So, here we see that at least this one is made in China.

Really hope that it won't make troubles, concerning still not so good situation ith japanese owned factories in China.

The retro color style looks very interesting. Compared to the standard profile it seems to preserve a lot more detail in the shadows and on some textures with lower contrast and color saturation. I wonder if it will be available in video mode.

From the ephotozine.com review.

http://www.ephotozine.com/article/panasonic-lumix-dmc-gh3-review-20489

"Video quality is very good, and the camera lets you manually select ISO125 to ISO6400 for videos."

@Vitaliy_Kiselev

The 45-200mm was really bad for it as well. I think it has something to do with the IS system trying to correct for the shutter vibration. The IS in my 14-140mm is much better than the IS in the 45-200mm I had. Hopefully the IS will be fixed when I get my 35-100mm F2.8 in a week or so.

@vicx

That video was great. Graham did a fantastic job on it. Very informative.

That is most of the problem. These reviewers don't understand m4/3s. They only think in full frame terms(Not just depth of field but also settings). There are also other things wrong though. For instance I wonder if they used the electronic shutter. Shutter vibration is a huge issue for m4/3s. It can even affect wide angle shots. I can't wait to try the electronic shutter for the GH3.

I saw some significant blurring and even double image in portions of the pictures. I am not sure if it was from shutter vibration or diffraction. It would have been nice for them to test that. However, they would have no reason to suspect shutter vibration as an issue if they were accustomed to using a camera with an electronic first curtain shutter.

All of that being said I am not impressed with the GH3's jpg images yet. I simply don't like the noise reduction that they have been using in the images that were posted. Hopefully, using different settings will help. If not then RAW will work anyway.

GH3 = 17.20 mp total / 16.05 mp image (4:3) = 4608(H)x3456(V)

EM5 = ~16.9 mp total / ~16.1 mp image (4:3) = 4608(H)x3456(V)

could be a reason of OM-D's less details?

@mpgxsvcd It is true that a lot of these photos are taken beyond recommended settings for the sharpest and cleanest images on m43 but the pictures still look fairly good. I kind of got the impression from the gallery that this reviewer was interested in exploring an architectural "everything in focus" look and he thought that he needed F11.

I had to use an online DOF calculator to confirm that F5.6 would have done the job perfectly but its not something I would have been confident claiming before double checking. I also know that a viewfinder really can't show enough detail to confirm that you 'nailing' focus through the range that you want.

Relevant to this subject of knowing the hyperfocal distance is a really cool feature in the FZ200 that I saw demonstrated in a youtube video last night. The FZ200 has a bar indicator for the focus range which I think is very useful and something I would love to see included in all Lumix cams. Demonstated by Graham Houghton below (Relevant portion starts at 3m35s)

@ Ralph_B "What software works for opening GH3 RAW files? Thanks."

Try this .. http://rawtherapee.com/forum/posting.php?mode=quote&f=2&p=30181

What software works for opening GH3 RAW files? Thanks.

Why oh why do reviewers still insist on taking underexposed wide angle shots at F11 with m4/3s. Oh wait they are so accustomed to shooting full frame that they don't realize that diffraction starts before F11 on m4/3s.

http://img.photographyblog.com/reviews/panasonic_lumix_dmc_gh3/photos/panasonic_lumix_dmc_gh3_49.jpg

I just wish these reviewers knew the m4/3s system better. M4/3s generally are much sharper closer to wide open than they are closer to the limits of diffraction. Yet you always see images shot at F8.0-F11.0.

The ISO 125 looks good there. The ISO 25,000. Not so much.

GH3 Full Size Sample Photos )raw) http://www.ephotozine.com/article/panasonic-lumix-gh3-full-size-sample-photos-20488

The GH3 is supposed to be much improved DR and for us the key issue is how much better in Movie mode. One thing to keep in mind is that how cameras actually handle Low Light and highlights is a huge issue. Some cameras look horrible handling highlights, but are really strong in low light.

One of the things we don't know yet is just how the GH3 will really perform with the best settings. From what i've seen no one has been able to confirm that the pre-production GH3's even had flat picture profiles available. So i'm waiting to see just what the final model GH3's are really capable of when set right. I will say that what I saw did seem to show improved DR, so I think already that this is one positive. Just how much is hard to say.