Using the Panasonic Lumix FZ1000

Nigel Barker · August 25th, 2015, 10:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Gunkel

At some point, something will come on the market that ticks all my boxes and adds even more like built in ND filter, headphone monitoring, wide ranging smooth zoom speed and easier battery accessibility on tripod, plus a price point that I can justify.

That would be the Sony RX10M2 except possibly for your last criterion. It's got super slo-mo too.

Roger Gunkel · August 25th, 2015, 12:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nigel Barker

That would be the Sony RX10M2 except possibly for your last criterion. It's got super slo-mo too.

Trouble is Nigel I am really not a Sony Fan :-(

Roger

Colin Rowe · August 25th, 2015, 04:32 PM

The FZ1000 is an exceptional performer in low light/high iso

Chris Harding · August 25th, 2015, 05:21 PM

Like Roger I struggle getting what I want from the Sony look! Technically they are brilliant cameras and I never had a single issue with my EA-50's so the RX10 build should be just as good including the features.

Sorry I tried every Picture Profile under the sun on my Sony's and every bit of footage I shot over 3 years was adequate but just did nothing for me and I could never get the result. Put the Panasonic in standard mode with no parameter changes whatsoever and BAM ..that's what I was looking for.

Sorry Sony but I agree with Roger I'm not a Sony fan either!!

Roger Gunkel · August 25th, 2015, 05:29 PM

I haven't had a problem with the FZ1000 in low light and find the general judging of a camera from the spec on it's low light performance to be somewhat shortsighted. I get better low light performance from the FZ1000 than from my Panasonic video cameras that have served me well for a long time. I have only ever filmed 3 weddings in candlelight in 30 years, all 3 successfully, so it is not a great priority for me. If I have one next week and I need more light, I will talk diplomatically to the venue or DJ about raising the lighting slightly, and if that is not possible, use just enough subtle light of my own to raise the level enough for my requirements. A surprisingly small amount of extra bounced light can give great results without killing any atmosphere or blinding guests as has been suggested.

I find many more times during wedding filming where there are much more important issues for a videographer than low light. These include missing an important unexpected shot through having to change lenses, needing a deep DOF when you have a lens on for shallow DOF, having to use a portable sound recorder because the onboard audio quality is too poor to use an external mic, poor or no auto or follow focus for fast moving shots, having to carry a supply of lenses or cameras for different situations. Those are some of the things that can make using a DSLR at a wedding problematic at times. Using more than one camera with different lenses or a second shooter can certainly help of course. There are also higher spec pro video cameras that remove some of those problems, but at a premium and for someone like me who also requires good quality stills, they are not very suitable.

A camera like the FZ1000 offers a comparatively new approach to both filming and stills, with it's larger and more efficient sensor than many video cameras, good telephoto range with Leica lens, fully manual controls and very efficient and fast automatic focus, stabilisation, image levelling etc. Couple that with zebra zoning, peaking, focus assist, audio level meters, high speed filming, stills during video filming and may other latest add ons and you have a rather useful little camera. Oh and I forgot to mention 4K video with the ability to lift stills in camera from 4K video and the excellent price.

OK, so I am countering some of the negatives expressed about the camera, and I fully appreciate that many here would want to get the highest possible quality currently available from big sensor cameras for their work, rather than a camera like the FZ1000. Interchangeable lenses are also something that many prefer to work with and a camera like the FZ1000 would just not fit their requirements. There are also a number of people that may well consider this little camera for fast run and gun work like weddings, whether it is another tool in the toolkit or the main tool. The times they are a changing and it won't be long before full frame bridge cameras are making big inroads into the traditional video and still camera arenas.

Roger

Chris Harding · August 25th, 2015, 05:39 PM

Hi Roger

I wonder if it's just the price point that puts people off the camera? A lot of wedding videographers and photographers seem to think that they have to spend a fortune so they won't be mocked in the field..I had a photog boast that she was in debt to Canon's finance department so over $40,000 so for people that insist on the fanciest and the best and especially like to tell everyone about it at every opportunity, are certainly not going to be seen dead with a sub-$1000 "toy" in their gear listing.

Their loss not ours!!!

Colin Rowe · August 25th, 2015, 05:43 PM

Thats about it Chris

Roger Gunkel · August 25th, 2015, 05:58 PM

I do agree on the price point deterring some people, it is difficult to believe that a camera at that price could be worth considering. I also think that there are other factors though including having spent a lot of time and money building up a full kit of camera and lenses to reach a specific goal. Then there is a natural reluctance to accept that something like the FZ1000 could carry out many of the tasks equally well and in some cases better than that carefully built kit at a fraction of the price.

Good glass is not cheap, frequently costing more for a lens than the FZ1000, plus it can be used with a later upgrade to a newer camera body. I see it differently, where a commitment to a particular type of lens can lock you into a limited upgrade path. I like to feel that the Panasonic gives me the quality that I need now, at a price that enables me to purchase future models that significantly add to the quality and facilities that I want without breaking the bank or locking me into a make or path.

Roger

Steve Burkett · August 26th, 2015, 12:06 AM

It is interesting to read such entrenched yet narrow views. So I'm not looking to buy the FZ1000, so that makes me a gear snob eh. Really. I'm also not thinking of buying the Canon XC10, a camera of significantly greater price and for much the same reason. Lack of constant aperture in the zoom. As Chris said, he keeps his camera wide to keep the aperture at 2.8 when the venues lights are low. A restriction I'd prefer not to have.

Face the facts guys, the Sony RX10 2 outclasses the FZ1000 on features, just not on price. If other Videographers have the money and like the Sony look, why shouldn't they prefer that camera to yours. There are so many cameras on the market to choose from and your reaction is to almost feel snubbed others aren't joining you in the FZ1000 love. Do you need others to buy it to justify your choice? The FZ1000 betrays its price point, lack of NDs, no headphone socket and a poor zoom. If I can afford better, why should I buy a more restrictive camera than what I currently have. If I buy a bridge camera, I'd want it to resolve the issues of my GH4, not give me new ones. I need some internal ND filter, a long lens with a constant aperture, decent zoom, superior slomo. Or else why bother. As it is, the 29 min limit is a big cross for me.

So the FZ1000 can carry out the tasks equally well or better than the GH4 say with a zoom lens on. Interesting but narrow point of view. Also the inference that I buy to impress people with my kit. Well of course I do, natural that couples and Guests are just flocking to me to say how impressed they are by my gear. Yeah right. Actually I hate it when people do come over and discuss gear. I'm there to work, not have cosy geeky little chats. My gear is oddly enough to help me do a better job and work to the style my clients expect. Remember I'm not trying to do photo and video, just the video. My criteria is therefore quite different. I've seen a noticeable shift this year in clients expectations. Discussions about the type of shots they like I've never experienced before. Several have referenced a company called Bloomsbury as a standard they like to see from me. Okay that last bit irritates me, but an indication of how expectations for different companies can differ.

I use primes because they're the right tool for the job. I also have several zooms, used frequently when time is restricted and I need to respond to different scenarios. This idea of missing a shot as I'm changing a lens is just pure fiction, a conceit to justify your choice and opinion. I use Primes during Bridal Preps, Reception drinks, the Photo Session and Evening Dancing. I have a small bag on my person with a selection and if needed can change a lens in less than 10 seconds. I have missed shots for many other reasons like being in the wrong spot, not close enough or not even there if outside when the moment happened. Never for changing a lens. So please remove this stupid notion that using interchangeable lenses leads to missed shots. I have zooms when on the go and primes when I have the time for quality.

Now I'm sure the FZ1000 is a great little camera and handles low light well, but better than a GH4 with a 1.2 lens or a voigtlander 0.95. Those lenses have delivered quality when lights have been very low. Now I've seen my GH4 footage in low light at 2.8 and its comparable to the FZ1000, but I've also seen the footage at 1.2. It's a thing of beauty and bares no comparison.

And isn't liking the Panasonic look locking you to a particular path just as much as say investing in lenses. If you can't consider the RX10 as you don't like the look, then what's the point of all that flexibility. Chris used this flexibility to get the EA50 after a Panasonic camera and now moans about the sterile footage he got. Hardly a ringing endorsement for this ability to jump ship.

Noa Put · August 26th, 2015, 12:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Harding

I wonder if it's just the price point that puts people off the camera?

It's not the pricepoint, the rx10 mark 1 is now also just 850 euro, half the price of a mark 2 and about 100 euro more expensive then the fz1000 but I would have no issue in getting a rx10 mark 1 because it has better videofeatures then he fz1000. Having a stepless irisring on the lens would be for me a very important feature for run and gun, also having a constant f2.8 lens is more important then a slower lens and longer zoom and being able to use a nd also makes a difference. 4k is less interesting on a camera that doesn't allow me to shoot more then 30 minutes because I only use 4k during ceremonies or speeches when I want to be able to crop the image in post.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Gunkel

I haven't had a problem with the FZ1000 in low light and find the general judging of a camera from the spec on it's low light performance to be somewhat shortsighted.

I don't use specs alone to judge low light, I try to find user videos that show the difference, you might have to take some reviews with a grain of salt because not all tests are done correctly but if you find a few videos that all show the same results I"m pretty sure how to assess the camera's low light performance, like in the 3 videos I posted below.

The low light performance is not bad on this camera, it's comparable with the rx10, but if I had to shoot with a f2.8 - f4 lens all day I would be in trouble in most of the venues I end up and I had to resort to a stronger videolight which I honestly want to avoid at all costs. Shooting wide all the time like Chris said would limit my options considerably, currently I shoot with a 42mm and a 75mm a lot on my gh4 at reception, it would be impossible to get nice headshot closeups with the fz1000 from a distance at f4 and I can't imagine standing a meter away from all people because I have to shoot at f2.8 with a light.

It's ok if the camera works for you two to cover an entire wedding day but it would not work for me, I need a mixture of either better run and gun camera's or camera's with fast primes for shooting in low light or to get creative shots to achieve the result I deliver now, something that would not be possible on a few fz1000's.

Chris Harding · August 26th, 2015, 02:30 AM

Hi Steve

Nope it's not a narrow view at all! This thread is about the FX1000 NOT about the GH4 or the Sony RX10II .. The thread title says " Using the Panasonic Lumix FZ1000" so expressing our views about the camera is not at all narrow minded ..it's actually spot on topic.

Sure the Sony RX has constant aperture, is more expensive and better features and the GH4 is a LOT more expensive than the Sony and needs lots of nice lenses to be a useful tool.

I certainly appreciate the fact above that they are better cameras than the FZ1000 but this thread is NOT about them so your comments are out of place..simple as that.

If you start a thread called "Which is better for weddings GH4, RX10 or FZ1000" THEN your comments are in line with the topics and MY comments are out of place and shouldn't have been posted. This current thread is here simply because there is no forum for bridge cameras yet (which the GH and RX series do have) but bear in mind that it IS an FZ1000 thread about usage and experiences not which is better to buy.

Chris

Steve Burkett · August 26th, 2015, 03:13 AM

Chris, I was responding not to general discussions on using the FZ1000, but to the following points made below, which I considered narrow minded. So yes I bring up the GH4 as that is the camera I use, but only in the context of my using interchangeable lenses, which Roger brought up.

If you want to discuss only the joys of using the FZ1000, may I suggest that you and Roger simply email each other. A thread opens itself to wider issues including those you may not like or agree with. Naturally the question of low light re the changing aperture is a significant issue for some with the FZ1000. If you're going to counter this with an opinion on interchangeable lenses and thoughts on how the FZ1000 is shunned because we Videographers want the best to avoid being mocked, don't be surprised when replies arguing the contrary appear.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Gunkel

I find many more times during wedding filming where there are much more important issues for a videographer than low light. These include missing an important unexpected shot through having to change lenses, needing a deep DOF when you have a lens on for shallow DOF, having to use a portable sound recorder because the onboard audio quality is too poor to use an external mic, poor or no auto or follow focus for fast moving shots, having to carry a supply of lenses or cameras for different situations.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Harding

Hi Roger

I wonder if it's just the price point that puts people off the camera? A lot of wedding videographers and photographers seem to think that they have to spend a fortune so they won't be mocked in the field.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Gunkel

Then there is a natural reluctance to accept that something like the FZ1000 could carry out many of the tasks equally well and in some cases better than that carefully built kit at a fraction of the price.

I see it differently, where a commitment to a particular type of lens can lock you into a limited upgrade path.

Steve Burkett · August 26th, 2015, 03:26 AM

One further point, if this is indeed a using the FZ1000 thread, then its perhaps better placed in the Panasonic LUMIX GF / GH / LX Series section rather than Event Filming. Although not one of the GF, GH,LX series cameras, I'm sure adding FZ to it would resolve any inconsistency and perhaps should be taken as read until such a time as it is done, if ever. Certainly this thread has more in common with other threads in that section than in Event Filming which covers multiple cameras even if the title alludes to just one or a few of them. A recent thread on Sony rx10ii fz1000 6d 70d is now considering bmpcc being one example.

If your intention is to discuss the FZ1000 within the wider field of event filming, then I'm afraid other cameras will get a mention, if only because many here do not use the FZ1000, and in considering it will compare it to those cameras they have or want to have. Deterring such comments and all you have left is just a self congratulatory thread for you and Roger to tell each other how brilliant your new purchase is.

Roger Gunkel · August 26th, 2015, 03:52 AM

Steve, I don't believe I have said anywhere that the FZ1000 is a better camera than the G4 or any other particular camera, I have also gone to pains to suggest that the RX10 and the FZ1000 are probably similar in many aspects of performance. Neither have I said that people who spend lots of money on lenses and bodies are looking for snob value. I have also acknowledged that larger sensors and a choice of good glass will give quality in many instances that neither the FZ1000 or RX10 can match. The whole point of my post though was that in my particular business and Chris's much of that extra edge and quality is actually at the expense of not using it or requiring it much of the time. I do believe that the FZ1000 is easily overlooked because the price point puts in in the consumer range and is an area that pros are quite likely to ignore particularly if they have a higher spending capability and investment in other types of camera.

What I have said is that an FZ1000 and probably RX10 can achieve a number of things in a run and gun situation that many bigger cameras with interchangeable lenses often cannot achieve. My comments about interchangeable lenses sometimes causing shots to be missed are taken from other threads where users have occasionally remarked on it, as are my comments on focus and audio problems etc which are often coming up in DSLR threads and I have experienced myself.

I don't see that buying a camera that I can easily afford two of, because I like the camera and the look, locks me into that particular make, because I haven't built up a collection of lenses which you yourself mention, which limits a possible change of make in the future.

Noah -, posting a selection of low light video comparisons between the FZ1000 and other cameras is a pointless excercise, because it is of no interest whatsoever when we consider low light something that isn't a problem. Other aspects of the camera are much more important to me as again I pointed out at length. My car will reach speeds of 135mph, others go faster or slower, so what if I never use that speed anyway and it does exactly what I need, does it make the other cars better?

Chris clearly reminded posters that this thread is supposed to be about USING THE FZ1000. With the exception of Chris, me and Colin, the majority of posts however seem to be from posters who are not actually using the camera and seem to resent the fact that we feel that it is capable of doing so much to cover what other much more expensive cameras are doing MOST of the time. If the posts are not related to using the camera what is the point apart from provoking a response? I couldn't care less if others aren't interested in the camera, but would like to hear input from others that are seriously using the camera if they exist.

Roger

Roger Gunkel · August 26th, 2015, 04:13 AM

Cross posts again Steve.

The excerpts from Chris and my posts are showing the reasons why we have elected to use the FZ1000, not because it is a better camera in every area than others are using or as self congratulatory, but to highlight some areas with particular types of cameras that we find frustrating. I think that it is also pretty clear that we also acknowledge that there are a number of areas that the FZ1000 is not better at.

The thread was put into the events section of the forum, because that is where both Chris and I earn our living and hoped that others using this camera or contemplating using it would be able to contribute their findings and learn from ours. As we both have considerable experience over many years of all types of video and stills cameras it seems reasonable to also explain why we feel the camera is suitable to our way of working.

Anybody is able to start a thread about why the FZ1000 is not suitable for wedding and event filming and comparing it with other cameras if they wish. I really don't see the value of trying to diminish the value of the camera with argumentative discussion from those who have never used it in a thread about using it. Of course we will defend our choice of camera but that is not the point of the thread which was to start a constructive place where others can learn about and discuss the FZ1000

Roger

August 25th, 2015, 04:32 PM	#153
Colin Rowe Major Player Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Cornwall UK Posts: 793	Re: Using the Panasonic Lumix FZ1000 The FZ1000 is an exceptional performer in low light/high iso FZ1000 isotest - YouTube __________________ Colin

August 25th, 2015, 05:21 PM	#154
Chris Harding Inner Circle Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Perth, Western Australia Posts: 8,441	Re: Using the Panasonic Lumix FZ1000 Like Roger I struggle getting what I want from the Sony look! Technically they are brilliant cameras and I never had a single issue with my EA-50's so the RX10 build should be just as good including the features. Sorry I tried every Picture Profile under the sun on my Sony's and every bit of footage I shot over 3 years was adequate but just did nothing for me and I could never get the result. Put the Panasonic in standard mode with no parameter changes whatsoever and BAM ..that's what I was looking for. Sorry Sony but I agree with Roger I'm not a Sony fan either!!

August 25th, 2015, 05:29 PM	#155
Roger Gunkel Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: LIncolnshire, UK Posts: 2,213	Re: Using the Panasonic Lumix FZ1000 I haven't had a problem with the FZ1000 in low light and find the general judging of a camera from the spec on it's low light performance to be somewhat shortsighted. I get better low light performance from the FZ1000 than from my Panasonic video cameras that have served me well for a long time. I have only ever filmed 3 weddings in candlelight in 30 years, all 3 successfully, so it is not a great priority for me. If I have one next week and I need more light, I will talk diplomatically to the venue or DJ about raising the lighting slightly, and if that is not possible, use just enough subtle light of my own to raise the level enough for my requirements. A surprisingly small amount of extra bounced light can give great results without killing any atmosphere or blinding guests as has been suggested. I find many more times during wedding filming where there are much more important issues for a videographer than low light. These include missing an important unexpected shot through having to change lenses, needing a deep DOF when you have a lens on for shallow DOF, having to use a portable sound recorder because the onboard audio quality is too poor to use an external mic, poor or no auto or follow focus for fast moving shots, having to carry a supply of lenses or cameras for different situations. Those are some of the things that can make using a DSLR at a wedding problematic at times. Using more than one camera with different lenses or a second shooter can certainly help of course. There are also higher spec pro video cameras that remove some of those problems, but at a premium and for someone like me who also requires good quality stills, they are not very suitable. A camera like the FZ1000 offers a comparatively new approach to both filming and stills, with it's larger and more efficient sensor than many video cameras, good telephoto range with Leica lens, fully manual controls and very efficient and fast automatic focus, stabilisation, image levelling etc. Couple that with zebra zoning, peaking, focus assist, audio level meters, high speed filming, stills during video filming and may other latest add ons and you have a rather useful little camera. Oh and I forgot to mention 4K video with the ability to lift stills in camera from 4K video and the excellent price. OK, so I am countering some of the negatives expressed about the camera, and I fully appreciate that many here would want to get the highest possible quality currently available from big sensor cameras for their work, rather than a camera like the FZ1000. Interchangeable lenses are also something that many prefer to work with and a camera like the FZ1000 would just not fit their requirements. There are also a number of people that may well consider this little camera for fast run and gun work like weddings, whether it is another tool in the toolkit or the main tool. The times they are a changing and it won't be long before full frame bridge cameras are making big inroads into the traditional video and still camera arenas. Roger

August 25th, 2015, 05:39 PM	#156
Chris Harding Inner Circle Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Perth, Western Australia Posts: 8,441	Re: Using the Panasonic Lumix FZ1000 Hi Roger I wonder if it's just the price point that puts people off the camera? A lot of wedding videographers and photographers seem to think that they have to spend a fortune so they won't be mocked in the field..I had a photog boast that she was in debt to Canon's finance department so over $40,000 so for people that insist on the fanciest and the best and especially like to tell everyone about it at every opportunity, are certainly not going to be seen dead with a sub-$1000 "toy" in their gear listing. Their loss not ours!!!

August 25th, 2015, 05:43 PM	#157
Colin Rowe Major Player Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Cornwall UK Posts: 793	Re: Using the Panasonic Lumix FZ1000 Thats about it Chris __________________ Colin

August 25th, 2015, 05:58 PM	#158
Roger Gunkel Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: LIncolnshire, UK Posts: 2,213	Re: Using the Panasonic Lumix FZ1000 I do agree on the price point deterring some people, it is difficult to believe that a camera at that price could be worth considering. I also think that there are other factors though including having spent a lot of time and money building up a full kit of camera and lenses to reach a specific goal. Then there is a natural reluctance to accept that something like the FZ1000 could carry out many of the tasks equally well and in some cases better than that carefully built kit at a fraction of the price. Good glass is not cheap, frequently costing more for a lens than the FZ1000, plus it can be used with a later upgrade to a newer camera body. I see it differently, where a commitment to a particular type of lens can lock you into a limited upgrade path. I like to feel that the Panasonic gives me the quality that I need now, at a price that enables me to purchase future models that significantly add to the quality and facilities that I want without breaking the bank or locking me into a make or path. Roger

August 26th, 2015, 12:06 AM	#159
Steve Burkett Trustee Join Date: Jul 2012 Location: Romsey, UK Posts: 1,261	Re: Using the Panasonic Lumix FZ1000 It is interesting to read such entrenched yet narrow views. So I'm not looking to buy the FZ1000, so that makes me a gear snob eh. Really. I'm also not thinking of buying the Canon XC10, a camera of significantly greater price and for much the same reason. Lack of constant aperture in the zoom. As Chris said, he keeps his camera wide to keep the aperture at 2.8 when the venues lights are low. A restriction I'd prefer not to have. Face the facts guys, the Sony RX10 2 outclasses the FZ1000 on features, just not on price. If other Videographers have the money and like the Sony look, why shouldn't they prefer that camera to yours. There are so many cameras on the market to choose from and your reaction is to almost feel snubbed others aren't joining you in the FZ1000 love. Do you need others to buy it to justify your choice? The FZ1000 betrays its price point, lack of NDs, no headphone socket and a poor zoom. If I can afford better, why should I buy a more restrictive camera than what I currently have. If I buy a bridge camera, I'd want it to resolve the issues of my GH4, not give me new ones. I need some internal ND filter, a long lens with a constant aperture, decent zoom, superior slomo. Or else why bother. As it is, the 29 min limit is a big cross for me. So the FZ1000 can carry out the tasks equally well or better than the GH4 say with a zoom lens on. Interesting but narrow point of view. Also the inference that I buy to impress people with my kit. Well of course I do, natural that couples and Guests are just flocking to me to say how impressed they are by my gear. Yeah right. Actually I hate it when people do come over and discuss gear. I'm there to work, not have cosy geeky little chats. My gear is oddly enough to help me do a better job and work to the style my clients expect. Remember I'm not trying to do photo and video, just the video. My criteria is therefore quite different. I've seen a noticeable shift this year in clients expectations. Discussions about the type of shots they like I've never experienced before. Several have referenced a company called Bloomsbury as a standard they like to see from me. Okay that last bit irritates me, but an indication of how expectations for different companies can differ. I use primes because they're the right tool for the job. I also have several zooms, used frequently when time is restricted and I need to respond to different scenarios. This idea of missing a shot as I'm changing a lens is just pure fiction, a conceit to justify your choice and opinion. I use Primes during Bridal Preps, Reception drinks, the Photo Session and Evening Dancing. I have a small bag on my person with a selection and if needed can change a lens in less than 10 seconds. I have missed shots for many other reasons like being in the wrong spot, not close enough or not even there if outside when the moment happened. Never for changing a lens. So please remove this stupid notion that using interchangeable lenses leads to missed shots. I have zooms when on the go and primes when I have the time for quality. Now I'm sure the FZ1000 is a great little camera and handles low light well, but better than a GH4 with a 1.2 lens or a voigtlander 0.95. Those lenses have delivered quality when lights have been very low. Now I've seen my GH4 footage in low light at 2.8 and its comparable to the FZ1000, but I've also seen the footage at 1.2. It's a thing of beauty and bares no comparison. And isn't liking the Panasonic look locking you to a particular path just as much as say investing in lenses. If you can't consider the RX10 as you don't like the look, then what's the point of all that flexibility. Chris used this flexibility to get the EA50 after a Panasonic camera and now moans about the sterile footage he got. Hardly a ringing endorsement for this ability to jump ship. Last edited by Steve Burkett; August 26th, 2015 at 12:51 AM.

August 26th, 2015, 02:30 AM	#161
Chris Harding Inner Circle Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Perth, Western Australia Posts: 8,441	Re: Using the Panasonic Lumix FZ1000 Hi Steve Nope it's not a narrow view at all! This thread is about the FX1000 NOT about the GH4 or the Sony RX10II .. The thread title says " Using the Panasonic Lumix FZ1000" so expressing our views about the camera is not at all narrow minded ..it's actually spot on topic. Sure the Sony RX has constant aperture, is more expensive and better features and the GH4 is a LOT more expensive than the Sony and needs lots of nice lenses to be a useful tool. I certainly appreciate the fact above that they are better cameras than the FZ1000 but this thread is NOT about them so your comments are out of place..simple as that. If you start a thread called "Which is better for weddings GH4, RX10 or FZ1000" THEN your comments are in line with the topics and MY comments are out of place and shouldn't have been posted. This current thread is here simply because there is no forum for bridge cameras yet (which the GH and RX series do have) but bear in mind that it IS an FZ1000 thread about usage and experiences not which is better to buy. Chris

August 26th, 2015, 03:26 AM	#163
Steve Burkett Trustee Join Date: Jul 2012 Location: Romsey, UK Posts: 1,261	Re: Using the Panasonic Lumix FZ1000 One further point, if this is indeed a using the FZ1000 thread, then its perhaps better placed in the Panasonic LUMIX GF / GH / LX Series section rather than Event Filming. Although not one of the GF, GH,LX series cameras, I'm sure adding FZ to it would resolve any inconsistency and perhaps should be taken as read until such a time as it is done, if ever. Certainly this thread has more in common with other threads in that section than in Event Filming which covers multiple cameras even if the title alludes to just one or a few of them. A recent thread on Sony rx10ii fz1000 6d 70d is now considering bmpcc being one example. If your intention is to discuss the FZ1000 within the wider field of event filming, then I'm afraid other cameras will get a mention, if only because many here do not use the FZ1000, and in considering it will compare it to those cameras they have or want to have. Deterring such comments and all you have left is just a self congratulatory thread for you and Roger to tell each other how brilliant your new purchase is.

August 26th, 2015, 03:52 AM	#164
Roger Gunkel Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: LIncolnshire, UK Posts: 2,213	Re: Using the Panasonic Lumix FZ1000 Steve, I don't believe I have said anywhere that the FZ1000 is a better camera than the G4 or any other particular camera, I have also gone to pains to suggest that the RX10 and the FZ1000 are probably similar in many aspects of performance. Neither have I said that people who spend lots of money on lenses and bodies are looking for snob value. I have also acknowledged that larger sensors and a choice of good glass will give quality in many instances that neither the FZ1000 or RX10 can match. The whole point of my post though was that in my particular business and Chris's much of that extra edge and quality is actually at the expense of not using it or requiring it much of the time. I do believe that the FZ1000 is easily overlooked because the price point puts in in the consumer range and is an area that pros are quite likely to ignore particularly if they have a higher spending capability and investment in other types of camera. What I have said is that an FZ1000 and probably RX10 can achieve a number of things in a run and gun situation that many bigger cameras with interchangeable lenses often cannot achieve. My comments about interchangeable lenses sometimes causing shots to be missed are taken from other threads where users have occasionally remarked on it, as are my comments on focus and audio problems etc which are often coming up in DSLR threads and I have experienced myself. I don't see that buying a camera that I can easily afford two of, because I like the camera and the look, locks me into that particular make, because I haven't built up a collection of lenses which you yourself mention, which limits a possible change of make in the future. Noah -, posting a selection of low light video comparisons between the FZ1000 and other cameras is a pointless excercise, because it is of no interest whatsoever when we consider low light something that isn't a problem. Other aspects of the camera are much more important to me as again I pointed out at length. My car will reach speeds of 135mph, others go faster or slower, so what if I never use that speed anyway and it does exactly what I need, does it make the other cars better? Chris clearly reminded posters that this thread is supposed to be about USING THE FZ1000. With the exception of Chris, me and Colin, the majority of posts however seem to be from posters who are not actually using the camera and seem to resent the fact that we feel that it is capable of doing so much to cover what other much more expensive cameras are doing MOST of the time. If the posts are not related to using the camera what is the point apart from provoking a response? I couldn't care less if others aren't interested in the camera, but would like to hear input from others that are seriously using the camera if they exist. Roger

August 26th, 2015, 04:13 AM	#165
Roger Gunkel Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: LIncolnshire, UK Posts: 2,213	Re: Using the Panasonic Lumix FZ1000 Cross posts again Steve. The excerpts from Chris and my posts are showing the reasons why we have elected to use the FZ1000, not because it is a better camera in every area than others are using or as self congratulatory, but to highlight some areas with particular types of cameras that we find frustrating. I think that it is also pretty clear that we also acknowledge that there are a number of areas that the FZ1000 is not better at. The thread was put into the events section of the forum, because that is where both Chris and I earn our living and hoped that others using this camera or contemplating using it would be able to contribute their findings and learn from ours. As we both have considerable experience over many years of all types of video and stills cameras it seems reasonable to also explain why we feel the camera is suitable to our way of working. Anybody is able to start a thread about why the FZ1000 is not suitable for wedding and event filming and comparing it with other cameras if they wish. I really don't see the value of trying to diminish the value of the camera with argumentative discussion from those who have never used it in a thread about using it. Of course we will defend our choice of camera but that is not the point of the thread which was to start a constructive place where others can learn about and discuss the FZ1000 Roger