For the non-believers -FZ2500/2000 is out!!

[Michael Liebergot]

Originally Posted by Chris Harding

I don't really need the extra zoom ..not at weddings anyway but the new features are geared towards better video. Love the Dolly Zoom especially ...that will be awesome at weddings! It was hinted that they would use the GH4 sensor but obviously not. I still find that my video with the FZ is still better than my Sony EA-50's with an F2.8 lens in low light. With the Sony I eventually needed to go to a Sigma Art lens in manual so I lost all the neat Sony features!! I wonder when it will appear in Australia. B&H are already taking pre-orders but that's the NTSC model FZ2500 ... They are not PAL switchable are they?? I'm assuming we will have to wait for the FZ2000 here.

Chris what ISO are you shooting at with the FZ1000?
I find that I can go to a higher ISO with the EA50 than my FZ1000. As 3200 starts to fall apart on my FZ1000. If Panasonic was able to get their sensors in low light tot he quality of Sony, Panasonic would have a slam dunk with their cameras in my opinion. As low light is my only real complaint about the Panny GH/FZ cameras.

[Chris Harding]

Hi Michael

I used to run both cameras on auto ISO and to be honest I found the EA-50 had more noise at 3200 ISO than the Lumix ..Technically the Sony should be a lot better due to the bigger sensor. I loved the Sony technology but the lenses really sucked and you have to use e-Mount lenses to use all the camera features. I honestly never liked the soft image the EA-50's gave me, the colour was always wishy-washy too but remember that's just personal taste ..no offence to Sony!! Forgetting any technical numbers I seriously find that the FZ1000 gives me way sharper and brighter images ..I find I need to reach for my LED very rarely now so really for me that is way more important than tech data. I would have NEVER attempted to do wedding speeches with the EA-50 with an F2.8 manual lens mounted with only the dim venue lighting, yet with the FZ1000's I do it all the time and get really nice footage.

[Roger Gunkel]

Originally Posted by Chris Harding

Hi Michael

I used to run both cameras on auto ISO and to be honest I found the EA-50 had more noise at 3200 ISO than the Lumix ..Technically the Sony should be a lot better due to the bigger sensor. I loved the Sony technology but the lenses really sucked and you have to use e-Mount lenses to use all the camera features. I honestly never liked the soft image the EA-50's gave me, the colour was always wishy-washy too but remember that's just personal taste ..no offence to Sony!! Forgetting any technical numbers I seriously find that the FZ1000 gives me way sharper and brighter images ..I find I need to reach for my LED very rarely now so really for me that is way more important than tech data. I would have NEVER attempted to do wedding speeches with the EA-50 with an F2.8 manual lens mounted with only the dim venue lighting, yet with the FZ1000's I do it all the time and get really nice footage.

There was quite a bit of debate about the low light performance of the FZ1000 when it first appeared, mainly quoting specs and camera comparisons. Like Chris, I use my FZ1000s for my business of mainly wedding videos and also like Chris I have had no problem with low light, particularly with first dances, where the light is often low or with red and blue leds which have always been a problem on other cameras I have previously used. I noticed a very big difference in the dynamic range and overall brightness of footage from the FZ1000s alongside two other SD800s that I have always found very useable in the frequent lower light levels of school productions, first dances etc.Where I was using 4 cameras recently in a low light stage production, I had to reduce the brighness of the FZ1000 footage in post as I couldn't lift the gain of the other footage without it becoming noticeably grainy.

However I do set the auto iso to a maximum of 3200 and if the light is particularly low, I shoot at 25p rather than 50p (PAL land). For stills work, I also get wider DR and sharper pics in low light from the FZ1000 than I do from my Canon D60, which surprises me.

Roger

[Chris Harding]

Thanks Roger

I did the maths too .. An APSC sensor with an F3.5 stock lens HAD to be better than a tiny 1" sensor on an F2.8 lens ..anyone knows that. I ended up with a Sigma ART lens on the Sony ..F1,8 right thru the 18 -35mm range and cost me more than my FZ1000 !! However the proof of the pudding is still doing a practical shoot and that convinced me to change, Dunno how they do it but the results are staggering from this camera and I'm always as pleased as punch when I see results, As far a ISO goes my wedding 2 weeks ago was in a badly lit Church that worried me a lot yet the camera gave me a clean sharp image and barely made it to ISO1600 when I zoomed up to the lectern during the sermon so that was at F4.

I'm seriously looking at using the FZ1000's as my stills cameras as well now ..they give me a cleaner and sharper image than my fancy Nikons (they are getting old anyway) I'm going to double up at tomorrow's photoshoot ( we are doing stills and video) and use the FZ and Nikons during the shoot to see just how good they are! Could be interesting!!

[Michael Liebergot]

Originally Posted by Chris Harding

Hi Michael

I used to run both cameras on auto ISO and to be honest I found the EA-50 had more noise at 3200 ISO than the Lumix ..Technically the Sony should be a lot better due to the bigger sensor. I loved the Sony technology but the lenses really sucked and you have to use e-Mount lenses to use all the camera features. I honestly never liked the soft image the EA-50's gave me, the colour was always wishy-washy too but remember that's just personal taste ..no offence to Sony!! Forgetting any technical numbers I seriously find that the FZ1000 gives me way sharper and brighter images ..I find I need to reach for my LED very rarely now so really for me that is way more important than tech data. I would have NEVER attempted to do wedding speeches with the EA-50 with an F2.8 manual lens mounted with only the dim venue lighting, yet with the FZ1000's I do it all the time and get really nice footage.

Chris in order to get relatively clean video at iso 3200, are you running anything special in the menu?
I normally run my camera at Natural and run manual (either in Manual or Movie Mode) for most of my filming.

I worry about low light for my weddings as much of the time for reception here the lights do go down low or off for receptions. I normally try to run 2 small off camera lights (TorchLed Bolt 200r) (self powered, remote control, dimmable power on/off) on light stands for supplemental lighting by the dance floor so I can possibly avoid on camera lighting when possible.

[Chris Harding]

Hi Michael

If I'm shooting 1080 I use MP4 which I feel gives a better output and result than AVCHD ..dunno why it just ends up better and also is easier on the editor ..You do have the clip limit but I'm used to that and with the FZ2500 it's not an issue any more. Apart from that STD profile works for me and shooting 25P in low light at receptions ... Outside I tend to shoot UHD so if I downconvert to 1080 I get an effective 4:2:2 due to chroma sub sampling Yes I do use a video light very occasionally when the stupid staff turn the dance floor lights OFF instead of down but on most receptions it's not necessary. I think it's also fairly obvious that if you get in close and shoot wide you will do better in low light as the lens doesn't ramp to F4 but stays at F2.8 I honestly think profiles make a huge difference to low light too!! On the Panny STD works well for me ..On the EA-50 I found default was great outdoors but terrible indoors so I used to use PP3 so it was an issue following a bride from bright sunlight into a dark Church !! Since you are in the USA I'm assuming your FZ1000 is an NTSC model so you only have 30P ?? Our slower frame rate of 25P can add quite a bit of extra light so have you tried 24P which both the NTSC and PAL units share?

If I shot my receptions at 50P (you would use 60P right?) then I could see the camera having to push the ISO pretty hard .. I think also we have to realise that if you artificially make a room darker than it needs to be and manually set ISO to 3200 ..you will get noise as the sensor simply doesn't have enough light to produce a noise free image and the gain has been lifted higher than the natural light level??

[Michael Liebergot]

Chris thanks for the info.
I shoot 24 1080p on all of my cameras (EA50M, FS100, FZ1000), so I can get a bit more low light latitude out of the cameras. I don't usually shoot at full wide as I don't like being on top of my subjects so I am usually zooming in which means that I am at usually at f4. True on the trying to raise the image brighter while you are shooting. But I wish that they increased the sensor sensitivity and size i the FZ2500/2000 then for me it would be a no brainier for an upgrade.

I haven't shot yet at UHD for a wedding but am curious as I could get more low light out of the camera as the noise would be reduced and look more organic when scaling the image from UHD to 1080 HD.

As for continuous recording, I did the hack a few months ago and have continuous recording so this isn't a big deal fro me compared to the FZ2500.

[Chris Harding]

It was rumoured that Panasonic would put the GH series sensor into the bridge cameras but alas that never happened! I had a lot of issues matching my Sony and Panasonic footage while I was in "transit" with one EA-50 and one FZ1000 at wedding ceremonies. I would have thought that a Sony bride camera would have been a better fit (and more light with the faster lens too) Just for interest the FZ series actually use a Sony sensor so both bride cameras have identical chips!!

I guess it's a delicate balance from a marketing point of view ...you never want your flagship camera to be overshadowed by a cheaper model.

I used to struggle with my EA-50 sensors ...changing lenses was a pain as the sensor got dirty so easily! I had to learn to find a wind free/dust free area and tip the body so it was facing the floor so no rubbish entered the front ...I once even did a stedicam shoot and had grass clippings on the sensor blown in from the wind and freshly cut lawn when I changed lenses sitting in the trunk of the car!!

[Ronald Jackson]

Just had me maulers on one at a local "Birdfair".

Panasonic bloke on the stand had no idea about video, "4K Photo" (yawn) seemed to be main selling point.

Very similar to FZ1000 in shape and size. but those lovely built in ND filters and, so he said, live view HDMI out so one can use a monitor without screen blanking out when "record" is hit.

Pricey, £1000 odd though that will presumably drop albeit GBP a bit wonky post Brexiters most of whom won't have got past the Box Brownie stage.

I put the cam into 4K video mode and activated the "Intelligent Zoom". Gave 1440mm which excellent for those like me whose target is wildlife.

FZ2000 out any time so he said. GH5? a sardonic sort of snigger.

I had a look at a new tiny 4K camera, LX15 would it be? Too tiny in fact for my largish bony mitts. A ladies camera perhaps?

Ron

[Noa Put]

I had a look at a new tiny 4K camera, LX15 would it be? Too tiny in fact for my largish bony mitts. A ladies camera perhaps?

What do you call a gopro then, a children's camera? :) Didn't know the size of the camera determines if it's a male or female thing.

[Ronald Jackson]

An attempt at a joke, Noah, obviously not a successful one. I thought GoPros for attaching to things, a friend used one on a yacht race from Brazil to Australia. The cam I looked at was tiny to one like me with biggish hands and used to cams like GH4 and FZ1000 as well as my old XLHI and EX3 (and various Nikons long ago).

As I said to the Panasonic bloke, would be okay for my wife who Japanese with small hands.

Ron

[Noa Put]

I was joking too :)

[Wacharapong Chiowanich]

One thing to keep an eye on this FZ2000/2500 whenever it comes out is the AF. The AF on the FZ1000 for me, to put it mildly, is very disappointing. Hunting proned and overall very fickle. Keeps pulsating too even when the subject is in focus and hardly moves. According to the published specs, the sensor still has no phase detection sites so beware.

[James Manford]

How does this compare to the RX10 III

[Chris Harding]

The AF on both my FZ1000's is awesome ..I have yet to have an out of focus shot at weddings even with brides walking down a long aisle so I really cannot complain about it at all. The FZ2500 has the same system.

James? The Sony has constant aperture compared to the FZ but I dislike the Sony "look" and sharpness ...very little compares to Leica optics (just my 2 cents of course) The Sony does have better specs too but costs a lot more. Interesting fact is that both cameras use the 1" Sony sensor so it's all in the processing I guess???