AF100 or FS100?

[spotts]

Crunch time here. Must buy a camera in the course of the next week or two. I've been sold
on the quality of image/feature set of the AF100 after studying test footage samples and
lurking on this forum. Now I'm wondering if the Sony FS100 might offer the edge with its larger
sensor/lower noise levels, albeit in my opinion fewer useful features. Just curious if some of you
have experience with both and could offer a little opinion one way or the other. Thanks....

[Stephen Mick]

What are you planning to shoot with it?

[spotts]

Job coming up is a safety orientation/training piece for a large petroleum refinery. Mostly exterior/day with no artificial fill for safety reasons. Portions will be shot in fairly deep shade inside the 'bowels' of the facility. There will be a few scenes
covering 'confined spaces' which are shots involving the 'do's and don'ts' of working within and servicing huge tanks and vessels.

[mikebarber]

If you already like the picture quality and the features of the AF100, then roll with it. You won't regret it.

[marlontorres]

If you haven't preordered an FS100 already, you probably won't get one in a week or two.

[spotts]

One is available tomorrow should I opt for it. I'm just looking at options...in that the FS100 looks as if it will require more accessories to make it fly out the gate than will the AF100. It just comes down to the image...both cams are roughly the same money. So, which?

[Phil H.]

The ND wheel on the the AF100 would be your friend if going from indoor to outdoor. Or bright to dim areas.

[maxusa]

The FS100 sensor advantage is most prominent under very dim or outright dark conditions. If your orientation footage is to be captured without lighting the scenes, then Sony may be the ticket. I suppose you have reviewed Philip Bloom's low light comparison, where the Sony sensor shows its performance side-by-side.

[Doctor Wu]

Do your clients have to watch it on a production monitor? If yes, go with the AF100. SDI is the best and most reliable way to go for client viewing as you shoot. HDMI is pretty bad for that.

I was trying to make the same decision, but my shooting demands are far different from yours.

-I made the switch to post production from cinematography when I was offered a lucrative job 2 years ago. My clients fell away as I could not shoot for them, other than a few directors. I'm going to be shooting for myself and director friends. The professionalism and reliability of SDI is not as critical.
-My lens ranges and focal lengths (Nikon, Canon, Kowa Cine Prominars) are better suited for the S35 chip and the resulting FOV.
-I have a matt box. And ND filters.
-I really like the clean imagery, the grain, the sensitivity of the FS100 chip. The DR between the two cameras is about the same it seems.

So it was a logical choice for me to go with the FS100. Next year, it's another story perhaps.

[dcloud]

based on your shooting requirements, af100 seems the right cam for the job.
id use the fs100 if i had matteboxes and scenes are set up.

go with fs100 if you have a mattebox/nd filter and fine with the on board codec
nd filter on the af100 has saved me time a lot of times.
though id love to have that awesome sony sensor :0