G3 image, 1600 ISO JPEG

RichA · May 15, 2011

This is the image you are not supposed to see! Apparently, the Toronto guys got the camera 4hrs before the show started, installed 3 firmware updates. As such I was told (too late!) that we weren't to take images as this is pre-production. I asked what about the one Dpreview and others got? They got production samples. In any case the lowdown from the tech is that the G3 does not have the same "level" sensor as the GH2. It is about 1 stop noisier. However, it is considerably better than the G1, G2, GF1 and GF2 sensor. I haven't opened the raws (I fired about 10 shots before getting shut down) but here is a JPEG.
Disclaimers: It is pre-production, it was shot through the mundane 14-42mm kit lens, I don't know what noise reduction was set.

As for the camera, I like it. It gives me most of the G1's features, but it is smaller and with the 14mm, pocketable in a coat, if not pants.

greypilgrim · May 15, 2011

Some how the math of what the rep told you doesn't make sense. If I recall correctly, the GH2 is about 1 stop better than the G2, so if the G3 is 1 stop noisier than the GH2, then I don't see how it can be significantly better than the G2 (etc).

Also, the reviews we have seen so far seem to imply it is on par with the GH2, no?

I guess we will see as more info comes out.

Thanks for sharing the pic,

Doug

pellicle · May 15, 2011

Hi

nice one

RichA said:
In any case the lowdown from the tech is that the G3 does not have the same "level" sensor as the GH2. It is about 1 stop noisier. However, it is considerably better than the G1, G2, GF1 and GF2 sensor.

interesting. Seeing as I don't see much difference in noise (and I'm uncertain I can quantify it as accurately as a stop) between my G1 and my GH1 its all looking good.

certainly a clean looking camera JPG and perhaps better than anything I got out of my G1 without resorting to RAW and some post capture fiddling.

I'm pleasantly impressed

RichA · May 15, 2011

greypilgrim said:
Some how the math of what the rep told you doesn't make sense. If I recall correctly, the GH2 is about 1 stop better than the G2, so if the G3 is 1 stop noisier than the GH2, then I don't see how it can be significantly better than the G2 (etc).

Also, the reviews we have seen so far seem to imply it is on par with the GH2, no?

I guess we will see as more info comes out.

Thanks for sharing the pic,

Doug

Honestly, I think the GH2 is more than a stop better than the G1. It's close to the Nikon D7000 at ISO's up to around 3200.

greypilgrim · May 15, 2011

RichA said:
Honestly, I think the GH2 is more than a stop better than the G1. It's close to the Nikon D7000 at ISO's up to around 3200.

I wonder if that is in JPEG or Raw comparisons. Don't get me wrong, I am very interested, but IQ improvements are really the key here for me (and it sounds like for many others as well).

Looking at the comparisons already up for JPEGs, I find it hard to see too much difference between the GH2 and the G3. Raw will be the key for me though.

Doug

Pelao · May 15, 2011

greypilgrim said:
I wonder if that is in JPEG or Raw comparisons. Don't get me wrong, I am very interested, but IQ improvements are really the key here for me (and it sounds like for many others as well).

Looking at the comparisons already up for JPEGs, I find it hard to see too much difference between the GH2 and the G3. Raw will be the key for me though.

Doug

I am also waiting to see some RAW testing. The jpegs look very good, and you can't have great jpegs without great RAW, but still, this is where my interest lies.

RichA · May 16, 2011

Pelao said:
I am also waiting to see some RAW testing. The jpegs look very good, and you can't have great jpegs without great RAW, but still, this is where my interest lies.

There are some RAW samples here, but unconverted!

http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/panasonic_lumix_dmc_g3_review/sample_images/

M5-Guy · May 17, 2011

Here is DPR compare of the
G3/K5/D300s/7D at 1600

Draw your own conclusions... but I see the K5 as the closest contender in JPG anyway

ptomsu · May 17, 2011

For me the G3 looks mest.

But I don't give a ..... on JPEGs OOC, I always do RAW!

RichA · May 18, 2011

ptomsu said:
For me the G3 looks mest.

But I don't give a ..... on JPEGs OOC, I always do RAW!

Panasonic JPEG's seemed to have improved.

raist3d · May 19, 2011

M5-Guy said:
Here is DPR compare of the
G3/K5/D300s/7D at 1600

Draw your own conclusions... but I see the K5 as the closest contender in JPG anyway

Be very careful using this to compare. There are different areas of the image that can vary wildly, sometimes due to lens DOF. This happens a lot. There's a guy around that likes to compare for example the playing came card hearts/queens whatever but he has been way off when you look at the general shot.

- Raist

PS: And to be clear, not saying the G3 doesn't look good- it does but I find that you just can't take an image slice and conclude. I would still for example expect a K-5 to do better high ISO than the G3, overall.

M5-Guy · May 20, 2011

raist3d said:
Be very careful using this to compare. There are different areas of the image that can vary wildly, sometimes due to lens DOF. This happens a lot. There's a guy around that likes to compare for example the playing came card hearts/queens whatever but he has been way off when you look at the general shot.

- Raist

PS: And to be clear, not saying the G3 doesn't look good- it does but I find that you just can't take an image slice and conclude. I would still for example expect a K-5 to do better high ISO than the G3, overall.

This may be true overall, as you say. I am glad the sensor technology for the 4/3 senors are finely delivering results that ARE comparable to lager sensors in today's DSLRs. That means DSLR sensors are also getting better, and we'll shall see some clean IQ images at any speed we want in the next Generation or 2, IF, the MP count is kept reasonable to take full advantage of the new technology.

kit laughlin · May 20, 2011

the lowdown from the tech is that the G3 does not have the same "level" sensor as the GH2.

It has been my experience that, sometimes, techs say things and make claims that can't be backed up in practise. Given the success of the G range, and the evolution of the sensors, I am doubtful that the latest iteration would have a "lower level" sensor, unless the G3 is effectively much less expensive than its siblings. What do others think?

M5-Guy · May 20, 2011

Not having the same level could mean a higher level also

pellicle · May 20, 2011

kit laughlin said:
I am doubtful that the latest iteration would have a "lower level" sensor, unless the G3 is effectively much less expensive than its siblings. What do others think?

+1

RichA · May 31, 2011

raist3d said:
Be very careful using this to compare. There are different areas of the image that can vary wildly, sometimes due to lens DOF. This happens a lot. There's a guy around that likes to compare for example the playing came card hearts/queens whatever but he has been way off when you look at the general shot.

- Raist

PS: And to be clear, not saying the G3 doesn't look good- it does but I find that you just can't take an image slice and conclude. I would still for example expect a K-5 to do better high ISO than the G3, overall.

There is something wrong with the Pentax images. The detail is smeared, even in the RAWS. It has lower noise, for sure, just like the Nikon D7000, but definition seems lacking. I am definitely getting the G3.

woodyspedden · May 31, 2011

RichA said:
There is something wrong with the Pentax images. The detail is smeared, even in the RAWS. It has lower noise, for sure, just like the Nikon D7000, but definition seems lacking. I am definitely getting the G3.

Rich

Based on these images I would come to the same conclusion as you.

However, based on my experiences with the K-5 and those for whom we all have respect e.g. Jono Slack et al I think that something is very wrong with the DP REview tests here.

Please understand that I am not trying to defend the K-5 (I also shoot with the Leica S2 system and my standards are pretty darned high) and I certainly am not trying to compare with the G3 about which I know nothing. I am simply trying to caution you about making any decision based on the DP Review comparisons.

Good luck and happy shooting with whatever tool you choose

Woody

pcb_dpi · Jun 1, 2011

Sorry, I'm a bit late to the party here.

Panasonic pretty much has a two-tier sensor scheme, oversized with cropless aspect ratios + higher performance (GHx series), and standard-size with cropped aspect ratios and slightly lower performance (Gx, GFx). I'll bet their product staff consider the std-size sensor to be "lower level," and I don't think the G3 has the oversize sensor. From that point of view, the G3 does have a "lower level" sensor.

It's also a newer sensor, and seems to come very close to GH2 quality and maybe surpass GH1 by a bit. In a compact body with integrated EVF and an affordable price point.

Good times....

kit laughlin said:
I am doubtful that the latest iteration would have a "lower level" sensor, unless the G3 is effectively much less expensive than its siblings. What do others think?

Diane B · Jun 1, 2011

Indeed good times. I can't wait to get my G3 but still have a few reservations since I originally expected to opt for the GH2. Now I anticipate waiting until the GH3 if I feel I want a bit more (or try to keep my mind open to other bodies or systems. Has to have OVF or excellent EVF, reasonable ergonomics all other things being about equal).

Dianr

pcb_dpi said:
Sorry, I'm a bit late to the party here.

Panasonic pretty much has a two-tier sensor scheme, oversized with cropless aspect ratios + higher performance (GHx series), and standard-size with cropped aspect ratios and slightly lower performance (Gx, GFx). I'll bet their product staff consider the std-size sensor to be "lower level," and I don't think the G3 has the oversize sensor. From that point of view, the G3 does have a "lower level" sensor.

It's also a newer sensor, and seems to come very close to GH2 quality and maybe surpass GH1 by a bit. In a compact body with integrated EVF and an affordable price point.

Good times....

RichA · Jun 2, 2011

woodyspedden said:
Rich

Based on these images I would come to the same conclusion as you.

However, based on my experiences with the K-5 and those for whom we all have respect e.g. Jono Slack et al I think that something is very wrong with the DP REview tests here.

Please understand that I am not trying to defend the K-5 (I also shoot with the Leica S2 system and my standards are pretty darned high) and I certainly am not trying to compare with the G3 about which I know nothing. I am simply trying to caution you about making any decision based on the DP Review comparisons.

Good luck and happy shooting with whatever tool you choose

Woody

Fair enough, I had the K10D and the K20D and they didn't produce that effect.

G3 image, 1600 ISO JPEG

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

Workshop Member

New member

Well-known member

New member

Subscriber Member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member