XVOYAGERX

Lives in United Kingdom United Kingdom
Joined on Nov 4, 2010

Comments

Total: 191, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

NaBalam: Could this device be classified as a "video camera that can shoot stills"? Maybe somewhere around 70%-30%...?

I thought 400 lines was astonishing at the time, however, the GFS1000 could manage an incredible 420 lines, there was another (at the time) camcorder, it was the JVC GRS 707 S-VHS C with the smaller SVHS-C Tape that required a full-size VHS adaptor, the GRS707 was around the same price, if not slightly cheaper than the GFS1000, the manual controls on this thing were incredible, out classing the GFS1000, however, it could only resolve around 370 lines, 50 lines of a difference, a pure shame really, so I went with the GFS1000, but those extra 50 lines on the GFS1000 made a "big" difference when you copied your tapes to a full-size S-VHS recorder, here Panasonic made the best with manual controls, audio-dubbing, jog-shuttle dial, etc, now you look at the video quality of say the GH5 with 4K, wow, awesome! ah! but those Linier editing systems consisting of 2 leads were the days, eh, lol!!

Link | Posted on Mar 24, 2017 at 23:46 UTC
In reply to:

Elite83: Finally, an A7RII killer. For video anyway.

Do you get 12mts instead of 11mts then?

Link | Posted on Mar 17, 2017 at 23:35 UTC
In reply to:

NaBalam: Could this device be classified as a "video camera that can shoot stills"? Maybe somewhere around 70%-30%...?

In 1990 I remember purchasing a JVC GFS1000 (full size tape) S-VHS camcorder, top-tech at the time at a STAGGERING` price of £2100, I remember drooling over its picture quality, however, I always dreamed of a camera with extraordinary video quality in the not too far future, and now it is here, the GH5, and not much more cost than the JVC, probably cheaper when you dial in the price difference from 1990!!

Link | Posted on Mar 17, 2017 at 22:38 UTC
On photo Coast In in the Turboprop incoming. challenge (5 comments in total)

A superb capture of this fine Aircraft, very well done, and congratulations on winning 1st place!!

Allan.

Link | Posted on Mar 7, 2017 at 18:58 UTC as 1st comment
On article Lens shootout: Sony RX10 III destroys the competition (501 comments in total)
In reply to:

Nukunukoo: Wish they'd offer a firmware update on the Mark II to add the prefocus feature of the III.

tbcass I am not a fanboy, everybody is entitled to their opinion on here, right or wrong, I am not denying the RX10III is a very good camera, I don't have an fz1000, it seems to be that you are the fanboy if anyone else dare say anything against the Sony you really do jump to its defence, enough of the fanboy material please, at least against me!!

Link | Posted on Mar 4, 2017 at 15:38 UTC
On article Lens shootout: Sony RX10 III destroys the competition (501 comments in total)
In reply to:

Michael_13: It surely has a great lens, but what is this?

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr234_0=sony_dscrx10iii&attr234_1=panasonic_dmcfz1000&attr236_0=3&attr236_1=3&attr237_0=3&attr237_1=3&normalization=full&widget=359&x=0.0648408977628483&y=1.9729487262606418

Is it due to heat waves or some strange "sharpening" algorithm?

If thats the case, why then is the Panny fz1000 kicking the Sonys a*s in that comparism?

Link | Posted on Mar 4, 2017 at 05:32 UTC
In reply to:

Derek Rivas: kind of expensive

Iooking at this site, i feel there always seems to be a biased, gushing, glowing admiration by the reviewers for Sony Products, nearly every second sentence in the review above is that overpowering gushing, glowing admiration by the reviewer for the sony RX10III, I was not sure whether it was a review for the fz2500/2000 i was reading about, or a review for the RX10III, make of that what you will!!

Link | Posted on Feb 24, 2017 at 03:01 UTC
In reply to:

Buddha003: Guys, don`t be fooled, if you wonder which is the best superzoom and you are hesitant between Sony RX10 Mark III and this camera, please just check direct comparisons on youtube and you`ll see that they ALL agree that the Panasonic LFZ2500 is the BETTER camera as a WHOLE, offering MORE in some aspects for MUCH less money and it is the BEST supezoom ever built! And here the Sony RX10 Mark III has higher score... really ?! For a camera at this price tag with so much accent on its video capabilities with no fully articulated and no touch screen and sometimes severe focus haunting during video com`on... We all know that the Panasonic deserves a gold reward and you can read more objective review here:
http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/panasonic_lumix_dmc_fz2000_review

Totally agree with you, the fz2500/2000 had to be talked down, because it is so darned good, best fz camera out there....period!!!

Link | Posted on Feb 24, 2017 at 02:43 UTC
In reply to:

Kaso: This review is soft and contains a lot of noise. The views expressed are not wide enough. Negative adjectives should be used judiciously. Well, there are at least 5 decent reviews of this camera just a tab-click away.

The fz2500/2000 had to be talked down, the reason is: it is "too good" and the best bridge camera out there so far, why has Panasonic not reacted to any of these allegations about its lens? could it be that most new owners are entirely satisfied with their copies of it? and that there has been no complaints made of this "gigantic issue" to Panasonic? it really seems strange, the vast majority of most other Website and UTube reviews give the camera a very high rating!!

Link | Posted on Feb 15, 2017 at 22:33 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Canon EOS 77D (446 comments in total)
In reply to:

Paul B Jones: What is it that Canon knows that DPR readers don't?

Oh, now I remember. How to run a camera company that actually makes money.

Paul B Jones
So why are you here?

Link | Posted on Feb 15, 2017 at 17:52 UTC
In reply to:

princecody: This is the poor mans D810 & RED rolled into one 🤔😀👍🏻

EH!!!!

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2017 at 00:29 UTC
In reply to:

princecody: This is the poor mans D810 & RED rolled into one 🤔😀👍🏻

Duh!!

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2017 at 00:28 UTC
In reply to:

weathersealed: People really wanted the fz1000 to be more quiet, I wonder if that is stabilizer noise? They should fix that if they can because they might still sell more fz1000 than the newer model.

The newer model "completely blows" the FZ1000 out of the water video-wise and feature-wise, and easily matches it in picture quality, also the fz2000 is "significantly quieter" in the sound Dpt, i sold my fz1000 within 1 week after purchasing the FZ2000, I had the fz1000 for over 2 years, a totally superb camera, i loved it, but the fz2000 is the way ahead for me now, and "not every" fz2000 has lens problems, as time goes on there are many satisfied people who are purchasing it, and think it is superb, "I am one of them"!!

Link | Posted on Feb 12, 2017 at 23:56 UTC
In reply to:

Ebrahim Saadawi: This truly is, my friends, the ultimate budget Cine machine. The spiritual successor to the beloved 550D/600D for budget filmmakers. It combines SO many, giving a major resolution upgrade to Cine standards at 4K with a very clean (and small) artefact-free codec (like Canon's h.264 implemen.). A bump in IS for all lenses even your Canon 50mm or 18-55 gives a whole new shooting way & experience with fast IS primes HANDHELD, on a great M43s sensor. This is what it's all about 4K video that looks great and stable in your bare hands. ISO is always said to be bad but come on, it's at least the same 550D league as in 1600 max. Remember when people shot movies @ night on 100 ASA film and Red Epics that shoot at 320 ISO. It's a very sensetive 4K sensor for most situation but the very extreme.

The great thing is that you csn use it that way as a 600D replacement on a cheap dumb adaptor.

OR, you can build it by putting an EF SB turning it to a 1.4x EF 4K camera, and plug it to an external BMVA/assassin and get 4K 10bit ProRes HQ 4:2:2 files straight off the VA card on the hot shoe. All in a neat small handhaldable set-up. This a sensir size format perfect for cinema and film with very high quality 10bit signal, and a universally loved & broadcast approved ProRes files for video/news work.

There's nothing more to chase. Maybe chase higher ISOs with a 5D/1DxII/A7s but they all come at much higher prices (WITH better 4K signal, the 5DIV is absolutely amazing 4K in how far you can pull the shadows and get extremely clean data but the Crop Quirk is off-outting. 1DX solves it but at MUCH higher cost). Maybe the only second thing to chase is AF, for news and non-skilled/fast operators who just need quick good "enough" video in which case a V Logger should get an 80D with a stabilized 18-135mm kit and be done with it. Forget focusing and just shoot footage.

But aside from these two specific requirements, this camera is underrated and truly is the absolute king and spiritual successor to Canon Rebels AND the GH4 at a degree, even the original A7s and C100. It displaces everything at this price league.

Hats off Panasonic. You put in the passion in low budget filmmaking again.

(A 5DIV 4K video user here with no Panasonic gear owned, I should change that and stop obsessing with Canon images - especially after doing a side by side. Canon only wins at DR (shadows, hugely) and high ISOs (greatly) but in everything else I find myself shooting in 100% I could just handhold a cheap GX85/G80 with a small lens and side by side below 1600 ISO is just lovely identically great 4K video)

Another Canon shooter here jumping ships (well, getting a second B-ship) from Canon to Mirrorless + a Metabones EF SB. All for video. And hey, missed shooting with peaking in an EVF with a fast prime and have it even stabilized. That's skill improving tech right there. What a world we live in, getting these IBIS stuff, 4K, 6400 ISO, 12 Stops in LOG, 24p, s35 chips and glass higher quality than cine glass, all in consumer devices at bestbuy.

We sometimes forget we should just get one of these and make films, videos, commercials, shorts, docs, news, tv series, broadcast, anything. Just handheld with a little camera. Period.

Ebrahim, Superb comments!!

Link | Posted on Feb 12, 2017 at 23:47 UTC
In reply to:

electrophoto: now if they could cut the "hum" out of the LX100's stabiliser too, I'd appreciate it.
it's one of the few annoyances using the LX100... that thing is loud.

Why no fix for the "rumble" that is picked up on the FZ1000s sound, now thats looooooong overdue, anyone listening at Panasonic firmware division?????

Link | Posted on Feb 12, 2017 at 23:34 UTC
In reply to:

John Koch: Cat lovers note: the FZ1000 and FZ2500 both have a little kitty that "purrs" when shooting video in quiet settings. It is the sound of the image stabilizer or something. If you don't like the pussy's snoring, you must doggedly turn down the audio gain or mount a dead cat (with mic) atop the shoe.

AWE dont talk Sh**e idiot!!

Link | Posted on Feb 6, 2017 at 06:05 UTC
In reply to:

Jorginho: Seems a fair review. Certainly if they try two copies and the lens is first of all better but still hampered by mediocrity. I think it is not typical for Panasonic, but I hope they learn from this rather big slip up.
1,4 crop in 4K.....With ILC you at least can get wider lens like a 7 mm that with such a crop would be 20 mm. Here it is a fixed lens...another to my mind big error.
Sad, because all other points seem to be really good!

Still I can't escape the feeling that a Silver Award is may be dpreview being kind to Panny. To my mind Sony has made a better choice by offering the best where it is needed: in IQ. And excellence comes at a price as we all know or should.

Well then, after the superb bashing of this fine model by the "other makes fan boys" it seems funny that there has been no reply to this made out to be "gigantic" lens problem from Panasonic, that leads me to believe that there has been hardly any complaints received by them, which leads me to believe that this lens myth is a load of p**sh, lol!!

Link | Posted on Feb 6, 2017 at 06:03 UTC
In reply to:

marshwader: I am coming to totally different conclusions with my own tests of the lens of my FZ2000.
You can see my samples here: My copy is very much better ???
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58981737

like many other cameras there can be a batch problem concerning a particular issue, here in the UK i have the FZ2000, i am mainly video-centric, having had the earlier FZ1000 for around 2 years (for mainly video work) i do have quite a few still pics i took with it, and after comparing a few similar still shots taken with the newer model, i can honestly say that i can see practically no difference in "still picture quality" if anything i would say the default color settings look a bit better from the new camera, the FZ1000 seems to have more of a bluish cast, that apart, the video quality (1080P) on the new camera is totally excellent, every bit as good as the FZ1000, my cameras lens seems fine, nothing like the over-hyped horror stories i am reading here, i have not tried 4K yet, but i imagine looking at my other results, it should be fine, i am very happy with the upgraded model so-far, and the superb new features, especially the ND Filters, and touch-screen!!

Link | Posted on Feb 6, 2017 at 05:44 UTC
In reply to:

mossymo: I recently sold my Sony RX10 iii and decided to keep the Panasonic FZ2500.
The RX10 iii had a sharper lens, but I felt this was offset by the much better image stabilizer of the FZ2500, along with its 3 position ND filter, internal zoom and faster and more accurate autofocus. Perhaps there is a quality control issue with with the FZ2500 as even though I felt the RX10 III lens was sharper when "pixel peeping" I didn't think there would be much of a difference in any but extremely large prints. I was surprised when DPReview described the FZ2500 lens as "mediocre". Again, there may be a quality control issue as my FZ2500 lens is far from mediocre.
Still, after reading the DPReview review I couldn't help wonder if I made the right decision. I welcome comments from other FZ2500 owners.

I think this lens softness thing has just been over hyped, way over the top, it only takes one website to state for example here, soft lens comparisms, others will follow on with it, and like a failing newspaper some folks, then loads will actually start to believe it, , i have the FZ2000 i would never move backwards to the FZ1000, it has "far too many major improvements" over that model, and many are being vastly under-rated by too much nay-saying in my opinion, if i am interested in a camera, i judge it for myself, not what a website and nay-saying forum commentators and dedicated fan boys state, Oh! and my lens is perfect, there are more than enough other test sites out there, and the majority of them are positive regarding he fz2500/2000 looks like a simple batch problem to me, as to what ya can get from all other makes, not just Panny!!

Link | Posted on Feb 6, 2017 at 05:39 UTC
In reply to:

Brel: From a statistic point of view you can say that when a population of devices (in this case the FZ2500), does not what it should do (making great images) the product is simply not good. In case of the FZ2500 (and unfortunatly also the FZ1000), the production and the end-control is/are the weak point. Let's face it, it's not a good product as long as the specs are not respected. So I don't understand dpreview's review. Mediocre=mediorcre. Quality starts and ends with the images matters, all the rest is bonus ! What more to say. Another weak point is the noise of the in camera stabilization. It was present in the FZ1000 and now again in the FZ2500. But..: this is not a fault, it's a choice of Panasonic that you can't put off the stabilization. A shame, I don't see the reason. So I stopped with the FZ1000 and bought the FZ300, and that's a good device. Small sensor ? Yes, but that's not decesive for the quality of the pictures. So simply it isn't.

The fz2500/2000 is "significantly" quieter than the older fz1000!!

Link | Posted on Feb 6, 2017 at 05:26 UTC
Total: 191, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »