I'm curious to see if people agree here, but I'd say the Canon produces a better image.

5D Mark III vs GH3 on Vimeo

Wouldn't call it "better"... "slightly different" is the proper description.

If I was shooting corporate training or information video, I'd take the GH3 every time. Narrative or beauty, 5Dmk3. The 5D has a 'prettier' and warmer image right out of the camera, but I'm sure you could get the GH3 very close if you wanted to.

Canon has improved with mk3 - but not enough to pay 2,5x the price of GH3. Even if the price was similar I would go for GH3 and 1920x1080 50P. :)

Both cameras provide the capability of adjusting the color profile to achieve the desired result. Basically all your clips from each camera show is that the color profiles are set differently in each camera.

One thing I found interesting is the dynamic range of the GH3 appears to be greater on the shots under the bridge.

The image on the 5DIII looks quite soft at times like the shot at 00:25 where you see the GH3 has more detail, especially in the leaves on the tree. I prefer the sharper image from the GH3.

A lot of this is viewer preference. I think the consensus is that Canon images are "softer". Some people actually prefer that. Personally, I like my images sharp - I can always soften them in post.

That said, the 5D Mark III is a great still camera - but, for video, I'll never go back to a camera without an articulated LCD or 1080/60p.

Cheers,

Bill

I understand what you all say, but look again, are you sure the canon image is softer? Do you really "see" the GH3 sharper? I don't. Is is me, my monitor, or both?

Here I clearly see it in some shots, especially the one around 00:25

What I see is a ~$2500, ~32oz. camera/lens combo with OIS and no record time limit creating images at least as well if not better than a ~$4500, 5lb camera/lens combo without IS and a 30min record time limit.

Here I clearly see it in some shots, especially the one around 00:25

You have to understand that 5DM3 is full frame, therefore it has more shallow DOF, at .25 seconds, the chair sharpness is identical on both camera, but the background the GH3 is sharper because it has more DOF, that is why the leafs on the tree is sharper,this is the reason why many people thinks it is sharper, it might be but not at .25 seconds.

Based on the comments for that video on the vimeo page I"m not the only one saying the gh3 is sharper. So you are saying that because it's full frame it's soft?

No I said it looks soft because full frame has less dof and so one part of the picture is sharp and the rest is soft, in the particular scene that you mentioned, it is clearly that the 5D M3 was focus on the swinging chair, and since full frame has less dof, the rest of the picture is soft or out of focus, the same scene with the GH3, since it is 2X crop it has much more dof and so the whole picture looks sharp, from the chair to the trees, if you want to compare sharpness, you need to know where the shooter was focus both camera on and compared it there, not the whole picture.

END OF THE WORLD SHOOTOUT - PART 3 on Vimeo

A third part of a review of GH2, GH3, 5dmk3, BMC, download the uncompressed files, in part 1.
Obvoius 5dmk3 look pale compared to other three.

Yes the raw footage of the 5D looks awful, magenta like they said, but they also said that they are not Canon expert and thought that it would perform much better if there is someone familiar with the Canon to shoot it, these guys are GH2/3 expert.

Ok, I think I understand now why I thought the GH3 was actually softer than the Canon, while it's not. That was a a different in focus. As somebody mentioned before the GH3 produces an unequalled image for its price and I think that for a log of people it's going to make a huge difference. Frankly, most people on this forum won't export to film and will, at best, render for Blue Ray to be projected on a big screen that can fit in a living room. I think at one point resolution and price have to be a limit. There's not reason to spend 5000 bucks when 2500 will give you a beautiful image on the viewing devices used by the population.
L.

I am shure that if the footage was posted on a Canon forum - the writers would have loved the lack of focus. The fact is that the defocus thing often could be made by using the iris and the use of ND filters. I usually make the soften in post - but yes it cannot always catch up with a defocused Canon.