Sirandar: I am fairly impressed with this camera, and if I hadn't bought an EM5 I would probably get one.
The dynamic range and low light performance isn't nearly as good and the FZ1000 seems pretty noisy above 800
To never have to change a lens actually outweighs both these cons for everyday practical use.
From my experience with the Pana FZ30, I found that the lack of dynamic range and telephoto end that was too slow to be useful are the only reason I am stilll not using it, megapixels be damned.
The dynamic range on the FZ1000 isn't bad .... may not be a limitation.
I have a suspicion that the telephoto end of the FZ1000 and may be still to slow to capture great pics in anything but the brightest light. That and the noise at high ISO, may limit this camera at the long end.
"I have a suspicion that the telephoto end of the FZ1000 and may be still to slow to capture great pics in anything but the brightest light. "
Why do you think that? Seems a ridiculous statement to me. f/4 for a 400mm lens (for this sensor size or bigger sensors) is plenty bright for most subjects, unless you want to work in near darkness which is not the typical conditions for a 400mm lens. There are f/2.8 400mm lenses but those are big and VERY heavy...
forpetessake: If you want a superzoom, just get any lightweight Nikon/Canon DSLR and attach an 18-200 zoom to it and it will be ahead of this Panasonic in every way. Or if you want a mirrorless camera, get a Sony A6000 with 18-200 zoom, or Samsung with 18-200, or Olympus with 14-150.Only those who are interested in half baked 4k video may find this camera interesting.
even the still image quality of the DSLR won't be better by definition. For the same reach you need a lens like the Tamron 16-300 which is a very compromised optic, more so than the FZ1000 lens. The DSLR may win easily on noise performance in low light conditions (I couldn't care less about that ...), and in DR (but only for Nikon, not much advantage for Canon DSLRs), but probably not for sharpness across the frame and across the zoom range.AF of the FZ1000 will probably be faster and more accurate than most 'lightweight' Canikon DSLRs with cheap consumer zooms, and the framerate will be much higher. Sometimes getting the shot is far more important than having the 'best image quality' while the subject has disappeared from the frame. Add to that the 4K video and many other features that don't even exist on DSLRs and it is clear how biased this 'DSLR is ahead in every way' claim is.
007peter: Incredible. This thing offer better value than buying a Canon DSLR with 100-400L, or buying Panasonic G6 + 100-300mm. I was leaning toward M43 for its 2x crop factor advantage in telephoto, but the more I think about it, the more incredible these LARGE SENSOR point/shoot are. Maybe they the are future. I can see myself carrying 2 L.S.P&S, one for zoom, and one with 35mm f/1.8 type of lens for wide angle portraits
"It should be noted though that on a small 1 inch sensor there is not much room for cropping quality wise."
I don't think there will be much more room for cropping on an m43 ILC or DSLR with a consumer level superzoom with its crappy optics (especially at the top end of the range). Yes, you can crop more when using an FF camera with a big white, but then we are talking about combo's that are 4-5 kg at least, so in a completely different league.
The equivalent aperture says a lot about 'light gathering': most of these combo's are relatively close in low light performance or DOF control. I don't see the value of 'Formal F-number' like having f/2.8 at 600 mm equiv. on an FZ200 when the tiny sensor means that you are stuck at low ISO. That 'advantage' is an illusion.
princecody: Curious how 17 people own this camera already when it hasn't shipped yet?
even more curious: how is it possible that 29 already returned the camera? I smell some anxious RX10 owners ;-(
gmke: Ouch. I had higher hopes for the ISO range, that the noise reduction fall-off would be gentle out to 1200 ISO, but no. It appears you get one stop only over 1:1.6 and two stops less than top of the line 4/3 or APS-C sensors. Loss of detail at 1600 ISO is pretty ugly. Of course the relatively fast f2.8-4.0 aperture over such a wide zoom range backs you away from the need to go there very often. How different would things be if, instead of 20MP, a 12MP 1-incher had been available? The average fabrication error compared to perfect pixels would be much smaller, translating to an ISO range that would be a bit deeper and a bit more serious compared to DSLR sensors.
"How different would things be if, instead of 20MP, a 12MP 1-incher had been available?"
Very little, probably so small that the average user would not see it in practice. This issue of 'too small pixels' hardly applies anymore for current sensors. If you definitely want less noise, you can always downsize the 20 MP image to 12 MP, at the cost of lower resolution ;-)
utomo99: Panasonic please prepare new version: 1. Look at the cons list2. use New sensor which work better on low light. 3. Body redesign so it is better
'use new sensor which work better on low light'
I'm curious, what sensor should they use with better low light performance, or are you going to design it for them?
kff: a cheap APS-C camera with a compact lens like Pentax DA 50/1.8 + 35/2.4 would give a better picture quality and with cropping to 1" too :)
But why not Panasonic or Sony :)
how would that work for focal lengths like 25, 100, 200, 400 mm equiv.??
harry: Now that Panasonic had FZ200 (1/2.3" sensor) and FZ1000 (1" sensor), would it make sense for Panasonic to make something like a FZ500 (1/1.7" sensor) that captures most of FZ1000's features but with a smaller body/lens? With a 1/1.7" limited to 10 MP for all practical purposes, it would likely produce similar ISO performance to a 20 MP 1" sensor.
Personally, I found the 4K video intriguing. After the World Cup that just finished, I have been seriously considering a 4K HDTV for home, replacing my "ancient" 50" plasma HDTV with only 720p resolution.
"With a 1/1.7" limited to 10 MP for all practical purposes, it would likely produce similar ISO performance to a 20 MP 1" sensor."
No it would NOT, not even by a long shot. Maybe it would be close on a per pixel basis but that is irrelevant. You could downsize the 20 MP 1 inch sensor image to 10 MP and improve 'noise performance' further.
some of the current long zoom options with equiv. focal length and equiv. aperture:
* Panasonic FZ1000: 25-400mm, f/7.6-f/10.8; 0.83 kg* Nikon 1 V3, CX70-300: 189-810mm, f/12.1-f/15.1; 1.0 kg* EM1 with 75-300II: 150-600mm, f/9.6-f/13.4; 0.95 kg* APS-C Tamron 16-300: 26-480mm, f/5.6-f/10; 1.3 kg.* APS-C Tamron 150-600: 240-960mm, f/8-f/10; 2.7 kg.(APS-C is mid-level Canon DSLR; Nikon 1 with EVF)
Several of these combo's have similar equiv. focal length range, equiv. aperture and weight, despite big differences in sensor size. The real value will depend not just on sensor quality but more on optical quality, AF performance, framerate etc.
I think the Nikon 1 combo will perform very well for long zoom action, but it is very expensive. FZ1000 has great spec for the price, although the maximum zoom is a bit low for some applications.
D1N0: For the price you could get a Nikon D5200 bundled with a Tamron 18-270 Tamron 18-270mm F/3.5-6.3 Di II VC PZD The Nikon's body is even more compact than this one.
agree with WACONimages: although equivalent focal length and aperture for these two are relatively close, FZ1000 will probably win on optical quality and on many other features (framerate, video, loads of options ...). The Nikon bundle will win on low light performance and flexibility (you can always buy a better lens and other specialized add-ons, but it will cost a lot of extra money).
Mikofox: I'm a Panasonic fan and user, FZ35 + GX1, and while I think the features of this camera are great, the IQ is not, when looking at the RAW lab comparison. The Olympus M10 beats it clearly, so does the GX7. It's mostly the lack of detail that bothers me. Technically it would be a great replacement for my FZ35, but at the high price I expect more and it's just expensive enough to make me look at the Fuji XT-1 or the Sony A7. Or wait for the successor of the XT-1, which hopefully will have the same body, but improved video.
Are you expecting the 1 inch sensor to be at least as good as the significantly bigger m43 sensors? Not realistic ...
And what about 'high price', if you add a somewhat similar lens to XT-1 or Sony A7 they will be a lot more expensive ...
PerL: A few comments regarding the final thoughts. Personally I would definitely prefer to carry the better camera for an exclusive trip like that. And a 7D with a 70-200 is really not that behind in reach - 320 eqv vs 400 eqv on the super zoom. Not to mention that the 400 mm on the 7D is a 640 eqv, quite a bit longer. Finally, the AF of the 7D should be more capable of dealing with breaching whales (read M Reichmanns experiences from Antarctica).
@Lab D:588 grams? FZ1000 weighs 831 gram, Canon APS-C with 18-200 will be around 1200 gram. With a third party zoom like Sigma 18-250 the total weight is about 1 kg, so relatively close. However, zoom range of the 18-200 and 18-250 is a bit less at both WA and tele... and I doubt if these superzooms will give much better images, in general. Would be interesting to see a direct comparison :-)
The 18-200 will be a slightly cheaper 'light travel' option but only if you already have the light APS-C DSLR body; otherwise it will be a lot more expensive (or even more optical compromise is required).
@Perl:If you want to go on vacation with 4 kg of photo gear (including a bright 70-200, 15-85 and additional 300 or 400mm) that's fine. I'm just pointing out that for most users this isn't a realistic option for travel, especially if you have to travel light (e.g. on foot) and need other things along the way beside photo gear.
Given the fact that the FZ1000 image quality is about what was considered 'pro' ten years ago, it should be plenty good for most users. This is not a replacement for a complete DSLR kit, it is a very affordable alternative that makes a lot of sense in some conditions (and in some ways is much better than a DSLR, e.g. for video and framerate).
jkoch2: One vast advantage of 4k video, even in a world of lower display resolution, is the ability to crop, stabilize, or adjust for rotation in post, without IQ loss.
The irony is that the FZ1000 can't offer 5-axis stabilization or "level shot" when shooting at 4k. This presents problems, especially when shooting at 400mm equivalent. Sad it has no internal NDF feature either.
The 400mm equivalent zoom reach is great for wildlife or other travel shots, but also means the FZ1000 will fit in no pocket. 80%+ of the time wide-angle and pocketability matter.
The discontinued coat-pocket LX7 (now very cheap) has internal NDF, as well as a colored bar option that indicates horizon. One fears the forthcoming LX8 may not.
The RX10 and RX100 series are both strong competitors, but cost more, and neither offer 4k video.
"The 400mm equivalent zoom reach is great for wildlife or other travel shots, but also means the FZ1000 will fit in no pocket. 80%+ of the time wide-angle and pocketability matter."
Since when are wildlife photographers expecting their camera to be' pocketable'? I can assure you an FZ1000 is a lot more pocketable than most of them are used to ...
If WA and pocketability matter and you don't care about tele reach, buy the LX8 or some small sensor compact. Just don't expect a pocketable camera with long zoom reach to be useful for wildlife photography ...
wrong comparison: the 7D with 70-200 will totally UNDERperform the FZ1000 for anything below 100mm equiv. focal length. You have to add at least one other lens like th 15-85IS to come anywhere close in reach.Oh, you are also going to carry a 400mm lens? Great, now we are talking about +/- 4 kg equipment to compete with the 0.9 kg FZ1000 ... enjoy the trip, and changing lenses while shooting the breaching whales ;-)
roguerye: why is it missing 24P@4K? haven't we had 24P/1080 for a decade now? I'll pass. 30P/4K only at squwished mode 37mm widest? Hmmmn. Call me when you get 24P/4K and 24MM WIDE END with ND and headphone jack. I'll pay $1500 for that.
Who wants to shoot maximum WA 4K video with such a long zoom camera? You can probably buy a Pana LX8 for that in the near future. This camera is about tele reach, so cropping makes a lot of sense (even more reach for nature/wildlife!).
Amnon G: 8MP frames from a video creates a whole new capability of extracting the best photo out of a video instead of continuous shooting. This could be very handy for many things, from sports to kids to animals.
@Thematic:the 'video' can be used for 8MP stills at 24/30 fps, high shutter speed, for an unlimited time (although in practice I think it would be used for short burst to capture the right moment). 30 fps is a big step up from 10-12 fps framerate, sometimes getting the shot at reduced quality (10 years ago most people would be very happy with such stills quality) is better than no shot at all.
George Veltchev: Come on guys ... the 'studio comparison' reveals that this 1' sensor battles with the noise as early as ISO200 ( just look the shadows at this settings ) ..ISO200 I am talking about !!!! WOW ...and on top of that this mediocre Leica lens is as soft as a poppy marshmallow on a hotplate, killing the detail even in the center of the frame, never mind the corners ... take it to the beach in summer, between 10:00am and 2:00pm, keep the ISO at 125 and you'll be happy as a scamp with new white leather shoes...... not bad for a lovely tight package with the modest $900 I guess !
@ George Veltchev: so ... you want to compare a 1 inch sensor camera with the 6D (one of the few cameras with top High ISO performance)? If you compare 1 inch sensor with a FF 6D DSLR, maybe you are comparing the FZ1000 lens to a bag full of Canon L primes??I don't think the lens is soft at all, look at the available sample images: it's a lot better than many DSLR consumer zooms.
I would not put too much faith in those 'studio comparison shots' anyway, sometimes they look awful while the real life images are great. Too sensitive to all kinds of issues, apparently.
trunksye: Why wouldn't one choose a combo like: Olympus M43+ lens 75-300mm? That's 150-600mm equivalent. I know there is this aperture factor, but the large sensor and better iso compensate a bit for this. And you get the flexibility of switching lens...
If you look at features like AF, framerate, 4K video etc. FZ1000 competes with the best (most expensive) m43 cameras, at only 50% or so of the price (and that is with just a 75-300 consumer zoom added, not full reach from WA to long tele). For the extra features and far lower price, most users will accept some compromise in IQ (and I doubt there is much difference, because most of the m43 long zooms are not very good optically at the long end of the range).
In some situations (like explained by Jeff above) the 'flexibility' can be a disadvantage, and having one camera that does it all is great.
Andrew Butterfield: Nikon have developed a DSLR-rivalling focusing and tracking system. If it was in a decent mirrorless camera like the Sony A6000 or the Olympus E-M10 it would storm the market. While it sits in the '1' cameras, it will be a relative failure. You'd need a good reason to buy this over a Sony RX100 Mk III, and I don't think interchangeable lenses are a good enough reason.
@brian57:irrespective of Sony lens quality, if you want a long tele (e.g. 800mm equiv. on Nikon 1) the A6000 is not 'small and light' at all. And for short focal length, RX100-3 is much smaller than A6000 with comparable zoom, and with better optical quality than most Sony standard zooms too. A bigger sensor is only a very small part of the story, and it also has some disadvantages.