Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Juggernaut

  1. I've got ready access to the FZ1000 and have used it a few times. My take: There are a lot of things to like - 4k, decent lens etc. Image stabilisation is superb. I never normally use autofocus, but the face detection on the FZ1000 was so good I ended up letting it do the legwork on that front with no errors at all. There are some drawbacks I've discovered for shooting video though: 1 - using the wifi link seems nice as your iPad turns into a director's monitor very easily BUT the screen on the camera switches off after 30 seconds of recording when wi-fi is on, so you end up having to use the iPad / phone to monitor - also, the iPad will display everything on the screen except the audio levels for some reason, so a fail on that front. 2 - Using a monitor via the HDMI works very well until you hit record and the monitor feed switches off (like the 5D used to), so no good there. However you can have a clean feed, so I think this camera would work very well with a ninja or similar. 3 - No headphone jack. Why??? Another reason to use a ninja. 4- I shot on Cinelike D and found it to be more noisy than I'd hoped. Not terrible, but not great. Back to Cinelike V for me. 5 - No ND as Andrew says - you could use vari NDs, but I'm not a fan of them as you have to unscrew them to get clear. I use Cokin adaptors, which work brilliantly with the FZ1000's fixed lens as you can leave the adaptor on the whole time, which allows you to drop in filters within 5 seconds and of course gives you lots of options for polarisers, grad NDs etc (and also gives you a little bit of flare protection). 6 - 1" sensor takes me back to old school ENG shooting a bit - it's harder to get shallow DoF but it can be done if you frame at the right focal length and separate your subject, etc. That lens gets to F4 fairly quickly (around the 50mm mark if memory serves) so you'll never use it as your primary shot, but it's fantastic as a wide angle 2nd cam on an interview for instance. All in all I'd say this is a really good semi-pro camera that can be used to get away with pro shoots if speed and simplicity are needed, but don't rig it up like other DSLRs - this is a camera that works best on it's own. I'll definitely pull it out for handheld GVs and the occasional vox pop.
  2. That's not their fault - it's a tax thing. If they declare it as a video camera, they have to pay more tax per unit sold.
  3. AAARGH! WHY oh WHY don't camera manufacturers understand the importance of ergonomics? Adding a pro audio and output module to a DSLR? Great idea, we've all been shouting for something like this for a long time. So why forget to add internal power to it? This is so infuriating, I just don't understand why they don't talk to the people who actually use these cameras for video. Look Panny, it's really simple: Adding a pro video module is great, adding one that is neither practical for use without rigging v-lock batteries nor small enough for run and gun is totally pointless. If you're going to make a video module, then do it right - make it big enough to include batteries, audio, outputs, physical switches, maybe a larger monitor with peaking etc, perhaps even a *gulp* handle so we can, you know, actually hold the thing? If you're going to turn a DSLR into a video camera then ACTUALLY do that, don't go half way and lose your nerve. It makes me SO mad - they know what we need and they just can't see the blindingly obvious solution. Sorry John_d, you're not going to be able to use this camera on a monopod.
  4. The Varicam?  Maybe, but I'm thinking that's going to be much more in line with the F5 or C500 price-wise. Plus they've been showing that mockup at trade shows for two years now whilst the rest get on with putting their to market.  Sadly I think Panny's share of the pro video market is slipping into the ether.
  5. Who says?  As a pro operator I'm REALLY fed up with the obsession to pack everything into a tiny space.  The ergonomics of the AF101 are vastly better than rigging up a DSLR and watching bits drop off it. It's size was right for handheld or tripod / slider work and the buttons and inputs made sense to anyone who's operated a video camera. Almost every time I go on a DSLR shoot, something breaks, from HDMI cables to monitors dropping off rigs.  DSLRs are great for walking around getting GVs without permission, but useless for almost everything else.  Why Panny have abandoned the AF line is a complete mystery - if they were to put this rumoured GH4 into the same body as the AF101 I'd buy it in a heartbeat, and pay twice this rumoured price at least - so would many others.
  6. Any thoughts on the dynamic range? And can you get close to a log profile? This is the biggest factor for me over the GH2
  7. [quote author=gethin link=topic=853.msg6166#msg6166 date=1339895996] would curious to know which shots took the longest to set up and used the most light.  (Sure you can use a $700 camera but if it takes 3x the time and light to get a result then your savings are gone). [/quote] Very good point - the relight time on most was around 90 mins - except for the Alexa, who's relight time was precisely zero.  That's a confident DOP right there!
  8. [quote author=sfrancis928 link=topic=853.msg6172#msg6172 date=1339905618] [quote author=ipcmlr link=topic=853.msg6169#msg6169 date=1339901892] I'm guessing gh2 is camera B! [/quote] Haha really? I wouldn't bet on it! [/quote] I wouldn't bet on not betting on that - I was at the screening in London and I know which is which ;) "Bare in mind that on a 4K projector, the Epic and Sony F65 would run away with it" - watching it on the 2K projector it's true that the F65 stood out as superb but the C300, Alexa, Epic and GH2 were all really really close. Of course they would be, given that they all used a £50k lens and 90 mins of Baselight time.  If you have access to those tools, you can make any camera look stunning.
  9. [quote author=Axel link=topic=848.msg6124#msg6124 date=1339790058] About the set-up: It may well mimic a real situation, but the extreme contrasts of outside and inside don't look natural to me. No? [/quote] Definitely.  The contrast was massively high on purpose to test the DR of the cameras to the limit.  It wasn't a 'real' looking scenario at all. 
  10. I was at the screening yesterday and was amazed at how well the GH2 performed - I had it down as the Epic in my list. the big note for me was that all the cameras looked great, even the iPhone to an extent.  the camera technology is level - what really made these cams shine were the lenses they used and the grading they got.  The ungraded footage of the GH2 was very surprising - it looked massively underexposed, but with Driftwood's patch they managed to really get into it and pull it up amazingly well. Had a great chat with nick Driftwood as well - he says there are interesting new patches on the way!
  • Create New...