Panasonic G3 or Nikon D7000

Discussion in 'Other Systems' started by hunyuan7, Sep 1, 2011.

  1. hunyuan7

    hunyuan7 Mu-43 Regular

    Aug 31, 2011
    Panasonic G3 or Nikon D7000?

    1. Is there a noticeable difference between the two cameras in the following:

    --Shooting sports in both RAW and fine JPeg
    --Image stabilization in the lenses
    --Low light street photography in a printed 4 x 6 photo
    --General (e.g., daylight, indoors, portraits, macro, landscape) 4 x 6 inch photos

    2. At what print size do you think you can see a quality difference between a photo taken with a G3 and one from a D7000?

    It is the diminutive size, convenience, and photographic improvements of the G3 that has caught my attention.

    Any input would be of great help.
  2. nickthetasmaniac

    nickthetasmaniac Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jan 11, 2011
    For general shooting I think the usability and convenience of the G3 are a winner. The IQ is very good (even if it's not quite as good as the D7000) and there's some wonderful lenses in Micro Four Thirds.

    However, if you shoot video seriously you should really be looking at the GH2. Likewise, if you're a serious sports shooter then m43 probably isn't the right platform at the moment - it can be done obviously, but other systems will do it better.

    Both the G3 and D7000 are great bodies from great systems, so I think you'll be happy either way :smile:
  3. dayou14

    dayou14 Mu-43 Regular

    Jul 6, 2011

    The Nikon D7000 is an awesome camera. However, you need to factor in whether you'll actually be carrying the camera plus lens combo around to actually shoot. Years ago, my old man bought me a Canon film SLR, and it was really cool. But I took it out for a total of less than 200 hours. That experience remained deeply ingrained in me, and for years after that, I avoid SLRs, whether film-based or digital. I know it would be in the closet, most of the time. When M4/3s came out, it was the breakthrough I needed to really go back to photography again. Now, my GH2 with lens is small enough to put in my bag everywhere I go, and that has made all the difference. The best camera is the one with you.

    Having said all these, if you just want a 'best' camera to really shoot special events or moments, on balance I think the D7000 and Nikon system would be stronger, minus the weight issues.

    • Like Like x 1
  4. dayou14

    dayou14 Mu-43 Regular

    Jul 6, 2011
    I realized I may have given you the impression that the G3 or M4/3 cameras are not as good as D7000. This isn't the case for my needs. The GH2 gives me everything I want, except perhaps greater low-light ability. It's too good for me for video, where I shoot sporadically. If video is important to you, skip G3 and go to GH2. It is probably the best video+stills combo camera in the market today.
  5. Sammyboy

    Sammyboy m43 Pro

    Oct 26, 2010
    Steeler Country
    Go with the Nikon, they have a REAL photographic system; prime lenses, zoom lenses, ultra wide angles, wide angles, standard, macro, telephoto, super telephotos, a bellows system, a comprehensive flash system and even have external microphones when doing video.
    If your looking for a small camera to walk around with, any m43 will do the job. Check out some of the new Nikon Coolpix also, they're compact, do HD video, and some can use many of the Nikon DSLR accessories.
  6. ~tc~

    ~tc~ Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Oct 22, 2010
    Houston, TX
    At 4x6, you will be hard pressed to see the image quality difference between a quality compact camera (Canon S95, Panasonic LX5, Olympus ZX1) and a D3.

    I have printed cropped photos from my GF1 at 13x19, and don't know how they could be much better.

    The D7000 will certainly have better perfomance in very low light. In the worst of conditions, you might be able to see a difference at 8x10.

    In normal/good conditions, you will be hard pressed to see the difference in any hard-copy output you are likely to make at home.
  7. Jonathan F/2

    Jonathan F/2 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 10, 2011
    Los Angeles, CA
    A G3 is more on par with a D3100. You should be comparing the GH2 to the D7000 if your focus is video. If it's stills the D7000 edges out, but you also have to into account the size advantage of micro four thirds. It's not so clear cut.

  8. elandel

    elandel Mu-43 All-Pro

    Apr 16, 2010
    Milan, Italy
    I don't know which will be better in relation to your use. Of couse the D7000 is a better overall camera without doubt.
    But I can only tell my experience. I had a Nikon system and sold out for Olympus M4/3 with which I was satisfied but din't like ergonomics, so I sold it and bought a K5 - very outstanding camera. After a while I returned to m4/3 with a G2. Well, now I'm only using the G2.
    But don't want to sell the K5 yet because it's not convenient. The G2 fits my needs even if the K5 is a far better camera, but the better camera is the one you use.

    Of course if you shoot sports mainly and low-light often then the D7000 is a no brainer.

    The question is that at your image size you won't see any difference, so it will be a hard choice.
  9. kytra

    kytra Mu-43 Regular

    Feb 28, 2011
    I had a D7000 and swapped it for a D90. IMO, the only things the Nikon will do significantly better is fast shooting and low light, body handling, OVF and easier DOF control because of bigger sensor and faster AF glass. The things that G3 will do better is live view shooting, video, usage of legacy lenses, touch ergonomy :). The biggest differentiator is that Nikon is huge compared with M4/3 so think that many times you'll be able to take the G3 but not the Nikon due to portability factor.
  10. soundimageplus

    soundimageplus Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Feb 2, 2010
    Have you considered the Nikon D5100? It has the same sensor as the D7000 but is a lot lighter and slightly smaller.

    I have one and a D7000 and a G3.

    There are Nikon lenses that have IS. For street photography a 35mm f/1.8 would work well.

    Its not as fast as the D7000 but still pretty quick for AF and shooting.

    Don't believe what you read about it in terms of video, its actually very good.

    Its as good as the D7000 at high ISO's, the file size is about the same as the other two cameras, and it has an articulated screen.

    I doubt you would see any difference between any of the cameras at any size of print.

    In truth any of the 3 cameras would pretty much give you what you want.

  11. Pelao

    Pelao Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Feb 3, 2010
    Ontario, Canada
    I think this is the important stuff to help answer the question. What you will shoot is only part of the equation. The final output is just as important. An increasing number of people appear to only display their photographs online. In which case. M4/3 IQ is easily adequate. This does not mean other cameras won't have performance or features the photographer needs, such as frame rate, AF ability etc.
  12. John M Flores

    John M Flores Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jan 7, 2011
    Somerville, NJ
    It's simple.

    If your subject moves a lot....D7000
    If you move a lot....G3

    While the Nikon may have a 1-2 stop advantage in high ISO, in practical terms the G3 @ ISO1600 plus a fast prime (20/F1.7 or 45/F1.8 for example) will work in all but the darkest caves.
    • Like Like x 1
  13. Jonathan F/2

    Jonathan F/2 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 10, 2011
    Los Angeles, CA
    The G3 and the 20 1.7 is a focal length combo you can't get with Nikon.
  14. hunyuan7

    hunyuan7 Mu-43 Regular

    Aug 31, 2011
    This thread has brought to my attention the GH2. I didn't consider it at first because the G3 is the cheaper, newer, and smaller camera. For video, I just need it to autofocus properly and to have optical zoom like on my digicam Sony HX5V and don't need to do anything fancy.

    Is there a thread in this forum that compares the photographic prowess (e.g., action, low light, photo print out quality) of the GH2 and G3?

    I have the D7000 in front of me. It is heavy and its video capability is unacceptable: It may be HD but the recording is fraught with poor autofocusing and camera lens focusing noise. My old Fuji F30's video, without HD and optical zoom, was light years more enjoyable to watch.

    I have considered a Nikon D5100 with its kits lenses 18-55 and 55-200, all for $1,000.00 at Costco. If the video is anything like the D7000's then....

    I would like to thank you all for your valuable input.
  15. Grant

    Grant Mu-43 Veteran

    Oh love this so considered it stolen for my future battles.
  16. Jonathan F/2

    Jonathan F/2 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 10, 2011
    Los Angeles, CA
    If that's your criteria, then the G3 is your camera! I had 3 D7000 bodies and a D3100. For AF video they suck.

    My favorite m43 lens for video is the 14mm pancake. It's silent and AF tracks on subjects better than anything Nikon and it's a fairly fast 2.5 aperture. With Nikon you only get rudimentary AF on the newer camera bodies.

    The G3, 14 pancake and the kit zooms (14-42, 14-45) work incredibly well.
  17. Pelao

    Pelao Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Feb 3, 2010
    Ontario, Canada
    Yes, me too. Nice one John.
  18. John M Flores

    John M Flores Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jan 7, 2011
    Somerville, NJ
    No worries. I'll place it under Creative Commons License!