Wow, George. Thanks for the comparison! The colors and clarity on that Sony really pop, but what a price tag! I'm using an EOS 7D from 2009 for small town reporting. I'm thinking of making a change to something simpler, so I was considering the FZ-1000 II. Now, I feel like I'd be better sticking with the 7D and maybe just upgrading my lenses. Hard to believe I've owned and used this camera for 15 years, but it still shines.
Fascinating tests! The FZ colors are more muted (less hyped?) in auto and look sharper; maybe video compression has to throw away brightness detail to handle the extra chroma in the RX video? Comparing original footage to check would be interesting. Also, the FZ was usually zoomed in ever so slightly tighter, whether from lens markings or actual sensor size or something else. Bigger probably looks better all else being equal. And at the very end, when you walked up to the camera with your glasses and mask, the FZ finally gave up and focused on the building behind you while the RX stayed locked on. But at half the price, the FZ holds its own for sure.
Thank you for watching! The FZ has a bigger crop than the RX that why it looks like it is zoomed in more. I guess with the bigger crop you are correct it is zoom in more
Another good vidio George. I`m in the UK and own the FZ1000ii which I bought for £679 the Sony RX10 IV was £1500. I still think FZ is the better camera. I also own the FZ330 which I`ll use if the weather is bad. I think if Panasonic weather sealed the FZ1000ii it it would have a lot more believers.
If they ever update the FZ2500 maybe it will be a weather seal camera. I have the FZ330 are FZ300 it is called here, and a homemade weather cover for the FZ1000ii.
@@georgeeharrison4293 That's why we need a still image test of both cameras cropped so both images are 1:1 scale. Then we'll know a little more of how the sensor treats pixels on both cameras. Forget optical zoom range, you'll spend all day comparing a bigger image to a smaller image. I've had teleconverters shots look better since the image looks bigger and still clear and only when you compare pixel treatment did I realize that the teleconverter shots are softer and blurrier.
Please tell me what the sealed box should look like, in what place? I ask you because I found both fz300-fz10002 // cameras on two sites, at different prices. The difference is about $ 150. And, of course, I have a suspicion, if the price at the lower price of the camera is New, as the respective website claims. Thanks a lot
Yes, I would still recommend it, but light every Panasonic camera sometimes the autofocus will want to make you throw the camera in the river. If you do not need a lot of zoom the LX 100ii is a great little camera, just wish the price would come down a little more.
For some reason, Panasonic still does not want to go to phase detection autofocus. Everyone who uses their cameras autofocus is their number 1 complaint.
Based off your test, I like the #FZ100ii better. I didn't feel like either of the cameras did much better in terms of auto-focus. The selling point for the Panny for me in Auto mode would be the difference in exposure. It looks like the Lumix managed auto exposure better the the Sony. The Sony over exposed whereas the Lumix looked pretty close or a little under exposed. I know that once an image is overexposed you are losing a lot of information. In my experience it's easier to fix something that is under exposed to compare to something that is blown out.
@@georgeeharrison4293 I'm using the C-100 MK II. All in all in all it's not a bad camera. The AF has little value, it's for the most part center weighted. There are some Cannon EF STM lenses where you can take advantage of Cannons flavor of facial tracking. Those lenses are on the slow side at F3.5/5.6 and the lens elements aren't quite as good as the EF-L lenses that are significantly more expensive.
I ended up getting the 1000 mark two, and I am disappointed in the frame per second rate. Panasonic was misleading in their claims. I’m still testing out the camera, but thinking maybe I should’ve went with the Sony lol. When I shoot seven frames per second it seems super slow. It only shoots faster than that when you’re doing 4K burst but then you have to pick the picture you want to save and it’s only 8 MB.
I have shoot one video with Panasonic Fz1000 that video had 4 crores views in my you tube channel .. 😀 Name of the video is "India Beats Vietnam 4x400m Relay" That video had shooted in the night with flood light 🥇
@@georgeeharrison4293 thanks sir. All my videos filmed by Panasonic FZ 200, Fz300, FZ 1000.(this camera is good in the evening because of 1 inch sensor ( Full HD only ).I have dropped my FZ 1000 during filming. Now I am using Panasonic FZ 300 and FZ 2500 . Image stabilization and autofocus is not good in 4k of Panasonic FZ 2500.. So I am thinking to switch over to Sony RX 10 iv or Panasonic FZ 1000. 💗🙏🎉
Overall the RX10iv is just a little better, but you can buy 2 FZ1000ii for the price of one RX10iv. If you do not need the extra zoom of the RX10iv are do not want to spend the extra money the FZ1000ii are a slightly used FZ2500 if you do mostly video will be a great buy. Thank you for watching!
First of all, the video has a poor quality, it very difficult to find sharpness from the cameras. The Sony has a tendence to the yellows, the FZ keeps the blacks and whites more prominent which I like it better, however, in this video, is not posible to say who is better, video is at 1080 resolution and compressed from RUclips even more! What a pity! Of course that the double price of the Sony makes it the loser of this comparation, for such price, I expected much more quality and less yellows! I thank you very much for your great videos, keep it up, greetings from Germany
The Sony has better sharpness. Early on in the video, you can see that the Sony has better sharpness. If you pause the video at around the 5:57 mark, the Sony RX10IV has much better image quality. The Panasonic FZ1000ii photo taken from the point would have been deleted.
Thank you for watching! You are right the RX10iv is sharper, if it had been only 300 to 400 dollars more than the FZ1000ii I would have gotten it, but it was $800.00.
You are correct the RX10iv is better. I rented both cameras to find out the one I wanted. The reason I got the FZ1000ii and not the RX10iv is because if it was only $400.00 more that would have been in my budget. The RX10iv was $800.00 more, BUT if they come out with an RX10v I might just jump in the deep water and get it.
I don't see any value in the Sony other than the ability to reach out further. The Sony was constantly blurry except when it was extremely close to the face. Also, it focused closer. The autofocus quality was about the same. At twice the price, I don't see the Sony as of any value.
There were some things I did like about the RX10. Overall it might be a little better video camera 200 are maybe 300 dollars more but not twice the price.
@@georgeeharrison4293 well, i find that almost impossible to find a review these days that mentions….photography. It’s all really vlogs and selfies. Should get a go pro for that. 5 days now of reviews, and I still don’t know the best for still. Insane.
@@tomd4748 For sills if you are willing to pay the price difference between the FZ1000ii and the RX10iv go for the RX10iv. It is better but I did not think for me it was twice the cost of a better camera. $300.00 to $400.00 better yes but not $800.00 better.
![Panasonic LUMIX 'FZ1000M2' major performance Test and Review! [FZ1000Mii]](/img/1.gif)
Wow, George. Thanks for the comparison! The colors and clarity on that Sony really pop, but what a price tag! I'm using an EOS 7D from 2009 for small town reporting. I'm thinking of making a change to something simpler, so I was considering the FZ-1000 II. Now, I feel like I'd be better sticking with the 7D and maybe just upgrading my lenses. Hard to believe I've owned and used this camera for 15 years, but it still shines.
Thank you for watching. A lot of the older cameras can still do a great job.
Fascinating tests! The FZ colors are more muted (less hyped?) in auto and look sharper; maybe video compression has to throw away brightness detail to handle the extra chroma in the RX video? Comparing original footage to check would be interesting. Also, the FZ was usually zoomed in ever so slightly tighter, whether from lens markings or actual sensor size or something else. Bigger probably looks better all else being equal. And at the very end, when you walked up to the camera with your glasses and mask, the FZ finally gave up and focused on the building behind you while the RX stayed locked on. But at half the price, the FZ holds its own for sure.
Thank you for watching! The FZ has a bigger crop than the RX that why it looks like it is zoomed in more. I guess with the bigger crop you are correct it is zoom in more
Another good vidio George. I`m in the UK and own the FZ1000ii which I bought for £679 the Sony RX10 IV was £1500. I still think FZ is the better camera. I also own the FZ330 which I`ll use if the weather is bad. I think if Panasonic weather sealed the FZ1000ii it it would have a lot more believers.
If they ever update the FZ2500 maybe it will be a weather seal camera. I have the FZ330 are FZ300 it is called here, and a homemade weather cover for the FZ1000ii.
The Sony might be a bit better but it’s twice the price. Editing and adjusting settings can equalize the field.
Thank you for watching! You are right the price difference is why I got the FZ1000ii over it.
@@georgeeharrison4293 That's why we need a still image test of both cameras cropped so both images are 1:1 scale. Then we'll know a little more of how the sensor treats pixels on both cameras. Forget optical zoom range, you'll spend all day comparing a bigger image to a smaller image. I've had teleconverters shots look better since the image looks bigger and still clear and only when you compare pixel treatment did I realize that the teleconverter shots are softer and blurrier.
Please tell me what the sealed box should look like, in what place? I ask you because I found both fz300-fz10002 // cameras on two sites, at different prices. The difference is about $ 150. And, of course, I have a suspicion, if the price at the lower price of the camera is New, as the respective website claims. Thanks a lot
You still recommending the fz1000ii?::looking at that or the lx100 ii
Yes, I would still recommend it, but light every Panasonic camera sometimes the autofocus will want to make you throw the camera in the river. If you do not need a lot of zoom the LX 100ii is a great little camera, just wish the price would come down a little more.
I am waiting for a FZ300 with phase detection autofocus.
For some reason, Panasonic still does not want to go to phase detection autofocus. Everyone who uses their cameras autofocus is their number 1 complaint.
Based off your test, I like the #FZ100ii better. I didn't feel like either of the cameras did much better in terms of auto-focus. The selling point for the Panny for me in Auto mode would be the difference in exposure. It looks like the Lumix managed auto exposure better the the Sony. The Sony over exposed whereas the Lumix looked pretty close or a little under exposed. I know that once an image is overexposed you are losing a lot of information. In my experience it's easier to fix something that is under exposed to compare to something that is blown out.
What camera are you using now.
@@georgeeharrison4293 I'm using the C-100 MK II. All in all in all it's not a bad camera. The AF has little value, it's for the most part center weighted. There are some Cannon EF STM lenses where you can take advantage of Cannons flavor of facial tracking. Those lenses are on the slow side at F3.5/5.6 and the lens elements aren't quite as good as the EF-L lenses that are significantly more expensive.
I ended up getting the 1000 mark two, and I am disappointed in the frame per second rate. Panasonic was misleading in their claims. I’m still testing out the camera, but thinking maybe I should’ve went with the Sony lol. When I shoot seven frames per second it seems super slow. It only shoots faster than that when you’re doing 4K burst but then you have to pick the picture you want to save and it’s only 8 MB.
How big are you going to print your photos? You can easily print 20 x 30 prints from a 8mp 4k file.
@@georgeeharrison4293 I’ll have to see. I haven’t done a 4k photo yet.
Why does the video look like 720p rather than 1080p?
To be honest I have no idea. Thank you for watching!
Because you were not wearing your glasses
@@TOSHAKPRAVI Is it funny? Are you a kid or stupid?
I have shoot one video with Panasonic Fz1000 that video had 4 crores views in my you tube channel .. 😀 Name of the video is "India Beats Vietnam 4x400m Relay"
That video had shooted in the night with flood light 🥇
I watch it! What camera did you use for your other track videos?
@@georgeeharrison4293 thanks sir. All my videos filmed by Panasonic FZ 200, Fz300, FZ 1000.(this camera is good in the evening because of 1 inch sensor ( Full HD only ).I have dropped my FZ 1000 during filming. Now I am using Panasonic FZ 300 and FZ 2500 . Image stabilization and autofocus is not good in 4k of Panasonic FZ 2500.. So I am thinking to switch over to Sony RX 10 iv or Panasonic FZ 1000. 💗🙏🎉
hi i am from Delhi, India your video is excellent i want to a bridge camera for personal/hobby use pl advice which is best as mentioned i your video
Overall the RX10iv is just a little better, but you can buy 2 FZ1000ii for the price of one RX10iv. If you do not need the extra zoom of the RX10iv are do not want to spend the extra money the FZ1000ii are a slightly used FZ2500 if you do mostly video will be a great buy. Thank you for watching!
Hi George, which is your wireless microphone? Good job as usual!!!
I used the BOYA BY-WM5 and the WM6
First of all, the video has a poor quality, it very difficult to find sharpness from the cameras. The Sony has a tendence to the yellows, the FZ keeps the blacks and whites more prominent which I like it better, however, in this video, is not posible to say who is better, video is at 1080 resolution and compressed from RUclips even more! What a pity! Of course that the double price of the Sony makes it the loser of this comparation, for such price, I expected much more quality and less yellows! I thank you very much for your great videos, keep it up, greetings from Germany
Thank you for watching from Germany. You can correct the yellow color in post.
very nice video
Thanks
cool vid great test Thanks
The Sony has better sharpness. Early on in the video, you can see that the Sony has better sharpness. If you pause the video at around the 5:57 mark, the Sony RX10IV has much better image quality. The Panasonic FZ1000ii photo taken from the point would have been deleted.
Thank you for watching! You are right the RX10iv is sharper, if it had been only 300 to 400 dollars more than the FZ1000ii I would have gotten it, but it was $800.00.
Sony's photo quality is much better I had both cameras
You are correct the RX10iv is better. I rented both cameras to find out the one I wanted. The reason I got the FZ1000ii and not the RX10iv is because if it was only $400.00 more that would have been in my budget. The RX10iv was $800.00 more, BUT if they come out with an RX10v I might just jump in the deep water and get it.
FZ1000ii is excellent for it's lower price
I know this is 9 months late but thanks for watching, and the price of the FZ1000ii has went up.
I don't see any value in the Sony other than the ability to reach out further. The Sony was constantly blurry except when it was extremely close to the face. Also, it focused closer. The autofocus quality was about the same. At twice the price, I don't see the Sony as of any value.
There were some things I did like about the RX10. Overall it might be a little better video camera 200 are maybe 300 dollars more but not twice the price.
4K camera uploaded in potato quality. Nice!
Thank you for Watching! Check your setting it was uploaded in 1080
Apostrophe in the word "photos". I can't....
I will accept the English lesson, but what is your opinion on the camera test?
@@georgeeharrison4293 well, i find that almost impossible to find a review these days that mentions….photography. It’s all really vlogs and selfies. Should get a go pro for that. 5 days now of reviews, and I still don’t know the best for still. Insane.
@@tomd4748 For sills if you are willing to pay the price difference between the FZ1000ii and the RX10iv go for the RX10iv. It is better but I did not think for me it was twice the cost of a better camera. $300.00 to $400.00 better yes but not $800.00 better.