More on the FZ1000 - November 28th, 2014

9:36 PM

Black Friday, Downtown Sunnyvale
I know, I've only had the camera for 3 days and 2 nights, but I think I've come to several conclusions.  I have been comparing it to the Canon G7x (and some interchangeable systems, sometimes).  I've used it in low light situations and tried the super-high-speed mode, 4k video, etc.  Tracking focus I have not tried in good light, but otherwise, I have a decent feel for its focusing system, I think.
Image quality wise, I think the G7x and the FZ1000 are pretty similar.  I am not critically comparing them or anything like that, but they are the same sensor, and they do produce "good enough for almost anything" pictures.  The things I like about the FZ1000 over the G7x are:

Battery life - WAY better than the Canon.  I managed more than 700 pics (with battery to spare!) vs. barely 200ish on the Canon.

Operational speed - everything is just snappier on the FZ1000.  And, of course, the frame rates department is no contest.

EVF - obviously, since the Canon doesn't have one.  But the Panny's EVF is really nice, no lag, looks great and super clear.  Even in low light it's pretty good!

Zoom - the zoom range is great!  Should be good enough for 90% of all applications.

Ergonomics - So many customizable buttons!  I basically ran out of buttons to assign cause everything I would want is accessible directly!  And I've made so it can be used with one hand for most situations!

AF - way fast in good light, struggles a bit in low light still though.

Screen - I hate tilting screens...or ones that just flip up and down.  The FZ1000 has the flipping/rotating one that you can angle to almost anything you want, which is the way to go if you are to have one.  I blame Sony for making the stupid tilting one popular and other manufacturers for copying them.

Engine still hot
Dynamic range is admirable...for a small sensor cam

Now, for things that I miss on the G7x:

f1.8 - enough said.  The FZ1000 is f2.8 to f4.0, vs. f1.8 to f2.8 on the Canon.

ND filter - like I said, base ISO 80 compensates for it a little, but the ND filter was nice (although I guess you could put on 62mm filters on the Panny).

Build-quality - the FZ1000 feels a little plasticky and cheap and a little light.  The G7x is almost all metal and feels better made.

Size - obviously the Canon is super portable and even pocketable, vs. the FZ1000 is almost the size of a DSLR.

Trying for more bokeh

Macro mode
Pictures are from camera jpegs, touched-up with Lightroom.

You Might Also Like


  1. I have a food & adventure blog that I wanted a camera for and I tried both the FZ 1000 and the Sony Alpha6000 (with a prime lens). I'm not a SUPER advanced photographer, but I wanted to pick your brain on your recommendation. I primarily take macro and landscape shots.

    1. Hello! I've only used the nex 6 (quite a lot though), but I loved that camera. The choice basically boils down to interchangeable vs. alll in one. I found that in order to get the most out of the fz, I had to shoot in jpeg (for the burst modes, more shots before buffer filled up, etc.) but that really limits the image quality. In good light, it is more than adequate, but it does struggle in moderately low light.

      Having said that, the macro mode on the fz is pretty impressive and it does 4k video, if that's your thing. If you want to do macro on the Sony, you'll have to shell out more money for the lens. I mostly used a speed booster with my pentax lenses on the nex 6 and it worked out great for me, but buying the native sony lenses can get expensive (and there aren't a lot of choices).

      Sorry, I don't think I helped much, but those are some thoughts. Let me know if you have specific questions.