You are here

Panasonic AG-AC90 or Panasonic GH3

com21's picture
Last seen: 5 months 6 days ago
Joined: 06/05/2013 - 11:35pm

Alright, not sure if this is the right forum but, I recently just got a GH3 , I do mostly VIDEO, I film alot of skateboarding about 60 percent and then short movies/docs/video/ the other 40 percent.  I am an old vx2000 user for like 10 years and thought it was time to upgrade. I been researching for weeks and decided to get a GH3,  My question is should I have i gotten a panny ag-ac90 insted?

 This was my reasoning,   For years i kept hearing and seeing how good the gh2 was, and how nice the quality was. i saw alot of pro filmers starting to use dslr's granted they prolly use mark 3's but whatever, I saw many tests were it was a gh3 vs the ag-ac90, and they looked just about the same , the ag-ac90 was about 800 dollars more but i would need 2 lenses for my gh3 for they even out in price. I understand that the Ag-ac90 is an easier SHOT and GO, and the has XLR, and an adapter for gh3 is more $$$$ like 300, but all the seperate videos and short films i kept watching for both cameras, the GH3 BESTED the ag-ac90 easly quality, I could not understand why,  

 

So in my NOT PRO opinion i got the gh3, it just shipped yesturday. IF u take away the shot and go, and the better sound controls ( i don't really mind taking time to set-up ) DID i make the right choice.   Also as there was a awsome hack for gh2 that made it super sweet, i am hoping sometime within the year the gh3 would get one that would make it even more better.    Opinions Please?

sorry for making you read all this,  --Alex--


brunerww's picture
Last seen: 2 hours 57 min ago
Joined: 06/09/2011 - 6:40am
Plus Member

Hi Alex. You made the right decision.  Check out this comment at the bottom of a thread called "Need a camera to shoot live music events" over in the Professional Camcorders sub-forum.

 

The poster bought both cameras, used them side-by-side in a production environment, and said the GH3:

 

1. was easier to use and

2. performed better in low light

 

I am a GH3 shooter and agree 100%

 

Good luck with your new camera!

 

Bill


com21's picture
Last seen: 5 months 6 days ago
Joined: 06/05/2013 - 11:35pm

thanks i appreciate it, i was getting worried but people do keep saying its super nice even if i never take picture siwth it,   i will but im just saying


AndersonSoundRecording's picture
Last seen: 1 year 1 week ago
Joined: 03/02/2013 - 6:52pm

I'll chime in since I'm the guy he's talking about.

 

These two cameras are basically the perfect compliment to each other - the strengths of one fill the weaknesses of the other.  I have both at the moment, and I might have to return one of them.  Deciding which is nearly impossible, because between the two of them I have almost every situation I'll ever encounter covered.

 

The AC-90 is a great point-and-go kind of camera, and is perfect for all things in regard to shooting live events.  It can use shore power easily, has two card slots that can be configured for redundant recording, has XLR inputs so you can feed it good quality audio, and would be an ideal camera to set up for live streaming.  The lens is powerful enough to cover almost any situation, and the low-light performance is great, considering how many people knock it for the size of its chips.  It is a real purpose-built camcorder.

 

Downsides: I still haven't figured out the white balance on this thing, the iris and gain control are linked, there is no separate "ISO" control.

 

The GH3 isn't eaiser to use per se, but offers a lot more control if you know what you are looking for, and accessing the parameters you need to access is very easy.  You'll probably need a few lenses to pull it off properly, but with a good lens, the image quality is stellar.  Low-light performance is great, it's small and compact, the third-party battery that I was using seemed to go on forever.

 

Cons: would require more lenses, to stream properly I need lots of crazy adapter things, not sure if it can use shore power, so you may end up having to swap batteries at a bad time, it does not look like a real camcorder - laugh at that last one if you must, but despite the ubiquity of DSLR's, if someone is paying you to video a gig, sometimes they want to see a "real video camera"

 

Hope that helps.


com21's picture
Last seen: 5 months 6 days ago
Joined: 06/05/2013 - 11:35pm

I see all the points you talking about and agree with them, i just today got my gh3 and tomorrow im going to buy a lense , i film mostly skating so the first one will be fisheye, the 7.5 ronikon/samyuang, or 8mm panny, I also would like good XLR audio but its not as important to me right now as video is.  I know the previous version GH2 was one the top most used camera's for pro-filmer for skating, also i know and have seen several movies that were completely filmed with it, i have 30 days so just as with you , if i don't like it for what i need, i will return it , ill post some videos after i use it for couple days,  but its like what you said, lenses can add up thousands of dollars and with that money i could have gotten a better one mabey you know.


Frank Redward's picture
Last seen: 1 year 1 month ago
Joined: 06/08/2013 - 3:11pm

Hi Com21

 

May I also agree with all the comments as well.

 

I have 2 x GH3s a GH2 5DMKII & III etc, I shoot freelance news media and though the 5D is the low light king, the GH3 has a brilliant crisp clear colourful image, it's small and takes so many lenses plus the wifi is great.

 

But having said all those nice things I just bought a Canon C100 video camera and wow!

 

The picture is just soooooo clear yes even clearer nicer than GH3 and the audio is proper professional high quality sound it's noise free and full bodied.

 

For your skateboarding the GH3 is the way to go, you will love it.

 

I just wanted to put it out there that the C100 is a serious movie making camera and as much as I didn't think it possible, as good as DSLR video is, and the GH3 is at the top, the C100 though more expensive is what the 5DIII pretends to be.

 

if anyone wants to graduate up from DSLR video have a serious look at the C100.

 

low light is better than 5DIII depth of field almost on par with full frame and lots more stuff.

 

Even the battery life & choices are a gift.


com21's picture
Last seen: 5 months 6 days ago
Joined: 06/05/2013 - 11:35pm

thanks man, appreciate it, I saw the c100 and youte'd it, it looked nice as shit but as you said way out of my price range.   mabey when i get to a higher level or just get alot more money i would def like to have it.