PDA

View Full Version : What about low light with 14-140 lens and af100?



wbrock001
11-09-2010, 10:26 AM
I shoot a lot of plays, weddings, etc...which are often low light...so the question is how well does the af100 work in low light situations with this lens? The gh1 is pretty bad with its banding etc. Thank you for any insight. I was not able to find any specific mention of this combo in low light.

Bill

jpmulligan
11-09-2010, 10:42 AM
There have been discussions about this, it seems that in end it will depend on how noise free the image is at higher ISO settings. So far, Barry has been very encouraging about this and my impression is that the AF-100 does a bang up job, significantly better than the ghx series of cameras. Better implementation of the codec that eliminates a lot of the issues found in other AVCHD implementations.

We'll have to see once Barry and others report back on their experience with a production or near-production quality sample. I believe that is happening as we speak.

groveChuck
11-09-2010, 10:46 AM
Hopefully the testing occuring now in Japan will include some low light tests on the nearly final model.

Mark Smith
11-09-2010, 12:05 PM
I have a GF 1 and the 14-140 lens. A lot depends on the AF 100 sensor, but from what I've seen, the the 14-140 will be partially useful, but I don't think its going to the " go to' lens that people expect to use 80 to 90% of the time, mostly because of its f stop challenged.

Taylor Rudd
11-09-2010, 02:42 PM
The question isn't really how the camera will work with this lens, but rather how good is this lens for low-light situations?

Answer: not the best. Bump up the ISO/gain enough and you'll see banding on any camera.

If you anticipate all low light situations, then prepare for them with faster lenses. You'll sacrifice range, but you'll get a cleaner image.

Michael Olsen
11-09-2010, 03:00 PM
If you are in a situation where you are pretty much shooting in the dark and you remain concerned about image quality, your best bet will be a fast prime. You'll have to move around to get good coverage.

Barry_Green
11-09-2010, 03:04 PM
I shoot a lot of plays, weddings, etc...which are often low light...so the question is how well does the af100 work in low light situations with this lens? The gh1 is pretty bad with its banding etc. Thank you for any insight. I was not able to find any specific mention of this combo in low light.
No banding, and a bit more sensitive than the GH1. But frankly, a must-have is the 20mm f/1.7. People sang its praises before, but after getting it, yeah, it's like super-turbo-boost for sensitivity as compared to the 14-140.

Barry_Green
11-09-2010, 03:06 PM
I have a GF 1 and the 14-140 lens. A lot depends on the AF 100 sensor, but from what I've seen, the the 14-140 will be partially useful, but I don't think its going to the " go to' lens that people expect to use 80 to 90% of the time, mostly because of its f stop challenged.
I think it's the go-to lens for almost anything, but for low light I totally agree -- f/4 isn't that fast. You can crank up the ISO, but nothing beats having 2.5 more stops of sensitivity (the 20mm/f1.7) or even 1.7 stops more than that (for 4 stops more sensitivity!) with the Voigtlander 25mm/f0.95.

Julienmassie
11-09-2010, 05:01 PM
f4 for video ...
I usually stay between 2 and 4,5
90% of the time at like 2,8-3,5 at -3db

And thats in a broadcast studio whit unlimited source of lightning, but indoor whit no gain to have a correct skin tone exposure at f4 .... you need to have some intense light !

I thought about that today and tryed to put all my iris at 4,0 .... wow it was really dark, i needed to open it up at like 2,8. Huge difference, enough to never buy a f4 lens.

John Foundas
11-09-2010, 05:11 PM
F4 is a deal breaker for my low light applications. I'd rather shoot full manual and have 2.8 at my disposal on a nice nikon zoom any day.

Jarek Zabczynski
11-09-2010, 05:54 PM
But frankly, a must-have is the 20mm f/1.7. People sang its praises before, but after getting it, yeah, it's like super-turbo-boost for sensitivity as compared to the 14-140.

Is the 20mm wide enough? Or is the 14mm that's coming out the one to look out for? Albeit it's a bit slower...

Mark Smith
11-09-2010, 06:25 PM
I have a HPX 170 in the house and a GF 1 with the 14-140 zoom. I've got half a mind to shoot some low light comparison with those two cams tomorrow. I think I'll see why the 14-140 zoom will generally suck at low light.

groveChuck
11-09-2010, 07:38 PM
Do it, that would be a great test! Full tele and wide on both cams would be great, too.

Mark Smith
11-09-2010, 07:56 PM
I should be able to do some sort of a test tomorrow late afternoon as the light is failing...

wbrock001
11-09-2010, 10:21 PM
I agree on getting a faster prime for general low light. For events the autofocus is very desirable which is why I'd prefer to use the 14-140 if at all possible. I've used the gh1 in such circumstances and compared to the hmc it was terrible. But it was all I had to work with. Thank you for your replies I'll look forward to seeing some results with the final camera.

Barry_Green
11-10-2010, 07:45 AM
Spent all day with the 14-140, the 20mm, and the 7-14, as well as my 100mm f/2 and 50mm f/1.4 zeisses.

Love the 20mm. Love it. Love love love it. Fantastic lens, so tiny, quite sharp, good value. Decent field of view, but not really wide.

Love love love love love the 7-14. It's a superb lens. Nothing it can't do (well, besides telephoto!) Huge glass front element that you really have to shade because it'll pick up flares. But it's great.

Love the 14-140. It's a great lens. It does everything, and it does it really well (except aperture).

But man, when the light goes down, the 14-140 and 7-14 go back in the box, and out come the ZF's. There's no substitute for wider aperture. If you want to shoot in LOW light conditions, you're going to want faster glass.

Rabot
11-10-2010, 09:29 AM
I have a HPX 170 in the house and a GF 1 with the 14-140 zoom. I've got half a mind to shoot some low light comparison with those two cams tomorrow. I think I'll see why the 14-140 zoom will generally suck at low light.

Yesyes! Please!

Mark Smith
11-10-2010, 10:36 AM
Barry:

But man, when the light goes down, the 14-140 and 7-14 go back in the box, and out come the ZF's. There's no substitute for wider aperture. If you want to shoot in LOW light conditions, you're going to want faster glass.[/QUOTE]


I cold see that train of thought coming a mile away.

I will shoot a test with the GF1 and HPX 170 today. I'm waiting till later this afternoon so I don't have to use ND on either camera.

Justyn
11-10-2010, 11:10 AM
I believe that this is also a bit of a shift for most video producers, one that still people have embraced. We can get a bunch of different lenses, budget provided. For me, I think it'll be a combo of a 8mm, 20mm, the kit 14-140, a really fast wide prime, a fast 85mm and a 200-500 or something like that. A pretty decent collection that suits each ocassion at its best. Having one lens that stays on all the time isn't a prudent or possible situation... without a pricetag attached.


If you have enough money then those 2f zooms seem nice, but wonder about the functionality. Overally, we'll have some decent options for a variety of situations.

Mac
11-10-2010, 11:47 AM
This is a silly comment, but contains some truth.. In the olden times, before there were any good zooms available, cameras had turrets so you could switch focal lengths quickly - even my first Eclair NPR had a 2 lens turret, and all Arri's did. A turret with three relatively small, fast primes could be an interesting compromise.. I don't think Panasonic, Sony or Canon are likely to jump on that one though.

Mark Smith
11-10-2010, 12:37 PM
A turret mount on an AF 100.... that would be like the custom "throw back" version of the AF

Mac
11-10-2010, 01:01 PM
Yeah, it would be the dark ages... but so is a viewfinder mounted on the back of the camera... why oh why?... Funny thing is, I kind of miss turrets. I got so I could rotate a lens during the shot and only lose about 6 frames of film.

Dafilman21
11-10-2010, 02:09 PM
The film cameras I used in college had a lens Turret I love those things! They should be the standard.

Mark Smith
11-10-2010, 02:09 PM
I don't think my test will be any good. No way to lock the ISO on the GF in video mode....

Mark Smith
11-10-2010, 05:43 PM
But I shot any way- Hey who knows what can be learned unless you roll the dice. "Pixels at 11"

Mark Smith
11-10-2010, 08:30 PM
Actually I was wrong: Pixels at 10;35 EST
http://o7films.com/hpx170_gf1lumix

groveChuck
11-10-2010, 08:35 PM
Actually I was wrong: Pixels at 10;35 EST
http://o7films.com/hpx170_gf1lumix

Mark, I got a 404 error.

Mark Smith
11-10-2010, 09:33 PM
Fixed. Note to self: publish button makes the link go live