Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 14
  1. Collapse Details
    Future AF - make it smaller
    #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Charlottesville, va
    Posts
    2,547
    Default
    Comparing my AF to a FS100 or C100, I'm not sure why a successor can't take advantage of the svelter m43 format and shed some weight and bulk. It's not a huge camera to begin with, but comparing it to a GH3 with many of the same capabilities does suggest that there's some inefficiency of form. Compact size is a primary draw of m43 format, after all. Working with GH's is OK, but not ideal. I'm not interested in moving to S35 or larger systems. If I could easily fit 2 mini-AF's plus accessories in a carry-on bag, it could solve many woes. OK, one woe, really... that all my camcrap for a 2-cam interview with AF's doesn't easily fit into a single carry-on.

    Just don't copy the C100's stupid, stupid handle design.

    That's it for today's minor rant. Thanks for bearing with me.


    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
    #2
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    21
    Default
    Agreed, although not at the top of my list.


    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
    #3
    Senior Member ShawnMi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Seattle, WA.
    Posts
    103
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by mcbob View Post
    Comparing my AF to a FS100 or C100, I'm not sure why a successor can't take advantage of the svelter m43 format and shed some weight and bulk. It's not a huge camera to begin with, but comparing it to a GH3 with many of the same capabilities does suggest that there's some inefficiency of form. Compact size is a primary draw of m43 format, after all. Working with GH's is OK, but not ideal. I'm not interested in moving to S35 or larger systems. If I could easily fit 2 mini-AF's plus accessories in a carry-on bag, it could solve many woes. OK, one woe, really... that all my camcrap for a 2-cam interview with AF's doesn't easily fit into a single carry-on.

    Just don't copy the C100's stupid, stupid handle design.

    That's it for today's minor rant. Thanks for bearing with me.
    Well to be fair... the AF100 does have a LOT more hardware built into to it than the GH3. What would you be willing to lose in order to accommodate a smaller chassis (for the AF100)?

    Shawn


    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
    #4
    Senior Member David W. Jones's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    La Petite Roche
    Posts
    6,742
    Default
    Maybe it's because I'm an old guy, but I would prefer a little larger camera with great ergonomics like the new Amira that can be shouldered out of the box, rather than a small camera which needs an extra $3K to make it work properly.


    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
    #5
    Senior Member hscully's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Hawthorne, NY
    Posts
    1,831
    Default
    Yeah, I like the new style of camera that has the shoulder mount right below the camera and a good EVF like the Alexas, and the new Sony Fs. I think the new varicam looks like it's going to be that style too. Now if they only made them at AF100 prices!


    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
    #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Charlottesville, va
    Posts
    2,547
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by ShawnMi View Post
    Well to be fair... the AF100 does have a LOT more hardware built into to it than the GH3. What would you be willing to lose in order to accommodate a smaller chassis (for the AF100)?
    a few notions...

    - The EVF is bulky and its image isn't that great. If I can't get critical focus with it, don't bother to put one on there. One single high-quality LCD/EVF is all I need.
    - replace the full size composite RCA jacks with a smaller combined 3.5mm breakout cable port (similar to the HV30/40 and others). I'd be fine if it also doubled as the headphone jack as it does on the HV's.
    - move tally, FA, and 1-2 programmable user buttons to the side handle
    - let larger batteries stick out a little. I'm cool with that. Stick your hand in there sometime and see how much of the AF body is devoted to wrapping around the battery.

    They could also go completely modular... based around a ~GH3w/batt grip-sized "brain" containing the sensor, general controls, ND wheel, I/O ports, attachment points; XLR audio pack; various available "compression packs" containing the guts to convert the "brain" signal and hold media (AVCHD to SD cards, AVC-I/U to MicroP2, 4K to SSD or ?); power pack for CGA, VBG, or AB/Vlock. Consider something like a super-mini F5 or Epic, but more modular in that you can essentially build the camera you need for the job you have. They'd be able to sell to multiple camera sectors with one line of products. Heck, have a cheaper HD-only "brain," 2/3" brain w/ B4 mount, 1/3" brain with integrated lens, etc...

    Shoulder-mount cameras are nice for some things but not for all. I build a small side-slung handle/shoulder thing to easily convert the AF to shoulder work, but of course it's removeable. Shoulder-mount-optimized cameras are necessarily bulky, too bulky for the aforementioned 2-in-a-carryon deployment. Now, if you go with the ultra-modular design, then you can just make the AB-power pack integrate a shoulder mount and additional power outlets since, if you're powering from AB's, compactness likely isn't your thing. Easy enough, eh?

    Screw it. I'll learn how to build the damn things myself.
    Last edited by mcbob; 09-24-2013 at 08:00 PM.


    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
    #7
    Default
    I don't want it to be smaller really. The design works so well for me, it's real practical. It is small enough to easily carry for one man gigs if necessary, without needing rigs and other crap on top, bottom and the sides. Yet it still looks substantial enough to look like a serious camera. It has everything it needs to work, in one light box. I like it.


    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
    #8
    Senior Member Bern Caughey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    4,234
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by mcbob View Post
    If I could easily fit 2 mini-AF's plus accessories in a carry-on bag...
    Count me in!


    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
    #9
    Senior Member Erik Naso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    4,368
    Default
    I want both! I don't think we live in a one camera world anymore. I want the AMIRA body (that I could afford). Throw in a action cam and I'm set. GH3 for stills and quick shots.
    I think I'm done buying any camera with a crappy viewfinder or EVF. This insanity has to stop. Lack of respect for the shooter is lame. We have to see what we are shooting! Rant over.


    2 out of 2 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
    #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Washington, the state.
    Posts
    3,627
    Default
    I'm with Eric on the VF issue. My biggest gripe with Panny! Having to add anything to a cam to get basic focus is just stupid. There are other reasons to add a monitor, but focus shouldn't be one of them.

    Eric, how does the VF and Flipout compare between the AF100 and HPX370?

    Grant


    Reply With Quote
     

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •