wobba

You would expect the 1DC to be better.  A lot better.  It's 2.5x the price (and 2.5x heavier) than the A7RII.  I don't think it justifies the extra cost (and weight).

Besides, the OP was asking for advice on the A7S vs A7RII.  In my view, the latter.  Internal 4K, IBIS and high res stills swing it for me.

​Seriously??  This can't be right!

I can't get past the fact that "Custom set memory" does not save shutter speed at 1/50. I was wanting this compact for my family to use, but there doesn't seem any way to set it up for someone to toggle between one setting for movies (shutter priority at 1/50) vs another setting for photos as I do with the GH4. I hope they address this in a firmware update.

Same here.  Quite bizarre given that this is a hybrid.  I watched a daggy Panasonic marketing video earlier today on the LX100 and had to laugh at the way they pitched the fact that you "simply" rotate multiple dials to alternate between Aperture or Shutter priority.  It would have been even more amusing if they showed that you need to rotate two dials just to choose 1/50s.  

Custom modes don't seem to take into account shutter speed, you still have to put the dial to 1/60 and reverse the rear dial back one to 1/50.

The retro controls make sense on something like a Fuji X100 which is primarily a stills camera.   But this cockamamy routine that requires you to rotate 3 dials (aperture ring, shutter dial, rear dial) every time you alternate between shooting stills in aperture priority and video at 1/50s is pretty poor.

What shutter speed does the LX100 choose if you just leave the shutter dial set to A and hit the record button?  Does it default to 1/50s (assuming you've selected 25P)?

There's the custom modes in there but instead of on a dial, they are in the main menu as Utilise Custom Set Feature. If you use this regularly just assign that option to a Function button like Fn3.

Thanks Andrew.  That works for me.  I assume the custom settings override aperture ring and shutter speed dial settings.  If so, do you just leave the aperture ring and shutter dial both on A, and program custom 1, say, for shutter priority with speed set to 1/50s?

Nice review Andrew. And very timely. How practical are the retro aperture/shutter speed dials?  For example, let's say I want to alternate between shooting video in shutter priority (at 1/50s) and shooting stills in aperture priority, do I need to constantly rotate the aperture and shutter dials to effect these settings, or can I simply program these settings into custom memory?

I have both, actually all 3.

 

It is hard to tell someone what to buy. The quality of the image and video from the LX100 is very good to excellent. Is it as good as the GH4? I would say if you are a pro and looking for the equal of the GH4 then the answer is no.

 

But if you are an enthusiast and can cut the camera some slack, you would be hard pressed to tell the difference.

 

Remember, I have only had the LX100 here for about 5 hours now, so as time goes on my opinion may change.

 

The disappointing thing about the LX100 is it is certainly not a baby GH4. The camera is 80 percent a point and shoot camera that dips into the higher end here and there. The menus try and emulate the GH4, but they are clumsy, and not just a little bit clumsy - low end pint and shoot type camera clumsy. I am quite surprised.

 

The camera would be a deal breaker for me if it were not for the really good quality video. I expect the images to be excellent too, it leans in that direction but I won't know until I can shoot RAW.

 

Here is a simple example. Say you are not totally or only a video guy. Video is really high on your list, but you want to take meaningful pictures too. I am a photographer, so when I take pictures - even just home pictures - if they are not "excellent" you know darn well the comment "and you are supposed to be a photographer" is going to hit you head on. To achieve those excellent pictures consistently, you really have to have control of the camera. So, take the LX100 in hand, go to take a shot and you will notice you have no control over the focus point. You can press 3 buttons and get control, or set the menu so you can have direct access to the 4 way controller just like the big boy cameras :) As you shoot along you want to do a custom white balance (something a lot of folks won't ever do) and you find you no longer can do a custom white balance unless you go into the menu and undo your setting to have direct access to the 4 way controller dial. You can change the white balance, but you can't do a custom white balance.

 

Now go to video.Is the quality as good as my GH4? not quite. But at 4K reduced to 1080, it is head and shoulders better than any direct 1080p camera I have used. Again, no custom white balance unless you go and reset the main menu back to the way it was. So now you give up using the 4 way controller easily and just go thru the hoops.

 

Bottom line, coming down fro the GH4 the feeling is yuck. Coming up from a Canon G1X II or a Sony RX100-3, the camera is terrific.

 

I won't be grabbing the LX100 for any pro level work, images or video. But I think most people will like the LX100. Its calling card is the 4k video quality - especially when going down to 1080 - and the bigger sensor for all other imaging. The focus is quite good and the camera surpasses almost all other point and shoot sized camera I have used. My problem is at $900 i would really really wanted more of a nod to having some usable features in it. For stills I cannot select a "lowest shutter speed" like I can on the EM1, but the GH4 doesn't have that either.

 

The GH4 with a 12-35 is a dream. It just works - period. if you do put the size differences in the mix, then get the 12-35 lens. If you want a 12-35 lens (almost, but not quite) and a free camera thrown in, then get the LX100.

 

Peter

Thanks Peter. This is the most helpful writeup I've seen to date on the LX100.  I'll likely just use this as a holiday cam.  Quick question.  My preferred mode for stills is aperture priority and for video, shutter priority with the shutter speed set to 1/50s.  Is it possible to set the custom memories to reflect these settings?  I'm hoping that the custom memory settings will override the LX100's dopey aperture ring and shutter dial. 

Will

there is a filter thread

the monstrous problem or mistake of LX100 is 4k moire a killer for video amateurs

Hopefully, you're right on the first point.

I agree, the moire is disappointing.  The image stabilisation is also quite mediocre, based on the CameraLabs footage, which will limit the ability of this camera to be used hand-held.

BTW it's dropped to £699 and also the GX line is discontinued or at the very least I don't think we'll see one til late next year. Considering a 12-35mm lens costs more than this camera, I would say it's quite a steal.

 

 

It has a 43mm filter thread

Are you sure?  The CameraLabs review states that there's no filter thread :

"There's also no filter thread on the LX100, nor an optional accessory for mounting them, although there is a bayonet for the optional auto lens cap that suggests it could be possible in the future or via a third-party."

In looking at this high-res image, I can't see a filter thread:

'>

How do you shoot video in bright conditions with the LX100 with no internal ND filter and no external filter thread ??

Given that you've sounded the death knell for Canon EOS, perhaps you should change the name of your site from EOSHD to AlphaHD :)

It's not such a big deal imo.

 

Set the shutter dial to 60 and you can change between 40, 50, 60, 80 and 100 with the control ring on the lens (it has both an aperture ring and extra control ring), or the small wheel on the back.

 

The camera has 3 custom modes (C1, C2, C3) in the menu. You can assign a FN button (or the wifi button) to access the custom modes.

 

Just make a custom setting with your favorite movie settings and photo settings and you're good to go.

 

Looks like it's not PAL/NTSC switchable though and also the Cine Profiles seem to be missing.

It's not such a big deal imo.

 

Set the shutter dial to 60 and you can change between 40, 50, 60, 80 and 100 with the control ring on the lens (it has both an aperture ring and extra control ring), or the small wheel on the back.

 

The camera has 3 custom modes (C1, C2, C3) in the menu. You can assign a FN button (or the wifi button) to access the custom modes.

 

Just make a custom setting with your favorite movie settings and photo settings and you're good to go.

 

Looks like it's not PAL/NTSC switchable though and also the Cine Profiles seem to be missing.

Thanks for the suggestions, but you've just reaffirmed my point.  Setting the shutter speed to 1/25 or 1/50 sec, for example, now requires that I rotate rotate two dials.  And I'm not sure how well the rear rotary dial works, but in general they are clumsy.  I much prefer a (programmable) top dial.  Video shooters will need to faff about just to make basic changes/settings with lots of button presses and using multiple dials to make one setting.

Because there are many many many photographers who like this particular control layout. They think it gives them more manual control. I've done this argument so many times and I don't think I'll ever get them to change their minds, despite the reality.

Sure, it will suit photographers.  But it's going to be PITA for those that shoot video.  Where's the 1/25 sec setting on the shutter speed dial?  Where's the custom mode settings dial that allows you to rapidly switch between stills and video mode?

So it seems that in PAL regions the dial has no 1/25 or 1/50, so you have to use the rear dial to change it. CRAP!

 

The control arrangement on this camera is CRAP, full stop.  Why on Earth did Panasonic follow Fuji with the "cute" retro X100 series?  The Fuji is effectively only a stills only camera.

I shoot video in manual mode and stills in aperture priority, and the not being able to seamlessly alternate between these modes is a show stopper.

Sony is often criticised for poor haptics/design but even the little RX100m3 has a dial that allows you to easily switch between video and photo modes.  The built in ND filter which can be readily activated is also a major bonus.

It looks like Panasonic is on a 4K roll, and they are starting to make the other company's camaras look dated, not only with 4K, but other features such as zebras, focus peaking, and cine gamma..

 

I'm seeing more and more 4K TVs are showing up in stores, and the prices are plummeting.  8K TVs are in development.  It's enough to give pause about shooting in 1080, because in 10 years it may look pretty awful.

 

Michael

I'm not so sure.  4K for cinema related content, particularly at high frame rates, may put people off.  I watched The Hobbit in 4K/48fps and did not enjoy it at all.  I preferred the 2k/24P version by a country mile.

I'm far more distracted by the constant camera jerking than rolling shutter.

This could have been near perfect except for two, maybe three, showstoppers.  

1. Lousy 28mbps bit rate for 1080P

2. No in-built ND filter (tiny cameras like the Ricoh GR and RX100m3 can accommodate one).

3. Panasonic need to stop living in the 70's and do away with this NTSC/PAL mentality. Why are they still doing one lot of bodies with NTSC frame rates and a different lot with PAL rates.  This is BS!

Good bye sony RX100Mk3 RX10

 

This is a monster camera especially the incoming LX8 with better lens ;)

Are you a Panasonic spruiker? The RX100m3 and FZ1000 are totally different cameras.

One fits in your pocket, the other is a monster (as you say) that's 6x larger and 4x heavier.  

 

@A2T2

GX7 and A6000 does not play in the same category, difficult to compare them...

What does this mean?

Inazuma, thanks for posting this A6000/GX7 comparison video.  I much prefer the image coming from the A6000.  In looking, for example, at the horizontal edges of the brickwork in the large building on the right, you can see very distinct aliasing/jaggies in the GX7 footage.  This is also evident on the weatherboards of the smaller/closer building.  This issue is not visible in the A6000 footage.  This aliasing in the GX7 footage is ugly and gives it a very abrasive look.  The A6000 has a little moire but, overall, the image just looks more organic.

Trafficarte, please refer to the tests I posted in this thread around early April. They are mostly just stills from the videos, but you can clearly see the quality differences. Maybe this weekend I will post all the videos on vimeo if I have time.

Edit: by "this" thread I actually meant the other a6000 thread (the one with many pages)

It would be far more meaningful / helpful to see actual video footage shot with both cameras.

I hope to see soon a real video comparison on same subjects, with similar camera configuration, low light rendition, skin tone rendition, fences' moire, something like this. I'm not an expert, I'm a musician and a wannabe documentary shooter. I've used a 550d and a Hx9v, sometimes a 7d.

Yes, same here.  I have not yet seen any comparison videos shot with both the GX7 and A6000 to see, first hand, how they perform in these conditions.

Nah, it really isn't.

 

With all due respect to Cameralabs they're not video guys and thus clearly do not know how to shoot video. The GX7 clip is a write-off car crash of a shot because it is interlaced. 1080i selected by mistake. Oops!

 

Also the focal length for the most part is completely different between the two shots and the depth of field looks like F11 or something, making it very hard to judge the effect of the different sensor sizes, indeed even the difference in overall image quality properly.

 

The GX7 is superior for video. Better codec, less moire, finer noise texture, better high ISO performance in video mode. I've been shooting with the pair of them for about a month now :) See the latest blog post.

 

http://www.eoshd.com/content/12822/best-small-camera-108060p-panasonic-gx7-a6000-review

 

You just can't compare the two Cameralabs shots, but feel free to pick a better example where both cameras are shooting the same shot and both handled optimally.

 

I'm not saying the A6000 cannot shoot nice stuff. It can.

 

I am saying the GX7 is better overall... more detail, better low light, better codec.

It would be helpful if you could post comparison videos shot with both the GX7 and A6000.

I've not seen anything to date which demonstrates that the GX7 is that much better than the A6000.

It would be great if you could include some actual footage in your review so we can all see first hand how these two cameras compare.

Philip Bloom liked it a lot..he didnt see mud..but on the other hand..  he didnt go out shoot bushes

 

http://philipbloom.net/2014/05/12/a6000/

Now here's a very interesting comment from Philip Bloom:

"Excellent 1080p image, detailed with few artefacts. Must be one of the best HD images from a stills camera I have seen, apart from the Super 35mm mode on the Canon 1DC"

He actually prefers the HD image from the A6000 over the GH4.