Jump to content
Andrew Reid

Shooting with a 4K pocket camera - the exceptional Panasonic LX100

Recommended Posts

For my opinion LX100 is overrated and overestimated. Nothing special come from a real users sample on the network like flikr and other site. The lens is soft at corner very soft and plenty of chromatic aberrations especially in buildings border on particular light conditions.

The video is truly affected by annoying moire thing that there is no in GH4 or FZ1000 video samples. The readout of LX100 in 4K s no 1:1 for preserve the widest angle possible...

This added to a problem discussed in previous posts suggests that LX100 is overrated product. Nothing more than compact premium toy not absolutely professional. This is my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
EOSHD Pro Color for Sony cameras EOSHD Pro LOG for Sony CamerasEOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs

For my opinion LX100 is overrated and overestimated. Nothing special come from a real users sample on the network like flikr and other site. The lens is soft at corner very soft and plenty of chromatic aberrations especially in buildings border on particular light conditions.

The video is truly affected by annoying moire thing that there is no in GH4 or FZ1000 video samples. The readout of LX100 in 4K s no 1:1 for preserve the widest angle possible...

This added to a problem discussed in previous posts suggests that LX100 is overrated product. Nothing more than compact premium toy not absolutely professional. This is my opinion.

how is LX100 compared to FZ1000 in general beside size and range differences?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

haha never ending. Maybe you should actually buy one rather than rehashing your sour grapes that seem to be VERY loosely based on reality, and incredibly badly formed expectations. Your complaints are never ending, that's for sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

how is LX100 compared to FZ1000 in general beside size and range differences?

Oh, it's great. The FZ1000 is awesome. It just doesn't fit in your coat pocket and takes up a bit of space in a bag too.

You do get the flexible zoomrange, the cinestyles, PSAM-dial, dedicated movie mode and the flippy tilty screen for example, which makes it more like handling a GH4 with 14-140mm. Albeit without the four thirds sensor of course and the GH4 features a touchscreen which is really convenient, not to mention adds a headphone jack to the audio interface for monitoring. The LX100 is great for on-the-go and B-roll, does have the big sensor and brighter lens to go with that compact form factor. The FZ1000 is more of a allround vacations camera (although not solely), if you do want quality and flexibility but not changing out lenses and setting up a tripod. Especially if you're out a lot during daytime anyways, for stills the increased megapixel count really gives you something you can work with, works great for high detail panoramashots for example. It's the perfect superzoom/bridgecamera, but it is a bit harder to get shallow depth of field (wide angle non-macro) and perhaps footage tends to look a tad bit more videoey. In the end both the LX100, FZ1000 and GH4 are very different cameras with each their own use (so, if you can, get all of them, use 'em individually and use 'em together). One is only better than the other depending on how you want to use it... stills vs video, compact vs feature set, futureproofing, et cetera, there isn't any clear answer, so wage the pros and cons of each and decide what suits your needs best.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, it's great. The FZ1000 is awesome. It just doesn't fit in your coat pocket and takes up a bit of space in a bag too.

You do get the flexible zoomrange, the cinestyles, PSAM-dial, dedicated movie mode and the flippy tilty screen for example, which makes it more like handling a GH4 with 14-140mm. Albeit without the four thirds sensor of course and the GH4 features a touchscreen which is really convenient, not to mention adds a headphone jack to the audio interface for monitoring. The LX100 is great for on-the-go and B-roll, does have the big sensor and brighter lens to go with that compact form factor. The FZ1000 is more of a allround vacations camera (although not solely), if you do want quality and flexibility but not changing out lenses and setting up a tripod. Especially if you're out a lot during daytime anyways, for stills the increased megapixel count really gives you something you can work with, works great for high detail panoramashots for example. It's the perfect superzoom/bridgecamera, but it is a bit harder to get shallow depth of field (wide angle non-macro) and perhaps footage tends to look a tad bit more videoey. In the end both the LX100, FZ1000 and GH4 are very different cameras with each their own use (so, if you can, get all of them, use 'em individually and use 'em together). One is only better than the other depending on how you want to use it... stills vs video, compact vs feature set, futureproofing, et cetera, there isn't any clear answer, so wage the pros and cons of each and decide what suits your needs best.

Exaclty The LX100 is a compact toy to replace smatrphone if you want a video or photo better than smartphones, or if you want a (limited) B roll cam.

Other device FZ1000 and specially GH4 put in your hand a complete device pro device with the characteristic if you underline.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For my opinion LX100 is overrated and overestimated.

 

It is funny how different needs do people have. LX100 is currently the best camera on the market for my needs (ordering this weekend). It will be my only camera (for both video and photo) for next few years.

 

You should say: "For my needs LX100 is overrated and overestimated.". When you say "The camera is bad.. It is my opinion." it sounds like you think that it's bad for everyone (or almost everyone). If you think like that - you are wrong. If not - you should correct your statement to cool emotions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

 

 

A lot of parrots in this thread, repeating things it seems. The moire comes from your non-4K display scaling the footage. It isn't from the camera.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

 

I don't see any issues with moire that looks worse than my GH3. Corners don't seem particularly soft. Distance photos could be you use an aperture with deep enough DoF, or focusing is a bit off. Of course, don't expect this or any m43 camera to compare to a 36MP camera from Nikon or Sony.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exaclty The LX100 is a compact toy to replace smatrphone if you want a video or photo better than smartphones, or if you want a (limited) B roll cam.

Other device FZ1000 and specially GH4 put in your hand a complete device pro device with the characteristic if you underline.

 

It is certainly not a toy for photos, I prefer it over GH3 for instance. For video, it is not a replacement for the GH4, and nobody ever said that. It takes almost equally fantastic 4k video, but lacks the features (that you must have repeated about a dozen times at this point).  You seem to have a problem grasping what the term "Compact camera" means. This is overall, everything considered, perhaps the best compact camera ever created. (At least if you are a hybrid shooter).  If you want to lug around a GH4, or even a FZ1000, that is a whole different segment. The FZ1000 cannot compete on stills, especially lowlight either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Andrew, I have really been considering this camera for use on my aerial platform and handheld gimbal Butr from what I gather it doesn't output and HDMI signal while it is recording? Is that true and if so how come it hasn't been such a big deal? I really need to be able to monitor the camera on a remote screen while shooting either fpv on a aerial gimbal or handheld on a larger lcd screen,. I have read all your reviews and an less I missed it you didn't mention that part.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of parrots in this thread, repeating things it seems. The moire comes from your non-4K display scaling the footage. It isn't from the camera.
 

Of course, it's my monitor, what an idiot i am.

By the way, download this clip for vimeo : https://vimeo.com/111291938
Look at the trees, they are oversharpened. And when you downsample to 1080p, it just give a "bad" video quality for a downsampled image.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you look at the DPreview studio test at corners it's as sharp or sharper than FZ1000, CANON GX7 or SONY RX100 III

 

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=panasonic_dmclx100&attr13_1=panasonic_dmcfz1000&attr13_2=canon_g7x&attr13_3=panasonic_dmcgh4&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=200&attr16_1=200&attr16_2=200&attr16_3=200&normalization=full&widget=156&x=-1.002604166666667&y=-1.1231603408210689

 

 

By the way, how much the 4K videos recorded handles croping in postprod?

If you crop the 4K video to a 1080p size for exemple? do you get a sharp enough 1080p image?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you look at the DPreview studio test at corners it's as sharp or sharper than FZ1000, CANON GX7 or SONY RX100 III

 

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=panasonic_dmclx100&attr13_1=panasonic_dmcfz1000&attr13_2=canon_g7x&attr13_3=panasonic_dmcgh4&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=200&attr16_1=200&attr16_2=200&attr16_3=200&normalization=full&widget=156&x=-1.002604166666667&y=-1.1231603408210689

 

 

By the way, how much the 4K videos recorded handles croping in postprod?

If you crop the 4K video to a 1080p size for exemple? do you get a sharp enough 1080p image?

 

It's really sharp, but with natural 0-0-0-0 the image has some fine grain even at base iso.

Check it out: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7Sh3eieBnyTZVhaakN1elZLRjA/view?usp=sharing

 

Im suprised about this 100Mbps codec, it can really hold the fine detail, even grain.

 

Here is another one:

 

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7Sh3eieBnyTUEFoYTFLd0Y1MWc/view?usp=sharing

 

Source from various reviews, cameralabs for example.

Cropped in Final Cut Pro X, encoded to Prores LT.

 

If it's natural -5-5-5-5, and base iso, the grain is negligible at 100% crop.

 

In my tests 80% crop + h264 can wash out the grain and most of the noise.

Oh and it's far sharper even at 110% than my RX100

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you look at the DPreview studio test at corners it's as sharp or sharper than FZ1000, CANON GX7 or SONY RX100 III

 

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=panasonic_dmclx100&attr13_1=panasonic_dmcfz1000&attr13_2=canon_g7x&attr13_3=panasonic_dmcgh4&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=200&attr16_1=200&attr16_2=200&attr16_3=200&normalization=full&widget=156&x=-1.002604166666667&y=-1.1231603408210689

 

 

By the way, how much the 4K videos recorded handles croping in postprod?

If you crop the 4K video to a 1080p size for exemple? do you get a sharp enough 1080p image?

 

Here is an example of (probably flat -5-5-5-5) 4K to 2K crop:

 

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7Sh3eieBnyTVlJsbWliSFY0MTQ/view?usp=sharing

 

The Original: 

 

It's has beautiful film look, probably flat, but graded. Unfortunately i don't have exact informations about this video.

I just cropped the 1920x1080 area from the center in FCPX

Keep in mind the source was already compressed h264, and i recompressed it.

 

Anyone experienced that Premier has much sharper output file than FCPX ProRes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course, it's my monitor, what an idiot i am.

By the way, download this clip for vimeo : https://vimeo.com/111291938
Look at the trees, they are oversharpened. And when you downsample to 1080p, it just give a "bad" video quality for a downsampled image.

 

Seriously, there is no info about this video what-so-ever.

 

Is "Download original" the actual out of camera footage, or is it a edited version that was uploaded to Vimeo?

What settings were used? Andrew suggests some settings, and certainly you want to dial back a lot of the settings as much as possible to have more leverage in post.

Aperture, Shutter Speed, Iso?

Shot seems to move around a bit. A moire test would have been better done on a tripod.

The title mentions softness on the left side. I have not yet had time to look at the footage (but will), but if that is the case, it may be a faulty camera to begin with as well.

 

I have not yet done in-depth testing on my LX100, but certainly in pictures corner sharpness is quite good considering this is a fast small zoom lens. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes it's the original footage, just check with ExifTool.
If you want the settings :

Contrast -1, saturation -2, sharpness 0, noise reduction 0.
Iso 200, f2.8, 1/5000.

To be clear, i never said the camera was bad, and if if we are parrots when we are giving our opinion, very well then.
So yes the corner sharpness is not bad considering the small lens, but i've compared it to the gh4 with the 12-35.

The real "problem" for me is the oversharpened video and the lack of IQ on landscape or far subject.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes it's the original footage, just check with ExifTool.
If you want the settings :

Contrast -1, saturation -2, sharpness 0, noise reduction 0.
Iso 200, f2.8, 1/5000.

To be clear, i never said the camera was bad, and if if we are parrots when we are giving our opinion, very well then.
So yes the corner sharpness is not bad considering the small lens, but i've compared it to the gh4.

The real "problem" for me is the oversharpened video and the lack of IQ on landscape or far subject.

 

No wonder the footage is so jarring. Those values are insane. They might make some sense if you are using 4K photomode and only want to extract a single frame, but for video footage, that is fairly useless to look at. In this case, it would have made much more sense to run at 1/60 (since it is 30 fps), and the aperture should be a higher value to ensure all the footage is in focus. (Again, if it is all indeed on a narrow plane across the frame, and the intent was to look at a single frame for sharpness problems on the side, that makes sense, but looking at this for video quality makes no sense at all). If it is too bright still at say aperture 5.6 or 8 w 1/60 shutter speed, put on some ND filter. It looks like a bright day.

 

It is also clearly oversharpened, so he should experiment with less sharpness for sure.

 

It is fine to give opinion if it is based on a good foundation, I think. However, this clip, once I look at it in Premiere, shows:

-Oversharpened due to settings

-Corners seem a bit soft, but it could be the aperture chose makes this to be out of focus. In any case, while I have found this camera has good corner sharpness, it is not incredible. It can't compete with my gh3 and Nocticron there..

-I don't see any significant issue with moire. The little I see is likely from the fact that he shot very fast shutterspeed, and did handheld, so the jittering between each frame makes is stand out.

-Generally unpleasing picture, but again, due to settings. 

 

Conclusion: Don't base anything on this footage. Have you tried it yourself?? Have you seen all the great footage out there?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...