Eric Cote

Well, I don't mind the price. I captured a theater performance yesterday and the LX100 was my master shot. First gig with it. I was pretty blown away by it and preferred it to the Canon 5dIII, especially considering the ease of the workflow (realising ML Raw is not even an option here) and how easy it was to rig up (15mm tube clamp under the camera to mount it to rods and you have access to battery chamber).
 
You do have the disadvantage of not having hdmi out and freedom of lenses, no headphone, no microphone in, etc. But I think it's a perfect companion to a GH4. What is there not to like? It pays itself back in a couple of jobs. And being able to shoot in a square format larger than hd is pretty wild for fx shots...
 
The 15 min recording limit is a bit silly of course, but what a great low profile camera this is.

zzzzzzzzzzzz......
 
By the way, anyone happen to know if there is a blacklist function on this site?

Why contrast zero but then shadow/highlight +2/-5?
Wouldn't you rather go for contrast -5 and shadow/highlight 0/0?
I don't use the cinestyles that much on the GH4/FZ1000 anyways (unless demanded), I do like the toned down natural profile.

I'm aware of that, but here the image is not becoming too flat (I'm using Contrast:0) and I like the results. I would only advice not to push it too far, but mainly because of noise (the color shift is still small at S/H:+5/-5).
 
It is the same 8bit codec as in GH4. People are using really flat profiles with GH4 - tuning not only highlights/shadows but also Master Pedestal and CineLikeD with low Contrast so don't say we are going too flat with these settings here - go and criticize GH4 users ;).
 
 
Wrong topic. Deleting.. :lol:

Indeed a lot of people are using Natural profile. Thanks for the hint, I'll try it too.
 
I did some more tests with Highlight/Shadow inverted S curve.
 
Deep shadows are improved, but it introduces also more noise in midtones. So you should be careful with Shadows part and push it to +5 only when you have something important in deep shadow. Highlights part is less destructive and safer to use.
 
To bring back proper colors you will need to lower saturation (in camera or in post), especially noticable when restoring the contrast in post. The stronger the curve, the lower saturation is needed to maintain colors in final image (otherwise they quickly become oversaturated and bright like neon).
 
I do often need to brighten the shadows a little, so I'll probably use something like Shadow/Highlight: +2/-5... (and lower saturation accordingly to have less work in post)
 
So for now it's something like:
Picture profile: Natural
Contrast: 0
Sharpness: -5
Noise reduction: -5
Saturation: -3 (or 0)
Shadow/Highlight: +2/-5 (or 0/0)

You mentioned DSLR, so I am guessing you have a decent understanding of the process to take pictures. You can shoot either a jpg image or a RAW image. With video though, you can only shoot what amounts to a jpg image in video mode. The jpg system in the camera "bakes in" the settings that you set the camera to work with, and in the process it clobbers the file making it much harder to "processes later in your computer. Video people have their own language and they don't call it processing the video, they call it "grading" the video. You know, like teenagers have their own language, video people have their own language :)
 
So in an effort to do the very least clobbering of the file, and leaving as much of the information still to remain in the video, an effort is made to to do as little damage to the file as possible. To do this, the video is shot as "flat" as possible. This means little contrast, little color saturation, little sharpness - basically the most untouched the file can get. This leaves as much of the original data as possible to still be there to addressed and called upon when you get the video into the computer.
 
Companies recognize this process and they try to help. Just like you would have color calibrations called vivid, portrait, landscape, natural, standard and so on, they add special color choices for video. Sony has s-log, Panasonic is adding v-log, and so on. It is as dumbed down as the file can get and still get recovered in the computer.
 
The joke, or facts are, it still doesn't get as good as a raw file you would be using for pictures, and you are still using a partially baked compressed file that is just "less clobbered". In my pro work, I shoot raw for stills. For video i shoot as flat as I can get the video, but it still ain't no raw file. On the other hand, raw files for video are not easy to work with like raw files for still images. And there are not that many cameras that even offer it, plus the knowledge it takes to process the video - or "grade" the video is harder to do.
 
Vlog is Panasonic's attempt to hardwire a very flat file for us to work with. They had CineD before this and I personally didn't like it. I found "natural" on the GH4 with everything turned to the flattest setting and for me is better to work with. In low light I like "vivid" with everything turned flat and seem to get lower noise. I am eager to see if this vlog will give a nice flat file to work with. For you, you need to remember your video shot in vlog will look terribly flat and bland. You will have to work it once in the computer, it isn't  a set-it-and-forget-it type of setting.
 
Hope that helps some.
 
Peter

Did you try in Natural instead of Standard? I find that Natural has lower contrast to start with so my guess was that it would be better for color grading. Especially since I read that many people shoot in Natural picture profile on the GH4 instead of the Cine-D. I shot with both cameras in neutral with C-3, S-5, NR-2 and got the same footage look that was easy to mix together. I did not do any tests though. Since the NR is awful in the LX100, I guess setting it to -5 is the right decision.

I fully agree on the HDMI! Glaring omission for drone users and will hurt sales. Sure I can forward the feedback to Matt. They are on our side. It's just sometimes a decision is made in Japan for engineering, technical or marketing reasons that doesn't quite chime with the demands of filmmakers.

Here are some tests shots I did to see how stable I can be with the help of the internal stabilization in the LX100.

I have checked many reviews, samples and specification before I bought this camera. If you would do the same, you would know about the lack of HDMI monitoring. Be angry on yourself.

It's always like that. When famous photographer says that camera X is excellent for portraits, I would still check if it has all features I need, like controls or focal length I'm using most often...

Hmmm, bit of a false equivalency retort mentioning the bmpcc, but it's the internet; no surprise. Par for the course. Your other argument is good. Tools are tools. Use what helps.

At any rate, I use Panasonic cameras all the time. Adjusting the exposure manually is fast and easy assuming you know what you're doing. As you say, to do it otherwise is lazy. So, my assertion remains: the long established manual way works for a reason.

Look, feel free to buy/use whatever camera you prefer for whatever rationalizations. I don't care much; only enough to note that many expectations of modern cameras seem kind of silly --especially when it's a complaint about a feature that I believe motion picture shooters should probably avoid anyway.

One man's opinion. Good luck.

Here are some tests shots I did to see how stable I can be with the help of the internal stabilization in the LX100.

Well, by having an aperture ring on the lens and always having live view with Zebra and a histogram, it can't be really faster to adjust the exposure on the spot.

Oh I don't know. Perhaps you do. It's worked for over a hundred years so far...for a reason.

My first week with the LX100: http://www.mirrorlessjourney.com/blog/2014/11/my-first-week-with-the-panasonic-dmc-lx100-1
:D

I have to agree, touch autofocus is one of the things you get used to almost instantaneously. I think this feature should become mandatory for a consumer photographic product, just like the autofocus did. It is not to be considered a premium feature - hey, you get that in a 100$ smartphone, that's what my consumer mind is telling me.

My first week with the LX100: http://www.mirrorlessjourney.com/blog/2014/11/my-first-week-with-the-panasonic-dmc-lx100-1
:D

My first week with the LX100: http://www.mirrorlessjourney.com/blog/2014/11/my-first-week-with-the-panasonic-dmc-lx100-1
:D

Sony Active Pixel Color Sampling is coming and it is completely different to anything else. It solves the low light performance issues with global shutter sensors, makes ultra high frame rates possible and scraps the traditional bayer RGB filter altogether.

Read the full article here

I read somewhere that you can't charge the LX100 by USB.

Not quite. There's a sealable hole in the battery door, which you can run a wire through. The compartment door itself would be difficult to get rid of without breaking it/being able to put it back together again, I'd say.

I'm pretty sure there is a way because you can use a DC Coupler (http://shop.panasonic.com/shop/model/DMW-DCC11) and an AC Adapter (http://shop.panasonic.com/shop/model/DMW-AC10) with the LX100. Those parts are listed in the accessories in the manual. 

Thanks to Tosvus and Someguy for posting my videos here. I got the LX100 last Wednesday and I'm in the honeymoon phase. I did the Coffee video as a first test and I like the results. For the Baby Workshop video, I mixed the GH4 and LX100 video and honestly, I think the quality is very close if not the same. I shot both cameras with the Natural Color profile (which I keep reading gives better results than Cine-D) with Contrast -3, Sharpness -5 and NR -2. The only thing I did in post was adding a bit of sharpness and I crushed the black a little.
 
someone asked about the stabilization in video: It does a good job. the problem is the camera is so light and small, it's tough to get a good handle on it. What I did was used my camera strap as a stabilizer and for shots without movement, the result is perfect. Trying to walk around like that though is tough. I did not have time to try to balance my Steadycam with the LX100. I think I might actually have to put some weight above because I fear the LX100 will be too light.

So far, I love the camera. It is not perfect but it has a character of its own. If you want to see some pictures I took with it, I'll be happy to share. If you have any questions, I'll try to answer them.

I just don't get this mentality. Get something. Use it. Make things.

The alternative is just... shopping. How's is that any fun?

That's a serious question. I truly don't understand. If anyone wants to try to explain it to me, I'd appreciate it.

Okay. So thank you for contributing to this topic, bye for now and good luck in the other threads.