1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

G3 heads to Alaska

Discussion in 'Panasonic Cameras' started by pjohngren, Aug 7, 2011.

  1. pjohngren

    pjohngren Mu-43 Top Veteran

    560
    Oct 15, 2010
    Just returned from a trip to Alaska with G3, 14-45, and 45-200. The camera and lens combination are a total delight and the G3 struck me as ideal for travel photography in this age of airline carry on restrictions. Everything fit into a LowePro Rezo 160 AW case including charger, polarizer, and spare battery. One battery easily handled a day's shooting.

    All images presented below were entirely in-camera processed by the G3 with nothing additional done to the images except resizing. The G3's Intelegent Resolution does a great job with sharpenning, sharpenning only the areas with detail and texture and leaving the areas such as sky and water alone. Intelegent dynamic brings out shadow detail without destroying blacks, and Auto White Balance, which I tweaked one notch toward magenta and one toward amber to warm things a bit, did great with the color. With the high res jpegs having little compression, the original file sizes are 7.5 - 8.7 MB and any additional tweaking you might desire can be done later in Photoshop.

    With processing done in-camera, all the mini-notebook (Toshiba NB505) had to do was download and view the images. No need for resourse-intensive RAW converting.

    Here are the images as they came off the camera:

    P2011-07-26_0006. P2011-07-26_0022. P2011-07-28_0128. P2011-07-30_0112. P2011-07-30_0176.

    A fun camera!!
    Peter
     
    • Like Like x 20
  2. dcisive

    dcisive Mu-43 Veteran

    460
    Feb 19, 2010
    Salt Lake City, Utah
    Lee
    sweet.......I'm guessing you used the "Vivid" color setting on those last 2. Seems like real rich color. Man the skin tones rival what I used to get from my Oly, and the sharpness is wonderful. I do love that 45-200 for shear versatility, and it's so small for what you get :)
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. G1 User

    G1 User Mu-43 Veteran

    411
    Jul 20, 2010
    These are wonderful photo's... nice color too.
    Looking forward to see more...
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. pjohngren

    pjohngren Mu-43 Top Veteran

    560
    Oct 15, 2010
    Yes - I actually leave it on Vivid all the time, but have the contrast at -1,the sharpenning at +2, the saturation at 0, and the noise reduction at -2. Both Intelegent Resolution and Intelegent Dynamic remain on high all the time. Both do fine and are concervative and don't ever cause any problems.

    My goal is to get an out-of-camera jepg that requires very little tweaking and an image that represents as closely as possible what I intended at the time of capture - not what I will try to remember I wanted much later in front of a computer. For my money, the in-camera jpegs of the G3 bring more information with them than could possibly be achieved with a RAW file, because they are my rendition of the image rather than a generic "all the sensor information" rendition.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. DHart

    DHart Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jan 7, 2010
    Scottsdale, Arizona
    Don
    pj... I just returned from Alaska myself.... wonderful trip! Your images are nice and I understand your enthusiasm for the G3... it's a great little camera. And thanks for sharing the info on your camera settings! While I await the Lightroom G3 RAW, I'm going to try the settings you specified here for JPG capture with my G3 (and still capture the RAW files as well).

    This bold statement, however, seems crafted to purposefully raise a point that many would strongly disagree with. Don't forget that "your rendition", which is simply a comparatively crude, pre-defined, one-setting-fits-all, in-camera, permanently "baked-in" setting could always be applied later, very quickly and easily, and with far more precision, to the data-rich RAW file. :wink:

    I've noticed that at every opportunity you seem to go out of your way to make statements (such as the one above) to the effect that JPG capture is "superior" to RAW capture. Clearly, many highly experienced and exceptionally well-seasoned photographers, including myself, disagree with these statements. So I was wondering, why not just do what you do with JPG and leave it at that? Without repeatedly making bold pronouncements that JPG capture is far better than RAW capture? Most photographers capture as they capture without trying to convince everyone else that their way of working is "superior". Photographers shoot as they shoot and typically just leave it at that (unless the comparison to JPG question is specifically raised) without continually maklng statements that RAW is superior to JPG or vice-versa.

    You have no need to be defensive about using JPG only capture, if that's what you like! Just shoot as you do, JPG only, and happily leave it at that! The rest of the photographic world is fine with you shooting however you like to shoot.

    When you repeatedly make bold statements, however, that attempt to make JPG capture appear superior to RAW capture, you do us all a disservice.

    The fact that other photographers prefer RAW capture doesn't mean you need to continually attempt to convince everyone that JPG capture is somehow "superior" to RAW capture. If you like JPG capture, that's just great! Do it and enjoy it. But when you try to repeatedly convince the photographic world at large that JPG capture is "superior" to RAW capture, that only serves to misinform the less-knowledgeable among us and raises the ire of the great many photographers who think differently on this topic than you do. So why keep hammering at it, continually making jabs at RAW capture by inferring that JPG is "superior"? JPG is OK if you like JPG and RAW is OK if you like RAW. No need to constantly try to make RAW capture appear inferior. It's not. In fact many feel just the opposite.

    Keep enjoying that G3... however you like to use it, it's a nice camera!
     
    • Like Like x 2
  6. pjohngren

    pjohngren Mu-43 Top Veteran

    560
    Oct 15, 2010

    I do feel there are ways and situations in which jpeg gives you more of what you may need than does RAW, and I feel that the G3 particularly excells in in-camera processing, allowing the photographer to concentrate on photographing.

    I feel that many photographers could easily be intimidated into thinking that RAW is in all cases and for all people superior, when that is simply not the case.

    Also, I don't necessarily use one setting for all instances. I have the function 2 button set for Photo Style, so that I can adjust especially contrast and satuation to suite the situation. In fact there are lots of adustments that you can make in the field with this camera in regard to color, tonality, contrast, saturation, etc., and of course with the live histogram, getting the exposure right is just about 100%.

    I agree with you that it is entirely dependent on how you work and where you want to make these decisions and adjustments. Simply using pre-sets on RAW files would not work for me. A RAW file doesn't contain the adjustments I made in the field, so it is less useful to me. The G3, I feel, has taken in-camera processing to a new level. It allows plenty of adjustment and does a great job at processing an image the way that I want it processed. And it does all this in an instant.
     
  7. DHart

    DHart Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jan 7, 2010
    Scottsdale, Arizona
    Don
    It is nice that the G3 has enough functionality to work as you would like it to work. And interesting how we all have completely different ways of working.

    For me, at the time of capture, I prefer to concentrate on angle of view, depth of focus, camera positioning, lighting, posing, proper exposure, and capturing at that "magic moment" in timing.... rather than trying to also attend to subtleties of sharpening, contrast, precision color balance, etc. because all of these latter aspects are so quickly and easily tweaked from RAW, if desired, later... whereas elements of camera positioning, angle, field of view, good exposure, pose, expression, and shooting at precisely the right moment can only be attended to at the time of exposure. Mine is just a different way of working than yours, that's all, and no particular way of working is necessarily "right" nor "wrong" nor "better" than any other.

    It's widely known that RAW capture does provide significantly greater image data and range of color depth and tonality, which is desired by many photographers, but that doesn't mean that RAW capture is "better" for your individual needs than JPG capture.

    We each capture as suits our individual interests and needs and none of these approaches is "better", generally speaking, than any other.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. DHart

    DHart Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jan 7, 2010
    Scottsdale, Arizona
    Don
    pj... I hope you don't mind that I took one of your images into LR for a few quick tweaks. This may not be a pleasing rendition to your eye, but this rendition captures the feel I had when visiting Alaska recently.

    P2011-07-26_0006-2.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  9. pjohngren

    pjohngren Mu-43 Top Veteran

    560
    Oct 15, 2010
    Don - interesting and I like aspects of what you did with my jpeg file. I might well intensify the color etc when I go to print it, and it is certainly unnecessary to have the RAW file in order to do that, as you have shown. I do like starting out with a version of the image that is my version, not just the sensor's version.

    If you are talking pure quantity, then RAW has more data - whether it is relevant data is the question.
     
  10. DHart

    DHart Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jan 7, 2010
    Scottsdale, Arizona
    Don
    Of course, RAW isn't necessary to make the minor tweaks I did with the file. But it can be very helpful when trying to pull out more detail from seemingly "blown out" highlights or blocked up shadows, or when working toward a B&W rendition with as much tonal range as possible. My point was simply that it's quick and easy to make such adjustments after capture than to try to make it all come together "just so" in the camera. I haven't met an OOC image yet that doesn't benefit in some way from at least a few tweaks here and there. But again, that's my way of working and I certainly don't mean to imply that it should be yours.
     
  11. pjohngren

    pjohngren Mu-43 Top Veteran

    560
    Oct 15, 2010
    I really have no argument with what you have said. However, I don't think I had one shot in the entire 10 day AK trip with blown highlights with the G3, as I have the histogram always in view and adjust accordingly. Intelegent Dynamic seems to do a nice job with shadow detail and that can be further tweaked on a jpeg in post processing. I also tweak every image somewhat that I am going to print and have never been hampered by doing that with a jpeg. My point was that I like getting as close as possible with the initial jpeg, and the G3 does a nice job at that. I can't speak to B&W since I don't do B&W.
     
  12. DHart

    DHart Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jan 7, 2010
    Scottsdale, Arizona
    Don
    As we gain dynamic range with forthcoming sensors, we will gain quite a bit of IQ (whether RAW or JPG). As far as I'm concerned, we have enough pixels now; the industry needs to concentrate more on improving the quality of those pixels to increase dynamic range.

    I have yet to really check out iDynamic and some of the other digital features in the G3, but I hope to in the coming months after my busy portrait season (5DMkII) dies down in November and I have time to play more with m4/3.
     
  13. pjohngren

    pjohngren Mu-43 Top Veteran

    560
    Oct 15, 2010
    Agree - it is an exciting time for photography. I feel it was a wise decision to go with the somewhat smaller m43 sensor and certainly with dumping the mirror box and trusting that the quality of the sensors would evolve, as they already have. It is such a pleasure to spend a day playing with the G3 on a trip, that I can't imagine going back to my hulky Nikons.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  14. DHart

    DHart Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jan 7, 2010
    Scottsdale, Arizona
    Don
    m4/3 still doesn't offer what I need for my professional portrait and commercial work - for that I need to rely on the full-frame sensor 5DMkII and a selection of fast L-lenses.

    And I will keep the Canon big guns even as I slide gently into a prolonged state of semi-retirement, so I can still achieve my needs for that work, but virtually all of my fun shooting and travel photography is done with m4/3 gear. With the GH2, G3, 7-14, 14-140, 20/1.7, legacy glass, and some of the latest greatest m4/3 glass (12/2.0, 25/1.4, 45/1.8) we m4/3 shooters are entering a real sweet zone of gear, for sure!
     
    • Like Like x 1
  15. Duke Mac

    Duke Mac Mu-43 Rookie

    18
    Aug 10, 2011
    Hello,
    New guy here. pjohngren Thanks for posting G3 heads to Alaska.
    The pictures are great. The G3 looks like a great camera and and
    a great one to get started with.
    Also Dhart I also like the tweaks you did with the picture. In particular
    in bring out the mountains and the sky. Cam I ask what you did?
    Thank You Both
     
    • Like Like x 1
  16. pjohngren

    pjohngren Mu-43 Top Veteran

    560
    Oct 15, 2010

    I started with the G1 and GF1 and am now loving the G3. For me, the G3 is the ideal balance between size and superb function. The GF1 is an elegent little machine, but I really miss the viewfinder. The G1 has the finder but a number of extra buttons resulting in a harder to use camera if you have guy-sized hands and fingers.

    The G3 has just the number of buttons you need so that most often you can work the camera without ever taking your eye off the viewfinder. It also takes astoundingly great video with stereo sound. And the image quality is right up there with the GH2. The sophistocation of the in-camera processing as far as I know is unsurpassed by any other camera.

    So for me, it would not only be a terrific place to start, it is a great place to end up.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  17. Duke Mac

    Duke Mac Mu-43 Rookie

    18
    Aug 10, 2011
    I think the G3 is a great camera to have. I also like how it is custimzble.
    It has to Custom settings right on the mode dial (C1, C2). You have to get
    to go over 1K on a Dslr for that. And the basic functions, WB , ISO a direct button.
    But I think it will be a bit before I can afford one. Maybe a used G1
    could get me started and be a more attainable goal.Something
    just to learn with again.
     
  18. DHart

    DHart Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jan 7, 2010
    Scottsdale, Arizona
    Don
    Duke... I opened Lightroom, clicked to import the photo, clicked the gradient tool, dragged in down from the top of the image across the mountains, then tweaked the contrast, brightness, and saturation sliders which applied to the gradient. And to the operall pic, I think I bumped the Vividity slider a little and the sharpening slider a little. The entire process probably took me about 20 seconds. If there were other similar images, I could have hit the Sync button and applied the same treatment to ALL of them with one click. Lightroom ROCKS.
     
  19. Duke Mac

    Duke Mac Mu-43 Rookie

    18
    Aug 10, 2011
    DHart... Thank You. That gives me something to work on. I love photoshop, I am going to have to Pick lightroom up.
     
  20. DHart

    DHart Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jan 7, 2010
    Scottsdale, Arizona
    Don
    PJ, there's a chance that you may not be interested in seeing this (though I think you should), but here's a good comparison of G3 JPG capture vs. G3 RAW capture which some other folks might appreciate seeing:

    Panasonic Lumix DMC-G3 review: RAW vs JPEG | Cameralabs

    In the end, decide which method you personally prefer. You are the only person you need to please with your images.