Dramatic portrait of the FZ2500 taken with Sigma fp at 1/6th of a second...
I have an embarrassment of riches when it comes to video capable cameras with which to shoot; or so it would seem. There are two Panasonic S1's in easy reach. Each has been upgraded with the magic firmware that yields in-camera 10 bit, 4:2:2 capture and V-Log. On the desk in front of me is the Sigma fp which is capable of shooting raw video as well as a long list of high data rate, .Mov files in every configuration you might want. There are Sigma Art lenses and Lumix S Pro lenses littering every flat surface in the studio as well. So why would I want to buy another copy of a camera I owned three years ago, made mainly of plastic, and readily available, used, for around $500?
There is actually a very straightforward answer. It lies in the fact that all the cameras I mentioned previous to the FZ2500 are made to work as cinema cameras. Tools that are engineered to give the very best image quality possible and yet they require a lot of "add-ons" to make them more functional for ENG work (ENG= electronic news gathering, or, stated another way = documentary work without a crew).
If I want to shoot on the fly interviews on the streets in downtown with, say, a Lumix S1 I'll need to add an assortment of neutral density filters to put on the front of the lens. And I may need several different lenses depending on the subject matter I'm going after. The larger sensor in that camera means I'll need to be extra careful to make sure I've nailed focus because the depth of field can be quite small. And, even though that camera has very good image stabilization it's not in the same class as the FZ2500 because the smaller sensor camera has....a smaller and more controllable sensor. Bring a tripod or a monopod. And then bring a permit....
The Sigma might be an even higher image quality machine but to use it I'll need to carefully manually focus, I'll need an outboard SSD drive to keep up with the data rate of the raw files and, since the camera has neither image stabilization nor neutral density filters built in, we'll have to bring a big tripod and more filters.
If I want to go out as bare-naked, equipment-wise, as possible I want something that works like a good, old fashioned camcorder. That means I want a package that can be handled in the street by one person. It needs to have a wide ranging zoom lens. It should shoot very, very high quality 1080p in an All-Intra codec, as well as offering full UHD and even Cinema 4K. I'll need peaking and zebras. I want clean microphone inputs, and I very much want the camera to have flexible, built-in neutral density filters. Add to all that good face detect AF and a long run time and you've put together a street ready video camera that can handle a very wide range of subjects. All for (used) around $500.
Want to use it with a clean output to send less compressed video to an external video recorder/monitor, like an Atomos? No problem. The camera will output up to 4K in 10 bit 4:2:2. Want to shoot an interview in front of a computer monitor or in a situation lit by flickering light sources. Yeah. It's got variable frame rates galore.
The real question, if you often want to shoot seat of the pants video, on the fly, is....why would you not want to pick up one at a bargain basement price?
Does this mean I'll abandon the above mentioned, full frame cameras? Heavens no! The files out of them look so great and the ability to use a wide range of fast, best in the market lenses gives me so much more image control. The audio adapter for the S1 cameras sounds great. The full frame image is a whole different aesthetic. The 85mm f1.4, wide open, is magic on the S1 and the Sigma fp. But they work both best on a tripod or slider or jib. They work best when you can take your time and set them optimally, manually and repeatably.
No, the FZ2500 is for all the other times. The handheld stuff. The "Quick! Can you capture that?" And for those situations when nothing will beat being able to reach in with a 450mm lens and get the shot.
I mean, since you were asking.
Kudos to M.J. today. I never thought anyone could use over a thousand words to say, "Eat your broccoli. it's good for you." And I never imagined that, if someone did write that much to say so little, that I would have read every word. I wouldn't enlist him as my nutritionist but Man, can that guy write!!!
15 comments:
Loved your comment about "MJ." TOP and VSL are at the top of my daily must-read list because they are the best-written photography blogs, hands down. I don't know much about pool or video production, but still read every word that Mike and you write.
It feels a bit like an oversized GH1 or GH2, with a mounted microphone in order to capture decent sound.
Quality is not really that much better, than using the most recent smartphones equipped with zooming microphone arrays and HDR10+ UHD in decent quality and most of not everything in focus most of the time. In a handy package to boot. Hard to beat, if you’re a ‘one man band’.
When bored, I may also try the feel of my old Canon EOS 40D with 18-200 mm monster lens and no sound and video, but still surprisingly lacking in the quality department ;-)
It has the benefit of curing my “Real camera GAS” within a few minutes, and after a pain killer or two - Scottish or farmaceutical - physical aches are cured too ;-)
That FZ2500 remains a bargain today new at $997. I’m still convinced Panasonic doesn’t push the sale of this item because it outcompetes their own camcorder line priced at $3,500 and above. Had I made a full-on commitment to video, I would have bought one — but then the price of the G9 fell to the same level. Temptation won.
Personally, I am not really buying into these bridge cameras. They arent pocketable and so they offer poor value in the size/performance/usefulness equation in my book.
Just get another G9, Kirk. Since the firmware update the G9 has become an epic video camera. It was always one of your favourites and as a "jack of all trades"casual shooter it ticks every box.
You will get another G9 eventually so may as well do it now.
I feel so antiquated. I still own two Canon camcorders, HF200 and M400, that only shoot HD not 4K. What's wrong with me.
Rufus, from experience I know that it's equally hard to pocket a G9 with a 12-100mm on the front of it... 😁
Robert, That's not being "antiquated" it is "embracing retro."
I've seen video reviews where the FZ2500 is called a "fixed-lens GH4" and while the files don't look quite as good as the ones from a GH4 with a really nice lens, the internals are about the same with the FZ2500 adding internal NDs and enough zoom to film after play reaction shots at my nephew's football games.
I got one recently for $550 in fantastic shape and while it won't get daily use, it's the ultimate "keep in the car/second camera bag" camera that - like you said Kirk - will allow me to get just about any shot I want in more than decent 4K.
Still hope at some point they release an updated version that would be a "fixed-lens GH5". I'd gladly pay a premium for one.
I fully agree that Mike Johnston is a fine writer. But I don't care much for any of the vegetables he talks about, so I scanned the column lightly and moved on. Fortunately, I am at a point in life where I cannot die young if I fail to follow his recommendations.
Dave, love your sense of humor!!!
kirk-glad everyone remains well on your side of the fence. we are still sheltering-in-place nearly 4hrs+ from my home. i have been shooting footage of our current locale and the surroundings. i have filmed with a Canon SL2 and a Nikon D750. neither camera is really an adequate video tool, especially for handheld interviews. but i do remember that i thought the video images from my FZ2500 were a tad softer than the footage that was coming out of the G7 and G85 i was using two years ago. i'm a wee bit surprised that you feel the FZ2500's is good enough, especially when i didn't. (not that my opinion is correct but rather i imagined you were more exacting than me!) again, thanks for posting and allowing all of us a place to check in. stay well. thumbs up.-rob
It was a great relief to attain the age of 70, because I knew that from that point on, whatever might happen, I could no longer die young.
Rob. I'm far from being perfectionist but do you remember the interview I did with an actress named, Chanel? It was for a Zach Production of the Billie Holiday play. I shot that with the FZ2500 and it seemed sharp enough to me. Also, when looking at stills I shot the dress rehearsal of "in the Heights" with that camera and it was surprisingly sharp and noise free.
I think there might have been a lot of camera to camera variation early on with the FZ2500, particularly when it came to the lens, but if you got a good one you would be happy with it. If you got a stinker you were obviously much less happy.
Also, I wrote a piece about getting sharp results from that camera/lens combination since I had issues with the first one I owned. You might look for that post in the search. But the upshot is that all was rendered in focus once I turned OFF the touch focus on the rear panel.... All best, KT
Here's the Chanel link: https://vimeo.com/213380186
As a stills camera I find that DXO makes the FZ1000 punch above its weight.
I’ve been helping a local church with their streaming and it has me rethinking my cameras. The RX10.2 has been my go to and I love the formula. The Fz2500 seems like a logical upgrade as a general utility camera. You are right. For the right situation these pull well above their weight and likely sufficient for 90% of the work. Funny that Sony lost their way after the stellar RX10.2 and Panasonic seems to think we all need to buy interchangeable lens cameras now. I’d love to see Bob Krist loose with one of these!
Post a Comment