- WHATS CONSIDERED HIGHT SHUTTERCOUNT GH3 MOVIE
- WHATS CONSIDERED HIGHT SHUTTERCOUNT GH3 FULL
- WHATS CONSIDERED HIGHT SHUTTERCOUNT GH3 ISO
WHATS CONSIDERED HIGHT SHUTTERCOUNT GH3 FULL
Continuous autofocus isn't going to better a similar-price DSLR either, but otherwise it's a full experience that holds its own and there are plenty of lenses to choose from too. But with hardened fans of the best-known DSLR brands, the GH3 does feel a little adverse to what we think compact system cameras to be. Will it woo the crowds already attached to DSLR brands? It's not necessarily a hard sell on paper, as there are features by the bucketload. It's even more cash than the Olympus OM-D, but in a more bloated and less "edgily" styled body. This is something the Panasonic marketing boys pushing the movie-capability just got plain wrong.Feature-packed, the Panasonic Lumix GH3 is up there with the best Micro Four Thirds cameras, but it sure is a pricey purchase. One of the top Panasonic execs explained it was designed as a pro-level stills camera.
Put it this way, the GH4 is one hell of a stills camera that just happens to shoot video. Did we mention that the GH4 has the better OLED monitor, not LCD. Both are really nice cameras and take lovely photos. Some DSLR are only 18Mp or even only 12Mp, so no mileage there.
WHATS CONSIDERED HIGHT SHUTTERCOUNT GH3 ISO
Also better in low light, less noise at high ISO and will AF ridiculously accurately in the pitch-black dark. The stills from our GH4 are on par with our Nikon D600, the GH4 actually has a better dynamic range, just.
WHATS CONSIDERED HIGHT SHUTTERCOUNT GH3 MOVIE
There are situations (stage gigs) where the E-M5ii simply cannot be used, it's too noisy and it cannot shoot more than 4Gb of movie anyway. On the E-M5ii it tops out at ISO6400, above that is "extended" whereas the pannies go all the way to ISO25600 (the bottom end is extended downwards).
The GH4 has far better low light capability. Tests show that Panasonic generally has the best colour accuracy, which may be rather important for product shots. The E-M5ii and the E-PL7 can't seem to resolve pale yellow-orange at all and whilst they may look glorious they get other colours just plain wrong. Hard to say whether the E-M5ii or the GH4 focusses the Bigma fastest and/or best, both do the job quickly the E-M5ii gets used because the 4/3 Bigma is unstabilised but the wunderstabilization on the E-M5ii makes little to no difference in practice it simply cannot cope with such a long and heavy mass of lens, so when the light drops the GH4 is pressed into service. It's a bit late in the day but I have used the GH4 for a couple of years now - it simply takes better stills than my E-M5ii even with the 4/3 Bigma, the pictures just look better.įocussing 4/3 is good and fast too but these are clunky lenses in comparison to the m43. the video goes way beyond what current FF bodies can do. The stills may not be up to FF standards. for wedding photographers that need to do both it's actually an excellent option. So ti's beyond excellent value for video.
It's 4k video shooting can not be rivalled until spending well over 10k in body alone. Since these lenses are among the best ever made this is the best reson for old oly users to buy one. and better compatibility with older 43 lenses. A lot of m43 prime lenses lack the stabilisation.Īll of these get stabilisation with the em-1 and not with the GH4. However it's excellent ibis system which the gh4 lacks makes it much better suited for stills. Well the EM-1 is not really the best for buck mirrorless. It's expensive, but not a big stretch past the EM1 (which I The focusing looks pretty impressive so far for CAF, and the viewfinder is a fair bit better than the GH3. Well, I'd buy it for both stills and video.
0 kommentar(er)
