with the above, then go for the BMD PocketCam. Otherwise, the GH3 fills a very nice niche in the market.

And no, I don't have a GH3. But I am very interested.

[Les Wilson]

Originally Posted by Andrew Armstrong

...Like I said before, name a feature on the Gh3 and "x" camera might do that feature better. But for the price I don't think there is a camera on the market that is as versatile a tool as the GH3. If you need a video production swiss army knife the GH3 is the one IMO....

Originally Posted by Andrew Armstrong

...I think it's the most versatile camera on the market. It's a swiss army knife and that's the main selling point IMO. ....

I think this is overstating it. It's a still photo camera that does video. Perhaps it does it better than other still photo cameras but that doesn't make it the most "versatile camera on the market". Forget "name a feature on the Gh3 and "x" camera might do that feature better", when I look at it, it flat out lacks fundamental features of a "versatile camera" such as ND filters, focus peaking, zebras shotgun mic holder and an XLR block. When I look at the BM camera, I see a camera made by someone that understands video.

[Bill Koehler]

Originally Posted by Les Wilson

I don't want to pay for any of the stills capability in a video camera. Why get the GH3 over the BMC for a couple hundred less?

Originally Posted by Les Wilson

...Forget "name a feature on the Gh3 and "x" camera might do that feature better", when I look at it, it flat out lacks fundamental features of a "versatile camera" such as ND filters, focus peaking, zebras shotgun mic holder and an XLR block. When I look at the BM camera, I see a camera made by someone that understands video.

Just to be clear,

1. None of the BMD cameras have ND filters. You get to add that.
2. None of the BMD cameras has a shotgun mic holder. You get to add that.
3. The BMD PocketCam has a 3.5mm stereo mini-jack mic input, same as the GH3.
4. The BMD PocketCam has a microHDMI output, not HD-SDI like bigger professional cameras.

Don't get me wrong. I am willing to concede that the BMD cameras are going to have a nicer image. I am only trying to point out it comes at the price of wrangling a far larger flow of data which will affect shooting, ingest, editing, and archiving. Only you can determine what the quality/data size tradeoff for you is and if your clients will notice the difference.

We live in pretty nice times to have options this good to choose from.

[Andrew Armstrong]

Originally Posted by Les Wilson

I think this is overstating it. It's a still photo camera that does video. Perhaps it does it better than other still photo cameras but that doesn't make it the most "versatile camera on the market". Forget "name a feature on the Gh3 and "x" camera might do that feature better", when I look at it, it flat out lacks fundamental features of a "versatile camera" such as ND filters, focus peaking, zebras shotgun mic holder and an XLR block. When I look at the BM camera, I see a camera made by someone that understands video.

I will agree the BM cameras do have a great picture, better than the GH3 in most instances. But if I needed one camera that gives me the most options for my story telling the GH3 would be it. I could have bought the BMCC no problem. It was just a bit more. I gave up some on the image side of things to get many features that BM cameras simply do not have. There are always trade-offs. There is no one perfect camera for every situation. The GH3 just checked the most boxes on my list at a price I could afford.

[Ron Fabienke]

Damn! ..... Andrew. What a fun, beautiful little edited piece, created from "getting to know your GH3 you just bought". Loved it, the footage, the editing and loved the music selection. Props!!

[Les Wilson]

Originally Posted by Bill Koehler

Just to be clear....

I realize all that. I didn't say the BMC had them. My point is a camera that lacks all 5 of those features simply cannot be the most versatile camera on the market as asserted by the OP. The BMC is a useful tool to illustrate the point. The extraordinary CODEC and the ability to get a well exposed and in focus image are in the BMC and shine a light on the more expensive GH3.

[Jeff Harper]

Originally Posted by Les Wilson

I think this is overstating it.

Maybe so Les, but so what? Let's allow those folks who are enthusiastic about the camera enjoy the newness of this fine camera. Let it go!

The video from this camera beats most DSLRs handsdown. We know this because the GH2 beat most (not all) DSLRs and the GH3 is improved beyond the GH2.

Maybe the Swiss Army comparison is overblown, maybe it's not. It's all in the eye of the beholder anyway.

The BM camera and the GH3 are apples and oranges, depending on what you shoot. These are tools. The GH3, for it's quality of video and photos, and it's frame rates, lighting fast autofocus, and unlimited recording time, may not be the absolute bestest camera ever made, or whatever, but it's a pretty freakin' awesome camera.

The GH3 was made to shoot video as much as photos, it was redesigned with video shooters in mind, so in my mind, it is a videocamera as much as it's a camera.

The BM camera is phenomenal, if you don't mind file sizes 10 times the size. Not even useful for many event shooters, except for beauty shots. Love to have one, but it is so far from practical for me, it's not even funny. The cost of the cards will be very quickly level the price, as has been pointed out. 64GB class 10 cards? Maybe the prices have come down, I would hope so.

Between the two, the GH3 certainly is much more versatile than the BM, of that there is no doubt. But versatility is not what everyone needs, either. Just buy the tool you need and enjoy it.

[Dan Carter]

Originally Posted by Les Wilson

Why get the GH3 over the BMC for a couple hundred less?

Because the BMC Pocket Camera will not be available until July, and based on Black Magic's history, probably much later.

Because not having shipped yet, other than a few sample videos, talk of its superiority over any camera is rumor and assumption.