@Svart This data is extracted from the specifications available at the Panasonic website.

GH2 Active Sensor: 17.3x13.0 (in 4:3 mode) Horizontal Resolution: 4608 (in 4:3 mode)

GH3 Active Sensor: 17.3x13.0 (in 4:3 mode) Horizontal Resolution: 4608 (in 4:3 mode)

The difference is that the GH3 maintains that horizontal resolution (and horizontal active sensor dimension) while the GH2 expands both (and the horizontal resolution in JPEGs hits 4976).

The two differ in the total sensor size (ca 18MP GH2 vs ca 17MP GH3) but the active sensor area in 4:3 mode (and resolution in that mode) are identical, at least as reported in the Panasonic official specifications on their site.

@svart

I think that there is a general misunderstanding of what the "Sensor Size" spec means. For the Panasonic GH3 it means that the size of the area of pixels used in 4:3 mode is 17.3 x 13.0 mm. Panasonic even puts a special note on there that this size is only with respect to the 4:3 aspect ratio mode.

This is NOT. and I repeat NOT the total size of the entire sensor in the camera. For multi aspect ratio cameras like the GH2(and yes the G5) the total sensor size is bigger than 17.3x13.0mm because it has to accommodate the different aspect ratios with the same field of view.

For non-MAR cameras the total sensor size is probably greater than 17.3x13.0mm because they can't use the pixels edge to edge. However, it is probably not as big as those cameras that have MAR capabilities.

There really is no way to convince you without showing you the exact same picture(Same Resolution and Same Field of View) taken with the GH2 and the GH3 in 4:3 mode. So until I have my GH3 you will just have to trust the specs that are listed on the Panasonic pages.

The sensor dimensions and resolutions in 4:3 mode are identical for all three of these cameras(GH2, G5, and GH3).

http://panasonic.net/avc/lumix/systemcamera/gms/gh3/specifications.html

@thepalalias

Yes...I am aware of that. But as you say depends on how the GH3's are set up. The point I was making is this sort of material does not show performance compared to hacked GH2 (exactly same scene with cameras side-by-side). That is the only test that is relevant to me for making decision about upgrade or not.

@Vitaliy_Kiselev

Your enlightened "bullshit" comment the other day about what I said regarding manufacturers cynically "unlocking" new features in the same camera hardware with only a firmware upgrade is itself "bullshit" in view of recent comment from Canon that:

"Canon confirmed ... the 1D C 4K DSLR is a 1D X with a firmware update. Identical hardware." $6,000 firmware that is. (canonwatch.com)

So, as I said, maybe the GH3 hardware is actually capable of much more than Panasonic would like us believe.

@svart

But FOV of lens will still be adversely affected. That is the problem using less of the sensor. Down scaling algorithm irrelevant for this.

Pure speculation on my behalf, and I don't reckon it will cool any of the catfights stirring in here.. but.. Is it not possible, neigh probable that Panasonic knows the true professionals will be right here on Personal-view.com waiting for the VGH3K to roll out, and thus they just make a marketable camera for the mainstream, and knowing doors they locked will soon be jimmied open by our beloved VK, they also know that the Pro's and Pro wannabes (mee) will buy their camera soon enough. Again pure speculation, but it seems probably obvious to me. At least if them boyz in the panahood have smarts.

What I am really trying to say though is... hush thy pussy, and relax till we know more =)

@thepalalias yes, to some degree that is what I meant but I also wonder about how they downscale the horizontal or vertical pixels to 1920x1080 resolution. Since we know that the GH2 binned pixels, the MAR action meant that the binning probably used the same number of binned physical pixels to equal a single summed "effective" pixel. In effect, the X/Y ratio stayed the same and necessitated a MAR sensor to do this. Now who is to say that they didn't figure out a new way to do this where the binned number changes or even switches to line skipping in the horizontal/vertical axis to change the X/Y ratio and utilize fewer pixels in either axis in order to optimize something like pixels size, ease of manufacture or simply cost of the sensor? At this point, I'm also just pondering different approaches based on limited data, much like most of the others in this thread. I'm basing all this on the fact that people are seeing aliasing and moire, which isn't a side effect of a non/MAR sensor but an effect from how the data is treated/processed from the sensor, I.E., line skipping/binning. I think once someone get's their hands on a GH3 we'll know a lot more.

Why are people whining about who made the sensor in the GH3? Does it really matter if it is made by Sony, Panasonic, or Toyota? These electronic products contain a gazillion parts from a gazillion different manufacturers. Can't we just wait and see if the GH3 has got the stuff we need?

Anyways, by the looks of the P.Bloom short, this thing really can produce some stunning footage, and most definately is a tool to be reckoned with.

I'm really excited about this, I skipped on the GH2 because I was happy with my GH1, now maybe I'll take a look at that GH3, because all of the new features are really looking promising to me.

DocZ

Hasselblad is also using a Sony Sensor

http://photorumors.com/2012/09/18/breaking-this-is-hasselblads-mirrorless-camera/

http://www.bjp-online.com/british-journal-of-photography/news/2206781/hasselblad-were-not-robbing-people-off-with-lunar-camera

Yup. Forget the GH3. At least until the Panasonic $300 rebates...meanwhile:

Dear Arri:

Alexa 2 for $899. please. With optional Rolls Royce hood ornament. -Thanks

Crap. Well, Voldemort video is just another nail in the coffin. He usually absolutely do not know what he's doing with cameras and I'm still only seeing the detail level of a 7D. Texture is abysmal. Everything looks like plastic or clay. Noise and patterns still don't look any better than the GH2 with the right patch (although I'm sure you'll be able to go higher overall). This is a horrible step backwards. I'm be more angry... but the thought of the BMCC soothes my rage. I was really looking forward to the 1080p 60fps stuff, but honestly, the GH2 still seems to have more detail in 720p mode.

I'm wondering if they just made a compromise, hoping people wouldn't notice the terrible resolution... or if it was done intentionally? I guess it doesn't really matter either way. There's no way I'm buying another fake-1080p camera.

@bwhitz Are we sure thats raw footage ? It seems to be half the bitrate.

@Stray

Are we sure thats raw footage ? It seems to be half the bitrate.

Well, I downloaded the original. Maybe there's a mistake, but even if compressed, a real 1080p image is usually detectable (see compressed BMCC downloads) and I'm just not seeing it here.

Like Astro said... I'd love to eat my words if this is just some "rough down-sample" in the beta firmware. But as it stands, the "1080p" looks terrible... no better than my 7D, and nowhere close to the GH2.

Too bad no one tried to shoot the same location that day with a Canon and GH2 just to compare directly with the GH3.

@Tron

Agree completely. That 7D comment a few posts back is just f*cking retarded... post that super-sharp 7D footage for the world to see!! Are you watching the vid on an iPhone, bwhitz?

I don't think so. I think your eye's are blurry. 7D footage is not sharp by a long shot... and neither is the GH3. I'm watching on a 24" Apple Cinema display...