or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Other Areas of Interest › Camcorders › The Panasonic LX7 as a Video Camera Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Panasonic LX7 as a Video Camera Thread - Page 3

post #61 of 132
Thread Starter 
Interesting comparison of LX7 and RX100

http://filmgeartorture.wordpress.com/2013/01/16/sony-rx100-review-vs-lx7-s110/
Edited by markr041 - 3/25/13 at 5:39am
post #62 of 132
Thread Starter 
Interesting comparison of LX7 and RX100

http://filmgeartorture.wordpress.com/2013/01/16/sony-rx100-review-vs-lx7-s110/
Edited by markr041 - 3/25/13 at 5:38am
post #63 of 132
post #64 of 132
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by hatchback View Post

Markr, those links don't work but this one does

http://filmgeartorture.wordpress.com/2013/01/16/sony-rx100-review-vs-lx7-s110/

Thanks. I have replaced the link in my original too.
post #65 of 132
Thread Starter 
The only way to get close-ups of wildlife with the LX7 is to get close.

Many people like to shoot birds in action with long lenses. With the limited zoom of the LX7 to get close-ups of wildlife you have to get, well, close-up. This duck does not seem to mind, although at the end she wonders why I am there:

https://vimeo.com/62529363

Harsh backlighting. Good ambient sound - doves, ducks, joggers and cars - all the sounds of an urban lake (Notre Dame campus).
post #66 of 132
mark, I trust you. Im thinking of buying an small camera that has good low light capabilities. Thats my only need. Low light. And I like doing videos, but I need something for pictures too.

My doubts:

- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0yFeb94HK94 ---> In this video the OIS from the LX7 looks waaaay better. Is it true? The angle looks wider too. Do I see more noise on the sony? How do they compare in low light video?

- I read that in another forum, can you please comment on that?

- "The dynamic range seems to be even higher"(on the LX7) than the one from the RX100"
- "Both are very competent cameras. For low light, I'll take the LX7. For cropping,the RX100 is the choice."
- "Well, at least with the LX7 vs RX100 it's pretty easy to compare them because the LX is between 1-2 f-stops faster at most focal lengths so if you have the RX at 400 iso then you'd compare against the LX at 100 and 200 for low light, then compare the 2 cameras at base ISO for situations where there's plenty of light or a tripod is used, etc."
- "The Sony does not resolve better than the LX7 when the Sony is at 2x or 4x higher ISO than the LX7, which will be frequent due to the Sony's much slower lens unless you shoot in bright light or on a tripod all the time."
- ".looking at the new IR extended preview I am pleasantly surprised to see the LX7 better or equal to the competition at low ISO and better that the smaller sensors at the higher."
- "Bottom line - RX100 at 1600 is noticeably better S/N than LX7 at 800, but RX100 at 3200 has fallen behind the ISO800 LX7."

Is that true? It looks to me that at low light the LX7 CAN be better than the RX100 sometimes. I dont need it to be better. Its a lot cheaper. If its almost as good, its good enough for me.

Can it be better or as good as the RX100?
The built in filters are good?
Is the LX7 better for video? As good?
post #67 of 132
Do I have other options for good low light with compacts?
post #68 of 132
"While on paper the RX100's bigger sensor may seem to justify the cost, in practice some of the benefit is reduced due to the slower lens aperture, especially when zoomed-in."

It definetly looks that the LX7 is a better camera
post #69 of 132
Thread Starter 
For video, I have concluded that the LX7 is the better camera compared to the RX100 (which is still good).

Aside from video quality, there are three important features the LX7 has that the Rx100 does not that are relevant for video:

1. Built in manual ND filter. Essential for bright light video.

2. Available viewfinder, with great quality.

3. High-speed video mode (720p).

For low light, the larger aperture in telephoto is important.
post #70 of 132
OK, but how about low light in wide angle. Is the RX100 better?
post #71 of 132
My main doubt is that the RX100 has a bigger sensor, but the LX7 is faster

"Both the cameras have a fairly impressive sensitivity run. However, the Panasonic LX7 is able to shoot at IS0 80, compared with the lowest setting of ISO 100 from the Sony RX100.
On the other hand, the Sony is able to expand its shooting capabilities up to ISO 25,600. The LX7, meanwhile, can only reach ISO 12,800. It's likely that the larger sensor of the RX100 helps it deliver lower noise performance at high sensitivities, though it's worth pointing out that the Panasonic, with its wider apertures, may not need the extra sensitivity."


So at the end of the day, wich one is better at low light?
post #72 of 132
another question: how about battery life doing videos?
post #73 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by markr041 View Post

For video, I have concluded that the LX7 is the better camera compared to the RX100 (which is still good).
Mark,

Do you own an RX100? I've never seen a post where you confess that you do! I've seen posts where you seem to understand the camera very well.

Bill
post #74 of 132
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsprague View Post

Mark,

Do you own an RX100? I've never seen a post where you confess that you do! I've seen posts where you seem to understand the camera very well.

Bill

I seriously considered owning the RX100, tried out a friend's and concluded that for video the LX7 was all I needed. If I had an RX100 I would also see no need to get an LX7 for video. That's my confession!
post #75 of 132
and my search continues. NO ONE in the hole freaking internet knows wich one is better at low light.


LX7:

- internal filter
- better OIS
- wider angle
- usable zoom
- better macros
- better DOF using zoom and ND filter
- cheaper

RX100:

- better looking
- pocketable
- better display
- better for cropping
- pictures look better


please, can somebody tell me wich one is better at low light? I need something small for low light! Is the EOS-M a good choice? Canon usually sucks for videos and I heard its slow as hell. Do I have other options? APS-C size compact or another good low light compact that can do videos?
post #76 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by thedest View Post

and my search continues. NO ONE in the hole freaking internet knows wich one is better at low light.

You didn't look very far. This came up on the first page of results for "LX7 vs rx100 low light":
Quote:
While at the widest point it is almost equal to the LX7 (f/1.8 vs f/1.4), at the telephoto end, the LX7 can maintain f/2.3, which should make for better performance in low light.
http://www.techradar.com/us/news/photography-video-capture/cameras/panasonic-lx7-vs-sony-rx100-1089834
post #77 of 132
I saw that and it tells nothing to me

im not a speciallist but I know that you cant simply compare f/1.8 vs f/1.4 or sensor sizes without taking the correct math in consideration. its a complex equation to know wich one has the advantage. I read somewhere that at wide angle the RX100 has 1.5 f-stop advantage over the LX7 and that the LX7 has 1.5 f-stop advantage at tele. as im not an speciallist, I would like to know in real world how does that works

you cant even compare their ISOs, because they have different sensors, so their equivalent ISOs would be different

thats too much complex for amateurs, so I would like to know at the end of the day, wich one performs better at low light

it looks to me that at wide angle the RX100 should be considerably better than the LX7

I dont need good light perfomance, and I dont need a big full frame DSLR, because I have both. I need something compact and good for low light
post #78 of 132
I would base the decision more on features as the difference probably won't be major. You could always add some light of your own. Portable LEDs can be had in the $30 range.

Keep in mind when they make a Hollywood movie, with very expensive cameras, they add a lot of light to the scene. So, don't expect miracles from a pocket consumer camera.
post #79 of 132
Thread Starter 
No one in their right mind is going to own the RX100 and the LX7.

We can correct your thinking, however.

Here is your list of RX100 pro's. But with respect to video, most are irrelevant or wrong:

RX100:

- better looking (not relevant for video)
- pocketable (you mean more pocketable, but the small size makes it less easy to handle)
- better display (no, because the display is 4:3 when you shoot video (in 16:9) a large part of the screen disappears - the LX7 has a 3:2 screen and you lose far less)
- better for cropping (irrelevant for video, and in fact the big sensor is a reason the video has far more artifacts than the video of the LX7)
- pictures look better (irrelevant for video, and not true in most situations).
post #80 of 132
yeah, thats the kind of opinion I want xfws

I want to know if the difference wont be major, because if not, there is no reason to buy a 700usd RX100 over a 400usd LX7, since the RX7 has a lot more features.

does any of you guys know anything about a good low light compact? is the EOS-M a bad choice for videos?
post #81 of 132
Thread Starter 
Do you want opinions or do you want facts or video examples?

"yeah, thats the kind of opinion I want xfws"

You have been supplied facts and video examples in this thread and links to sites with information. But somehow that is not good enough, you just want someone to give you their opinion?
Based on what, besides video and facts, which are also available to you here.
post #82 of 132
well, if there is a way to obtain FACTS about one being better than the other in low light, and how much better, that would be great, but im not finding that anywhere.

I want an information that can be usefull for an amateur. watching videos from different places shot from different people is not the best way to do that, and I cant understand all of those numbers. and most of the review sites are saying wrong things. they cant compare sensor sizes and f-values separately. some say the RX100 is better because of the sensor and some say that the LX7 is better because of the lens

thats why knowing that they are almost the same in low light could solve my doubts

or if anyone here knows another great compact for low light videos, that could also help me

there is no doubt that the LX7 packs A LOT more features than the RX100 and it looks like a better tool for videos. Im almost decided on buying one. I just wanna make sure that im not losing much in the low light area, which is my main concern
post #83 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by thedest View Post

or if anyone here knows another great compact for low light videos, that could also help me

There's the Panasonic GX1 (30p or 60i), which is about the same body size as the LX7, but has a much larger sensor/same sensor that's in the GH2:
http://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-DMC-GX1-Compact-System-Camera/dp/B00604YTGG/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1364433601&sr=8-4&keywords=DMC-GX1X

It's a micro-four thirds interchangeable lens system and can achieve ISO of 12800. The GX1 along with the LUMIX G 20mm f/1.7 lens would slay both the RX100 and LX7 in low-light...although it's a bit pricey at $350 (roughly $630 total):
http://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-Aspherical-Pancake-Interchangeable-Cameras/dp/B002IKLJVE/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1364433741&sr=8-1&keywords=lumix+f1.7

There's no image stabilization on that lens, although there are many other lens options that do have OIS.

GX1 can also be hacked for higher bit rates:
http://www.43rumors.com/hack-your-gx1-and-g3-now/
post #84 of 132
Thread Starter 
The Gx1 has no fast zoom; one focal length (no wide angle, no telephoto) does not cut it for video. It cannot do 108060p either (as you know). And it has no manual controls of video at all. The f1.7 lens makes loud noises when changing focus or aperture - it is not made for video and really cannot be used except locked down (I own it). The GX1 is not a serious video camera.
post #85 of 132
I didn't realize the lack of manual control on the GX1. But I think if thedest can find a compact system with a large sensor and fast lens (and manual control) it will beat out the RX100 and lx7 in low light.
post #86 of 132
damn you mark, I was watching a lot of reviews and I was getting pretty much excited with the GX1. it looks great in low light and it can produce nice bokeh effects. it has a nice touch screen focus and its small and cheap.

zoom is not important for me since my main camera have that (this one will be used as a backup only in low light). I can live with one focal lenght. I really like 60p but I could live with 30p, but having no manual controls really suck =/

do you have sample videos of that camera?

@xfws: thats what I want. 1080 progressive, good in low light, pocketable, decent manual control
@marks: absolutely no control over video? not even ISO?
post #87 of 132
The 12-35mm constant f/2.8 and the 35-100 constant f/2.8 wouldn't be bad lenses for video although the price is very steep. Then theirs the new Olympus 17mm f/1.8 which they claim is good for video auto focusing but I haven't really done any research on it. Still, that lens is $500 so that still ads a bit to the cost of the GX1 and if it's true that that the manual movie options might be lacking. I heard a hack was being worked on for manual movie mode but I don't know how that turned out.
post #88 of 132
and how about the canon EOS-M or the samsung NX series?
post #89 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by markr041 View Post

No one in their right mind is going to own the RX100 and the LX7.
Depending on how you interpret community property laws in Washington State, I do own both!

Bill
post #90 of 132
It looks like the compact Olympus micro-four thirds have manual control...perhaps someone else can confirm that.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Camcorders
AVS › AVS Forum › Other Areas of Interest › Camcorders › The Panasonic LX7 as a Video Camera Thread