Gh3 emergency - please help

[Steve Burkett]

I have a great deal of time for the C100; I don't own one as the lack of 4K is an issue. But I really wish the Mark II added this and it was sitting in my range of cameras.
Still I can understand Luc's statement; yes the implication was made the C100 is inferior - objectively I'd say not. However if you're use to using the GH3, switching to a C100 suddenly isn't an easy transition. I recently used my AF101a for continuous shooting reasons, and hated it. The real reason wasn't quality of footage - I didn't edit it, but because I wasn't as smooth and relaxed using it. My GH4 is like second nature; I don't have to even think about the controls. With the AF101a, it was a case of where's this control, how do I do this and boy do I miss the touch screen. Quality isn't always the reason for liking a camera. Sometimes the camera just fits the person. Personally I disliked the GH3, halfway into 2013 I was back with the GH2, but my GH4 and I are a perfect fit; never had an issue with it.

[Gary Huff]

Originally Posted by Steve Burkett

However if you're use to using the GH3, switching to a C100 suddenly isn't an easy transition.

Of course, but it doesn't mean that one camera is harder to use than another. I use both and am comfortable with both, so I can tell you what the difference is and which one is actually easier to use.

[Luc Spencer]

Guys, I did NOT say the C100 is inferior! I am fully aware of its capabilities. When you see ISO 80.000 selectable for video, you know it's no joke. Especially compared to the GH3's max of 6400.

However, I do have to agree with Steve. The GHx cameras are SIGNIFICANTLY easier to use and just feel friendlier. And I mean that in every way possible: weight (especially) for both the body and the lenses, ease of operation (not saying having more buttons is worse, it's just that we Panasonic users learned to make do with fewer and are happy that way), and maneuverability. In tighter spaces the C100 becomes a problem, especially with its big lenses. I also found out that shooting from a high angle is difficult (like a fully extended Manfrotto monopod), since the screen does not tilt down enough. You don't get this problem with a GH3.

Oh, and Gary, even though the GH3 has a smaller screen than the C100, I can determine where focus is more accurately on it. During the 2 years of filming events with it, I don't remember having to delete a single shot due to bad focus. And I'm sorry, but that's impressive for a camera with such a small screen and no focus peaking. And no, I don't use a loupe.

[Greg Boston]

Well Luc, we have had a long standing motto here at DVI, that the best camera to use is the one that feels most comfortable in your hands. Camera specs aside, it just means we do our best work when the ergonomics are working with us, rather than against us. And since we are all different, one man's perfect fit can be another man's straight jacket.

Hope it all works out for you with whatever camera you use.

-gb-

[Luc Spencer]

Exactly Greg, that's a great way to put it. And while I recognize that the C100 is a more powerful tool than the GH3 (for the most part; I couldn't live without 1080/50p), to me it felt like a straight jacket during this weekend. And I wanted to like it, I was actually somewhat excited to be using such a pro camera. But... I didn't, and I doubt I ever will.

[William Hohauser]

Quite frankly between all the cameras I have worked with and owned in the past ten years, the easiest most versatile have been and still are the JVC HD video cameras which is why I am really interested in their new 4K offerings over upgrading to a GH4 even though the price is quite a bit higher. Quite a number of higher end cameras tend to be less friendly to single person crews and the GH3 series, while filled with difficulties, tend to be easier than similar DSLR/35mm style digital cameras. Sure a C100 is better in many technical and image aesthetic aspects but ease of use is an important quality.

And it's possible that in certain filming situations the C100 focus peaking isn't helpful, I certainly have experienced that with many cameras over the years. However this is the Lumix forum not the "C100 is a better camera, how could you not like it" forum. He could have said that he tried a BlackMagic camera and didn't like it also and I wouldn't have blamed him at all. Here's to hoping that Luc's GH3 is repaired as fast as possible and that his next temp replacement camera is easier to work with at his upcoming job.

[Gary Huff]

Originally Posted by William Hohauser

but ease of use is an important quality.

However, pointing out "ease of use" features such as peaking and magnified focus assist during recording doesn't seem to resonate. That's the issue.

And it's possible that in certain filming situations the C100 focus peaking isn't helpful,

Never been an issue with me. It's only an issue if you don't know how to read the peaking, much like not getting exposure correct because you also don't know how to read a waveform monitor (which the C100 also has and the GH3 does not).

I certainly have experienced that with many cameras over the years. However this is the Lumix forum not the "C100 is a better camera, how could you not like it" forum. He could have said that he tried a BlackMagic camera and didn't like it also and I wouldn't have blamed him at all.

It mostly started as a sly gibe against the "C100 turned out to only make me miss my GH3 even more." comment, which then turned into an attempt to turn the negatives into positives, and it struck me that he doesn't really know how to use the camera. That's fine, just pointing it out.

[Luc Spencer]

Thank you very much William for your kind words, let's hope that will be the case :)

Gary, I wish you the best of luck with your C100. I hope its peaking, the magnified focus assist functions and the waveform help you get the best possible footage. I, on the other hand, will continue to use just "the force", because it's worked very well for me over the last 2 years. That, and I consider zooming in 8x (or whatever the ratio is) when you're filming to be a bad idea, especially at weddings when you never know what's going to happen next. Not to mention you might be zooming in on a portion that you don't want to be focusing on, in which case I'm guessing you have to use the joystick to move around. Not my cup of tea.

[Gary Huff]

And this is probably the best demonstrated example of trying to make negatives sound like positives (there was a similar thread on this about a waveform display).

As part of my workflow, I prefer repeatability, i.e. I can deliver repeated results and don't have to rely on "the force" and the missed focuses that plague that style of shooting (which I can attest to since I have done so, and with a GH3 no less).

Magnified focus assist and peaking means that the frequency of missed focus is far lower than trying to eyeball everything, just like knowing how to read a waveform monitor means that you'll never have to eyeball or guess exposure. Not having these are both negatives for the GH3.

However, from a competition standpoint, it's probably good that there are people who think in this way, so please, continue.

[Luc Spencer]

I really don't understand this repeated emphasis on negatives sounding like positives and what it has to do with anything discussed here relevant to this forum. I understand, you love being completely right 100% of the time and can never accept even part of a counter-argument, not even when the other person uses his few years of experience as solid facts instead of just pure theory. And I'm not just talking about myself.

Out of all the people on this thread, you seem to be the only one with a negative and/or superior attitude, from its beginning, and continue to do so even after it has been generally agreed (including by myself) that the C100 is a more powerful tool, overall.

This attitude is something I have dealt with repeatedly in Canon and Nikon DSLR video shooters and, to tell you the truth, it is also a reason why I love my GH3 so much - once they see my results, they shut up.

Rest assured, everybody understands the importance of all those functions you so highly praise. At the same time, they can do quite well without them.

[Gary Huff]

Originally Posted by Luc Spencer

I understand, you love being completely right 100% of the time

You misunderstand then.

and can never accept even part of a counter-argument

Counter-argument? What counter-argument? The counter-argument that eyeballing is just as good as the tools? Because then you go on to say:

Rest assured, everybody understands the importance of all those functions you so highly praise.

Because if those functions are important, then there is actually no counter-argument.

At the same time, they can do quite well without them.

A stopped-clock is right twice a day as the saying goes. But a running clock can be depended on for having the correct time. That's what I am saying. I'm not saying you can't get shots in focus by just eyeballing, or that you cannot have correct exposure with just eyeballing. You most certainly can. But the tools allow you to be sure. That's all I am saying here.

not even when the other person uses his few years of experience as solid facts instead of just pure theory.

Who here is speculating based on pure theory? Are you saying that using proper tools for focusing is just theory? That sounds an awful lot like lack of experience to me.

This attitude is something I have dealt with repeatedly in Canon and Nikon DSLR video shooters and, to tell you the truth

So what? I'm not a Canon and Nikon DSLR shooter. I am an EOS Cinema camera and Lumix mirrorless shooter, just like you are. So why even attempt an ad hominem here? I switched from the GH2 to the C100 primarily because of the tools I got in-camera. I understand you cannot afford a C100 camera (especially not the Mark II which has the slow-motion you use for your shooting), but what I'm saying is don't act like the lack of peaking and other tools is a positive for your GH3 simply because it's not a financially smart business decision for you at this time.

[Steve Burkett]

Originally Posted by Luc Spencer

I really don't understand this repeated emphasis on negatives sounding like positives and what it has to do with anything discussed here relevant to this forum.

I wouldn't continue this argument if I were you; Gary is like a bulldog in winning the final point and will hold you to everything you say and everything you say will be used against you. :) Just let the matter drop and enjoy your GH3 when its back from repair. Hope you find a worthy replacement in the meantime that fits your style of shooting.

[Gary Huff]

Originally Posted by Steve Burkett

will hold you to everything you say and everything you say will be used against you.

Ha, yes, heaven forbid having me point out someone contradicting their own point! :-)

[William Hohauser]

I wish you peace with your C100, your loyalty and defense of it is admirable. Please direct us to a place where the laudible features of the camera are taught (for free) so we can learn why you are so protective of it's reputation.

[Gary Huff]

Originally Posted by William Hohauser

Please direct us to a place where the laudible features of the camera are taught (for free) so we can learn why you are so protective of it's reputation.

There's this thing called the Internet, and within that Internet is something called Google. It is your friend, and within it you can find out why peaking, magnified focus assist, and even the waveform monitor, are important, professional tools.