if both cams were more or less the same price I'd most likely go for the Sony ( I have a dozen or more Sony's in drawers,on shelves and in carry cases and I am comfortable with the file formats and love the handiness of PMB but the fact is I can get two 4k video cameras for the price of one, Despite Dave's warning (much respect sir but no) of the possibility of reduced image quality I bet we'll see similar video quality and most likely superior stills. I don't have a 4k video camera at the moment so I don't have any position to defend so it easier for me to pick the panny this time

The only thing that raises some questions is the dynamic range of this camera as the example video from panasonic showed some harsh highlight differences that where not handled very well but we"ll know soon enough when the first user videos will appear, one thing the camera seems to have plenty of which is detail and that is one of the features why you would get a 4K camera, the ax100 is a more complete camera but with a matching pricetag.

a pdf re fz1000
https://www.wetransfer.com/downloads/568948839c6e50f4de1f03f959c9942720140627092357/377299


a bit of video
http://mr.mention.net/link/xgxr/on5gntp/21/Y7rp-VuKXuZACcLU6FyEug/aHR0cDovL3dlYi5tZW50aW9uLmNvbS9yZWRpcmVjdG9yL2VuP3VybD1odHRwJTNBJTJGJTJGd2ViLm1lbnRpb24uY29tJTJGZW4l MjNhbGVydCUyRjc4MDg2NyUyRm1lbnRpb25zJTJGNzc2NDU2NjAwMSZ0YXJnZXRfdXJsPWh0dHAlM0ElMkYlMkZ2aW1lby5jb20l MkY5OTM4Mjc5MSZyZWRpcmVjdF90b19hcHA9MA

Hmm, I put together a three shoe mount and two singles for under $20 in parts, and a little time customizing the shoe to fit. NO problem mounting a light and a mic... you'd have to have something similar for any camera...

AF on the AX100 is quite good. The FZ1000 is currently an unknown. it's a wash...

And my only comment is that with Panasonic, my experience is that you get what you pay for... yes, they produce some great cameras on paper, but that's different from IMAGE QUALITY when the bits hit the fan!

I've already seen enough in the Panasonic samples to know I'd likely be very disappointed vs. the AX100 and the RX10 - yeah, both more expensive cameras, but again, you get what you pay for.

I tried the vaunted FZ200, hoping for a great "cheap" camera... the images were "cheap" too... I know some people love and use that camera, but the image quality was just not up to what I expect from ANY camera - even though "on paper" it "should have been" a great cam. I have cameras I paid less than $100 for that outperformed it in terms of general image quality.

Both the above Sonys were good "on paper", and despite some people not knowing how to use them, most are getting eye popping results, myself included. Image quality compromised for budget is not something I'm willing to accept.

Lest you think I'm being overly critical, let me say that I really hope the FZ1000 is better than the posted samples for 4K and stills... I think it will again be a great "budget" entry to 4K, it will push the market down, but I also worry that the 4K produced based on the samples posted will be less than exciting. I'd love it if it turned out that it's the perfect marriage of the RX10 and the AX100... but the samples (and I presume those were the "best" output) didn't even come close to impressing me. A nice budget entry, meaning more people "testing" 4K, and that's GOOD, but I'll wait to hear how it goes for "early adopters"... And even if it SUCKS (the 4K samples weren't THAT bad, just not as good as what the AX100 can produce), maybe it'll get Sony off the dime on putting 4K into the Cybershots!

GO PANASONIC!! <wink>
like I said I'm not going to play with the idiotic shoe mount of the AX100. I did it it in the past with the SR11 and never again. (and of course Sony did it in purpose: when they design they know exactly what will work and what will not work and why) it's their decision and they can do whatever they want and I can do whatever I want skipping the purchase (see? we're even). The AF of the AX100 is slow and hunts. The AF of the FZ1000 is as fast as the GH4. The FZ1000 gives video almost as good as the GH4 and that concludes the story about quality.
What makes me thinking and thinking is somewhere else and again in regarding of another trick and that's the 30min limitation. Yeah: that's a big one. Like always they (all) measure the limitations scientifically. Good thing we have this forum where we can talk.


P.S. about the proprietary shoe mount attachment let me give you a good piece of advice: when you play with shoe raisers and gadgets like that make sure you turn the camera off before. the same when you remove the attachments. Also make absolutely sure that the gadget sits tight with NO play. That's mandatory and if not extremely risky (and that comes from the experience), What works better? A standard shoe mount (always). Do they know that? Of course they know. LOL

Only time 30min is a problem for my production is in the event of a university convocation or such which can run to 3 hrs, I'll have several cameras rolling. The video camcorders just keep on rolling but if you are occupied and a 30min cam stops recording and is not noticed then something will be lost Also if it's a file based post production effort rather than live switched then syncing is more of a chore

Connected is sooooo much better than years ago when we were islands unable to know what others everywhere around the world were doing other than monthly magazines.
Really fantastic the way improved communications has axcelerated humankind's progress.
eg: My son had a breakdown on the highway couple days ago. After hunting on Youtube with his phone, found the solution, make the fix and went on his way. A few years ago the outcome would have been much more painful.

Only time 30min is a problem for my production is in the event of a university convocation or such which can run to 3 hrs, I'll have several cameras rolling. The video camcorders just keep on rolling but if you are occupied and a 30min cam stops recording and is not noticed then something will be lost Also if it's a file based post production effort rather than live switched then syncing is more of a chore

Connected is sooooo much better than years ago when we were islands unable to know what others everywhere around the world were doing other than monthly magazines.
Really fantastic the way improved communications has axcelerated humankind's progress.
eg: My son had a breakdown on the highway couple days ago. After hunting on Youtube with his phone, found the solution, make the fix and went on his way. A few years ago the outcome would have been much more painful.
Bruce the 30min limitation is a problem and will always be a problem. Since I bought pluraleyes all my syncing are easy. Definitely take a closer look at that software. Sometimes I use the zoom instead of the on-camera shotgun just for the fun of syncing it (well not really.. but that little software works great and makes our life easier). Try it.

I have not been wowed with the samples I've seen from the FZ1000 when viewed in 4K. The image depth, detail and dynamic range are simply not as good as the AX100.

The AF of the AX100 is quite good and the combination of its manual controls, zebras, peaking, 1" sensor and 3 stage ND filters, all contribute to superior image quality as well as better control over DOF.

There's no way I'd sacrifice all that just to get more flexibility in the shoe mount. Frankly that makes little sense to me, but each to his own.

As has been said, you get what you pay for.

I have not been wowed with the samples I've seen from the FZ1000 when viewed in 4K. The image depth, detail and dynamic range are simply not as good as the AX100.

The AF of the AX100 is quite good and the combination of its manual controls, zebras, peaking, 1" sensor and 3 stage ND filters, all contribute to superior image quality as well as better control over DOF.

There's no way I'd sacrifice all that just to get more flexibility in the shoe mount. Frankly that makes little sense to me, but each to his own.

As has been said, you get what you pay for.

nah the FZ1000 videos are fine. And the zoom is impressive. The stabilization is superior to the Sony's implementation for handycams, the AF is lighting fast, touchable , perfect. The camera is ready to work on a tripod and the shoe can handle the weight of mandatory accessories like a shotgun and a video light. If you din't find the need for those yet then give another few weeks of shooting and come back after that.
All pointing to the FZ1000 as a superior camera compared to the handycam AX100

I use a sony ea50 right now , and a canon XA20 . I had the EX1 before. so about my own.

funny how they don't sleep to come out with limitations over limitations: now let's think about this: the FZ1000 gives a 2.5mm tripod remote zoom control and that's basically a still camera, while the AX100 can't have that option. Funny uh? They just can't sleep at night and wake up in the middle of the night with a new limitation "what about if we take OFF the lanc? yeyyy..." or better yet let's make it even harder with the mandatory purchase of a cable, so 2 patch cables, one for the 2.5mm to 10pin (A/VR) and another cable to the idiotic port. since they'll have to buy at least 2 of each cables (total of 4 small patch cables... WOW!) , and then 2 more cables to use any 2.5mm lanc remote then the beauty of the marketing got to the highest level of stupidity (our stupidity, they make money with these idiotic things)

remember that the handycam ax100 is a camcorder, so lanc is kinda important for a camcorder, isn't it? and it's a damn 2.5mm port.

anyway any camera without a useable remote zoom option will be immediately dismissed by me. The same goes for any 2014 camera without face recognition at least. so the AX1 is out as well. The flexibility of the AF of all the panasonic gh2-3-4 and now this jewel FZ1000 makes interviews a piece of cake.

and that's my own.

now let's hear about your own.....

We won't convince each other. I and others have spoken our peace. So be it. You'll never convince me the Panny is a superior camera. I've used my eyes from the clips released thus far and it's simply not as good as the AX100 on a variety of fronts.

BTW, the AF on the AX100 is quite flexible. Using the touch screen for selective focus enables you to do a pull focus with little effort. Tracking focus is another very nice feature and the firmware update just issued improves upon this.

But whatever, enjoy your camera.

We must maintain a semblance of objectivity in this discussion. It serves no purpose to reduce the conversation to assertions amounting to "my camera is better than your camera" the DMC Lumix FZ1000 isn't even here yet but I for one am delighted my first 4k camera is costing me 1/2 of what the first bunch did.
Doesn't matter if this or that is better or not. It's going to be awesome anyway

The stabilization is superior to the Sony's implementation for handycams, the AF is lighting fast, touchable , perfect.

Just curious, have reviews shown the FZ1000's stabilization and AF to be superior to the Sony AX100? I use an AX100 at the moment and stabilization/AF are both critically important to the way I work. If they have both been proven to be better on the Panasonic then I'd love to read about that and maybe get a Panasonic camera as well. I don't want to get involved in brand wars and all that, I'm just hoping for honest answers that can steer me to gear that will improve my final product.

We must maintain a semblance of objectivity in this discussion. It serves no purpose to reduce the conversation to assertions amounting to "my camera is better than your camera" the DMC Lumix FZ1000 isn't even here yet but I for one am delighted my first 4k camera is costing me 1/2 of what the first bunch did.
Doesn't matter if this or that is better or not. It's going to be awesome anyway

Sure, if you take a look at what I say about the XA20 and the ea50 then you'll see that I always tell what I like and loudly what I don't like. For example Canon "forgot" the 1/120 shutter speed for the 60p XA20, and that's ridiculous . LOL
I couldn't care less of the manufacturer of the specific model that I bought..
But please notice that the two members entered a discussion between the two of us regarding the remote zoom suggesting a camera that doesn't even have that option. And that should tell a lot about the fans upset because the toy got ridiculed by the competition at a fraction of the cost with more and better features.

it's not like I need to defend Panasonic , but I had it with the marketing at Sony's spending more time limiting the models than building the models. At least Canon and Panasonic came out with good offers with no hidden little things like Sony does (all the time!)

anyway 2000 vs 800 is a big slap in the face... we have to admit it. oh well ...

I heard they will be available in Japan July 17 and almost ordered on from there but got stung in 2004 ordering a HDr-HC1 from Japan. Menu was in Japanese and wasn't able to hack it for several years to get an English Menu. Need to be able to read the menu lol

"Yes, what fools those initial buyers were of the AX100 - paid $2,000! And the forthcoming camera is only $800 - - a big slap in the face! And it's better (better focus and stabilization (ignoring the fact that in 4K, 5-axis stabilization cannot be used)); I have read the press announcement so I am sure that it is superior. What idiots those Sony fanboys are." :;

Yeah, nothing provocative in this thread at all. I guess having a parfocal, quiet power zoom with smooth aperture changes, built-in ND filters, and battery-size choices are worth nothing, and who needs audio in and out or pro xlr possibilties? The Panasonic 30 minute limitation is also a good thing - reduces the chances of a really boring video. It's a feature - boredom protection!

Anyway it's good to see that there are choices, and, as always, there are trade-offs.

Just curious, have reviews shown the FZ1000's stabilization and AF to be superior to the Sony AX100? I use an AX100 at the moment and stabilization/AF are both critically important to the way I work. If they have both been proven to be better on the Panasonic then I'd love to read about that and maybe get a Panasonic camera as well. I don't want to get involved in brand wars and all that, I'm just hoping for honest answers that can steer me to gear that will improve my final product.

Absolutely: in here we should tell (others) the truth, and I must admit that usually we do. At least I do, no questions. I always said LOUDLY what I think of the cameras that I have. But in this case I can only talk waiting for the thing to arrive. Regarding the AF there is no doubt that Panasonic got it right since the GH2. The stabilization works great as well but @1080. 4K is a different beast and I have a feeling that only the OIS will work, still better than sony in general, but the 5-axis thing may not work at all (@4K)
anyway regarding the FZ1000 I can only scream about the limitation (intentional) of the 30min (absurd, coming from Panasonic who broke the "deal" with the GH1. All the rest should be in place with no hidden tricks (like Sony does).

I agree with Ken - the few FZ1000 videos posted so far do not appeal to me as much as the AX100 footage I've seen. But, the FZ1000 seems from my reading to have more adjustment options than the AX100. It has CineD and V choices, and you can control highlights and shadows separately, etc.

So I'm really not judging the FZ1000 clips (or Image Stabilization) much yet because we really haven't seen what the camera can really do. Who knows what settings were used in those few sample clips we've seen so far.

Just curious, have reviews shown the FZ1000's stabilization and AF to be superior to the Sony AX100? I use an AX100 at the moment and stabilization/AF are both critically important to the way I work. If they have both been proven to be better on the Panasonic then I'd love to read about that and maybe get a Panasonic camera as well. I don't want to get involved in brand wars and all that, I'm just hoping for honest answers that can steer me to gear that will improve my final product.

"Yes, what fools those initial buyers were of the AX100 - paid $2,000! And the forthcoming camera is only $800 - - a big slap in the face! And it's better (better focus and stabilization (ignoring the fact that in 4K, 5-axis stabilization cannot be used)); I have read the press announcement so I am sure that it is superior. What idiots those Sony fanboys are." :;

Yeah, nothing provocative in this thread at all. I guess having a parfocal, quiet power zoom with smooth aperture changes, built-in ND filters, and battery-size choices are worth nothing, and who needs audio in and out or pro xlr possibilties? The Panasonic 30 minute limitation is also a good thing - reduces the chances of a really boring video. It's a feature - boredom protection!

Anyway it's good to see that there are choices, and, as always, there are trade-offs.

Mark
you understand that I shoot with a Sony camera, right?

yes, the 30min. limitation is absurd and plain ridiculous. I already said that, several times, and here I'll say it again. No excuses for Panasonic for coming up with that horrendous trick. Disgusting. they had to "copy" the RX10. shame on Panasonic.

The five-axis "thing" does not work at all in 4K, according to Panasonic. There is no question. Thus, there is a real question at this point if in 4K the Panasonic stabilization will be superior. And who knows about focus speed - it is surely worse on the Panasonic GH4 (with their latest lenses) than on the Sony AX100 (I have both, and like both). I would doubt very much that will be different for this cheaper alternative. :)

Having shot with still cameras with 30 minute limits, I wouldn't stress it that much... but yeah, it's just one extra thing to deal with on a shoot. Syncing multicam is VERY easy once you get the hang of it with a couple tricks, even without additional software, seldom takes me more than a few minutes even with 4+ cameras! And at least part of the "trick" with a 4K cam is no sync, just pan and scan!

As Noa notes, dynamic range seems like it might be an issue with the Panasonic, he felt highs were "hot"... I looked at the other end, after pulling up the mud in the shadow areas of the samples, looks EXACTLY like I've seen from Panny in the past, and no thank you, macroblocking and mush are not OK for my use - I expect better low light performance and shadow handling than that. It'll probably be fine in good light and unchallenging dynamic range situations, I don't see those often... Falling apart gracefully is one thing, just plain falling apart is another - it could be this is from online compression... if so, then it's another matter, but I'd expect Panny to have done their best with promo clips...

I am THRILLED that the price of 4K is dropping so quickly, but I suspect there will be LOTS of 4K that really isn't so great, except on paper... it's what's on screens that count! Even shooting with the AX100 requires a little bit more attention and manual intervention than "point and shoot in auto", but the results are worth it. We'll see in a few weeks if the FZ holds up in use. I'm sure some will find it a useful tool.



@Anthony - I modded MY OWN mounts, there is no worry about shorting (can't happen, as I discovered on closer examination of the shoe before modding my "feet"). They are 100% sturdy and will NOT come off under any normal circumstances - I wouldn't worry about mounting a handle of some sort on the triple mount and using it to carry the cam like the NX30. Light(s) and mic are NOT A PROBLEM! This comes from EXPERIENCE too, so please don't pretend your "opinion" is the last or only word... it is not. Stirring drama over an aftermarket adapter that didn't work for you... and blaming the CAMERA??? Please...

ANYONE could do the same mods on very cheap parts with a bargain Dremel copy from Harbor Freight, and I'm sure the folks offering aftermarket parts will modify their designs to be just as sturdy! I looked at the ones posted, and there were some flaws in the design that are easily remedied - it is NOT rocket science. There were good cheap adapters for the old AiShoe as well. It's quite doable, if one decides to!

I bought exactly ONE cable to adapt between the MULTI and the old A/V remote (which uses a LANC protocol, BTW - it's a "language" not an INTERFACE). Would you prefer that all audio and video equipment used 1/4" plugs because that was once "the norm"?? Interfaces change, new interfaces are developed, so you have to buy or adapt a few things... it's NOT the end of the world.


In the end, we won't know for sure how well the new camera performs until more people get hands on the FZ1000 - I'll be the first to say I prefer CHEAPER... IF it actually performs... but the samples had flaws I wouldn't live with, they are consistent with my past experience with Pannys, and honestly it bummed me out to see things that should have been "fixed" or "better".

I like the Panasonic LCD implementation, the extra zoom couldn't hurt, and 4K under $900... yep it sounds great... the sample video posted, upon close inspection, not so much. "Fine"... perhaps for some, but left me unimpressed.

guys let's all calm down and try to analyze the situation instead.

there is no doubt that the marketing departments are working hard to design the future of video. The best offer comes from the GH4. but there are no lenses with servo zoom . only the standard zoom and the 45-175
we need the entire focal in one lens. They know that (of course). But wait to settle the marketing first.
Now they're coming up with the AX100 and the RX10 (30min.limit) and the FZ1000 (again 30min limit) , ea50 (idiotic servo zoom, poor low light, intentional, of course)
it's ALL intentional
the AX1 with no face detection. Intentional again.
Never seen before, such an impressive marketing in this segment, while we still need a decent camera for the next years.

is it frustrating or it's just me?

there is ALWAYS something important missing, A L W A Y S.

The five-axis "thing" does not work at all in 4K, according to Panasonic. There is no question. Thus, there is a real question at this point if in 4K the Panasonic stabilization will be superior. And who knows about focus speed - it is surely worse on the Panasonic GH4 (with their latest lenses) than on the Sony AX100 (I have both, and like both). I would doubt very much that will be different for this cheaper alternative. :)

Yeah that's what confuses me, there seems to be mixed messages out there about AF and OIS. I only film 4k now so how it performs in 4k mode is all that matters to me. Some say Panasonic AF is better, some say it's worse, so who knows what it really is. Guess I have to wait for some reviews. The 30 minute record limit doesn't affect me, the lens being not as wide in 4k mode does bother me though as would battery life. I fear with these little picture cameras that you have to spend double their price on more accessories to get acceptable battery life from them in the field when used for video. I think that's my biggest fear with picture cameras used for video. I don't have staff, I do everything myself so I tend to forget things sometimes so I'm almost certain I'd lose some shots just from battery running out while recording on cameras like the FZ1000, A7S, etc. I like that the AX100 can run an entire shoot on one V100 battery, just gives me one less thing to worry about. The AX100's AF is good but failed me sometimes on firmware 1.0 hence why I was curious about the FZ1000's AF. Maybe 2.0 firmware has fixed some issues though...but so far there's too many mixed messages for me to be able to determine if Panasonic's AF is better or worse although everyone's use varies. Mine is primarily indoors with medium light levels, the sensor tends to be in the 9db to 12db range so that could be why AF sometimes doesn't quite work right but I'm limited to the lighting gear that I have so it is what it is.

The five-axis "thing" does not work at all in 4K, according to Panasonic. There is no question. Thus, there is a real question at this point if in 4K the Panasonic stabilization will be superior. And who knows about focus speed - it is surely worse on the Panasonic GH4 (with their latest lenses) than on the Sony AX100 (I have both, and like both). I would doubt very much that will be different for this cheaper alternative. :)

I think this is what is creating a little too much "drama" - the FACTS (AKA "truth") are out there - the MSRP is $899 (a tad more than 800, thank you, but still very good!), the 5 axis stabilization isn't going to work in 4K (seems like there were a couple of "gotchas" for buyers, like needing really expensive/fast cards for 4K).

FACT: There are options for remote zoom (etc.) on the AX100, contrary to incorrect statements being tossed around. I should hope there is one for the FZ1000 as well, all cameras SHOULD have it for "serious" use.

FACT: There are ways to make the shoe on the AX100 perfectly usable with less effort than has been expended here complaining about supposed problems...

FACT: Users are not having AF and stabilization issues with the AX100, IF they understand how the camera operates - Sony has already issued a firmware update, I haven't had any problems, but will likely install it - Sony updates, while few and far between, are typically trouble free, and usually make minor improvements. I've found both AF and stabilization to be just fine, and better than expected in some ways!

The AX100 is a darn fine VIDEO camera, the FZ1000 is a consumer level (OK, high end consumer) still camera that shoots video. The advantages of the former are many, the limitations of the latter are perhaps annoying, but not insurmountable.

Spewing unsupportable complaints about a camera that are without basis (other than personal biases, which are showing) really don't belong in the discussion.

And rabid speculation about a camera that isn't even out yet is ridiculous - I'm with the other Dave (Dixon) that we will need to see what this camera can do in proper hands. The unfortunate fact is many of us are seeing the same thing in the promotional pieces and are less than impressed. These are Panasonics OWN promotional bits, so I think we are safe to guess that the results are "accurate".


EVERY camera of late seems to get slammed because some incompetent "early reviewer" doesn't know how to RUN A CAMERA!! And swings it wildly around only to complain of skew and RS... etc. etc... 4K adds the opportunity for myriad screw ups when dealing with post/output/display... I've replicated most of them in the last month while "tuning" a computer system to handle 4k!!

I'll be watching to see if users have better results than the promotional videos, I have my doubts, again from experience with certain "Panasonic specific" image traits (fleshtones, and macroblocking issues in low light/shadow areas, both "deal killers" for me), but if it's a good cheap tool, I might even buy one...

Having shot with still cameras with 30 minute limits, I wouldn't stress it that much...

Dave, in my case it is a big deal, since the vast majority of my work are soccer games (45min +45 min)

@Anthony - I modded MY OWN mounts, there is no worry about shorting (can't happen, as I discovered on closer examination of the shoe before modding my "feet").


Dave, it used to happen to me several times on a SR11 , Be careful, seriously. In case turn off the camera and remove the battery for few seconds. It should reset once ON again.

The lanc is a protocol, the commands are simple codes sent via RS232 (com, the good old serial port of the MS-DOS puters LOL) They make it look SO complicated because they have to sell the gadgets to make us believe that's a BIG DEAL.

Sony gave permission to Canon to use the protocol, but not to Panasonic. So Panasonic had to come up with something different - 2 different ports, 2.5mm and 3.5mm adding iris but excluding the zoom speeds from the implementation.
In the end we are the ones paying for this idiotic war when it was so simple and easy.
and adding cables to cables is plain ridiculous. I had 3 cables for my SR11 I remember, all lost, one by one. All the remotes available come with a 2.5mm . As I remember only 1 particular model from Sony has the 10-pin terminal, but even that one comes with the 2.5mm as well. So not even SONY believes in the 10-pin standard, imagine the multiport , idiotic as the name that carries.

guys let's all calm down and try to analyze the situation instead.

there is no doubt that the marketing departments are working hard to design the future of video. The best offer comes from the GH4. but there are no lenses with servo zoom . only the standard zoom and the 45-175
we need the entire focal in one lens. They know that (of course). But wait to settle the marketing first.
Now they're coming up with the AX100 and the RX10 (30min.limit) and the FZ1000 (again 30min limit) , ea50 (idiotic servo zoom, poor low light, intentional, of course)
it's ALL intentional
the AX1 with no face detection. Intentional again.
Never seen before, such an impressive marketing in this segment, while we still need a decent camera for the next years.

is it frustrating or it's just me?

there is ALWAYS something important missing, A L W A Y S.

A: This is life on the bleeding edge, deal with it, or buy older stuff.
B: Features don't always work as "expected", see A
C: When things don't work as expected, you figure out a workaround.
D: If there's no workaround, presuming nobody dies, we wait for the next product announcement with fingers crossed...
E: Calm down and remove the tinfoil hat, the manufacturers aren't spending time conspiring against us (or at least I THINK they aren't... maybe time to buy some Reynolds Wrap!!!! <wink>


The AX100 has been working great for me and many others, the RX10 needed to have 4K, before Panny came along and "stole the thunder", something likely rectified in the near future... though the omission in the RX100M3 was notable. I can do anything I'd like to with these "imperfect" cameras, as is... good enough for me.

A: This is life on the bleeding edge, deal with it, or buy older stuff.
B: Features don't always work as "expected", see A
C: When things don't work as expected, you figure out a workaround.
D: If there's no workaround, presuming nobody dies, we wait for the next product announcement with fingers crossed...
E: Calm down and remove the tinfoil hat, the manufacturers aren't spending time conspiring against us (or at least I THINK they aren't... maybe time to buy some Reynolds Wrap!!!! <wink>


The AX100 has been working great for me and many others, the RX10 needed to have 4K, before Panny came along and "stole the thunder", something likely rectified in the near future... though the omission in the RX100M3 was notable. I can do anything I'd like to with these "imperfect" cameras, as is... good enough for me.

talking about older stuff: you made me remember stuff from my past with that ridiculous proprietary shoe. Something I didn't want to remember... can't believe that in 2014 you have to settle with THAT

LOL


and the way I see it the marketing people with panasonic and sony are indeed driving us crazy, if you don't see it then know that I do. Greed runs at dangerous levels in the video , never seen before running at that level.
the strategy has changed: before it was something more with the competitor to win : now is all about limiting the cameras. Do you honestly believe that it was by "accident" that the FZ1000 (perfect camera doing almost everything right) HAD to come up with that 30min. limit? Remember that Panasonic was the first breaking the wall (of the dslr for video) offering the GH1 able to shoot for hours. The others didn't like it, Im positive about it. They all continued to limit their cameras. Now Panasonic seems to have said "yes sir" to the oligopoly. Why? because they are planning to restore the 5K dollars and up segment for pro-sumer video, that's why.

Dave, in my case it is a big deal, since the vast majority of my work are soccer games (45min +45 min)


Dave, it used to happen to me several times on a SR11 , Be careful, seriously. In case turn off the camera and remove the battery for few seconds. It should reset once ON again.

The lanc is a protocol, the commands are simple codes sent via RS232 (com, the good old serial port of the MS-DOS puters LOL) They make it look SO complicated because they have to sell the gadgets to make us believe that's a BIG DEAL.

Sony gave permission to Canon to use the protocol, but not to Panasonic. So Panasonic had to come up with something different - 2 different ports, 2.5mm and 3.5mm adding iris but excluding the zoom speeds from the implementation.
In the end we are the ones paying for this idiotic war when it was so simple and easy.
and adding cables to cables is plain ridiculous. I had 3 cables for my SR11 I remember, all lost, one by one. All the remotes available come with a 2.5mm . As I remember only 1 particular model from Sony has the 10-pin terminal, but even that one comes with the 2.5mm as well. So not even SONY believes in the 10-pin standard, imagine the multiport , idiotic as the name that carries.


I can't imagine there are no "lulls" in the action where you can "double punch" during a 30 minute span... used that approach and haven't missed anything yet... just double punch in a section you'd edit out anyway! Problem solved.

The LANC protocol is just a method to control the camera - implementation varies widely, even within a manufacturers different cameras (well, Sony at least!). It shouldn't be an issue for a manufacturer to figure out an alternate method, you know, like how Ford and Chevy and Chrysler have similar features, but different cars...

Sounds like you've had bad luck with adapters, but I'm VERY cautious, and can tell you that Sony prevented any potential issues in the MiShoe design... you'd have to try REALLY hard to short anything or cause problems... the AiS that was on the SR11 was likely different, but I've got PLASTIC shoe adapters that work just fine... I'll admit that the MULTI USB is an oddball way to combine two functions into one "new" connector, and I'd rate it as far from "ideal". You've got the 5 pin USB, and then 10 "multi" pins buried deeper so the only activate with a "special" plug!?!? I guess it saved some space or something!


I know you like to come up with "facts" out of thin air and speculation, but I can tell you that the "10 pin standard" goes back a LONG way. Sony has used a variation of it in the AiShoe since the HC1, the 10 pin A/V port since the HC3, and now in the MULTI shoe and MULTI USB port.

Although there are variations in implementation (such as the current inexplicable differences between Handycams and Cybershots, which gives me much consternation, and I still hope to find the "hack"), the "10 pin" grouping has been present for well over a decade!! Hardly a flash in the pan! It is poorly documented, unless you have the service manuals, and even then it's a "reverse engineering" puzzle! The pins and functions (and especially the "trigger" mechanisms) are a "tad" mysterious, and I think we'd have to kidnap a Sony engineer to get the whole story! But you CANNOT say Sony hasn't had a specific interface methodology with 10 multipurpose pins, they have... for over a decade.

HERE is the "rub", I still have the email from when I asked Sony about the LANC interface on the A/V... US customer service had ZERO knowledge that it even existed (the AV2 had not yet been released). IOW, there couldn't have been much of a conspiracy, they just never told anyone the function was even THERE!! Much like the earlier discussion about the "Panasonic mystery port" <wink>. It could be there, but sufficiently undocumented that CS has "no idea"!! Part of the problem is that only a SMALL portion of camera enthusiasts would even know what a "LANC" port was for! Most people will NEVER use a remote or even contemplate that they might really NEED one... There are a few niche uses where it's considered a necessity, but for the vast majority of users, it's a "who cares" feature. Of course now there is more of an expectation that you can use your smart phone as a remote... such as it is.


And, looping back around.... at least from "internet legend", that 30 minute limit is due to some obscure EU law that taxes camcorders (that record OVER 30 minutes) at a higher rate than cameras... No reason that "they" couldn't release region specific firmware, but it probably is just easier to avoid attracting the interest or ire of government and regulatory authorities... SO, no conspiracy, just STUPID archaic outdated laws... with Global commerce, it is FAR too easy to "grey market" unrestricted cameras into the EU to bypass the taxes, so I'd imagine that it would be HIGHLY discouraged!

talking about older stuff: you made me remember stuff from my past with that ridiculous proprietary shoe.
.
I like that shoe and use a Sony wireless mic attached there, It can give 2ch or 5.1 audio so with the latter you get something like 6 tracks of audio - 2 from the wireless mic up on the podium or whereever, plus it mixes in the 4 tracks that the camera produces so in post you can pick the cleanest tracks or all
I use a vello bracket for mounting other things (and cameras even)

Spewing unsupportable complaints about a camera that are without basis (other than personal biases, which are showing) really don't belong in the discussion.

Dave, I agree with both you and Mark, as the points you've both made are both factual and on target. Unfortunately it became obvious this thread had taken a turn toward the absurd, as so many internet threads do, when Anthony said this:

"And that should tell a lot about the fans upset because the toy got ridiculed by the competition at a fraction of the cost with more and better features."

And here I never realized we were using a toy. What more can you say? Have fun guys, I'm outta here.

Viewing the video from the lumix fz1000 and ax1000 in 4k: The Seiki SE39UY04 39” Class 4K Ultra HD 120Hz LED TV is under 400cad at the moment. I was hoping Vizio would have their 4k tv out but don't see it from here, What else is there in the under 500 price range?

I"m trying to understand the field of view this camera provides, I read it has a 35mm equivalent focal length of 25-400mm. I know my Sony cx730 starts at 26,5mm and the ax100 starts at 29mm.

The reason why I like my cx730's is that 26,5mm is pretty wide and makes it a very useful wideangle lens, the FZ1000 starts at 25mm which is even wider or should I take a cropfactor (like the gh4 has) into account as well when comparing the field of view to my cx730 when the lens is at it's widest?

I"m trying to understand the field of view this camera provides, I read it has a 35mm equivalent focal length of 25-400mm. I know my Sony cx730 starts at 26,5mm and the ax100 starts at 29mm.

The reason why I like my cx730's is that 26,5mm is pretty wide and makes it a very useful wideangle lens, the FZ1000 starts at 25mm which is even wider or should I take a cropfactor (like the gh4 has) into account as well when comparing the field of view to my cx730 when the lens is at it's widest?

Any time they put the lens in 35mm equivalent, it should be apples to apples, or at least very close to it, since they're relating it to the old standard of 35mm/FF photography.

But as we know thus far with the fz1000, you are getting an additional crop factor when in 4k mode, bumping it to a 37mm equivalant. not very wide

Thx Darren, exactly what I wanted to know and indeed much less usefull, does the same apply for the ax100 in 4k mode?

The LANC protocol is just a method to control the camera - implementation varies widely, even within a manufacturers different cameras (well, Sony at least!). It shouldn't be an issue for a manufacturer to figure out an alternate method, you know, like how Ford and Chevy and Chrysler have similar features, but different cars...

and you missed the point again: it doesn't matter what kind of port you have, what really matters is what kind of remote you can attach. Varizoom, manfrotto, libec all are 2.5mm
got it now?

the sony proprietary remote for that absurd port is a toy, not really to be used for a real coverage.

now may I ask what remote are you using? I mean right now, and how many patch cables you need?

and the plastic adapter to the shoe to hold heavy stuff is like calling for troubles, absurd and plain ridiculous and brings back bad ancient memories

you can turn it the way you like but still is ridiculous. And the "proprietary" concept serves one purpose and one purpose only: TO SELL the proprietary accessories. What else?

about the time limit I agree that it was (originally) a way to save taxes in EU , but then it became an excuse to limit the offer and save the sales of the more expensive ones. look closer: what camera you can get right now with 4K, no time limit and a decent zoom and face detection? None. We all need that camera, aren't we?
They are still deciding where to go and how much they can make us pay. And again the way they (all) are doing it is disgusting. little tricks, limitations here and there, all scientifically calculated.

Thx Darren, exactly what I wanted to know and indeed much less usefull, does the same apply for the ax100 in 4k mode?

No, not with regular OIS stabilization - no additional crop factor for 4K for the Ax100. Sony samples from the entire sensor in 4K mode. Only in "Active" stabilization mode, Sony crops and then there is a crop factor.

The fact that the fz1000 has an additional crop factor in 4K mode tells us that the camera is taking a crop of the sensor, and not sampling from the entire sensor, does it not? And thus the Sony 4K image will be better (less noise, more resolution) than that from the fz1000, no?

Thx Mark for that confirmation as I only wanted to know if there was any cropfactor in 4K. So that 29mm (35mm equivalent) stays 29mm in 4K, that's good to know. I would have preferred wider but 29mm (I have a hdv camera here that starts wide from 29mm so I know how that will look like) will do fine, 37mm otoh does limit shooting in narrower spaces, too bad, otherwise that fz1000 could have been a nice B-camera for my purpose.

The fact that the fz1000 has an additional crop factor in 4K mode tells us that the camera is taking a crop of the sensor, and not sampling from the entire sensor, does it not? And thus the Sony 4K image will be better (less noise, more resolution) than that from the fz1000, no?

Not sure but do you want me to answer that? Sorry to ask but I don't understand what this has to do with my question?

Thx Mark for that confirmation as I only wanted to know if there was any cropfactor in 4K. So that 29mm (35mm equivalent) stays 29mm in 4K, that's good to know. I would have preferred wider but 29mm (I have a hdv camera here that starts wide from 29mm so I know how that will look like) will do fine, 37mm otoh does limit shooting in narrower spaces, too bad, otherwise that fz1000 could have been a nice B-camera for my purpose.

That's exactly the same issue I'm having with this camera. I've been thinking about it as a backup camera but since I only film in 4k means that it's basically 37mm at its widest. At 29mm the AX100 isn't quite wide enough for me and has forced me to alter some shots but it's been workable, but at 37mm I'm not sure I could make it workable. Then again since it would be a backup camera, I guess 37mm footage would be better than no footage at all in case my AX100 broke down at a shoot, hence why I'm still contemplating it. Now I'm just trying to find out how it's AF and OIS compares to the Sony, but so far opinions are conflicting on that alas leaving me in a bit of a fog as to what the reality is.

Now I'm just trying to find out how it's AF and OIS compares to the Sony, but so far opinions are conflicting on that alas leaving me in a bit of a fog as to what the reality is.
Such a question will only result in my camera is better then yours comments, best is to ask a fz1000 owner to shoot some out- and indoor shots and let the autofocus and ois do it's thing and post that on vimeo or youtube, I believe I have seen such a video with a autofocus test for the ax100 on this forum.

and you missed the point again: it doesn't matter what kind of port you have, what really matters is what kind of remote you can attach. Varizoom, manfrotto, libec all are 2.5mm
got it now?

the sony proprietary remote for that absurd port is a toy, not really to be used for a real coverage.

now may I ask what remote are you using? I mean right now, and how many patch cables you need?

and the plastic adapter to the shoe to hold heavy stuff is like calling for troubles, absurd and plain ridiculous and brings back bad ancient memories

you can turn it the way you like but still is ridiculous. And the "proprietary" concept serves one purpose and one purpose only: TO SELL the proprietary accessories. What else?

about the time limit I agree that it was (originally) a way to save taxes in EU , but then it became an excuse to limit the offer and save the sales of the more expensive ones. look closer: what camera you can get right now with 4K, no time limit and a decent zoom and face detection? None. We all need that camera, aren't we?
They are still deciding where to go and how much they can make us pay. And again the way they (all) are doing it is disgusting. little tricks, limitations here and there, all scientifically calculated.


I have heard no indication that that EU law has been repealed... have you? If it hasn't, it's not an "excuse", it's a real life business decision dictated by unfortunate realities... government silliness does that sometimes!

My shoe adapter for the AX100 is 100% solid METAL, cannot short anything, and is as sturdy as possible, I presume the MiShoe is part of a metal subframe, so I'm fairly confident in the way my adapter works! I only referred to older plastic adapters for the AiS.

The RM-AV2 works just fine, with the AVM1 adapter. I believe the VPR1 also works, maybe not as "fancy" (or expensive) as your "2.5mm" ones, but certainly workable.

As I stated earlier, the LANC remote "niche" market is relatively quite small, ANY manufacturer can easily attach a different plug and mod their device to work with a Sony "10 pin" port of whichever flavor. Why don't you go to them and complain that they don't? If there's this HUGE PROFIT to be made in selling LANC controllers, I'm sure they will be thrilled you brought it to their attention... or not.

When there was a need for LANC on the A/V port, adapters and LANC controllers sprung up to meet the niche market demands once the "hack" was reverse engineered (something I had a hand in at the time). I'm fine with the MULTI to A/V adapter for now, it provides all the functions I need with the remote I already had, at least for the AX100!

I WOULD like to sort out why it DOES NOT work with Cybershots... I rather prefer the tiny AV2 to the VPR1! But that's somewhat apples and oranges... Sony isn't even 100% consistent "in house"!

I have heard no indication that that EU law has been repealed... have you? If it hasn't, it's not an "excuse", it's a real life business decision dictated by unfortunate realities... government silliness does that sometimes!

My shoe adapter for the AX100 is 100% solid METAL, cannot short anything, and is as sturdy as possible, I presume the MiShoe is part of a metal subframe, so I'm fairly confident in the way my adapter works! I only referred to older plastic adapters for the AiS.

The RM-AV2 works just fine, with the AVM1 adapter. I believe the VPR1 also works, maybe not as "fancy" (or expensive) as your "2.5mm" ones, but certainly workable.

As I stated earlier, the LANC remote "niche" market is relatively quite small, ANY manufacturer can easily attach a different plug and mod their device to work with a Sony "10 pin" port of whichever flavor. Why don't you go to them and complain that they don't? If there's this HUGE PROFIT to be made in selling LANC controllers, I'm sure they will be thrilled you brought it to their attention... or not.

When there was a need for LANC on the A/V port, adapters and LANC controllers sprung up to meet the niche market demands once the "hack" was reverse engineered (something I had a hand in at the time). I'm fine with the MULTI to A/V adapter for now, it provides all the functions I need with the remote I already had, at least for the AX100!

I WOULD like to sort out why it DOES NOT work with Cybershots... I rather prefer the tiny AV2 to the VPR1! But that's somewhat apples and oranges... Sony isn't even 100% consistent "in house"!
Dear Dave
I bought the AX100 this morning and the multi adapter cable (avm1 I think) and none of my remotes work (varizoom and libec). BUT the vivitar works! And it has 8 constant speeds +1 variable (of the zoom) plus on-off (camera) , on-screen info on lcd on/off, on-screen info on hdmi monitor on/off, photo , start/stop rec and focus (I have to double check the focus but it seems to be working)
So the whole protocol is in there. I was about to return the camera but then the Vivitar saved it. If you want to get that 20bucks remote just let me know and I'll tell you how to make it (much) better, with no "clicks" zooming. The slowest speed for the zxoom is fairly slow and the fastest is lighting fast. then there are 9 speeds to choose, so no problem. The camera is impressive, but a bit dark in low light (but I just got it.. so it's too soon to report)
Back to the vivitar and since it's the only one with on/off switch may be that the other two (without it) set the multi port off by default. Again "maybe", anyway they don't work so be it... not going crazy to find out. The vivitar is good enough and the control of the zoom speed from the remote is priceless. So so far I'm good.
Why don't you go to them and complain that they don't? If there's this HUGE PROFIT to be made in selling LANC controllers, I'm sure they will be thrilled you brought it to their attention... or not.
care to explain that sarcasm up there? the remote or lanc is important, Dave. You put the camera on a tripod and zoom with it, shooting sports like I do is mandatory (no other way to produce a decent coverage without it. I will use the XA20 on a crane and the remote is again important. What's so funny if I wanted to make sure that I had that option? I don't get it. After all you don't work for Sony and you are a customer like me, no? jeeeezzzz

My shoe adapter for the AX100 is 100% solid METAL, cannot short anything, and is as sturdy as possible, I presume the MiShoe is part of a metal subframe, so I'm fairly confident in the way my adapter works! I only referred to older plastic adapters for the AiS.

Dave,
sorry I didn't answer to the shoe adapter since I was fairly upset with the lanc thing. You should be fine with your adapter if it's tight. I remember that the SR11 shoe had a "play" (the shoe itself had that play, didn';t matter how tight I screwed the adapter on it. and that most likely caused the shorts. Just make sure that the adapter sits tight with no "play" and you should be just fine. After all a word of caution may help to prevent troubles. Just be careful, that's all.

I was pointing out that no matter how critical you or I may feel the remote function is, I'd venture that 90%+ of cameras sold NEVER see a wired remote - maybe the wireless one, but that's enough for most people - I've even used it as a kludge in a pinch. There's just not a lot of money there... despite what you or I might think! And if there is, a Chinese knockoff will hit the market within 60-90 days... especially with accessories!

And while I'm glad to hear that the cheap Vivitar remote works well (will have to look it up, thanks!). as you've discovered the LANC implementation can be pretty "varied". This has been my experience as well. It's up to us end users to sort out what works and what doesn't, and there's not a lot of options, either OEM or aftermarket! Find one that works for you with your rig, and go with it!

The camcorder market has already experienced (along with the point and shoot market niche) a MASSIVE reduction in sales, and it's not getting better. This means where 10 years ago a manufacturer could afford R&D, engineering, tooling and manufacture costs, and have a decent chance of selling enough units to make that sunk cost back and a profit. Now? Not so much.

You keep ascribing some "plot" to the manufacturers that is related (I guess) to supposedly raking in huge profits through market/feature manipulation... I'd argue they are just struggling to survive...


There's zero "play" in the foot the way I modded it, it clamps VERY tight to the metal frame, which should be attached to the camera metal subframe in a typical Sony. I had some concern about shorts, but it turns out that the contacts are ever so slightly recessed below the molded plastic, and once you notch/key the part of the foot that goes into the front (contact area) of the socket AND thin it out enough to clear the molded area, nothing to worry about! You end up with a lot of clamp surface once that "tongue" is machined to fit.

We probably should move back to the AX100 thread for further discussion, I think you'll find the AX100 to be a good video camera, it does take a little to get the most out of, so don't panic if you hit some bumps, don't be surprised, I expect early FZ1000 adopters will discover some "fun" with 4K too...

But it's worth it!

Mark
you understand that I shoot with a Sony camera, right?

yes, the 30min. limitation is absurd and plain ridiculous. I already said that, several times, and here I'll say it again. No excuses for Panasonic for coming up with that horrendous trick. Disgusting. they had to "copy" the RX10. shame on Panasonic.

Not excusing Panasonic here, but I wonder if the 30 minute limitation was a deliberate attempt to satisfy the requirements of the EU market, where cameras that can record more than 30 minutes are classed as camcorders and higher taxes are levied on the camera as a result.

I was pointing out that no matter how critical you or I may feel the remote function is, I'd venture that 90%+ of cameras sold NEVER see a wired remote - maybe the wireless one, but that's enough for most people - I've even used it as a kludge in a pinch. There's just not a lot of money there... despite what you or I might think! And if there is, a Chinese knockoff will hit the market within 60-90 days... especially with accessories!

<snip>

The camcorder market has already experienced (along with the point and shoot market niche) a MASSIVE reduction in sales, and it's not getting better. This means where 10 years ago a manufacturer could afford R&D, engineering, tooling and manufacture costs, and have a decent chance of selling enough units to make that sunk cost back and a profit. Now? Not so much.

You keep ascribing some "plot" to the manufacturers that is related (I guess) to supposedly raking in huge profits through market/feature manipulation... I'd argue they are just struggling to survive...

<snip>

Although the quoted and highlighted part of your post is something that could probably be discussed in another thread, I'd like to weigh in and offer my opinion on what is happening here. Camcorder sales are dropping for a number of reasons:

1) There are too many camcorders on the market, with each manufacturer offering umpteen different 'flavours'. Digital SLRs and other still cameras with video recording capabilities also militate against greater camcorder sales because they partially cannibalize the market for camcorders.

2) Most people who would normally buy a cheap, low-end camcorder are taking the 'good enough' route and shooting their videos with iPads, iPhones and Android devices with similar capabilities. Sure, this reinforces the phenomenon of crap videos you see on Youtube, but most consumers really don't know how to use their camcorders properly, and they don't care to learn. They just want something that lets them capture a moment on the fly. Most are also not willing to absorb the extra expense and hassle of buying yet another device just to get arguably better sound and picture quality.

3) Consumers are broke, and with the way the global economy is going, people are becoming progressively less able to spend on anything but necessities. This means they are going to be keeping their existing camcorders longer, if they have one.

I think part of the overall problem too, is that the market is jaded with the feature-itis the manufacturers are coming out with all the time in an effort to keep sales stoked up. In other
words, they perceive it as gimmick after gimmick with little real value loaded into the transaction.

Right now, I think 4K is still somewhat of a gimmick in the camcorder arena, since most people don't have TV sets that can properly reproduce 4K video. I've seen what 4K looks like on a 4K TV, and it is simply stunning, provided that you have excellent-quality source material to display. The average highly compressed cable TV signal is going to look like crap on such a TV set, yet this is what most consumers have to work with. 4K has potential, and it's what 1080p HD video should have been, but broadcasters weren't willing to invest the money needed to upgrade their infrastructure properly so that they could broadcast a real 1080p signal. If they weren't willing to make that kind of investment in 1080p, what makes anyone think they will invest in 4K?

2) Most people who would normally buy a cheap, low-end camcorder are taking the 'good enough' route and shooting their videos with iPads, iPhones and Android devices with similar capabilities. Sure, this reinforces the phenomenon of crap videos you see on Youtube, but most consumers really don't know how to use their camcorders properly, and they don't care to learn. They just want something that lets them capture a moment on the fly.

I don't think it's so much that they don't care, but that they use what they have with them. I have an AX100 that I use for my websites business, but the reality is that outside of business use I never use it, and I exclusively use my phone to take videos and pictures. Does the quality look as good? Definitely not. However my Nokia 1520 is with me 100% of the time and is always there to video a memorable situation, whereas my AX100 never is. Simple as that, hence why even though the quality isn't as good, personally I find that large camcorders are slowly becoming useless for personal use because they are not likely to be around when the moment to record strikes whereas someones phone always is. Uber quality video recording is useless if the device isn't with me, and it simply never is.


Right now, I think 4K is still somewhat of a gimmick in the camcorder arena, since most people don't have TV sets that can properly reproduce 4K video.

I don't think this matters as much anymore. Maybe my case is different for everyone else, but by and large most people I know show off their pictures and videos on their ultrabooks, tablets and phones. I don't know of anyone, family or friend, that says 'hey check out this video' and has everyone sit around the family tv. That just never happens in my world. Ultrabooks, tablets, etc, all have had > 1080p resolution for a long time now and that's what gets used to show people videos and pictures. Incidentally that's also why I switched to filming entirely in 4k because I think it's actually very important and people are switching to it more rapidly than some realize because some keep using the traditional tv as the basline metric, which I don't feel is the correct way to look at it anymore. Heck the analytics on my websites which get millions of hits a year show that 28% of my users access my websites with a tablet or a phone. Not a Roku, game console, or some other device hooked to a tv, but a tablet or phone. That's quite amazing given that it was 0% not all that long ago, things are shifting fast.

Consider ordering the camera from Omega Broadcast. Click below:


Panasonic LUMIX DMC-FZ1000K (http://www.omegabroadcast.com/product-p/pan-dmcfz1000k-90-4980.htm)

Steve, even if you don't have a 4K monitor or UHD TV, the down rez 'd 4K> HD looks far better than any HD camera you're likely to use.

So, it's far from a 'gimmick' even for those with only an HD display. Additionally, the gorgeous 4K can be archived for future use whenever you get a 4K display.

which brings up the archiving of 4k issue
Man I have about 20tb of hd and a similar amount of SD stored on dvd
What in heaven's name will we use to hold onto 4k?
I read Sony and Panasonic are working on enormous capacity Blu-Ray bring em on and quick

which brings up the archiving of 4k issue
Man I have about 20tb of hd and a similar amount of SD stored on dvd
What in heaven's name will we use to hold onto 4k?
I read Sony and Panasonic are working on enormous capacity Blu-Ray bring em on and quick

I use a combination of 50gb blurays and 2tb hdd's. After a shoot I burn the footage to a 50gb bluray, and copy it to two different 2tb hdd's. I store the blurays and one of the hdd's at one bank, and the other hdd at another bank. Once that 2tb hdd is full I get another set of two, rinse and repeat. I use portable usb 3.0 hdd's that don't need external power and are very small. That's also why I love that the AX100 records at 60mbps with a pretty good codec, it makes archiving much easier than 240mbps prores and the like. At 100mbps the FZ1000 will take more space, but it's still doable. I've been managing my archives this way for many years now, it's relatively cheap and easy to do and lets me sleep at night knowing my stuff is archived at two separate location on two separate storage types, optical and magnetic.

which brings up the archiving of 4k issue
Man I have about 20tb of hd and a similar amount of SD stored on dvd
What in heaven's name will we use to hold onto 4k?
I read Sony and Panasonic are working on enormous capacity Blu-Ray bring em on and quick

Shoot less and more selectively. Save only whatever 4K turns out good enough to have value at that resolution. Down-convert the rest.