Crop factor in Cinema 4K (C4K) on Panasonic FZ2000

Today was the second day I was experimenting with the FZ2000, and so far I was completely blown away. I am a Sony fanboy, but the FZ2000 looks brilliant, it's absolutely amazing. Actually it is a 1"-senzor semi-professional videocamera; it cannot be regarded as pro because of the lack of (direct) XLR. I have zero interest in its photography features, and I am evaluating purely its video functions.

When I selected 4K video mode either in 50 Hz (PAL) or 60 Hz (NTSC), the widest focal length was changed to 36mm, which is quite disappointing, and might be a showstopper, eventually. On the other hand, today I was playing with the Cinema 4K mode and 25mm was displayed as the shortest focal length (FL). Is this just a firmware error, or the 25mm is the real FL for C4K? Tomorrow I'll double check. C4K mode has myriads of limitations, unfortunately, but if this 25mm is true, then C4K would be a really useful feature for wide 4K shots.

C4K is 17:9 aspect ratio. This mode is a Digital Cinema Initiatives standardized format, and matches the widescreen aspect ratio of digital cinema cameras and projectors.

But you probably know that already. It really is that wide. Also exists on their pro camcorders, for ex DVX200 that I use.

The video on the FZ2000 is astonishingly good.

Miki Nemeth wrote:

Today was the second day I was experimenting with the FZ2000, and so far I was completely blown away. I am a Sony fanboy, but the FZ2000 looks brilliant, it's absolutely amazing. Actually it is a 1"-senzor semi-professional videocamera; it cannot be regarded as pro because of the lack of (direct) XLR. I have zero interest in its photography features, and I am evaluating purely its video functions.

When I selected 4K video mode either in 50 Hz (PAL) or 60 Hz (NTSC), the widest focal length was changed to 36mm, which is quite disappointing, and might be a showstopper, eventually. On the other hand, today I was playing with the Cinema 4K mode and 25mm was displayed as the shortest focal length (FL). Is this just a firmware error, or the 25mm is the real FL for C4K? Tomorrow I'll double check. C4K mode has myriads of limitations, unfortunately, but if this 25mm is true, then C4K would be a really useful feature for wide 4K shots.

deep7 wrote:

I was just reading about this earlier today here: http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/panasonic-fz2500/panasonic-fz2500A.HTM#shooting . (You have to scroll down quite a long way to find the video part.)

Thank you for the link, in a comment someone wrote :

The FZ2000 has hardly any crop in its Cinema 4K mode. You can shoot as wide as 25mm in this mode.

It is quite interesting that the pro reviewers fail to mention this terribly important fact, even the user guide written by Panasonic has not a word about it. The entire community is fully sure that 36mm (vs 24mm) is the crop in 4K, but in Cinema 4K (24fps only, though) the crop is only 25mm (vs 24mm), completely OK.

marshwader wrote:

C4K is 17:9 aspect ratio. This mode is a Digital Cinema Initiatives standardized format, and matches the widescreen aspect ratio of digital cinema cameras and projectors.

Thank you for the explanation.

According to the FZ2000 manual C4K has a couple of limitations: no 5-axis hybrid IS (not in UHD either), no still pictures while recording video, no 4K live cropping, no level shot (but not in UHD either).  The 5-axis Hybrid IS and the Level Recording wouldn't work with UHD 4K either. 4K live cropping is essentially exploiting 4K resolution for in-camera technique for HD videos. Still 9M pictures can be extracted from the recorded C4K video in the camera. So C4K is really a viable option alternative to UHD 4K on the FZ2000 to get 25mm wide angle.

If I wanted to make 24mm FoV 17:9 2160p (that is 4096 x 2160) with a camera that has only 16:9 4K (3840 x 2160 (UHD)) I'd simply chop 63 pixels from the top and bottom parts to get 17:9 3840 x 2034, and I'd upscale it to C4K 4096 x 2160 when exporting. What do you think?

It really is that wide. Also exists on their pro camcorders, for ex DVX200 that I use.

So you confirm, too, that 25mm is the wide end of C4K on FZ2000, don't you?

The video on the FZ2000 is astonishingly good.

I fully agree. This camera is competing against the Canon XC10 and Sony AX100, too. In this regard the Sony RX10III is not a really a competitor since it has no touch screen, and most importantly has the typical 29-minute limit of still camera videos.

Still, this extreme fast zoom test shows the limitations of the AF-C of FZ2000: Panasonic FZ2500 4K UHD Video Sample: Zooming - 36mm to 720mm eq.  It would be interesting to see how the RX10III AF-C performs at this zoom-speed, though. On the other hand, this kind of zooming would be required rarely in story telling, I wouldn't say never, but not really a typical technique; but definitely zooming into a face of a character would give some dramatic effect. However, I'd take the zoom with normal speed to let the camera making the recording hunting-free, and I'd simply speed up the zoom in Premiere for my story.

Yesterday I went ahead and I bought an FZ2000. Originally I wanted to buy the new Sony A6500, but it wasn't available in the shop. I had been experimenting with the FZ2000 in the showroom for three days before I decided to buy. I was and still I am completely blown away by its videography features and capabilities. In my opinion the FZ2000 is a video camera since it has ND filters, power zoom, UHD/C4K and unlimited (no 30 minute-limited) internal recording, microphone/headphone jacks.

The touch screen is excellent. After the brilliant functions in my Sony A5100 touch screen operations: no-hunting touch-focus, touch-to-snap focus, I was afraid, if the FZ2000 can keep up, but I am totally happy with the FZ2000; actually it's not inferior to the A5100. The FZ2000 is a hefty piece of camera, it's definitely recognized/admired by the people around me, it's not stealthy as the extremely small A5100.

I love that the video files can be trimmed (divide) in camera; this way my workflow can be made (much) quicker. As a Sony fanboy, I was really hesitant to go for a Sony RX10III, I am sure its image quality is higher, and its lens is more versatile. But, the RX cameras have no touch screen, the RX has the 30-minute limit, XAVC-S cannot be trimmed in camera.

1 hour C4K recording takes 40G. Rendering 1 minute video requires 5 minutes on my Microsoft Surface Pro 4 (i7, 16G, 512G), so 4K post-processing is not fun at all.

I want to use the FZ2000 as my primary, no-hassle, movie making camera. I wanted a simple to use, grab-and-go video camera. I prefer the photo camera form of this video camera.

Panasonic FZ2000 with Zoom H1 and headphone.

I loved the Canon XC10, but it was terribly expensive, and required the hilariously expensive CFast2 cards.

I'd prefer a tilting EVF, similar on the GX8, but anyhow. I love the internal zooming lens, but the lens is absolutely not super silent when zooming. I have to use an external microphone placed at a distance from the camera when zooming in a silent environment. I'd love that the FZ2000 could be operated from a USB power brick, like the recent Sony cameras, but it's definitely not a deal breaker, since a fully charged battery can record at least 2 hours of 4K video continuously if the SD card is large enough.

Here is my first day video: Experimenting with Panasonic FZ2000 on Dec 19 in Budapest

If you need really long recordings on an enormously big storage with ultimate image quality that is quick to process, then FZ2000 and Atomos Ninja2 is really a great option. I've just give a quick try, and the 4K to 1080p downconverted image is absolutely brilliant. Cleaner than the image coming from my Sony A5100, which has really great HD image, anyway. Another brilliant function of FZ2000. This solution has a number of advantages:

• You can record hours and hours of uninterrupted videos on large capacity disks.
• The downconverted 4K to HD is brilliantly clean and detailed, noise free
• Downconversion is immediate, no need to wait for hours during post-processing.
• HD files are much smaller and much faster to post process giving a much faster workflow. 4K gives ultimate image quality, HD gives fast workflow.
• The hard disk can be directly used with the video editor application (Premiere Elements in my case); no need to copy the large files, simply mount the disk via USB3.

Later this or next week, I'll make a couple of nice videos. So far FZ2000 is amazing. I had zero interest in the FZ1000, but the FZ2000 is a totally different camera.

Totally agree with you about the possibility of "streaming" down conversion to 1080p to an external recorder. I've been using the Shogun Flame I initially bought for the Panasonic DVX200 for the same pupose but also because it's such fantastically bright monitor. The process works just as well on the FZ2000 and the IQ is so good that it's absolutely no problem to combine the footage from both cameras especially with the option of shooting V-log on both. One shouldn't underestimate it's photographic abilities either. It's a very competent super zoom with extraordinary video features.

Miki Nemeth wrote:

If you need really long recordings on an enormously big storage with ultimate image quality that is quick to process, then FZ2000 and Atomos Ninja2 is really a great option. I've just give a quick try, and the 4K to 1080p downconverted image is absolutely brilliant. Cleaner than the image coming from my Sony A5100, which has really great HD image, anyway. Another brilliant function of FZ2000. This solution has a number of advantages:

• You can record hours and hours of uninterrupted videos on large capacity disks.
• The downconverted 4K to HD is brilliantly clean and detailed, noise free
• Downconversion is immediate, no need to wait for hours during post-processing.
• HD files are much smaller and much faster to post process giving a much faster workflow. 4K gives ultimate image quality, HD gives fast workflow.
• The hard disk can be directly used with the video editor application (Premiere Elements in my case); no need to copy the large files, simply mount the disk via USB3.

Later this or next week, I'll make a couple of nice videos. So far FZ2000 is amazing. I had zero interest in the FZ1000, but the FZ2000 is a totally different camera.

Hi Mike, as I have the FZ2000 I thank you for your interesting posts re video and have been reading them with great interest.

Please keep us up to date with your findings/progress.

Many thanks

Nigel

Nigel Clifford wrote:

I have the FZ2000 I thank you for your interesting posts re video and have been reading them with great interest. Please keep us up to date with your findings/progress.

Hi Nigel, Sure I'll do, since these are also important to me myself either to review hem later.

So, here is one more hint: the manual incorrectly writes on page 172 that 4K Live Cropping doesn't work in C4K. My primary resolution is C4K and 4K Live Cropping works completely fine.

Yes 4k cropping works in C4K mode but if you look at the zoom range it is 35mm - 720mm.

I think the camera is reverting to UHD 4K.

Another tip for new users is before being able to select C4K you have to change the system frequency from NTSC or PAL to 24.00Hz frequency (this is available in the spanner menu). I don't think that is made clear in the manual.

Nigel

Nigel Clifford wrote:

Yes 4k cropping works in C4K mode but if you look at the zoom range it is 36mm - 720mm. I think the camera is reverting to UHD 4K.

Very true, thank you for the correction. Actually, the recording is made in FHD/24fps/100M.

I've elaborated a kind of video shooting "best practice" with the Panasonic FZ2000 in the past couple of days. I still need a lot of refinement and experimenting and practicing, though.

For video my primary exposure monitoring tool is Zebra Pattern. I keep an eye on the zebra lines on the main subject of my videos to make it not overexposed.

I configured Fn4 to enable/disable and change Zebra Pattern easily.

I enable both Zebras and Histogram. The fine Zebra lines are excellent on the Panasonic, less distracting than Sony zebra stripes.

The soft Fn10 button is available for switching on and off histogram.

Zebras work perfectly with Exposure Compensation.

Since I heavily use Exposure Compensation with Zebras, I assign the back/rear dial to be my compensation dial. This way I can directly adjust exposure, and the zebra lines are immediately reflect my adjustments. Simply brilliant.

I mostly use S exposure mode for videos with Auto ISO set to max 3200 combined with exposure compensation and zebras. S mode is the most convenient for my Exposure Compensation oriented shooting style.

In M exposure mode the rear dial is reverted to adjusting the Shutter Speed; so, the only way to change the ISO is to press the ISO button and adjusting the ISO; the problem with this kind of ISO adjustment is that while adjusting the ISO this way, neither zebras nor histogram are visible at all, unfortunately.

To make the dials consistent both in S and M mode for video, I changed front dial to SS and rear dial to F. So in both S and M modes the front dial is to control shutter speed; the rear dial in M mode is for iris, in S mode exposure compensation.

How can the iris be adjusted in S mode? In S mode I set the shutter to the 180 degree value. For 24fps I use 1/50th sec, and I let the camera adjust the iris and ISO (limited up to 3200) automatically, and the FZ2000 does it excellently. However, the actual F, nor the ISO numbers are not shown on the screen during video recording on the FZ2000, unfortunately. On my Sony A5100 the actual F-stop number is displayed during video recording in S mode.

In low light the FZ2000 first opens the iris and raises ISO afterwards. In good light, it decreases ISO down to the minimum level, then starts closing the iris. This algorithm is perfect to the highest image quality with the lowest noise possible. I would do it exactly this way; so why not then let the camera do this job automatically for me. When I want to adjust the exposure, I use the exposure compensation dial. I'd love to have a max F-stop setting, nevertheless, combined with Auto ND Filter; maybe in the next firmware.

This automated iris + ISO adjustment is perfectly fine, since the small 1" sensor of the FZ2000 gives enormously deep DoF even at f2.8 (corresponding to the DoF of about f8 on FF EQ). So, automated iris control is totally appropriate as done by the FZ2000.

When I need shallow DoF (f2.8 at 400mm as close to the subject as possible, for example), I change to M mode, and I set f2.8. The built in ND filters help here a lot here in harsh daylight. Auto ND filter is not available in video mode on the FZ2000. That is, ND filter is expected to set manually on the FZ2000. So far I wasn't able to find any meaningful way of using AUTO ND FILTER in photography modes.

The bottom line is:

In bright daylight I shoot in M mode (front dial SS, rear dial iris) after I set ISO to the minimum value (no auto ISO). To prevent too small iris, I use the built-in ND filter.

In low light I shoot in S mode (front dial SS, rear dial exposure compensation) after I set ISO to Auto (with max 3200). ND filter has no role in low-light videography. Exposure compensation controls both aperture and ISO automatically.

marshwader wrote:

I've been using the Shogun Flame I initially bought for the Panasonic DVX200 for the same pupose but also because it's such fantastically bright monitor. The process works just as well on the FZ2000 and the IQ is so good that it's absolutely no problem to combine the footage from both cameras especially with the option of shooting V-log on both.

Definitely you have excellent gear for movie making. To bring the $1200 FZ2000 into perspective, it's worth watching a couple of reviews of Panasonic dedicated video cameras : AG-UX90 ($2100) , AG-UX180 ($3500) and HC-X1 ($3200)

The AG-UX180 and HC-X1 has exactly the same super zoom lens az the FZ2000. None of these cameras have V-Log, and they cannot even be extended, the FZ2000 can. None of these cameras have 10-bit HDMI output, the FZ2000 has. The image stabilization, AF is exactly the same. The AG-UX180 and the HC-X1 can shoot 4K/60fps, the FZ2000 only 4K/30p. The AG-UX90 cannot shoot Cinema4K, the FZ2000 can. The FZ2000 is much smaller and more convenient to carry around then these video cameras; I prefer the FZ2000 form factor a lot more. The Canon XC10/XC15 have the same form factor. The FZ2000 has the same ND filters, too. These video cameras have a lot more buttons, of course. The tilting viewfinder with the huge rubber eyecup is really a big plus for the video cameras.

The integrated lens-cap is excellent on these cameras, the FZ2000 should have one too.

I especially loved the review UKAirscape Review: Panasonic AG-UX90 4K camcorder (vs UX180 and HC-X1)

• At 1:30 he explains the lens rings. I found the focus and zoom ring excellent on the FZ2000, too. If only the FZ2000 had an iris/aperture ring, too, just like the video cameras. I love manual focusing with the FZ2000, it works brilliantly.
• at 14:01 he explain how shocking is the 36mm crop in 4K mode, he finds this as a major caveat. The FZ2000 has 25mm wide angle in C4K.
• At 17:43 he mentions plastic, and what he says about the AG-UX90 is applicable on the FZ2000, too.
• At 19:20 he is complaining about how infuriating is that magnification doesn't work while recording. This is a generic and major problem with all Panasonic cameras including the FZ2000, too. This was nearly a deal breaker to me. All Sony cameras work excellently magnified view while recording video. He is explaining a couple of situations how important this function would be. I totally agree him.
• At 22:00 he is explaining the audio noise from the zoom lens servo, and this is a problem with the FZ2000, too. 

Thanks very much for the links you have provided. I'll have a good look over the Christmas period which will finally give me some more time to do my research and learn more about the FZ2000. I'm primarily a studio and landscape stills photographer and the video thing was kind of foisted upon me at some point but I soon began to enjoy it and gather the stuff I need for the job of recording people at work (mainly in the creative industries). I can see some of the draw backs of the camera that you mention, but by now I've begun to work around them so far as possible:

Noise/fans/IS/OIS are all very annoying but even worse on the bigger cameras I have been working with. They all have fans and so do the external recorders. 4K and UHD gets things very hot as all the time limits and overheating on smaller Sony cams show so clearly.

Therefore I'm always trying to get the microphones as far away from the sources of noise as possible, mainly by planting a mike totally off camera mounted separately but here's my "compact" on camera solution for the FZ2000.

I don't like cages and monster rigs so this is built around an old Calumet flash bracket which hosts a Sennheiser mike and the excellent Black Magic 5" video assist. The Video assist is great as it allows one to down convert 4K to 1080p on the go with very crisp results and it is the cheapest (approx. $400) of all the external recorders and now finally has extensive codecs and it allows magnification during recordings.   Like you I also often use small external audio recorders to get a clean separate continuous audio stream but the little Sennheiser (MKE440) is stereo but very directional at the same time and not as absurdly expensive as the pro Rode video mics:

FZ2000 with Calumet flash bracket rig

marshwader wrote:

Thanks very much for the links you have provided.

One of the best overview videos is this Panasonic unveils the FZ2500 & HC-X1 at PhotoPlus 2016 at 4:01 he explains why the FZ2000 photo camera form-factor is perfect for videographers (he is mentioning incognito, avoiding professional video shooting permit), since the internally the FZ2000 hides all the features of professional camera, while from the outside it looks like a plastic-y/toy tourist camera. With the possibility to add V-Log it is even more pro than the brilliant HC-X1.

recording people at work (mainly in the creative industries).

That is going to be fun, sure.

I can see some of the draw backs of the camera that you mention,

To me the 36mm wide angle 4K crop would have been a definitive deal breaker, if the FZ2000 hadn't the 25 - 500mm C4K. The other major issue was no magnification while recording; it is really terrible limitation, but what can I do, this is Panasonic. Sony RX has no touch screen, Panasonic has no live magnification.

Therefore I'm always trying to get the microphones as far away from the sources of noise as possible, mainly by planting a mike totally off camera mounted separately but here's my "compact" on camera solution for the FZ2000.

In a silent environment definitely it should be arranged like that, very true.

I don't like cages and monster rigs so this is built around an old Calumet flash bracket

Same here, I don't even use a bracket.

which hosts a Sennheiser mike and the excellent Black Magic 5" video assist. The Video assist is great as it allows one to down convert 4K to 1080p on the go with very crisp results and it is the cheapest (approx. $400) of all the external recorders and now finally has extensive codecs and it allows magnification during recordings.

You have an Atomos, too, if I remember correctly. So you have two external recorders, haven't you? My Ninja2 has no magnification, hmm, but your Blackmagic has, good point. Honestly I prefer SSD recording what Atomos does vs the SD cards, since an SSD can directly used (USB3) with my computer as an external drive editing movies directly from the disk, no need to copy the huge files of (4K) long recordings. You cannot use an SD card directly with Premiere, for example, you should copy the files. So for the perfect workflow when an external recorder is involved, SSDs are much more versatile.

An 500G HD is $50 an 500G SSD is $140. I can even buy a separate disk for each of my projects and keep the files on these external disks. A 128G SDXC card is $60, but these cannot be used as permanent storage, since the files should be copied on the computer HD anyway. You can buy Atomos Master Caddy II (5 Pack) for $30, and keep your disks ready for external recorder and external drive for your computer. Absolutely the most convenient workflow.

Like you I also often use small external audio recorders to get a clean separate continuous audio stream but the little Sennheiser (MKE440) is stereo but very directional at the same time and not as absurdly expensive as the pro Rode video mics:

FZ2000 with Calumet flash bracket rig

I have a Rode NTG-2 ($300), but it I used it only a couple of times. It's too cumbersome to use with a camera like the FZ2000. Your Sennheiser is $350 and a Rode Video Micro Pro is $230, the others are even less expensive. Which Rode mike do you think absurdly expensive?

The Rode videomic I was referring too is this one:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1082671-REG/rode_svmx_stereo_video_mic_x.html

Their top line which would be useful for me as you can feed it's XLR outputs straight into the DVX200. I like Rode microphones. I've had an NT4 for coming on 15 years which I've used for sound recording to a Marantz PMD 661 recorder with great results. It works well on the DVX through the XLRs but it is very heavy. Too heavy and big to keep it in the bag at all times. It doesn't work at all with DSLR through 3.5 mm jacks. You can power it with a 9 volt battery but it gets very noisy that way. I mostly want stereo because it adds realism. That's where the Sennheiser gives you similar sound quality at a "reasonable" price. Let's face it. Once you get into video most accessories are exorbitant.

Why the BM video assist when I have the Atomos? First of all because it's small an easily fits into any camera bag. Also because it has HDMI and SDI connectors and the SDIs create a much more secure connection when you can use them (DVX). I also often use two cameras on location at the same time: One for a very close up view, one for the overall scene. I used to have a Panasonic AG-HMC151 for many years and for the time it was a great camera but it's footage doesn't look right now alongside DVX200. The FZ2000 works extremely well with the DVX. You can get the colours close enough so that transitions are not noticeable although the ATW on the FZ2000 is astonishingly faster and more accurate.

The FZ2000 is a great and reasonably small package for video and the still are pretty good too, It will be picked up by a lot of people like me as a travelling and B camera. The Sony RX100 III might have a great lens and a bit of weather sealing but it cannot compete in any way with the pro video features of the Panasonic and the lack of NDs and touch screen are a serious let down.

You are right about working with SSD,. Much faster and more convenient and you get 5 caddies with the Flame recorder, but the portability and pretty good screen on the Video assist make it worthwhile for me. You have zebras, peaking, histogram and you can load luts , and record to Avid and Prores codex and now even mxf format  at varying bit rates. Great stuff!

Happy Christmas and a very Happy New Year to you and everyone on this Forum!

marshwader wrote:

The Rode videomic I was referring too is this one:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1082671-REG/rode_svmx_stereo_video_mic_x.html

Wow, I see, that is a microphone, sure! Thank you for the link. I use a Zoom H1 or occasionally a Zoom H5 as my stereo microphone. Now I am buying a Saramonic Smartrig + (Plus) ($100) to get a small XLR pre-amp for my Rode NTG-2, when I need mono shotgun.

I mostly want stereo because it adds realism.

This is a really a great comment. Hmm. I love stereo, too.

That's where the Sennheiser gives you similar sound quality at a "reasonable" price. Let's face it. Once you get into video most accessories are exorbitant.

I completely agree. When I started photography took a 6-week crash course on photography. Last year I took a 6-month cameraman/filmmaking course held by a brilliant old-style director; videography, film making is a magnitude more complex than photography. Being educated and experienced in photography is only a first and small step in learning to be a film-maker. I love every aspects of film making: planning shoots, story-boarding, acquisition/shooting. Spending hours behind the computer editing my movie, well, this what I don't really like.

Why the BM video assist when I have the Atomos? First of all because it's small an easily fits into any camera bag.

Reason enough on its own.

Also because it has HDMI and SDI connectors and the SDIs create a much more secure connection when you can use them (DVX). I also often use two cameras on location at the same time: One for a very close up view, one for the overall scene.

Exactly, very important point, I am fully convinced that no really decent movie/video can be made with only one camera. So you picked Panasonic vs Sony? Honestly, I found terribly cumbersome to mix footage from two different brands. This was the reason I bought two Nikon V1 cameras as my first video-making set.

The FZ2000 works extremely well with the DVX. You can get the colours close enough so that transitions are not noticeable although the ATW on the FZ2000 is astonishingly faster and more accurate.

Now I have the FZ2000, only for a couple of days, if I am happy with it, I may decide to buy another Panasonic. Maybe an HC-X1 or DVX200

The Sony RX100 III might have a great lens and a bit of weather sealing but it cannot compete in any way with the pro video features of the Panasonic and the lack of NDs and touch screen are a serious let down.

I fully agree. In his quick commenting review Andrew Reid of EOSHD wrote that

"Like the LX15, the FZ2500 use the OLD Sony 1″ sensor and that is a bit past it for video. This is less of a problem on the LX15 which is aimed mainly at photographers. More of a problem for the FZ2500, which is basically sold as a semi-pro camcorder! I’ve tried it out and this camera is SUCH a missed opportunity. It’s an absolutely fantastic body in every respect apart from the old sensor. Feature packed to the rafters and with great ergonomics, Panasonic could have killed the Sony RX10 III stone dead with this."

I think he is right, this was one of the reason I was so much hesitating between the RX10III vs the FZ1000, but eventually I picked the FZ2000, since I wanted more pro video features/touch screen vs slightly better image quality and better lens. The RX10 cameras are limited to 30 minute recording, too. An XAVC-S file cannot be trimmed in camera, this is terribly important to my quick run-and-gun mobile videography. After I record a clip, when I have some break I very often trim my footage to make editing faster later; when I shoot my clips I have the story in my mind more or less. It would be cool, if the FZ2000 gave me a function to add comments/title to my video clips.

Happy Christmas and a very Happy New Year to you and everyone on this Forum!

I Wish You a Merry Christmas, too.

Unless I am mistaken Panasonic made a huge scam with the FZ2000 when it displays 25mm - 500mm in Cinema 4K. No way it is as wide as 25mm, it is much closer to 36mm.

Check out these screen shots:

This is 24mm FoV in Photography Mode

This is Cinema 4K movie mode, no way it is 25mm FoV.

This is regular 4K mode 36mm FoV. As you can see the Cinema 4K is only slightly wider than this 36mm FoV.

I feel completely stupid and scammed by Panasonic. If the FZ2000 cannot shoot 25mm FoV in Cinema 4K, this camera is not for me, and I am selling it right away on ebay, and never again Panasonic.

Convince me, please, that I am missing something here.

I think you are on to something. On the left a frame grab from a C4K video listing EFL of 25mm and on the right a 30mm photo. An EFL of 31mm would have been a closer approximation.