@zigizigi

Software stabilization has it's own issues from introduced crop, to sudden blur and freezes.

@mpgxsvcd

What is it about the IS that generates so much heat? I never understood why the IS would not allow the sensor to dissipate heat.

It is very simple. Because IS is moving sensor to compensate, so, instead of fixed sensor and proper contact with massive heat spreader all you have is sensor assembly, that is made as light as possible. Hence, while generated heat is the same, heat can't go away as efficiently, and overheating occurs.

@Vitaliy_Kiselev

What is it about the IS that generates so much heat? I never understood why the IS would not allow the sensor to dissipate heat. Does the IS encompass the entire sensor or is it something that only touches the sensor in small discreet spots?

DxOMark is a fine tool for what it was set to be... a tool to reveal strong points, week points and sweet spots of each sensor RAW output.

Using it to derive conclusions to JPEG or video output is nonsense, as it is to qualify a sensor by one final single number. Most of the negative comments on DxOMark that surface especially at DPREVIEW, is made by mentally lazy or challenged people who look at the final score and couldn't spare 1m looking at the graphs to learn something.

I'm not affiliated with them but I have to say that with all else being similar (unlike banding on the GH1 as an example), it's a great tool to tell you what to expect from your photographic tool.

I was mainly focusing on the DR of the sensor more than making a pure judgment of image quality which I don't feel I can make at this time. If it's true that the GH3 has a similar sensor to that of the EM5 then it's likely going to have a very significant increase in DR. I do think that is an improvement. When you take that and ALL of the other improvements as a whole the GH3 could be a very worthwhile upgrade.

None of this is definitive but it just goes to show that there's a real chance that the GH3 will indeed have improved DR and Low Light capability. My guess is that we should be able to record at lower ISO's and still bring out the image we need in post with improved DR and Color. It's just a guess from what i've read so far. I've read that the new codec holds up very well grading in post and that combined with the improvements in DR, Color and Noise should really help to achieve a better final product.

@DrDave @Aria They also rated the sensor better on the GH1 than the GH2 and we all know how the result worked out on the video side. :)

DXOMark does not in any way, shape or form currently address the video-pipeline side of things. The issues with many DSLRs on the video side have to do with how the original data gets output at the video resolution in a given format. The pixel-binning/line-skipping/whatever else method used is a huge factor in that equation.

Like you said, DXOMark can show the sensor's potential, but we are not anywhere near realizing the potential of the sensor in most cases. The color bit-depth, sub-sampling, final output resolution, compression, etc. all mean that we are several steps further from the sensor's potential.

Even on the GH2 (which does a really good job by comparison to most cameras) the pipeline used for video means we are nowhere near the still image potential of the sensor. Even the hacked settings often cannot replicate the detail of JPEG in a high detail scene (let alone the color) and of course none of us are really expecting to be able to get RAW quality either.

So given that baseline, it really is much more about what the camera does with the sensor in video specifically than about what the image potential is like - unless we were recording in RAW at the original resolution and bit-depth.

EDIT: To see the gap between JPEG stills shot at 1920x1080 and video shot with the same settings try comparing the word "Pancakes" or "Ultimate Chicken Fingers" on the box in these pictures at full resolution.

http://personal-view.com/talks/discussion/comment/60506#Comment_60506

DXO rates the Olly-presuamably-same-as-GH3-Sony sensor the best of the bunch, but of course that only measures the potential. Wondering if the GH3 HDMI will provide a clue for the cleaning up the GH2 HDMI..................... Of course I wouldn't use the Olly for video, so I hope the GH3 is better as far as that goes.

@sicovdplas Likely not, antiglare or matte screens kill sharpness so having a hi-res screen AND an anti-glare coating would be senseless.

if the next firmware will not scan the full sensor (18MP downscaled to 1080p) i don't see much reason for name this a beta firmware.. -_-'

someone know if it will ?

@MirrorKisser I'm unfortunate enough to shoot in pouring rain most of the time :)

Why use Sony sensor

@driftwood: great idea, really looking forward to that!!

@oscillian: lol why is a weather sealed body a pro for weddings? (unless of course its a bloodshedding mafia wedding, a dolphin wedding or a russian wedding with vodka and hering allover the place) sorry just joking and trying to find my lost sense of humour. i am sure there are outdoor weddings, too, especially in California.

Itll just be the same matrix as gh3 all-i and ill try and see if 70mbps will work out with it. You must remember the mov files of gh3 are using the more effective level 5 High profile resulting in greater effeciency of the new gh3 codec so dont expect identical similarities.