Using the Panasonic Lumix FZ1000

[Chris Harding]

Hi Guys

The way I edit makes the limit on the camera actually an advantage for me! Ok, I'm going back to the Sony's here and AVCHD files and it really was a pain to have to import the files via the Sony Utility and then it joined up the split file and changed it's extension to a long date based one. Basically it put my nose out of joint so I purposely started restricting my record lengths wherever I could so I didn't need to have to end up with split files. At 50P that meant I had to try and reset every 15 minutes so I have become quite used to doing this and reset at convenient places not just as the recording is going to fail!

Despite the tax issue you have to get used to having shorter record times anyway with HD MP4 as 50P only gives 20 minutes now not 29 minutes due to the 4GB limit ... !

Chris

[Peter Rush]

Originally Posted by Steve Burkett

It just flies in the face of professional gear. I had on Saturday set my GH3 on a light stand, up high to avoid being blocked by a crowded church. Twice I had to disturb guests to lower the camera and restart during the church service. If I explained my reasons, I'd have looked a fool. How can you explain that a camera that cost me originally £1000 is incapable of performing to one that costs only £150. It's all very well Panasonic avoiding a tax, but if they can pay it for a £150 camcorder, surely one worth over 6 times the price should be no problem.

To me it limits the possibility for any bridge camera, from something that sits well in my kit to a camera I can only use if manned throughout. As a replacement to my GH3, a camera like the FZ1000 has potential, but with the clip limit, all I got is 4K and lose a 4/3s sensor for a 1" one.

This tax thing is beyond stupid - here is a camcorder that also takes stills for £25 and I assume no time limit as it's a 'camcorder' - as the price is inclusive of this extra tax how much can this bloody tax be!!!

They must be aware it's an issue for us professionals so i'm guessing there's more to it. It means sadly I'll never use anything but my Handycams for locked off cameras

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Compact-Camc...amcorder+cheap

[Dave Baker]

Originally Posted by Peter Rush

...... how much can this bloody tax be!!!

4.9% apparently, see here https://www.ephotozine.com/article/e...l-cameras-5905.

It still makes no sense and I am finding it hard not to say something political here!

Dave

[Noa Put]

Originally Posted by Chris Harding

Ok, I'm going back to the Sony's here and AVCHD files and it really was a pain to have to import the files via the Sony Utility and then it joined up the split file and changed it's extension to a long date based one. Basically it put my nose out of joint so I purposely started restricting my record lengths wherever I could so I didn't need to have to end up with split files. At 50P that meant I had to try and reset every 15 minutes so I have become quite used to doing this and reset at convenient places not just as the recording is going to fail!

Which Sony's are you referring to? I never had any issues copying files from mu sony camera's, split files where always joined back automatically without frame loss and it was as easy as copy/paste. Never had to reset a recording every 15 minutes because of that.

[Steve Burkett]

Originally Posted by Dave Baker

4.9% apparently, see here https://www.ephotozine.com/article/e...l-cameras-5905.

It still makes no sense and I am finding it hard not to say something political here!

Dave

So for the sake of £25 if the camera costs £500, Panasonic are willing to lose my business. Given 2 of my cameras are set to wide angle, making the FZ1000's variable aperture a non issue, without the clip limit, the camera would be high on my list. If you're going to do a bridge camera, why not just add the 4.9% to the cost. Think how many more they'd sell for that feature alone.

I wonder if there's heat issues also at work, problems guaranteeing it stays recording and doesn't cut out if it overheats. But then small camcorders don't suffer from this, so it still makes no sense.

[Roger Gunkel]

Originally Posted by Dave Baker

4.9% apparently, see here https://www.ephotozine.com/article/e...l-cameras-5905.

It still makes no sense and I am finding it hard not to say something political here!

Dave

Reading that makes it even more ridiculous. Bringing it back to the FZ1000 which is what this thread is about, adding 4.9% to the typical price would increase it by £25-29. Is that actually going to drastically reduce sales of the camera? No of course not! Anybody deciding to purchase a camcorder instead of the FZ1000 because of the recording limit, like perhaps Pete, is going to be paying tax on it anyway.

The only possible reason that I can think of is that Panasonic and others do not want cameras like the FZ1000 to take sales away from their camcorder offerings at the semi pro end of the range in The EU. But even that explanation makes little sense if they are selling uninhibited cameras to the rest of the world.

Might be worth a new thread to discuss the ridiculous tax situation.

Roger

[Roger Gunkel]

Just had delivery today of a collapsible rubber lens hood' with a view to mounting a variable ND filter and still being able to adjust it. The hood is great, but unfortunately as the camera lens is fairly wide angle, the hood is visible as a black ring around the frame on full wide angle, so no use to me. Just thought I would post as a warning.

Roger

[Chris Harding]

That was worrying me too! I have the Fotga slimline variable ND's that don't vignette at all BUT I would think that a hood with a 67mm screw fitting might just cause an issue. I wonder if one can get/fabricate a hood that could clamp around the outside of the ND filter?? Either that or would it help if you screwed a nice low profile thread adapter ..something like 67 - 80mm ?? and then put an 80mm hood on that ...From memory the rubber hoods are round are they not? Maybe a petal hood that has more "space" on the sides might help??

Ok as a bit of help, my ND's are 70mm OD and only 5mm thick..The Panny hood is actually 69mm across the open end and if I tape the Panny hood to the filter it doesn't vignette at all but boy, it's super close .. Just 1mm offset (sticky tape doesn't hold very well at all) and you can see the hood on the LCD so to be 100% clear one needs something like a 72mm hood that we can somehow clamp to the outside of the Variable ND filter....How far do your ND's protrude from the lens when screwed in Roger?? More than 5mm??

[Roger Gunkel]

I'm still waiting for the adjustable ND to arrive, so can't answer that yet, all I have that's adjustable is a 62mm polarising filter which is only about 3 mm.

Following your comments on the LED light at about 2 metres, I have been investigating the auto exposure and wondered if you had played around with the settings. I have found a massive difference between the spot exposure and the centre weighted exposure, so would think that if you used spot exposure for you close LED filming, you wouldn't have the burnout on faces.

Roger

[Chris Harding]

Thanks Roger

Actually it's not at all bad on video ..if I make the light too bright then faces blow out but with the balance just right and no huge distances between subjects the led light works very well. Stills are where it fails! On a still frame the light dropoff is really bad and you get a dark rim around the image and still faces are blown out in comparison. I think sadly that if you want to avoid high ISO's then a bounced flash is better OR a bounced LED light so one gets even lighting ... I think an umbrella would actually work quite well but of course be totally impractical. The easiest solution is a TTL flash I would think! Metz make one that has roughly the same Guide Number as the Panasonic FL36 (also the Olympus FL36 ..which is identical) I might try one. However for now I'll still use the Nikon setup at receptions but the FZ is worth a shot for outdoor photoshoots.

What variable ND did you end up buying?? I got two Fotga 62mm ones as Colin Rowe said they worked very well!!

Chris

[Roger Gunkel]

I ordered the Fotga 62mm one also on Colin's recommendation.

Roger

[Chris Harding]

Excellent! At least we have a common goal towards solving the lens hood issue ..but the inside of the hood needs to be an absolute minimum of 70mm otherwise the lens will most definitely see the hood edges at full wide so if we use a filter conversion ring is will probably need to jump up quite a bit and be as slim as possible ...at least 67mm to 75mm or even more. Otherwise I guess there is no real harm in using the camera without a hood surely???

[Dave Baker]

Originally Posted by Chris Harding

Otherwise I guess there is no real harm in using the camera without a hood surely???

A bit of a moot point I would say Chris.

I believe in always using the correct hood for any lens for the reasons you will already know, but with modern zoom lenses and wider and wider angles of view, a hood can only be correct at min. zoom. Three questions I ask myself 1) Is the hood doing any good at any focal length other than minimum, 2) At what angle is light considered extraneous and 3) Is it a fixed angle.

Maybe modern lens design and coatings have changed things, but the answers I have to my questions are 1) No, 2) It's different for each focal length and 3) No. So if I were to guess at an answer to your question it would be probably not, give it a try.

Dave

[Chris Harding]

Hi Dave

Apart from sunsets and such we usually don't purposely shoot with light coming into the lens! It always open shade if we can and stray light sources off to the side or behind us ... the real problem with a variable ND is that you have to get your fat fingers around the outer ring to adjust it so a close fitting hood doesn't allow this anyway. The more correct question here is can I find a hood that will do it's job AND allow me to get into the filter to rotate it?? Rails and a matte box is an overkill

Chris

[Roger Gunkel]

I agree with Dave, that for most normal circumstances a lens hood is really superfluous, most of the time. Along with a big flash, it just makes you look more professional than Uncle Bob with his expensive camera but no accessories :-)

Roger