Anyone using the FZ1000 for weddings?

[Chris Harding]

Thanks Colin

I saw a few on a FZ1000 review and it does an 8mp frame grab which is pretty impressive! That would be a killer feature if the photog missed a shot and could give the bride a nice still!!

Based on the big price gap going the next step upwards and getting a GH4 with a pile of fast lenses for low light wedding receptions doesn't seem to be worth the massive price difference. I think in the rare weddings where everything is lit with tea light candles a video light will work OK . If I use one for an A-Cam at Church weddings I just may drop one camera into a simple aluminium frame on a tripod so I can add an XLR to stereo adapter and two receivers ...I have to discard both my Azden wireless kits before the next season anyway as their frequencies are illegal ..probably two AudioTechnica system 10's will suffice so I would still need somewhere to mount two receivers for the 2.4GHz receivers

Chris

[Chris Harding]

Sorry one quick question? Can one use the FZ1000 in normal focus not continuous as a main camera locked on the bride and groom as a fairly tight shot and then do a half shutter button press to focus and prevent AF hunting as the couple are not going to move anywhere???

I know my GH1 used to do this nicely ..if the couple move you just repeat the procedure .. like to refocus when the priest moves over to the lectern to do a reading??

[Kyle Root]

I was looking at the FZ1000 manual and does not indicate there is a time limit on the recording... which is interesting because the BH website indicates the 29 minutes.

The LX100 which is basically the same price in a soap bar style, actually has no recording limit on 1080p.

[Roger Gunkel]

Hi Kyle,

Page 33 of the manual shows the time limitations for different file types and there is a limit of 29mins 58secs for HD files and 4K MP4. 4k records for 29m 58s but plays back in 4gb sections.

Roger

[Chris Harding]

Quite correct and bear in mind that your slo mo mode, because it is running at 100 or 120 fps has a time limit of a little over 7 minutes before it hits the 4GB limit not 29 minutes but you still end up with 29 minutes on a 25P timeline.

I assumed that the timelimit was only on PAL cameras?? something to do with import duty???

[Kyle Root]

This is very interesting... page 33 of the US(?) manual has nothing about recording time limits. It talks about how to shoot in Manual mode and confirm aperture.

Page 23 shows all the movie sizes and formats and some nice tables... but no mention of any limits either.

Additionally, when I got to Panasonic USA, their own spec sheet says the FZ1000 can do 130 min of continuous recording, with no indication of a 29 minute restart.

Panasonic DMC-FZ1000 - LUMIX FZ1000 4K QFHD/HD 16X Long Zoom Digital Camera

[Chris Harding]

Hi Kyle

On Page 33 of my advanced manual is gives the total time you can record on various size cards but under the table are some notes one which says " Recording stops when the continuous recording time exceeds 29 minutes and 59 seconds or the file size exceeds 4 GB"

It's no big deal for me as I normally limit my record times to under 20 mins anyway so I don't have huge files to try and slice up on the timeline.

I could maybe see an issue if we had a wedding where the father of the bride decided to talk for more than 30 minutes (I had one father who recounted every year of his daughter's life and she was 33!! that was my record at a total of 37 mins) Surely there must be an instant over such a long recording where the person has to stop to sip a glass of water and you can hit stop/start while he is doing that??

Chris

[Noa Put]

It's no big deal for me as I normally limit my record times to under 20 mins anyway so I don't have huge files to try and slice up on the timeline.

So everyone is screaming for dslr's with no 30 minute recording limit and you deliberately start/stop recording every 20 minutes on a camera that does not have that limit to save up on size/file? :)

Why would you do that? It's so much easier having just one file with a continuous recording to match up with one audio file, while on a dslr a ceremony will consist out of 3 separate files with some lost seconds between each start/stop operation, this means much more work during the ceremony because you have to manually reset 2 camera's 6 times and during the edit you have to sync 6 times as well with separate audio recorders, unless you use a plugin to do the syncing for you, providing it works like it should.

Based on the big price gap going the next step upwards and getting a GH4 with a pile of fast lenses for low light wedding receptions doesn't seem to be worth the massive price difference. I think in the rare weddings where everything is lit with tea light candles a video light will work OK

The fz1000 has a f2.8 lens that ramps to f4.0 when zoomed in, the light gathering difference between this camera and a gh4 with a f1.4 lens will be much more massive then the pricedifference. I would consider f2.8 allready to slow for most of the venues I shoot in and f4.0 unusable on my camera, that might work on a sony a7s but won't fly on a Panasonic camera, you definitely need something faster then f2.8 if you don't plan to annoy the guests with a videolight.

I think that fz1000 is a great camera as long as there is sufficient light.

[Steve Bleasdale]

Just looking at this camera and for me the problem is taking the manfrotto plate of every time you need to put in a new battery, is this correct because that's a nightmare for me. Also you cant use 4k without a tripod as it cuts of the stabilizer? I work alwasy at 2.8 so going to f4 on the zoom would counteract my wedding film look. Tell me i am wrong. Steve

[Noa Put]

Originally Posted by Chris Harding

Do a YouTube search for "FZ1000 low light" It's not that far behind the GH4 in performance and sometimes looks better than a GH3 ... obviously the GH4 with a lens faster than F2.8 will kill it!!!

Don't know which test you saw but below video is pretty clear, the fz1000 falls apart at iso 6400 while the gh4 doesn't (test starts at 02:11), take the extra advantage of shooting with faster primes into account and the difference between both camera's in low light will be very obvious at any focal length.

YouTube (Short URL)

[Noa Put]

Originally Posted by Steve Bleasdale

I work alwasy at 2.8 so going to f4 on the zoom would counteract my wedding film look. Tell me i am wrong. Steve

If you mean the lack of shallow dof then yes, at f4.0 there is not that much shallow dof with a 1 inch sensor, unless you zoom in completely and are close enough to your subject.

[Chris Harding]

Hi Noa

I was looking at the FZ1000 against the GH3 not the GH4 which is a LOT more money ..The GH4 body only down here is already $1800 before any lenses so the price difference is substantial. On the test I saw the GH3 definitely had the edge (and so it should) but the image quality at ISO6400 on both were both quite usable.

I use wireless audio so I can stop the video anytime and restart and I won't have sync issues at all. I have always shot weddings this way and prefer editing event clips rather than one massive movie. However I do see the point about sync if you have continuous running DVR's scattered around the Church and then stop and start the video.

Yeah the SD and battery flap is just plain stupid! My GH1 was like that so a big QR plate blocks the battery flap from opening ...I assume the GH4 solved that design problem???

Yep I don't think this is the camera for those looking for the wedding film look with crazy shallow DOF ..If you want that then the GH4 and some fast lenses is the answer not a bridge camera ...I use F2.8 constant lenses on my EA-50's at ceremonies and the DOF is certainly not shallow at all!!

[Noa Put]

Just saying, I think you might be disappointed with the fz1000 because it will not be that much better then your ea50 and the stocklens when it comes to low light sensitivity considering 6400 iso doesn't seem usable, there will be much more detail but you probably will be battling more noise issues then you wish for.

Also the nex-ea50 has much more shallow dof, even with the slow stocklens then a 1 inch sensor camera has, not that this has to be a disadvantage but if that is an effect you are after then you need to get a larger sensor camera.

[Chris Harding]

Hi Noa

I quite understand but remember a GH4, 14-140 F3.5 and 12-35 F2.8 lens here would set me back over $4000 whilst the FZ1000 is a mere $900 ..that's a HUGE price difference so I wouldn't expect it to be anywhere near the GH4 is performance at a quarter of the price so comparing the two is silly! However for the money it still seems pretty darn good ... 2 x GH4's with a batch of lenses would be awesome but I don't really want to spend maybe $9K or even more with the XLR cradle to achieve that at this stage.

On the video only side (we do both video, photography and photobooths) we probably make around $30K a year tops with more than double than that made on the stills side so it makes sense not to invest too much on the video gear but can channel more into still camera gear.

Chris

[Roger Gunkel]

It's back to the debate about quality against requirement. If you are after the best possible technical quality then you need to spend lots of money. If like me and probably Chris, it's balancing the capital outlay against your expected return and getting the best bang for your bucks. In parallel with that, and particularly for my weddings, its being able to work quickly and efficiently without losing shots while fiddling around changing lenses or cameras, or humping shed loads of equipment around.

For me, the new zoom lens bridge cameras together with a small videocam, are able to fulfil my needs in most circumstances, particularly now that sensors are getting bigger. Where the camera on its own is not quite enough on the odd occasion, then a simple led light usually solves the problem without troubling the clients.

It is easy to read these forums and be impressed by some of the cameras, lenses and equipment that many wedding shooters use. Sometimes I think that perhaps I should be investing far more in equipment to keep up with what others here use. But then I think 'hang on a minute' I have never had a negative comment about the quality of my videos from any client and I am constantly improving and refining my equipment and techniques. On top of that, quite a few here use the cameras for serious commercial work and others are coming from a photographic background and see equipment from a different viewpoint. If my client is happy, I am happy.

I am also not looking to expand my business into higher earning more upmarket work, so I don't need to plan for work that I don't have and don't intend marketing for.

Roger