Jump to content

ita149

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    65

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by ita149

  1. ita149
    I had the opportunity to use it again today, and while i still find that on a close subject, the picture quality is great, on a distant subject or for landscape, it's less convincing. Soft corners, more moire than my gh4, and mostly, the sharpness is too high (if I reduce it, the picture is a bit soft but a lot of moire disappears), it seems the camera sharpening is overused.
  2. ita149
    and yet the 12-35 is more expensive than the LX100 ...
  3. ita149
    Yes it do 24p but not 30 in my country, it's 25p "max", sorry i misspoke :).
  4. ita149
    While it's true the LX is less practical than the Gh4, several things surprised me. First, the stabilizer ! Better on the LX than the 12-35, a real pleasure (but apparently less good when recording while moving) ! Then, for video image quality, the LX is not very sharp at f1.7, stopped down to f2.8 with 400 ISO give better result but with a bit more noise. In fact the LX at f2.8 is sharper than the 12-35 at same aperture, quite a feat ! Otherwise, there are equal, maybe a bit sharper on the LX ! However, the frame rate is limited to 25fps on the LX in my country :( and CINEV is missing (CineD too but i dislike it). I hesitate to sell my 12-35 now !
  5. ita149
    The 12-35 stabilization is not bad if you don't record with your hands stretched upwards, but the LX100 is better, especially at 35mm. I've read on several sites that the LX is less steady while moving or paning, this explain why some people prefer the lx100 stab and others the 12-35 stab. Unfortunately i haven't done the comparison while moving, but it seems obvious. But the most surprising is the lens, better than the 12-35 on a gh4, it's a gem.
  6. ita149
    I come back with news, i've bought the 12-35 and i've compared it to the LX of a friend. While it's true the LX is less practical than the Gh4, several things surprised me. First, the stabilizer ! Better on the LX, a real pleasure ! Then, for image quality, the LX is not very sharp at f1.7, stopped down to f2.8 with 400 ISO give better result but with a bit more noise. In fact the LX at f2.8 is sharper than the 12-35 at same aperture, quite a feat ! Otherwise, there are equal, maybe a bit sharper on the LX ! However, the frame rate is limited to 25fps on the LX :( and CINEV is missing (CineD too but i dislike it). I hesitate to sell my 12-35 now ! The choice is really hard since the Lx has better image quality and stabilization; but the 12-35 could still be used on a future camera, not the compact...
  7. ita149
    Thanks you all - this is helpful !
  8. ita149
    I've already the gh4 and I must buy either one very soon (12-35 or the lx100) but i want the sharpest. Does someone has the gh4 with 12-35 and the lx100 to make a 4k video comparison or advise about it ?
  9. ita149
    1080@30p all-i 200mbps get around 42mbps for me too. Strange ...
  10. ita149
    Hi, My gh4 makes a strange short sound when im doing Af with an aperture of F9 or higher. Same "problem" on all my lens but no problem at f8 or lower. When im doing af during video, no problem either. Anybody else experiencing that ?
  11. ita149
    Thanks for your reply, so 25fps is the way to go ^_^ .
  12. ita149
    It was for capturing still from video so in my case it's important. But if it's like you said, difference is negligible, i will go for 29,97fps, thanks for your answer.
  13. ita149
    Hi, I have a question about GH4. it can record 4k@25-29fps with an average of 70-90mbs according to my test, does it mean that 25fps mode has better quality than 29,97 ? Less frames so better quality per frame as it's the same data rate per second for the two settings ?
×
×
  • Create New...