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

[Cinegain]

I didn't get a response on this, hoping someone knows...

 

Hmm...either I misunderstood something, or I managed to switch some setting that disabled it, but in manual (set shutter and aperture), auto iso only works for pictures. once I press record, it defaults to iso 200. Anyone have an idea? I thought it could still do auto iso measured at the start of the video (and then set for the duration)?

Yeah, you appear to be right, I can't seem to replicate that.

Perhaps this wasn't the case to begin with and ISO200 coincidentally just happened to be sufficient when briefly testing that, making it seem the camera locked the ISO to match the lit scene and not dynamically adjusting the ISO to keep a balanced exposure when starting to pan away to something lit differently (the test was to see if the ISO (auto) changed throughout; it didn't, auto-locking an initial ISO was an unfortunate assumption, not tested for (apparently)).

 

Although again I still prefer not to use any automated settings. I don't want to touch the shutter (flickering/motion blur), I know the aperture is not clickless (exposure jumps, losing set depth of field) and you can not add more light to f/1.7 (maximum aperture), in lowlight you don't want to cut more light with a ND-filter (it's like that one guy you know that wears sunglasses indoors) and if you're out and about doing some street stuff, you can't just add light to a scene (or do you just happen to always carry around a huge lighting kit?)... so I get the only variable left to touch and add light is the ISO. But then again, I also like to control noise and think it's rather noticeable if you change ISO mid shoot, but okay, you can make a creative cut to make it less obvious... but then again. You can also do it manually. Just 'feel' what the scene needs and just adjust any of the settings you'd rather not change. Sometimes I do not mind under- and/or overexposing during a clip when I know I'll be back to the initial settings a moment later (I find this rather natural anyways, on a sunny day with blinds closed at home, you won't magically adapt from in- to outdoors in a second, it takes a bit). It's different of course if the change lasts and you're still under- of overexposing. But again, then I just press a button, twist a dial and Bob's your uncle. Not really a that big of deal. Especially if you considered it for intial ISO and knew it wouldn't change automatically thereafter anyways. Would you really mind setting it? Do you think the auto-mode would be that much faster/accurate? Maybe due to funky metering it might jump up to a higher ISO than you think the scene needs (or a too low ISO). I don't know. I guess that more options and features is always a good thing and that (extreme) situations (where you need to start rolling quickly and adaptively, or an oppertunity could be left unused), might require certain wishes to be fulfilled, I personally can't really say I'm bothered by the amount of manual control.

[tosvus]

Yeah, you appear to be right, I can't seem to replicate that.

Perhaps this wasn't the case to begin with and ISO200 coincidentally just happened to be sufficient when briefly testing that, making it seem the camera locked the ISO to match the lit scene and not dynamically adjusting the ISO to keep a balanced exposure when starting to pan away to something lit differently (the test was to see if the ISO (auto) changed throughout; it didn't, auto-locking an initial ISO was an unfortunate assumption, not tested for (apparently)).

 

Although again I still prefer not to use any automated settings. I don't want to touch the shutter (flickering/motion blur), I know the aperture is not clickless (exposure jumps, losing set depth of field) and you can not add more light to f/1.7 (maximum aperture), in lowlight you don't want to cut more light with a ND-filter (it's like that one guy you know that wears sunglasses indoors) and if you're out and about doing some street stuff, you can't just add light to a scene (or do you just happen to always carry around a huge lighting kit?)... so I get the only variable left to touch and add light is the ISO. But then again, I also like to control noise and think it's rather noticeable if you change ISO mid shoot, but okay, you can make a creative cut to make it less obvious... but then again. You can also do it manually. Just 'feel' what the scene needs and just adjust any of the settings you'd rather not change. Sometimes I do not mind under- and/or overexposing during a clip when I know I'll be back to the initial settings a moment later (I find this rather natural anyways, on a sunny day with blinds closed at home, you won't magically adapt from in- to outdoors in a second, it takes a bit). It's different of course if the change lasts and you're still under- of overexposing. But again, then I just press a button, twist a dial and Bob's your uncle. Not really a that big of deal. Especially if you considered it for intial ISO and knew it wouldn't change automatically thereafter anyways. Would you really mind setting it? Do you think the auto-mode would be that much faster/accurate? Maybe due to funky metering it might jump up to a higher ISO than you think the scene needs (or a too low ISO). I don't know. I guess that more options and features is always a good thing and that (extreme) situations (where you need to start rolling quickly and adaptively, or an oppertunity could be left unused), might require certain wishes to be fulfilled, I personally can't really say I'm bothered by the amount of manual control.

 

Thanks for the input Cinegain! :) 

 

It would be a neat feature to have, but no big deal. Fact of the matter is if you want to see the metering the camera does, it does indeed show the iso on the screen before you press the record button, so you can manually switch the iso to whatever that value is.  I would rarely have huge jumps in exposure, so tuning ISO works for me mostly (indoor that is). 

[Igor Campana]

Nope it's not as good as that.

 

Andrew you mentioned in your article that the LX100 is the best 4K small camera for aerial imaging. As I have mentioned in my post it is not as long as Panasonic does lock the AV & HDMI Out. So there is 2 things you could do:

 

1. change your article & mention that the LX100 does not work for aerial

2. or ask Panasonic and make pressure on them to change this in a fw update. We all know that the LX100 could do a HDMI out since it is the same engine like GH4... Im fine if the output is only 720p and with overlays, but we need a signal on the ground or the LX100 WILL NEVER be used for Aerial images on drones...

 

Thanks for your udnerstandign, I really would appreciate your help in this...

Thanks

Igor

[tosvus]

Andrew you mentioned in your article that the LX100 is the best 4K small camera for aerial imaging. As I have mentioned in my post it is not as long as Panasonic does lock the AV & HDMI Out. So there is 2 things you could do:

 

1. change your article & mention that the LX100 does not work for aerial

2. or ask Panasonic and make pressure on them to change this in a fw update. We all know that the LX100 could do a HDMI out since it is the same engine like GH4... Im fine if the output is only 720p and with overlays, but we need a signal on the ground or the LX100 WILL NEVER be used for Aerial images on drones...

 

Thanks for your udnerstandign, I really would appreciate your help in this...

Thanks

Igor

 

I think this is a bit of a circular discussion, but I don't agree with your #1 (though I wish your #2 happens). I think Andrew's main point is that it is the lightest camera with the highest picture quality (great 4K plus really good lens), so it is capable of taking the best 4K video from a drone at the moment. For navigation, you can easily purchase a 1080p camera for 50-100 bucks that is extremely lightweight and can be attached to the gimbal where your camera is. I don't think you can speak for ALL drone owners :)

 

It is most definitely valuable to highlight the lack of HDMI/video out in the full review though.

[Eric Cote]

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

[fuzzynormal]

C'mon fuzzynormal, you didn't answer my point about speed. By your logic I should use a bmpcc as my A cam at fast moving events, since having to carefully set up each shot and change batteries every five minutes doesn't matter.. I'm quite sure that in the hundred years people used only manual exposure there were plenty of great shots ruined or missed. People also got along for decades without sound, or color, or stabilization and made superb films, but that doesn't mean those aren't useful things to have. Just as ae lock is indeed useful.
Oh well, it's still a great camera, and, yes, having to use manual exposure more often will be good training. I agree that a downside of all the helpful "the camera does it for you" functions is that it can make you lazier..

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.

[Xavier Plagaro Mussard]

I fully agree with Igor. An AV output or a 720p HDMI with graphics on are needed to make aerial shoots. Andrew, make some calls please!!!  :rolleyes:  :rolleyes:  :rolleyes:

[Igor Campana]

I think this is a bit of a circular discussion, but I don't agree with your #1 (though I wish your #2 happens). I think Andrew's main point is that it is the lightest camera with the highest picture quality (great 4K plus really good lens), so it is capable of taking the best 4K video from a drone at the moment. For navigation, you can easily purchase a 1080p camera for 50-100 bucks that is extremely lightweight and can be attached to the gimbal where your camera is. I don't think you can speak for ALL drone owners :)

 

It is most definitely valuable to highlight the lack of HDMI/video out in the full review though.

 

sorry but it does not make sense to have a 4k camera on the drone where you don't see any image that it will take... and where is the sense to put a FHD small fpv camera on it? The LX100 is at moment the best compact 4k kamera on the market, I have it, but it will NEVER EVER be used on drones as long as it has no video out signal while recording... or how do you think you'll be able to see what your gimbal does in 100m distance? and for sure I can speak for all drone flyers that want to have 4K on a drone and can't carry a gh4 due to law regulations (drone under 5 kg in total). So if Panasonic here is doing the same policy as Canon, this will be my last Panasonic that I purchase... it seems that also the German Panasonic PM want this feature, but the Headquarte will NOT integrate it... why, they don't tell you

 

so to recap this: LX100 is great, but its not suitable on drones... so this part needs to be canceled. I purchased the camera just becouse I saw Andrews good review, and now Im really angry that I can't use this camera for aerial 4k footage...

[Igor Campana]

I fully agree with Igor. An AV output or a 720p HDMI with graphics on are needed to make aerial shoots. Andrew, make some calls please!!!  :rolleyes:  :rolleyes:  :rolleyes:

 

I really don't understand why Andrew doesn't reply at all. He seems to be a Panasonic angel, but when it needs to get any serious feedback, he never reply (also not on emails regarding the purchase of his user guides...)

 

Comon Andrew, you are the best chance to help us in being more happy with the LX100. Please help us. I pay for your phone call + your time lost....

[Cinegain]

Isn't Panasonic representative Matt Frazer to be found somewhere on the social mediaz to address this? I suppose that's the guy to forward this to...

[Jacek]

 
so to recap this: LX100 is great, but its not suitable on drones... so this part needs to be canceled. I purchased the camera just becouse I saw Andrews good review, and now Im really angry that I can't use this camera for aerial 4k footage...

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...

[tosvus]

sorry but it does not make sense to have a 4k camera on the drone where you don't see any image that it will take... and where is the sense to put a FHD small fpv camera on it? The LX100 is at moment the best compact 4k kamera on the market, I have it, but it will NEVER EVER be used on drones as long as it has no video out signal while recording... or how do you think you'll be able to see what your gimbal does in 100m distance? and for sure I can speak for all drone flyers that want to have 4K on a drone and can't carry a gh4 due to law regulations (drone under 5 kg in total). So if Panasonic here is doing the same policy as Canon, this will be my last Panasonic that I purchase... it seems that also the German Panasonic PM want this feature, but the Headquarte will NOT integrate it... why, they don't tell you

 

so to recap this: LX100 is great, but its not suitable on drones... so this part needs to be canceled. I purchased the camera just becouse I saw Andrews good review, and now Im really angry that I can't use this camera for aerial 4k footage...

 

Ouch, I can understand your frustration if you assumed it would have this feature - I haven't had enough compacts to know if this is a feature that is normal (at least some video out). I would think HDMI live out is a fairly tall order for a compact though, so probably should have done due diligence there.

 

We can all wish for features they did not include (I have a few on my list too), but I did take issue with your assertion that LX100 will never be used for aerial images on drones. Obviously not on yours, and maybe many others, but I have already read about people that are willing to live with this flaw and will use a secondary camera for navigation/rough preview, so clearly it will be used on drones :)

[Cinegain]

I remember the times that a livefeed was still something extraordinary.

Now it may perhaps be quite mainstream, but enough people know how to live without it. So I agree, theres no reason it really cannot be used at all.

That aside though, I also do not really see a reason for Panasonic just to leave out this option.

I can't imagine them just 'overlooking' this ('ah shit, now you can only use it for 'playback', not 'live recording', guess we forgot, good point'). Maybe they believe nobody wants to add a monitor or external recorder to a 'compact camera'? They're afraid to many people would use it as an aerial cam, crashing it and using the warranty to claim Panasonic has given them a faulty camera?

Not sure, I'd say techwise there wouldn't be too much to it. Perhaps it's even as simple as coding a few lines? Perhaps they'll even do that? They also didn't think the 4K Photo mode would be used for anamorphic shooting, so didn't give it a 24p mode. I can see them changing that, so if this really was an afterthought, then I do hope the people in need of such a thing will get it through a firmware update. But if not... remember, Panasonic never advertised the LX100 as being the 'ideal camera for aerial video', so being all upset and never wanting to buy something from Panasonic again is pretty uncalled for. I've seen people do great things with a DJI Phantom 2, H3-3D gimbal and a GoPro too... and again, people used to film without a livestream all the time, so it's still not impossible with the LX100 either.

[Igor Campana]

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...

 

sure I understand you in this and I agree... but there was not so many talking about the HDMI and I thought this is a beta issue... becouse for what do I put a HDMI on a camera like this, that in the menu is capable of giving out 4k in 422, when no signal comes out at all and only the AV-Out in 480p works in playback mode...

o probably they expect that customers purchase a panasonic viera (viera link) so that you can use the HDMI?

 

than it#s better they completely leave away that fucking special usb port (wich no one needs) and also leave away hdmi out. make camera 100 bucks cheaper & smaller and all are happy. but manufacturing tools that can't be used at all is a really shame. I mean, this was Canon style to do it... not Panasonic

[Igor Campana]

Ouch, I can understand your frustration if you assumed it would have this feature - I haven't had enough compacts to know if this is a feature that is normal (at least some video out). I would think HDMI live out is a fairly tall order for a compact though, so probably should have done due diligence there.

 

We can all wish for features they did not include (I have a few on my list too), but I did take issue with your assertion that LX100 will never be used for aerial images on drones. Obviously not on yours, and maybe many others, but I have already read about people that are willing to live with this flaw and will use a secondary camera for navigation/rough preview, so clearly it will be used on drones :)

 

but why should it be a problem for the camera to give out HDMI... they already use LVDS digital port and they have some kind of coprocessor to reduce the video res to some kind of HD so that you can see it on the screen, so its already a postprocessed image that you see with overlays. why not just make a pass through the hdmi out... ok it's not 4k, but everyone and especially drone users would be happy. Instead of this, no one is going to purchase the LX100 and all are waiting for the new sony alphas coming in January...

 

and sorry, your thought in using a second FPV camera is totally wrong... it seems you haven't been really in touch with drones. the second camera for fpv is mentioned for the pilot to see & avoid that the drone crash in tree or somewhere else, while the assistant can use the main camera on gimbal to make the perfect shot... how will you be able what your lx100 is filming using a secondary camera that doesnt have the same DOF & FOV? makes no sense...

 

so Panasonic is loosing a lot of customers that if happy, would probably also purchase a GH4...

[Igor Campana]

I remember the times that a livefeed was still something extraordinary.

Now it may perhaps be quite mainstream, but enough people know how to live without it. So I agree, theres no reason it really cannot be used at all.

That aside though, I also do not really see a reason for Panasonic just to leave out this option.

I can't imagine them just 'overlooking' this ('ah shit, now you can only use it for 'playback', not 'live recording', guess we forgot, good point'). Maybe they believe nobody wants to add a monitor or external recorder to a 'compact camera'? They're afraid to many people would use it as an aerial cam, crashing it and using the warranty to claim Panasonic has given them a faulty camera?

Not sure, I'd say techwise there wouldn't be too much to it. Perhaps it's even as simple as coding a few lines? Perhaps they'll even do that? They also didn't think the 4K Photo mode would be used for anamorphic shooting, so didn't give it a 24p mode. I can see them changing that, so if this really was an afterthought, then I do hope the people in need of such a thing will get it through a firmware update. But if not... remember, Panasonic never advertised the LX100 as being the 'ideal camera for aerial video', so being all upset and never wanting to buy something from Panasonic again is pretty uncalled for. I've seen people do great things with a DJI Phantom 2, H3-3D gimbal and a GoPro too... and again, people used to film without a livestream all the time, so it's still not impossible with the LX100 either.

 

sorry but I dont agree at all with you. if people want to crash and claim warranty, than they could also do it with the GH4. I would be happy if Panasonic has advertised the cam as foto only with 4k feature, but for Photokina they produced a lot of SEPCIAL 4k video stuff to show how well the camera performs for film making.

 

and they also explained clearly that hdmi out is a feature only of the GH Series, wich they want to keep at higher level. We have spoken with the German PM and he also said he sees a really need in this but also the HEadquarter just don't want to integrate it, while they could and also the camera would be able with no problem to perform it.

 

Sure you can use it for crap aerial imaging, but if you want to go serious you need live feed out, which most dji phantom + perform and is also a really havy feature of the new dji inspire...

 

I mean, would you film or make fotos from ground withouth even looking on the screen? Or do you also prefer to see what your camera is going to see? sure you can also run in the citiy keeping the camera away from your eyes and continuosly press the shutter... and maybe you have 1 or 2 good pictures out of 1000, but imagine how much better pictures you could get when you looking on the monitor....

[Igor Campana]

Isn't Panasonic representative Matt Frazer to be found somewhere on the social mediaz to address this? I suppose that's the guy to forward this to...

 

any way to get in touch with him?

[Andrew Reid]

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.

[nicholas dunning]

Andrew you mentioned in your article that the LX100 is the best 4K small camera for aerial imaging. As I have mentioned in my post it is not as long as Panasonic does lock the AV & HDMI Out. So there is 2 things you could do:

1. change your article & mention that the LX100 does not work for aerial
2. or ask Panasonic and make pressure on them to change this in a fw update. We all know that the LX100 could do a HDMI out since it is the same engine like GH4... Im fine if the output is only 720p and with overlays, but we need a signal on the ground or the LX100 WILL NEVER be used for Aerial images on drones...

Thanks for your udnerstandign, I really would appreciate your help in this...
Thanks
Igor

But couldn't you use the Panasonic app and view the feed from your phone while you cobtrol the copter?

[Cinegain]

sorry but I dont agree at all with you. if people want to crash and claim warranty, than they could also do it with the GH4.

Except for the fact that it's a side effect of the GH4 being used with external monitors and recorders. So there's no way they could leave it out if they wanted to. Pretty sure the feature wasn't added in mind that you could use it for FPV and monitoring on aerial shoots. So it's not quite the same. That's why I said that probably they do not expect you to rig the LX100 up and just use it as it is, because it is so compact, that's the key selling point, that it is all-in-one already. And yeah, it's a step below the GH-line, surely. But I'm not sure adding HDMI-out during recording to the LX100 would effect GH4 sales that much. So I hope they have a change of hearts then if it's technically possible to add it with a firmware update.

 

The other point. Yeah, a couple of years ago you'd have to go with spycam(like) cameras. There weren't any gimbals around for consumers/prosumers, let alone an afforable FPV solution. So I did fly without seeing any livefeed... and still people are shooting without a live feed... just because it can't be budgeted for, so it's not impossible, it's not that insane, people have been shooting like that for years.

But fair enough, those people then probably don't have the means to get themselves a multirotor with gimbalmount to handle a camera such as the LX100. So admittedly it's already more serious and I know it's not years ago now, we live in 2014 with all this technology availlable... except then for the lack of video-out whilst recording, lol. Well, I hope Matt will respond to this and maybe tell us if anything will be possible in the future.

 

 

But couldn't you use the Panasonic app and view the feed from your phone while you cobtrol the copter?

The range though... besides, people aren't fond of Wi-Fi signals when they're flying their multirotor. Wouldn't want to get signal mess-ups.