Contrary to suggestions, I did not withdraw because of others disagreeing with my views or being over sensitive, but because I felt that a number of comments on this and previous fz1000 threads were becoming very personal and sometimes mocking.

Totally agree Roger. Welcome back

Bottom line is that for the price, there are some pretty impressive cameras... pluses and minuses, of course...

It took a long time for Chris H to get the Sony areas rearranged, so as one "orphaned category" to another, you're more than welcome to discuss the FZ1000 over under the threads on the Sony RX10... as far as I'm thinking, they are very similar cameras in "focus" and concept - so sort of fit together better than the ILC class cameras. Us outcasts gotta stick together!

FWIW, I've found that dropping shutter speed to 30 can bring up low light in a pinch, not sure how the FZ operates, but since 4K is 30p anyway, it seems to be workable. Maybe not ideal. but one way to squeeze a little more out of the darkness.

There are some "tricks" that are universal, and others that are brand specific, in the end the only thing that counts is that you got the shot, and didn't tear your hair out getting it... regardless of the label on the front or how much you spent!

Hi Dave

I know my Sony EA-50's defaulted to 1/25th in 25P mode (in your case it would be 1/30th and 30P) so I'm assuming the bride cameras (both Sony and Panasonic) would do that indoors? I don't seem to have any motion blur even with the dancing but then again it's a wedding so they just don't go wild! 25P seems to work pretty well both indoors and out plus I'm used to shooting in 25P as my Sony's used to give me a bit of posterization if any area was over-exposed and you were shooting 50P so I normally just use 50P for my stedicam shoot. The FZ has a beautiful 100fps slomo mode but when you start recording it locks the exposure so I cannot do my "roundie rounds" with the stedicam as I usually do a full 360 circle around the couple and try to get a sunburst on the way .... fixed exposure just blows out totally as I get to the bright section and stopping and restarting the camera spoils the flow totally. That's a big bummer as I was hoping to use the slomo feature for bridal shoots on stedicam!!

Bottom line is that for the price, there are some pretty impressive cameras... pluses and minuses, of course...

It took a long time for Chris H to get the Sony areas rearranged, so as one "orphaned category" to another, you're more than welcome to discuss the FZ1000 over under the threads on the Sony RX10... as far as I'm thinking, they are very similar cameras in "focus" and concept - so sort of fit together better than the ILC class cameras. Us outcasts gotta stick together!

FWIW, I've found that dropping shutter speed to 30 can bring up low light in a pinch, not sure how the FZ operates, but since 4K is 30p anyway, it seems to be workable. Maybe not ideal. but one way to squeeze a little more out of the darkness.

There are some "tricks" that are universal, and others that are brand specific, in the end the only thing that counts is that you got the shot, and didn't tear your hair out getting it... regardless of the label on the front or how much you spent!

Hi Dave,

That could be a good intermediate compromise until a new category is available :-)

I've been experimenting with 25fps and 50fps (pal land) to see what differences I can find, no hard and fast conclusions yet though. I probably need to set up a fixed shot and switch from one to the other to really see the difference.

Roger

Totally agree Roger. Welcome back

Hi Colin,

How did you get on with your 'out of retirement' wedding?

Roger

Whoah boys! - I don't check in for a while and there's been a fair bit of verbal biffo - let's relax.

I had an FZ200 as a backup cam and found it great, I got the FZ1000 and now have 2. I always have a 2nd shooter and we each have one hangng off the belt.

I've used them for bride & groom prep and they are great, I find the GH4 with FD lenses gives me a an image I like more - but the ease of using the FZ1000 really makes it a hard decision.


During ceremonies we both have the GH4 and the FZ1000 as a backup cam - it's great to be able to leave the GH4 on a fixed closeup and grab the FZ1000 for a quick shot of the MOB tearing up.

Up till sundown I feel I could get away with using the FZ1000 as the only camera, no problem.

In dim receptions I have a problem, maybe it's my settings but given a choice between a GH4 with my FD 85mm F1.2 ans the FZ1000 it's no contest.

I'll try to do some direct comparisions and put them up.

I still have a pair of FZ200s that I use for quick grabs occasionally and it was those cameras that influenced me to get the FZ1000s.

I'm sure the f1.2 lens on the G4 will give you far more low light options probably about the time I would consider using extra light for the FZ1000. I have found that my receptions so far haven't given me any low light problems, but the next one could just turn out to be candlelight!

A G4 with lenses is a way to go for a number of users on the forum, but not suitable for me, partly for cost, but also because working solo most of the time I want the speed and convenience that the FZ1000 gives me, rather than different lenses, which some prefer of course. One man's meat etc.

Roger

Hi Paul

It's just common sense that a GH4 with it's bigger sensor and fast F1.2 lens will be a low light killer ...At our receptions I can mange everything except when they really dim the lights for the first dance to crazy levels and then, of course the video light is a necessity!

A GH4 and 85mm F1.2 is also likely to cost a whole heap more. We seldom have candle light receptions like Noa often has and if we did I too would opt for a GH4 and a very fast lens.

At 85mm at F1.2 don't you struggle with DOF? The GH4 has a crop factor of 2X right?? so that makes the lens a 35mm equivalent of 170mm ....you must have to be an awfully long way from the people to shoot with that?? On the FZ I seldom move off 25mm and at F2.8 I do have a reasonably big DOF to work with so it's easy! I tried a 50mm Sony F1.8 on my camera once during the dancing and everything was just too close to work with ...at that was a 35mm equivalent of 75mm only and I really struggled!!

Using fast primes for low light isn't just about capturing a visible image, it's about capturing one with as minimum noise as possible. I've just spent the day going around castles with my GH4 and 2.8 zoom lens. The image acquired was quite visible and clear but nothing at all like the quality I can get with a fast prime. Colour and detail look considerably better when ISO is kept lower.

As Chris is right to point out, it comes at the cost of a narrow DOF and tough focusing, and as Roger says, carrying a lot of lenses. However there is a clear difference in the kind of videos we all offer. For me, I'm trying for something more artistic or cinematic, whichever term best fits. Using sliders, jibs and gimbal along with primes to capture the day with an eye for a good looking image. Others favour a more documentary approach and the criteria of gear will differ accordingly.

Ultimately we choose for our needs and budget. Suggesting the FZ1000 isn't suitable for my needs is not a suggestion it isn't suitable for Wedding filming. That rather falls down to your style and methods of filming.

I don't have a FZ1000 and don't plan on buying one, but I did find this footage which I thought looked pretty impressive for a camera with its price tag:

PANASONIC FZ1000 4K & SLOWMOTION 120FPS CINE V SETTING RAW FOOTAGE - YouTube

I could see the 120fps being very useful as long as there's lots of light. Even if you didn't use it as an A or B camera, you could still get some shots in 120fps that would be pretty spectacular.

Hi Colin,

How did you get on with your 'out of retirement' wedding?

Roger
Excellent Roger. It was in my dark old local church, just 2 minutes down the road. I got a fair few shots at the tele end and was delighted with them. Will post a clip when I have edited. I pushed the iso up to 5000, the results were very impressive

I look forward to seeing the clip Colin.

I dug out my Glide Gear stabiliser today after about 18 months of non use. It just didn't seem to do the job with my other cameras. The FZ1000 though seems to balance perfectly and initial testing looked promising. The cameras stabilisation seems to work well with the Glide Gear, damping out movement that the hand held one doesn't fully remove. I'll try it at the next wedding and see if I can get some good steadycam type shots and any remaining jitter should be easily correctable with Mercalli in my NLE. I never really expected much from the mechanical stabiliser, just bought it as a cheap experiment, but looks like it may have come back into play. One advantage with it is that I can clamp it directly to my double tripod plate with camera attached, then just unclamp it for instant flying shots (If it works well enough).

Roger

Hi Roger

Is that a hand held model of the Glide Gear you are using? I'm running a Weildy system with vest and dual arm and it now works with the FZ very well but I had to add a bunch of weight onto the top stage so the dual arm actually worked. I like the fact that a mechanical arm system has natural dampening so you get rather nice footage. However my stedicam use is restricted to an outdoor shoot with just the bride and groom wandering around the venue gardens doing roundie rounds etc etc.

I find my little U shaped rig and the foam grips either side keep the footage pretty stable so 90% of B-Cam stuff is done handheld rather than using a stabilise.

Hi Chris,

Yes the stabiliser is this one http://www.amazon.co.uk/Glide-Gear-SYL-3000-Stabilizer/dp/B0092736US/ref=sr_1_9?ie=UTF8&qid=1442930923&sr=8-9&keywords=glide+gear

The 3000 can take a bit more weight than the 500 & 1000 and it was bought as a first stabiliser to see if I could get used to it. It just wasn't great with my other cameras but seems to suit the FZ1000 well. I replaced the plastic gimbal with a chrome plated one for less than £5 off the internet, which made it much smoother. I'll be trying it in anger at next week's wedding where Claire will also be with me, so a bit more time for experimenting.

Roger

With this type of stabilizer you get what you pay for and I would not expect any fluid motion possible with it at all and forget about having decent pan and tilt controll, if you don't have experience flying a steadicam then a 3 axis gimbal which starts just below 500 dollar will give you much superior results.

With this type of stabilizer you get what you pay for and I would not expect any fluid motion possible with it at all and forget about having decent pan and tilt controll, if you don't have experience flying a steadicam then a 3 axis gimbal which starts just below 500 dollar will give you much superior results.

A Beholder MS1 in the UK would set me back about £400 and at the moment is not something that I could justify the cost of for possible occasional use. The stabiliser I already have is very basic, but won't cost me a penny extra to play with, so I will try it and see what it does. Possibly nothing, but it will be interesting to see.

Thanks for the input,

Roger

I've owned a glidecam for several years but never gave it the time of day. I just never could get it balanced and frankly didn't miss the kind of shots it could give. It's only with the acquisition of the gimbal that I've begun to experiment with such shots and seen their value.

However using any stabiliser requires a great deal of practise in how you move and operate it. I've been using it on every Wedding in the last month but still feel I have so much to learn. Not that I'm not getting great shots, but it feels more random and that the gimbal is doing the hard work and not me. Perhaps that's the point of it, but I'd rather I was making some contribution to smooth looking shots.

I keep getting tempted to try to mod a smartphone active gimbal to take an RX100. Seems like it might be a good cheap "flying" option, and not too expensive. Eventually these 3 axis active systems will probably drop in price while becoming reliably stable, but so far I'm not sure about them! Somehow they seem like prototypes rushed into production...


I've tried various "passive" stabilizers, with mixed results, and a fair amount of time trying to make them reliable enough for "live" use... if I had time to set and repeat missed shots, maybe, but more stress than I prefer.

In the end, I've found I can get passable results by using my footed monopod with the right grip and "walk", not great, but I'm already on that "rig".

For handheld, I'm with Chris's "U shape" configuration (mini Fig Rig!), but using just a folding flash bracket on the left side, regular grip on the right for camera control - with a two hand grip, most of the objectionable wiggles (roll/pitch/yaw axis) are kept under control, and if you learn "the walk" (no bouncing!), and use your arms correctly, you can simulate a gimbal/steadi rig under many conditions. It's lightweight (less fatigue), cheap, effective, and better than just handheld. In my case, the Stratos folding bracket is so small, I can always stick one in even a tiny camera bag and have it when needed, I have a bunch of them I picked up cheap on ebay, so I usually have one stuck somewhere handy!

A Beholder MS1 in the UK would set me back about £400 and at the moment is not something that I could justify the cost of for possible occasional use. The stabiliser I already have is very basic, but won't cost me a penny extra to play with, so I will try it and see what it does. Possibly nothing, but it will be interesting to see.


It depends what you plan on achieving with it, the fz1000 would in terms of weight be perfect for such a beholder, but there are more and more coming out in a pricerange between 500 to 1000 dollar. The footage I saw from Glide Gear users on youtube looked awefull but that is coming from someone who takes steadicam work serious :) The motion was all over the place and they each time ridiculed the Merlin, which has a similar design, for being so expensive. Only once they see how that merlin is build, the way you can finetune, and the quality of the used materials, in particular the gimbal, and what result it can have on the motion you are trying to achieve, only then they will understand why it's more expensive.

That's not to say you can't get anything decent out of the Glide Gear, with correct balancing you might get some usable shots out of it but it probably would be a constant frustration just to nail that one smooth move.

If you want to lift your productions to a higher level and want to include steadicam shots you are better off investing a little, practice a lot and get it right the first time.

I

In the end, I've found I can get passable results by using my footed monopod with the right grip and "walk", not great, but I'm already on that "rig".


I find exactly the same with my lightweight tripod, where I am so used to working with it that I can set the legs as a counterweight and get quite stable walking footage in conjunction with the excellent camera stabilization. That makes me think very carefully before investing in a comparatively expensive 3 axis gimbal that might just end up sitting in a cupboard.

Roger

A "steadicam solo" might be interesting as it combines a monopod and steadicam in one but not cheap either.

Like a lot of onboard camera mics, the FZ1000 pics up a lot of mechanical noise from the camera, particularly when moving around with it. The image stabilization seeming to make a constant background chattering sound at quiet moments.

To get round this, I have many different mics for different occasions, ranging from 3 different Sony stereo mics, a couple of AT21s, Sure SM56 & SM58, a Rode studio vocal mic, radio mics, a handful of lavs and several cheap electret mics. The cheap electrets are hissy and none of the mics will mount on the camera without making it difficult or impossible to use the viewfinder because of the overhang. So I wanted something to put on the camera while I am walking around getting general shots. Sound quality needed to be useable without system noise, preferably stereo, but not necessarily to the quality needed for formal sound.

Having been very pleased with my Boya radio system, I came across a Boya electret mic for DSLR type cameras which seemed to have very good reviews. http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B00RF3EIS0/ref=pe_385721_37986871_TE_item
As it was a pretty silly price, I thought it worth a punt as I could always use it for something else of eBay it not much good. It arrived this morning, so I have been trying it out around the house and garden in comparison with the onboard mics.

It arrived nicely packaged and included an attached coiled connecting lead of sensible length with stereo 3.5mm plug, foam windshield (that all camera mics seem to come with and are useless), and a rather useful looking dead cat windshield, plus a soft mic bag. The mic takes one AAA battery and has a switch and power on light. The build is plasticky as you would expect with a normal hot shoe connection and locking ring. The body of the mic is permanently connected to the mount via four flexible rubber legs for shock absorbing.

First tests showed that the mic didn't impede on using the viewfinder, which was one of the main reasons for getting it. It wobbled about a bit on the rubber legs, but they were unexpectedly good at cutting handling and camera noise. The mic was quiet in operation and frequency range seems initially wide, picking up top end well but also a nice bass end on voice. The foam windshield behaved as expected i.e. poorly, but the dead cat was extremely efficient at killing all wind noise. I can put up with the very pale and obvious couloured fluff if it going to be that efficient.

Yet to be tried at a wedding in anger, but first thoughts are that it is going to do exactly what I bought it to do. That is walking around handheld shots, cutting out wind and handling noise and not obstructing the viewfinder or screen, while giving a reasonable sound quality.

It won't satisfy the officianados, it's cheap and cheerful, but it performs above it's price level, doesn't matter if it gets lost or broken and if it is as reliable as the Boya radio system I will be well satisfied.

Roger

I should add that the Boya mic comes with a stereo 3.5 mm plug and lead, but is a mono unidirectional mic. Suits my needs for general sound pickup but not if you want stereo sound for general shooting.

Roger

I came across a Boya electret mic for DSLR type cameras which seemed to have very good reviews.

Thanks Roger, I'm after a mic for my camera too and was thinking of the videomic pro r

The Boya as you say, might be worth a try.


Thank you.

Thanks Roger, I'm after a mic for my camera too and was thinking of the videomic pro r

The Boya as you say, might be worth a try.


Thank you.

The Rode is a very nice mic and will use far better components and construction than the Boya, but I didn't want to spen that much on a mic for occasional use at the moment, just wanted to improve on what the onboard mic does. The Boya looks like a cheap copy of the Rode, but I'll see what I get from it in a wedding environment.

Roger

...but I'll see what I get from it in a wedding environment.

Roger

Thanks Roger, time will tell :)

I find this a particularly good mic - good sound and well made

Nikon me1 - been using it with my A7s for about 6 months now

I find this a particularly good mic - good sound and well made

Nikon me1 - been using it with my A7s for about 6 months now

Thanks Peter, must have a look at it on youtube.

I find this a particularly good mic - good sound and well made

Nikon me1 - been using it with my A7s for about 6 months now

Looks like another good option Pete, thing is I'm not even sure that I need that sort of mic at the moment which is why I bought the Boya first to see how I get on with it. If I use it a lot and it makes a noticeable difference I may well upgrade to a better mic.

Roger

What i like about the nikon is that you can mount it on your hot shoe and still use the viewfinder - unlike the rode that protudes from the back

I agree Pete, that's exactly why I thought I would try the Boya mic.

Roger

I tried to find an old style Videomic but they are hard to find, The new ones all have a Rycote mount that replaces the rubber suspension and the rings used to break until I invested in some industrial "O" rings (still have a bag full) There is only one downfall to these mics which includes the Boya, Rode Videomic and I also have a Takstar which work well. These mics all use batteries so you have to remember to turn the mic on!! I usually turn it on when I arrive at the venue and leave it on all day only turning it off when I pack up. On Saturday however I packed up after the first dance and the bride begged me to just film a few minutes of bouquet toss ...No problem AND no audio either cos I had turned the mic off, hadn't I

I even have a label on the mic saying "Is the mic on" but that didn't help either and I now have to try to find music and ambience to fill in the blanks .... Is there anything else one can do to ensure that you have indeed turned the mic on???? I have the label and a bright green LED but I still left it off!!!

I do have the audio levels continuously showing on the screen which is a reminder, trouble is you get so used to seeing things on the screen it's easy to ignore them.

I have been using an excellent old Sony dynamic mic mounted on the camera, but I can't use the viewfinder when it is on.

Roger

That would be no good to me Roger as I use the viewfinder 90% of the time, only using the rear LCD screen for low or high shots - I have a party to film on Saturday and i'll be using my rode videomic but (I don't know why they are designed like this to go on a shoe mount but means you cannot use the VF!!) I'll have to mount it on the side of my minirig - It just fits without being seen at 24mm - but only just!

...No problem AND no audio either cos I had turned the mic off, hadn't I


Sorry to hear that Chris, that can happen so easy.
As you said no matter what you have there to warn you, its still possible to over look it, sound bars or not.

I would like a mic that doesn't need a battery.

This doesn't and although not as directional as the Rode - there's not much in it and the audio quality is really good and it doesn't backwards protrude - also has a lo-cut switch - If you want good sound and remove handling noise it's great

Nikon ME-1 Stereo Microphone: Amazon.co.uk: Electronics (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Nikon-ME-1-Stereo-Microphone/dp/B004V6BQ3O/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1443110845&sr=8-1&keywords=nikon+me1)

If you want good sound and remove handling noise it's great


Exactly what I'm after :)

Thank you.

Has anyone tried shooting at 240fps in 720p on this camera? I was looking at the Sony RX100 IV because it does 240fps at 1080p but I've read that it has an overheating problem. I've heard great things about the FZ1000 and I'm interested in finding a camera that shoots at 240p, but if the quality at 720p is poor then it wouldn't be worth it to me.

I have a Panasonic shotgun mic, very good sound but a very long mic. However it doesn't need batteries and that's its biggest bonus for me. Whilst I'd continue using it for key audio moments, the Nikon looks a great small alternative when I need background sound but don't want the inconvenience of the Panasonic mic.

I've seen some clips online from the FZ's HFR online, they looked "OK-ish". Sony clips have looked pretty good in HFR modes, though the higher ones lose quality/resolution, as might be expected.

The RX100IV heat issues are supposedly with the 4K, but may cross over to the HFR (?). I've got the RX10II, and doing some heat testing is on my list... just haven't had time to set up a proper test. It's on my radar, as I've had Sonys that overheated in the past... not a problem for short clips, but a potential issue for longer events! I've had NO problems with the AX100 or the earlier RX's, got my fingers crossed for the new iterations, and the 5 minute clip limit on the 100IV (for 4K shooting) is a bit concerning... we shall see!

The FZ1000 doesn't do 240FPS at all! It only has either 100FPS in PAL land or 120FPS in the USA and Japan. Just remember the faster the frame rate the less actual footage you can record so at 100FPS you only can record 7 minutes of video at a time. Also the FZ locks the exposure when in HSV so if you chance scenarios you must stop the camera, refocus and re-expose!

The GH4 would probably have 240FPS??? I wouldn't know but plenty of GH4 owners can confirm that!

I've used the 100fps on the FZ1000 a few times and it is very smooth. As Chris said, you only get 7mins recording, but when you are using the HSR you really need to think how long you want the clip to be. You only need a 5 second shot to get 20 secs of footage. It's very easy to get long boring clips that you end up cutting right down anyway.

Roger

for those with mike on the hotshoe problems - It's not to hard to cobble together an extension setup - I have 2 for using mikes on the GH4 and FZ1000 so I can use the viewfinder

Well what do you know, there's a dedicated forum for the FZ. Hopefully now this thread can prosper in its proper home.

How about that. Finally.

How about that. Finally.

Not a pop at you Chris. Updating websites do take time and I don't even own the camera. Just glad to see such threads in their own forum and off Weddings. Cheers for the work.

Beautiful Chris

You are a king among men!! We did realise that you actually DO have a life outside the forum so we were quiet happy to sit and wait until you found a little time.

I've had a FZ1000 since they came out so have had a over a year to play with it. Although I can't complain about the image quality there are several things I dislike with the cam for video. I had a FZ200 and loved the way it was set up for video but the quality wasn't there compared the FZ1000 so I sold it. I recently got the FZ300 and this may be the ticket for me.

Like the FZ200 this cam must have been designed by a videographer. I can't think of anything physically I would change if I was designing it myself. The control buttons are layed out perfectly for me. Having the zoom slider, manual focus wheel, and one button push auto focus on the lens barrel right where I place my hand is ideal. Both the FZ300 and FZ1000 have plenty of reach but an advantage of the FZ300 is there is no crop at the wide end when shooting 4K. The first couple times I used the FZ300 I thought the stabilization was much better than with the FZ1000 but I now believe the difference is due to the poor balance of the FZ1000. If a guy can keep that front heavy lens stable while shooting there probably is no difference. I can't.

Going to spend some time comparing the two closely to see how much, if any, difference there is in image quality or light sensitivity. The Fz300 has a smaller sensor but fewer pixels and with it's constant 2.8 aperature sensitivity may be comaparable when zoomed in.

Did a quick walk around today with a few shots shooting into the sun, sun behind, sun from the side, some contrast shots to see what DR was like, and seeing how the one push auto focus works in full manual mode.

Natural photo style
Contrast 0
Sharpness -5
NR -5
Saturation -2


password is: fz300

Private Video on Vimeo

Hi Tom

For me the video just buffers and buffers and then plays about 5 seconds, buffers again and goes back to zero .. very frustrating!!

Was this uploaded in UHD maybe???

Chris, video was acquired in 4K and rendered out as 1080 and uploaded as such. Don't know what the problem is. Vimeo videos run slow for me and I generally have to start and then immediately stop them and let them fully load before playing.