|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
June 16th, 2013, 10:52 PM
|
#1 |
|
Regular Crew
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 27
|
Nikon D7100 or GH3 for stills?
I'm looking to upgrade my GH2 and I was wondering which of these are better for wedding stills and why?
|
|
|
|
June 16th, 2013, 11:53 PM
|
#2 |
|
Inner Circle
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 8,441
|
Re: Nikon D7100 or GH3 for stills?
Hi Jarred
What car do you drive?? It's much the same, personal choice!! I was using a GH1 for stills but my real favourite is still my Nikon D90 with a grip. I find I can get a nicer range of lenses for it compared to 4/3rd cameras. Both however will do a great job! Chris |
|
|
|
|
June 17th, 2013, 02:52 AM
|
#3 |
|
Trustee
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Romsey, UK
Posts: 1,261
|
Re: Nikon D7100 or GH3 for stills?
Hi Jarred,
I love the GH3 for video, but to be honest it's not brilliant for stills - adequate rather than exceptional. I can't comment on the Nikon as I've never used it. However if stills is your aim, then I suggest you head to Digital Photography Review. You can compare detailed reviews of both cameras including sample pictures. However the best way is to really visit a camera store and try out both and se which you feel more comfortable using. Steve |
|
|
|
|
June 17th, 2013, 07:14 AM
|
#4 |
|
Regular Crew
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Bendigo Australia
Posts: 25
|
Re: Nikon D7100 or GH3 for stills?
I agree with Steve. The GH3 is a fantastic video camera but not up to the Nikon for stills. But it is a handy stills camera. I've used it side by side with a Nikon for sport shooting and it gives good results.
Having said that I feel it would fall behind the Nikon for wedding use. I have done a few weddings both video and stills and I'd prefer to use the GH3 for video for that type of event. |
|
|
|
|
June 17th, 2013, 07:50 AM
|
#5 |
|
Regular Crew
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 27
|
Re: Nikon D7100 or GH3 for stills?
So is there a MASSIVE jump in image quality with the D7100 vs the GH2/GH3 or is it minor?
I couldn't find any head to head comparisons online so I'm a little lost, haha. All I want is better image quality for portraits and quick autofocus for events. |
|
|
|
|
June 17th, 2013, 08:11 AM
|
#6 |
|
Trustee
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Romsey, UK
Posts: 1,261
|
Re: Nikon D7100 or GH3 for stills?
Not a massive jump in quality, but there are issues with the GH3. The eye viewfinder is OLED, compared to a mirrored view, and I find composing the image a lot better when not done through an electronic display. If you're looking for comparisons, the link I gave you to Digital Photography Review, there is a review of the Nikon D7100. Go to page 20 of the review and you can compare up to 3 other cameras to the D7100 at various ISO levels. You can select which part of the studio image you want to compare by dragging a small box around on the main image. To be honest the GH3 holds its own at lower levels, perhaps seeming a tad sharper, but at higher ISO levels, the Nikon delivers better results.
|
|
|
|
|
June 17th, 2013, 08:17 AM
|
#7 |
|
Inner Circle
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 8,441
|
Re: Nikon D7100 or GH3 for stills?
Although my Nikon D90 is a current camera I bought mine used at 4K shutter actuations and it's actually only 12.3mp (like the older GH1 but absolutely blew the Panny away for stills. However if you are going to shoot video and stills on a Nikon then the 7100 is a better buy. They just seem to have a much larger dynamic range and even using the D90 in full auto you get amazing stills BUT the video will be noticeably poorer I think ... I only use my Nikon for stills and two Sony EA-50's for video (plus of course a Novoflex adapter which gives me use of all the Nikon mount lenses for video too)
Chris |
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
|
||||||
|
|
