Panasonic GH3 and Blackmagic Pocket

Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera vs. Panasonic GH3

Today at NAB 2013, Blackmagic Design shocked the production world the second year in a row with the announcement of their new Pocket Cinema Camera. It packs much of the same punch as last year’s groundbreaking Blackmagic Cinema Camera, in a more compact form factor—at one third of the price.

The most compelling thing about today’s announcement is that it’s aimed at users like myself. The closest competitor to the new BMPCC is the Panasonic GH series of cameras, namely hacked GH2’s and the GH3. I’m considering picking up a Lumix GH3 as my next camera body, and I didn’t anticipate that Blackmagic throwing a stick in my decision-making spokes. So in this post, I’m going to break down the pros and cons of choosing between a Panasonic GH camera and a Blackmagic Pocket Cinema.

The first point to consider is that the BMPCC isn’t a hybrid photo and video camera. If you’re into firing off some stills as you shoot video (which is something I often do), then the BMPCC is not the way to go. It’s strictly for video, or as Blackmagic is fond of saying: Super 16 digital film.

Ergonomics are something else to consider. None of these cameras have a good ergonomic video camera design. The GH cameras are shaped like traditional still cameras, and the BMPCC is shaped like a point-and-shoot. The GH cameras are shaped the way they are because they’re actually hybrid cameras. The BMPCC is shaped the way it is, presumably, to be more pocket friendly.

The trouble with making a big sacrifice in order to be more pocketable is that it was done in vain. Even with the slimmest of pancake lenses, interchangeable lens cameras don’t fit in your pocket. Sure, you can remove the lens and slide it into your jeans, but then the purpose of a pocket camera is lost, because you’ll need to wear a fanny pack to tote around your glass.

So with this in mind, I would be more compelled by a $1000 cinema camera with a more ergonomic design. That said, I do find the BMPCC appealing. It’s nice looking. The 1/4 20 thread at the base and top of the body is a welcome, video-rig friendly touch. People who got hands-on time with the BMPCC today are reporting that it has a solid feel, and that it’s heavier than it looks. This is also good. The weight will help you shoot steadier shots, however, a more traditional video camera shape would’ve helped far more.

The next major thing to consider is size. I personally like small cameras. Don’t get me wrong, I like big cameras too, but there’s something really attractive about a tiny body that can capture big cinematic images. So this is a plus for the BMPCC. It’s notably more compact than the GH3. I was kind of bummed that Panasonic discontinued the GH2. I figured since they made the GH3 larger, that it might make sense to keep the GH2 around as a smaller option.

If you’re weighing the pros and cons between a BMPCC and the compact GH2, an important thing to consider is the headphone output. The GH2 doesn’t have a headphone output, but the new BMPCC does. It’s a small detail, but an important one nonetheless.

GH3 Dimensions = 5.2 x 3.7 x 3.2″

BMPCC Dimensions = 5 x 2.6 x 1.5″

Visual monitoring is another major factor to consider. Both the GH2 and the GH3 have pretty great monitoring options. The articulating LCD display is key for low and high angle shooting, and the electronic viewfinder is indispensably important to me. I personally use the EVF a great deal more than I use the LCD. It would be really difficult to give up.

The BMPCC has a fixed 3.5″ LCD. No electronic viewfinder. You can connect an external LCD monitor to its mini-HDMI output, or perhaps get some kind of eyepiece loupe going, but again, adding this stuff makes it less and less of a pocket camera.

Another major differentiator is file types. The BMPCC shoots Apple ProRes 422 (HQ) and something called “lossless CinemaDNG RAW.” Being able to shoot straight to Apple ProRes 422 is really nice. I consider this a big perk of the BMPCC. Shooting RAW is another story. It sounds like you would have to spend a couple of hundred bucks on ultra-fast SDXC cards to shot in this RAW format. I realize that this is a main attraction for a lot of people. I would be interested in trying it out, but for me personally, it’s not a huge draw.

Sensor size is another big difference. The BMPCC has a “Super 16” sensor, which was designed to be a digital version of a 16mm film camera. The GH cameras have a Micro Four Thirds sensor, which is larger. The GH cameras win in this category.

At the end of the day, and being a few minutes before midnight, it really is the end of the day for me, I think the BMPCC is a really cool new camera. I really welcome the idea of a pocket cam dedicated to cinema video. I’m cheering for you, Blackmagic. You’re doing great work. I also really like that this camera has a Micro Four Thirds Mount. That means the format that I’m invested in will be getting some more love in the days to come. More people will be buying MF3 lenses and adapters. Everyone wins.

Have I been swayed away from the GH3? No. Not yet. I want to see what this camera can do in the hands of talented users. I want to check out the test footage, and pick one up, and see how I get on with it. However, it’s the same story once again. No matter which way you go, you’re likely going to have an awesome camera. These are good times we’re living in, people.

Published by

Sam

Writer, musician, photo taker and video maker. When not writing somewhat longish articles for this blog, I write incredibly short things on Twitter: @SamMallery

8 thoughts on “Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera vs. Panasonic GH3”

  1. I would have the two cameras, complementing each other for video.

    The plus side of this, is that you can interchange the lenses. An for example, with the Nokton 17.5 you get that 35 mm film look…

    Another consideration is the dinamic range, wich by the bmpcc is 13 stops, and the gh-3?

    We need a side by side comparison of pros and cons.

  2. Just thought I should point out the GH2 does have a headphone input. I can’t speak to the GH3 or bmpcc, though I seriously doubt the GH3 would be lacking one, and I would be seriously disappointed if the pocket cam didn’t.

  3. Hi Travis. Thanks for posting a comment. As a GH2 owner, I have to disagree with you. The GH2 does not have a headphone output. It has a 2.5mm stereo microphone input, but no headphone output. Both the GH3 and the BMPCC have a 3.5mm headphone output, and a 3.5mm stereo microphone input.

  4. I’d like to mention that the GH3 has 1080 60p. As a Canon T3i shooter, this is a big feature that others lack! Unfortunately the lack of focus-peak display on the GH3 gives me pause.

  5. Lowlight performance, rolling shutter and moire, these are details which are of great importance and which there is very little info on with respect to the BMPCC. I also use a GH2 and have been thinking of an upgrade to a GH3, but if the BMPCC proves to be better in these areas it would be my preferred choice, also the fact that it is priced at around ÂŁ665 you could buy a decent sized break out monitor which unless you intend on using your camera handheld all the time is a must in my opinion, for comfort and focus, nice as the GH2 & 3’s flip out screen is, it is just not big enough and the viewfinder is only good for set up no good for using while taking video. The whole “pocket” tag is just marketing nonsense and most users will be using on a rig of some sort.

  6. I’ve been using the GH3 since Jan. Early days yet but one thing stands out. It will get you that shot in a working environment. No overheating, shutting down or unpredictable quirks and seamless stills/video operation. It offers frame rate options fast and slow, 50p (Euro) 25p and 24p with 50 or 72 mbps plus weather sealing and over 11 stops of dynamic range – with fast lenses I can easily work with that. I’ve no issues with the image quality which is especially important considering my production design background and fussyness re colors and look. Its a big thing that I can go into any situation, hot studio or freezing location and get the shot with a minimal amount of gear. For a full days shoot only two batteries are needed and some 32/64 meg 45 plus write SD cards. No need for portable hard drives/ recorders or back ups. I’ve evolved into two ranges of lenses, manuel fast like the Voightlander/SLR Magic and auto MFT’s like the Olympus 45 f1.8/ Panny zooms and primes plus a few classics just for their unique looks. I was told by more than one iconic photographer it takes about a year to figure out a lens, so plenty of learning yet to do. At the end of the day, for me, its about getting that shot then turning it around on location via your laptop last thing at night, than doing the whole thing again – and again and . . . . .

  7. Let us see what type and quality of videos you produce at the moment. If you are talented then a dedicated cine film camera may be utilised properly. If you video the kids or the cat anything will satisfy your abilities.

    See you on the big screen
    Joe

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.