Selling my FZ2500

[Chris Harding]

Hi Tom

Nope I realise your main concern was the stills side and yes, people on the Lumix forum have noticed the softness too so I understand your issue! That's why the profile adjustment was suggested for stills to try and bring it up to the FZ1000 image quality.

Since you seldom shoot video in low light I would just keep the FZ300 ... For interest how do the stills match up between the FZ300 and the FZ1000 ?? It's pretty hard to get a dual use camera that has everything you want so that's why my FZ2500 stays permanently on video and I use the two FZ1000's for stills and the occasional B-Cam video ... It would be awesome to use just the FZ1000 if it had the zoom facilities of the FZ2500 ... carrying two cameras is a pain!!

[Mike Griffiths]

Hi Tom,
Looking at your footage I'm wondering if you might have a bad copy of the FZ2500. I've added a clip, unedited, 1080p, 50 fps 100mb/s on a monopod (hence the shake), autofocus, about mid zoom. The old lady was about 5-6 metres away. Rode video mic pro audio. If I stabilise in FCPX it's really OK. I'm very happy with this quality. My stills are normally for inclusion in the video so I'll not be as searching as you.
I'm having trouble uploading the original MOV file so
Here is a YT link,with of course, lowered resolution

YouTube (Short URL)

And here is a Vimeo link:

Untitled on Vimeo

This was Songkran, the Thai New Year, when it's customary to pay respect to old people. This is a traditional village ceremony, not the frantic squirting with water from the back of trucks that all backpackers come here to participate in.

[Chris Harding]

Hi Mike

I don't think that Tom is concerned with the video quality ..his main issue is that the stills from the FZ2500 are somewhat softer on the edges than the FZ1000 and he wanted the 2500 as a two-in-one camera so he can shoot video and stills whenever needed BUT the stills from the FZ2500 and the FZ1000 differ a lot in overall quality ... we usually use stills to supplement our video so the quality is good enough but Tom gets exceptional stills from the 1000 so expected the 2500 to be just as good.

Am I right Tom?

[Tom Mussatto]

That pretty well nails it Chris.

That looks very nice and rich Mike.

I haven't given up. I am hoping Panasonic tells me I have a bad copy of this cam if I can ever get through to them. They certainly addressed the video issues I was having with the FZ1000 with the FZ2500. Going through their website it says it doesn't recognize the model I punch in. In calling they keep me on hold for over an hour. If they tell me my cam is within their specs hopefully they will address the lens issues with the next version of this cam. This for me would be the perfect all in one camera.

According to B&H website both the FZ1000 and FZ300 are selling better than the FZ2500. Is this because of the big difference in cost or a possible issue with the FZ2500 lens. I have no idea. I wonder if this reorganization they are going through is going to effect future models of this cam. That would be a real shame.

[Dave Blackhurst]

Hi Tom -
Been lurking on this post, trying to see what you're running into.... I have the RX10M2 and M3 myself, and have tried Panasonics a few times....

Playing back your video comparison, 1080 on a 42" 4K TV/monitor, here's what strikes me - the FZ300 is the softer of the two overall, but due to the shallower DoF, it's a more "even" look across the entire screen... motion issues as you've noted have some effect on the clips, as expected.

BUT, and this is where you may want to see if you've got a bunk lens... in the FZ2500 clips, I was discounting the out of focus to the shallower DoF, but the second time I watched more closely, I noticed that the lower right and upper left corners are more distorted (rather than just out of focus - sort of looks "more" out of focus, but it seems like it's more than that?) than the opposing corners that in theory are about the same focal distance, and at a couple frames those areas seemed to come into focus while the rest of the frame drifted off... took me a second pass to see it, but it's pretty "off" once you know what you're looking at (for?)... maybe this is what's been driving you batty?

From a practical standpoint, most people wouldn't ever see the (edge) distortion and would be more impressed with the "subject" being sharper? Until I spotted the corners, I thought the duck looked better <wink>.

Content and composition is always "king", but you don't want a camera that has aberrations if you can help it. From what I know of lenses, it's quite the challenge to get all the elements aligned and maintain the image quality across the whole frame...

My challenge with Panasonic has always been with the compression artifacts/blotchyness in parts of frames (particularly in lower light areas), and certain skin tones that seem "off" to my eye, but the features and price are certainly solid.... FWIW, the GH5 samples I've seen seem to have addressed those "issues" I've mentioned.

[Tom Mussatto]

Thanks for the feedback Dave. Although I don't notice it as much in video, what you are seeing is what I'm seeing with stills. Makes prints unusable. I also don't think this camera renders as nice an overall image as the FZ1000. I suspect it's a lens issue but until I get it in for service I don't know if it's typical of the cam or I have a bad copy. Hoping it's the latter and the problem can be fixed.

[Chris Harding]

Hi Dave

I remember my old hmc80's and one issue I always had was in 50P was areas with a lot of detail had severe pixelation but I was never sure if it was a lens issue or not ..it never appeared in 50i only in progressive ... one of it's favourite tricks was to blur/artifact the bride's cheek bones at weddings which was a disaster!!

Tom? I'm wondering if there is any isolation tests you could do to prove it's the lens and not any compression issues ... Have you tried stills in different resolutions but more importantly does a raw image have the same corner problems and does it appear at most focal lengths?

I remember Panasonic had terrible issues with the Chinese produced AC-130 and 160 and they were all lens related BUT those were branded as "Panasonic Lens" not a "Leica Lens"

I'm quite happy to see if I can replicate your issue on my FZ2500 if you can maybe give me your camera settings and profile including zoom where it's worse and I can shoot a few stills for you to compare? Maybe do a very controlled test with your camera and give me the exact camera to subject distance, zoom etc so the conditions are identical .... Let me know if you would like that done?

[Tom Mussatto]

Chris, appreciate the offer. That would probably be the best way to determine if it's just my camera or typical of the model. It's on it's way to Panasonic repair so don't have it available at the moment. We'll see what they find. Thanks again.

[Ian Thomas]

did you get the problem resolved Tom