gh2 vs g3

Discussion in 'Panasonic Cameras' started by dave, Feb 13, 2012.

  1. dave

    dave Mu-43 Regular

    52
    Jan 30, 2012
    ok so i am very new to the :43: community and i know that the gh2 is suppose to be better than the g3 but my question is, what makes it better? is it features, functions, design? I've been looking but i do not see a huge difference between the two. thanks in advance.
     
  2. mister_roboto

    mister_roboto Mu-43 Top Veteran

    637
    Jun 14, 2011
    Seattle, WA, USA
    Dennis
    The G3 is about 1/3 thinner and smaller overall, GH-2 is more expensive (by $100 USD or so depending where you shop around), the GH2 is much better with video (it's a gem for video, and has a mic jack), and the GH2 also has that fantastic over sized sensor to change image ratios without loss.
     
  3. dave

    dave Mu-43 Regular

    52
    Jan 30, 2012
    so for still images there isn't a whole lot of difference?
     
  4. speltrong

    speltrong Mu-43 Veteran

    338
    May 8, 2011
    Northern California
    There are some differences in the sensors and in-camera processing. I doubt you'd be able to tell the difference for most shots, but in extreme low-light, I've read that the G3 does slightly better (like 1/3 of a stop - nothing major). The GH2 shoots a bit faster (5fps instead of 4fps for stills) and has better battery life, as well as more manual controls. The ergonomics are also apparently nicer on the hands. As mentioned before, the GH2 is way better for video. You can't buy the GH2 new without a kit lens (AFIAK), but you can buy the G3 w/o one.

    The GH3 will also probably be coming out this year. Maybe for Photokina, maybe sooner.
     
  5. meyerweb

    meyerweb Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Sep 5, 2011
    I bought a G2 rather than a G3 a while back, and the reasons I did apply to the GH2, as well. In addition, the GH2 has benefits the G2 doesn't. (I have a GH2 now, too.)

    The GH2 has much better ergonomics. The large grip makes it more comfortable to handle, easier to hold one-handed, and easier to handle with large lenses. But even with smaller lenses, I really like the grip on the GH compared to the vestigial grip on the G3. The GH also has many more manual controls, for things like focus mode (face detect, single spot, multi-spot, AF-S, AF-C, MF), and shooting mode (single shot, continuous, bracketing). It has more buttons, and more customizable buttons. The G3 sends you to the menus for most of these things. If you think you'll rarely change these settings, that's not a big issue, but if you will, the GH2 is much easier to make adjustments to.

    The GH2 also has an eye-sensor, so when you put the camera to your eye, the EVF turns on and the LCD turns off. The G3 requires you to use a manual switch. Is this a problem? It depends on how you use the camera. If you'll rarely use the EVF, or never use the LCD while shooting it won't matter much.

    And the GH2 has the multi-aspect sensor. If you like to shoot 3:2, like I do, you don't lose pixels from cropping the 4:3 image down to 3:2. The GH2 sensor seems to have somewhat better DR at low ISOs, the G3 sensor slightly less noisy at high ISOs.

    OTOH, the G3 is noticeably smaller and lighter, and seems to have a different jpeg engine that produces more saturated jpegs.
     
  6. Kevin

    Kevin Mu-43 Regular

    62
    Aug 25, 2011
    Vancouver, Canada
    I originally though this was going to be a big downside to the G3 when I got it. Was pleased to notice it automatically switched to the EVF when the LCD is 'closed' (turned to face the camera). For me personally I use the EVF 90% of the time and the LCD is always 'closed' to help protect it but when I flip it around to use it, it automatically turns on then turns off when I close it again.

    Not saying it isn't a plus to have the eye sensor but for me it didn't turn out to be as big of a downside as I originally thought it would.
     
  7. meyerweb

    meyerweb Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Sep 5, 2011
    I agree with you Kevin. While the Eye sensor is a plus, it's not a deciding factor. Combined with everything else the GH2 offers, though, the balance FOR ME definitely tilted towards the GH2.
     
  8. Markb

    Markb Mu-43 Top Veteran

    532
    Jun 9, 2011
    Kent, UK
    Mark
    That's the way I use mine, Kevin. Evf on normally, open the lcd when I want it for review or odd angles.
     
  9. jim_khoo

    jim_khoo Mu-43 All-Pro

    Apr 9, 2010
    Kuala Lumpur
    i have a G2 but not the GH2 nor the G3... i am rather surprise that the G2
    has the sensor like the GH2 with the EVF-LCD thingy but not the G3. wonder
    what made panasonic remove this feature...?
     
  10. garfield_cz

    garfield_cz Mu-43 Veteran

    218
    Jul 9, 2011
    Czech Republic
    Pavel
    It is because many people like me found this feature useless and want to have full button control of EVF/LCD switch instead. No offence, but basically I don't like when anything is trying to be smarter than me. In 90% I am using EVF and then switching off the camera immediately. In such scenario automatic switch to LCD when opened seems more natural to me.
     
  11. meyerweb

    meyerweb Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Sep 5, 2011
    Money? They probably save $5 or $6 on each camera. More charitably, maybe space? Cramming the EVF into the smallest possible body was clearly a key design criteria for the G3, so maybe that was a design tradeoff.
     
  12. jim_khoo

    jim_khoo Mu-43 All-Pro

    Apr 9, 2010
    Kuala Lumpur
    no offence taken...

    me uses both the touch screen to focus and the EVF features of the G2.
    hence the sensor is wonderful - no near field LCD glare when i switch use
    the EVF (under the sun). in this scenario, i don't mind the camera being
    the smart one. :smile:
     
  13. jim_khoo

    jim_khoo Mu-43 All-Pro

    Apr 9, 2010
    Kuala Lumpur
    good point... every business is about cost & profit. smaller body relates to lower cost too.