Image courtesy: SLRlounge.
SLRlounge (Click here) is the first website posting a GH4 versus GH3 High ISO comparison:
Overall, there is a clear improvement in the GH4 low light, high ISO performance when it comes to shooting jpegs. So, based on my first impression, Panasonic took what’s great about the GH3, from the ergonomic to the video quality, and improved just about everything. The new sensor produces noticeably better image quality especially in low light, the EVF and LCD are vastly improved, and of course, the headliner is the 4K video output, which we will cover more in-depth in the near future.
Bestmirrorlesscamerareviews posted a short GH4 hands-on article which also includes original 4K video for download at Google Drive (Click here).
51 Responses
Just make the camera available, don’t talk it to death!
I’m impressed… is it a foveon sensor?? Ha ha….
Skin tones are also much better. Great job Pana!
Very bad testing. Light is far from the same
So is the focus. The bird didn’t get that fuzzy just from DNR, the ISO1600 and 3200 shots are clearly OOF. Very amateurish.
Please read my reply above.
To be honest, my time with the GH4 was fairly limited, especially with the low light test. It’s definitely not a comprehensive test because of the pre-production GH4 firmware and lack of RAW processor with Adobe/Capture One.
Giulio was the one who advised me to reduce the Noise Reduction for both jpegs.
Even the Panasonic lens has pre-production firmware, which I think is the reason my GH3 was not able to get a proper focus at f/1.2 in low light. My other lenses focus just fine.
YAJC? Yet Another JPG Comparison? Why not compare image quality shooting through foggy glass?
Something tells me that Panasonic is nervous about its image quality, because I suspect it has pumped up video quality without attending to the basic reason for a camera: picture quality.
Here’s a better idea: Compare the image quality in RAW. Or even a better idea. Don’t compare one generation of your quasi-video camera still to another generation. How about a comparison of RAW to Panasonic’s own 3-4 years old GH2? Or even better, a comparison of RAW image quality to Olympus’ current EM-1, or even its 2 year old em-5?
I think the results would be very interesting.
Any company will be nervous if someone will use preproduction firmware and beta RAW developer in open testing. Just small silly bug and sales will be ruined, many people decided on such tests.
And to the extent your issue is valid (which it may be), how does introducing the variability of JPG conversion into the equation help? What if the JPG conversion in one camera is worse than in the other? Should I buy a camera with a worse intrinsic sensor because the JPG conversion software in it is better?
And pre-production, beta in-camera jpeg processing is any more accurate?
Most hobby & recreational camera users don’t want to deal with RAW. To hear even the successful professionals talk, they all seem to be looking for a way to simplify their work-flow.
Improved JPG quality is highly desired for the masses and like video performance will continue to be an area of intense R&D.
I’m not asking anyone to deal with RAW. Not the rec camera users, not hobbyists, and not my mother-in-law. The point of this comparison is not to shoot a day in the park with grandma. We are trying to compare the ability of the cameras (at least I was expecting that based on what this website is). To do that, one should look at the RAW, not the variability of a JPG conversion. That’s like printing both pictures to paper, and then comparing the paper.
As others have stated, the pre-production RAW data is not available. What IS available are these JPG images.
Actually, the point of this post is to compare some early JPG results. It isn’t about RAW.
Relax. Other people take better pics than you. So what?
I can accept that. Photography is not a contest. It’s about ART.
Since you’ve never seen any of my photos, (because they are not posted), as usual you are talking out of your butt.
Hey kid, here’s looking at you.
http://cdn.geekwire.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/nerd-bigstock_Extreme_Computer_Nerd_1520708.jpg
Dealing with raw files, at least, with Phase One Capture One Pro 7 is not a big deal, if you don’t want it to be. Just as with Photoshop, you can let the software evaluate the photo and make automatic changes, or you can apply Style presets.
Dealing with RAW can be very very easy, incredibly so.
But it also leaves open the door open to almost limitless potential! If you so wish.
No reason not to use RAW!! (except in a few very limited circumstances)
Get Lightroom (or a similar program), it will revolutionize your photography!
David, Thanks for your polite assistance. I do use Lightroom and couldn’t get by without it. So far I am pleased with the OoC JPGs I get from the GH3 & GX7. I do however intend to start taking event photos and “street” in both JPG & RAW just to play it safe.
I often shoot video, (which isn’t in RAW), @ 60 fps wherein such individual frame manipulation isn’t feasible. Editing video already consumes a lot of time, (a commodity I am running out of).
I have helped my son edit RAW images from his D600 in Lightroom 5 and I can appreciate the extra latitude RAW offers.
Go to DPR (In the top menu: “Sample Image” – at the bottom “New studio scene comparison tool”) and compare the latest Panny sensor of GX7 or GM1 to the E-M10’s Sony sensor. (E-M5 is in the old scene comparator. E-M1 has Panny sensor.)
Link: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison
Well as stated in the article, if you read it, they didn’t have access to a RAW converter yet. Not surprising the cameras are still pre-production. Once production cameras are available, I am sure there will be endless RAW comparisons against just about everything. This was a simple JPEG comparison, with both cameras set to their minimum settings to minimize the impact of the JPEG processing. A valid comparison within certain limitations.
Hi Ale, just wanted to say that the Dropbox link to the GH4 footage is ours (bestmirrorlesscamerareviews). The high number of visits caused Dropbox to disactivate the link. We’ve now moved the files to Google Drive, which can be found just below the video in our hands-on article: http://www.bestmirrorlesscamerareviews.com/2014/03/04/hands-on-with-the-panasonic-gh4-leica-15mm-and-nocticron-425mm-at-the-tps/
Thanks! I updated the post link 🙂
Thanks! 😉
Sorry, one more thing. I just clicked on the link to our article and it takes you straight back to 43rumors. Could you update the link? Thanks. 🙂
Fixed it!
Grazie! 😉
The second link is deactivated too (for download), May be you should upload the files to Mega or Copy
The Panasonics reds are looking much better =)
How is that an improvement! All i see is additional color noise and a bit of oversharpening. Dear god. Several years later and the 4k is hardly better and if anything a step back. LOL. Personally, I find the 4k render extremely harsh and unpleasant. Yes, I get it targeted to Video people.. then why show a still high ISO image.
it seems you need new glasses….
totally agree!
Btw, I didn’t bother to open the link and passed my judgement solely off the 12800 comparison provided on here. Simply put, way more color noise probably due to less nr to preserve some addition edge detail over the gh3.. and a gh3 oof image to try and make the gh4 look better then the older gh3. People actual fall for the games played.. really? Be objective and see whats posted for what it is.
I guess we see what we want to see.
I LIKE what I see.
Let me guess, it’s no Ep2?
I expect real video picture improvement after Panasonic implement 8Mpix martix only.
I too do not see any improvement in low noise performance in these test shots. In fact, other than what looks to me to be a possible difference in focusing between the two cameras, the GH4 looks worse. In the closeup of Giulio’s head at ISO12,800 (link below), blotchy green and red color noise is very obvious in the background behind his head, and there is considerably more black grainy noise in all the darker areas on the GH4 side. The focus/sharpness looks about the same in this particular comparison. Looking at any of the images, even full images, and even at lower ISO settings, the same lumpy color noise shows in the GH4 shots and, although less pronounced than at 12,800, it is in all cases more distracting to me than the higher frequency noise in the GH3 shots. Of course, if this is not the final version of the camera the results may be better when the final version does hit the stores. And perhaps it just needs the noise reduction turned up a notch. But if I had purchased this particular GH4, and this is the best that it could do, I would be very unhappy with it’s high ISO performance.
I agree that the video from the GH4 is extremely impressive!
http://d1ax9dx3gero0.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Head-ISO12800.jpg
The GH4 looks like the GH3 with vivid and NR dropped a couple of notches. I’d still love the improved VF, but the GH3 is so beyond my ability I can’t justify a GH4 yet.
The test is inconclusive, the guy should have left the NR set to default on both cameras. GH3 apply s NR even at the -5 setting in JPG, it is a known fact.
I like the structure of the noise in GH4 and I’m curios how the files look at normal NR settings compared to GH3.
You have to remember that this “test” is brought to you by people who are supported (if not out right paid) by Panasonic. So take it all with a grain of salt.
Wrong, fella. I definitely did not get paid nor do I work for Panasonic. I was invited to test out the GH4 for an hour, but that’s about it.
That being said, what can be “taken with a grain of salt” is the fact that both the GH4 and the Panasonic 42.5mm f/1.2 have pre-production firmware, so image quality may change.
– Joe Fotosiamo
Thanks Joe, for your efforts on behalf of the m4/3 community. I can appreciate your efforts to show us early test results. Your findings made it very clear that these were merely pre-production JPGs because such is all that is available at present.
It’s a shame that critics can’t lay aside their parochialism and maybe even learn to criticize in more nuanced terms. There is no excuse for the accusations nor for the poor conduct.
Don’t give up!
I on the other hand like the fact that they turned down the noise reduction which I find more interesting then default JPEG settings. Panasonic has indicated that the GH4 processing engine does things differently then the GH3. Not going to get overly excited by any of this as these are all pre-production results and RAW results are not yet available. Still though, in that I prefer detail over noise reduction, I think the GH4 results look more to my liking. In real world use though, I would do as I have done in the past. Shoot JPEG+RAW and using the JPEG as a reference to aid in the RAW post processing. But that is my workflow, and other people have other needs. Being pre-production cameras though, while interesting and feeding my desire to see results, none of it is conclusive at this point. We will have plenty of comparisons, once production cameras are available. I suspect that the GH4 will be quite popular with the professional testers around the world and will receive some priority in their work queues. For now, what I see is interesting and entertaining, but not the stuff of which to make decisions on.
It looked as though ISO 6400 with the GH4 was better than the GH3 on the face, and perhaps, slightly better than ISO 3200 on the GH3, but not better on the hands.
I think there are certain improvements, you can see more details from the GH4. However, the improvements seem to fall off sharply after ISO 6400 (aka ISO 12800s are almost the same). In addition, the GH 3 pics are so out of focus that it doesn’t make sense (or could be that Gh4 produces much sharper images). Will wait for more 4k movie samples.
GH3, out of focus.
It’s not, it’s just noise. For instance, in the ISO 12800, the yellowish pattern confirms it’s in focus. The black looks better in the GH4, but the red not.
The image just above at ISO 12,800 shows that it’s in focus but the details of the bird are better.
Hi, I’m the one who wrote this article. I refocused for every single shot for both cameras. What I think is the real cause is the pre-production firmware of the 42.5mm f/1.2 not working properly with the GH3, and maybe just shooting f/1.2 in low light with my GH3.
My own mu4/3 lenses auto-focuses just fine on my GH3.
– Joe Fotosiamo
For comparisons it’s always best to eliminate as many irrelevant variables as you can. Something as obvious as focusing shouldn’t even be part of the equation in a ISO test, find a static object and lighting, use manual everything. Personally i’m all for real-world samples over ‘brick wall’ tests, but this way it’s neither. 🙁
I’m almost tempted to get into video because of this camera.
Plans for 2014:
1. Win the lottery.
2. Get a GH4
3. Get into videography
4. Move to Hollywood
Realistic plans for 2014
1. Get an E-M1
2. Take better pictures
3. Eat ramen.
Temptation!!
Plans for 2014:
1. Win the lottery.
2. Get a GH4
3. Renew my passion in both still and video.
4. Retire to Southeast Asia where there are infinite tapestries of life craving to be captured.
Backup plans for 2014
1. Get whatever I can afford that is better then what I got.
2. Get out and shoot more with whatever I have, wherever I am.
3. Eat ramen and rice. (I like variety)