LUMIX FZ1000 user update

[Colin Rowe]

True Noa, but it would never apply to me. When I need lights, I use them, Never had a problem in that regard. A correctly diffused light will always get a far more satisfactory shot, than filming in a coal hole. IMO. I really dont see the point of all this comparison with other cameras, and lenses. Of course some are better. But it doesnt alter the fact that the FZ1000 is more than up to the job

[Steve Burkett]

Lights Colin rely on a controlled scenario and of course subject to any irritations amongst the Guests. I've had requests to turn off lights before and those were diffused and on its lowest setting. I use a ring light where I can, quite happily as like you say, good lighting delivers better results than pushing iso and shallow aperture.

As for camera comparisons, perhaps you're right. I've never doubted that for those Videographers not looking for the DSLR look, the FZ1000 is quite capable of capturing a Wedding to a good standard. In fact, I'm quite happy to sit this thread out as I don't own a FZ1000, nor have any intention of doing so. I only came in as a point was raised as to why the camera gets overlooked and that its low price has led to this snub; a fact I disagree with.

[Noa Put]

Originally Posted by Colin Rowe

TI really dont see the point of all this comparison with other cameras, and lenses.

It makes a lot of difference for anyone interested in buying this camera, lets say I use a gopro and say it's good enough in low light at weddings for my use, I"m sure many would be disappointed to buy this camera based on my opinion if they have no idea what is acceptable to me, I can use my gopro4 black in that same church you have shot at and it will look ok as well.

When I found those few comparison videos in lowlight between the gh4 and the fz1000 it didn't interest me which one was better but it learned me that both camera's have similar low light performance at f2.8 and 6400 iso where the fz1000 is a bit noisier at it's highest iso setting. Now Roger keeps on saying those vides where not accurate but all three appear to be done with the same f-stop and same iso setting, as noted in each video, and all three come to the same conclusion.

For me this is important to know because having a gh4 I also know now how the fz1000 would perform at similar f-stops and iso levels, I know from experience that f2.8 would not cut it on my gh4 to shoot almost all weddings I cover at the venue and f4 would be totally out of the question, this also means the fz1000 would not cope as well for my particular needs, buying such a camera would mean I could only use it up to the venue in the evening and either switch to my gh4 or use a videolight on the fz1000.

That's the only thing I was trying to say all along but Roger doesn't seem to want to know that because for "him" all is ok as it is. I have been trying to put it into perspective for other users but it appears this is not really appreciated.

[Roger Gunkel]

I've only ever said that extreme low light/candlelight performance is of no great interest to me, I have never suggested that low light performance is not of interest to others and Colin has kindly offered to post some low light clips, although that offer has also been criticised.

I just don"t understand this absolute obsession with ultimate low light performance. There are so many different sides to using a camera and I just wanted a place where people can discuss what they are finding with this camera, including low light performance. However every time I try to do that, I seem to come under personal attacks for apparently dictating what people may say on the thread or who may post, and the fact that I am not bothered by ultimate low light comparisons with other cameras when others obviously are. It also seems to be the same people making personal statements about what they think I want and don't want.

I am tired of the snide personal comments and have decided to withdraw from any further involvement!

Roger

[Clive McLaughlin]

As someone who has just purchased an RX10ii, I cannot see how anyone could not justify an extra few hundred to buy the RX10ii over the FZ1000. No contest surely??

Sony RX10 II Vs Panasonic FZ1000 - YouTube

[Colin Rowe]

QUOTE: As someone who has just purchased an RX10ii, I cannot see how anyone could not justify an extra few hundred to buy the RX10ii over the FZ1000. No contest surely??

That video sums up what I mean by these silly arguments over equipment. There is a contest Clive, The RX10 would be of no use to me at all. I cover fieldsports and the 200 lens on the RX10 just wouldnt cut it for me. I need the 400 of the Lumix. Its all about using a camera that is suitable for the job, regardless of the name on it. Its all very subjective, and always will be.

[Steve Burkett]

Actually the video shows the contest is less one sided than I would have thought. No doubt the FZ1000 is a fine camera, albeit one restricted by a few things like no constant aperture and a poor zoom. I'm not sure why Roger felt the forum needed another thread on the camera, given this is the 4th one in so many months, and the last 2 ran to a dozen pages. Whilst a good discussion on gear is always fruitful, if the last 3 didn't achieve the type of discussion Roger wanted, one wonders what he expected a 4th would do.

[Nigel Barker]

Originally Posted by Clive McLaughlin

As someone who has just purchased an RX10ii, I cannot see how anyone could not justify an extra few hundred to buy the RX10ii over the FZ1000. No contest surely??

As someone who has just purchased an RX10ii, I cannot see how anyone could not justify an extra few hundred to buy the RX10ii over the FZ1000 either:-)

I don't film weddings any more & only want one camera & on the specs & videos that I have seen the RX10M2 looked like a better long term purchase. I also wanted something to match easily with AX100 footage. If I were still filming weddings & wanted to standardise on several identical cameras the FZ1000 might be appealing as it is literally half the price of the RX10. On the other hand compared to the costs of running a full frame DSLR the incremental cost of three RX10s versus three FZ1000s is about the price of a good lens.

[Noa Put]

Originally Posted by Roger Gunkel

I just don"t understand this absolute obsession with ultimate low light performance.

It's not an obsession, it's an attempt to clarify to other users what they can expect from this camera as objectively as possible. You wanted to talk positives/negatives yet get very defensive if it's not in line with your personal experience.

Originally Posted by Roger Gunkel

I have never suggested that low light performance is not of interest to others

That's right, you said it was of no interest whatsoever to you because you don't have an issue with low light, but does that mean we cannot share helpful information for users that have higher demands for low light or should we only accept what you have to say about the camera?

[Noa Put]

Originally Posted by Clive McLaughlin

As someone who has just purchased an RX10ii, I cannot see how anyone could not justify an extra few hundred to buy the RX10ii over the FZ1000. No contest surely??

This thread has never been about a contest between camera's, not sure where you got that idea, it was to pass on experiences and gain advice on the fz1000.

[Chris Harding]

Roger has a very valid point here guys. He is trying to make this an information thread. If you want to sing the praises of the very nice RX10 or GH4 then Chris Hurd has provided forums under Sony and Panasonic especially for those cameras.

Sadly, despite multiple requests Chris hasn't given a forum for FZ cameras at all so our only option seems to be to post here!

If there WAS a forum under Panasonic that the GH and LX cameras already have then we wouldn't need to post here and people that wanted to get information about the FZ series of camera would have somewhere to go!!

Sadly this thread again has been hijacked so it has lost all usefulness as an FZ1000 information thread and has become a slinging match between a couple of people so I will quietly make no further comments here.

[Dave Blackhurst]

Having just gotten an insane deal on an RX10II from someone it just wasn't quite right for, I will say that I'm pretty sure I'll be thrilled with it, and it's "OK" that it didn't meet someone else's needs... my Mk1 will probably stick around for "backup" as it's served me well, and the used prices are almost silly for them... it's way more useful to me than what they seem to be bringing in used... oh well...

If the FZ1000 is meeting the needs after learning to get the most out of it, that's great, the price is right, and overall seems to be a good little camera that doesn't break the bank - I appreciate the posted samples, just to see what offerings are out there. I'm guessing that Panasonic will bring out a "MkII" or FZ2000 or whatever, competition is good! I might even pick up a used FZ1000 just to play around with a bit! The posted footage looks very good, and I'm not really seeing the things that always made me just a teeny bit less than happy with the Panasonic "look", I'm guessing if I wasn't overly confused with a "different" menu set, I could pick one up and get good results!

Every camera is more than just specs, and every camera takes time to adjust to, and learn to maximize (this being a reason that the typical "review" with maybe a few minutes of "hands on" before "critiques" must be taken with a degree of skepticism).

The AX100 definitely had a learning curve (4K having it's own set of potential "gotchas"...), the RX's can do a lot of things that aren't immediately obvious, and so a "long term driving report" on the FZ's is certainly a valid exercise.



One thing that really bears mention and consideration... small, reasonably priced cameras mean that as a business, you've got less overhead, and also that you can upgrade to newer better technology when it comes around. If they (along with your talent as an operator) produce the output that works for clients, and don't get in the way of your creativity/workflow, it's silly not to consider them. They are tools, and when a camera you can buy well sub $1K produces a better image than one that cost several "K's" just a few years ago, it's worth consideration if it meets your needs...

That said, I'm looking for some guy who buys and A7SII (and of course some nice lenses!) and decides it's not for him... or an A7RII, can't be TOO picky after all!

[Steve Burkett]

Originally Posted by Chris Harding

Roger has a very valid point here guys. He is trying to make this an information thread. If you want to sing the praises of the very nice RX10 or GH4 then Chris Hurd has provided forums under Sony and Panasonic especially for those cameras.

Sadly, despite multiple requests Chris hasn't given a forum for FZ cameras at all so our only option seems to be to post here!

If there WAS a forum under Panasonic that the GH and LX cameras already have then we wouldn't need to post here and people that wanted to get information about the FZ series of camera would have somewhere to go!!

Sadly this thread again has been hijacked so it has lost all usefulness as an FZ1000 information thread and has become a slinging match between a couple of people so I will quietly make no further comments here.

Chris that's utter rubbish. Why not post under the Panasonic LUMIX GF / GH / LX Series forum. Yes it technically doesn't say FZ, but surely this thread has a better home there than a Wedding and Events forum. Is it being posted here as a protest to there not being such a dedicated forum? Its hardly the "only" option as you say. I don't think us Panasonic users would mind a FZ1000 thread in the Panasonic LUMIX GF / GH / LX Series forum - it shares a close connection to these cameras and would involve all users of this camera rather than the select few using it for event filming. A much better resource if the intention is to gather information on settings and experiences as Roger intended.

I suggested this for the last thread Roger ran on using the FZ1000, but Roger said he wanted to hear from those involved in Wedding and Event filming, suggesting the lack of a dedicated forum wasn't the reason for posting here. Over 13 pages that thread dealt with many practical aspects of using the FZ1000, so unless the camera has received an update or new features, one wonders where a new thread on its use could possibly go that the previous one didn't touch on. I'm sure if I posted constant user updates on my use on the GH4, it would go the same way as this thread.

[Ronald Jackson]

Not a wedding man but one who does wildlife. I have two GH4s and a FZ1000. The latter compliments the former particularly in situations, like being on the move, where weight and portability is an issue. (I always use a focussing monitor with the GH4s - I use a Carryspeed VF4 Loupe with the FZ.)

The ability to zoom wide to long with the FZ also very handy, as my only GH4 lens with comparable reach is a 80-400 Nikkor with 1.4X TC which a bit ponderous, to say the least , compared with the FZ, and nothing at the wide end.

At their best the image quality with the GH4 is better than the FZ but the FZ ain't bad and in 4K.

A few clips here from last winter, straight off the SDHC card with audio "in camera". I'll admit to being sat comfortably in hide where weight wasn't an issue but the zoom range was.

YouTube (Short URL)

Ron

[Noa Put]

The "Sony is better than Panasonic" was not the problem here, at a certain point it was mentioned and I reacted to that telling it was not the intention of the thread and then it also stopped, I think there is some overreaction here, this thread was heading the exact same way as the previous one where only current owners opinion was appreciated.