LUMIX FZ1000 user update

[Colin Rowe]

Originally Posted by Roger Gunkel

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

[Roger Gunkel]

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

[Chris Harding]

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.

[Roger Gunkel]

Hi Chris,

Yes the stabiliser is this one http://www.amazon.co.uk/Glide-Gear-S...rds=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

[Noa Put]

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.

[Roger Gunkel]

Originally Posted by Noa Put

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

[Steve Burkett]

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.

[Dave Blackhurst]

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!

[Noa Put]

Originally Posted by Roger Gunkel

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.

[Roger Gunkel]

Originally Posted by Dave Blackhurst

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

[Noa Put]

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

[Roger Gunkel]

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/B00RF3EIS...986871_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

[Roger Gunkel]

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

[Anthony McErlean]

Originally Posted by Roger Gunkel

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.

[Roger Gunkel]

Originally Posted by Anthony McErlean

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