Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Used AF100 or new Blackmagic?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #16
    Here's a question people aren't asking:

    The BlackMagic uses either a Nikon F or EF mount, but has a smaller-than-4/3 sensor; if people thought finding wide lenses (as one might use in, say, architectural and scenic video) for 43 was hard (which it isn't, with the Tokina 11-16 and Lumix 7-14), how possible will it be with these long-flange mounts and ~3x crop?

    Not sure why they didn't just make it C-mount with a plethora of adapters like the 43 systems.

    The BM cam is interesting within a particular niche (commercial and narrative), but I currently prefer the flexibility vs. price of the AF100 or FS100 systems.
    Pudgy bearded camera guy
    http://mcbob.tv

    Comment


      #17
      They went with an internal battery so you could have a quick light handheld solution. I think they are assuming you'd be hooked up to a power source most of the time.

      Comment


        #18
        The BlackMagic uses either a Nikon F or EF mount, but has a smaller-than-4/3 sensor; if people thought finding wide lenses (as one might use in, say, architectural and scenic video) for 43 was hard (which it isn't, with the Tokina 11-16 and Lumix 7-14), how possible will it be with these long-flange mounts and ~3x crop?
        Pretty sure I saw a video from the NAB show floor of one of the Blackmagic Design people stating clearly that the sensor used is M43. Crop factor should then be identical to the AF100 I would think.

        Comment


          #19
          The Black Magic shoots at a max of 30fps. That's a big red flag for me, no thanks.

          Comment


            #20
            Originally posted by ErikTande View Post
            The Black Magic shoots at a max of 30fps. That's a big red flag for me, no thanks.
            yes. major oversight. Plus one for FS-700
            "We are approaching the point where the cost of the camera vs. the quality of the return negates the worthiness of investing in a $40K system. Further, what people want is ease of use.
            ----Clayton Burkhart.
            "I honestly can't tell the difference between any of this footage anymore. Now the motion is different. Maybe that's why I like the Alexa, it moves like film."

            Comment


              #21
              Originally posted by Zephyrnoid View Post
              yes. major oversight. Plus one for FS-700
              Yeah it would be nice if BM made it possible to record higher fps in a more compressed codec
              Probably won't be possible in uncompressed RAW since it would take up too much bandwidth

              Comment


                #22
                From BMD specs, BMCC active sensor is 77% of area of AF100's sensor. Crop factor compared to Cine35 (not FF) is 1.36, where AF100 is 1.19.

                This means a "normal" 45 AOV requires a 30mm lens on a Cine35 camera, a 25mm on an AF100, and a 22mm on the BMCC. If you like to go wide, a 71 AOV requires a 17mm on Cine35, a 14mm on AF100 and a 12mm on BMCC. (Figures rounded for convenience.)

                AFAICT, the BMCC only requires a slightly wider lens than the AF100.
                .: popcornFlix :.

                Comment


                  #23
                  Originally posted by Inveresk View Post
                  I haven't ruled out the GoPro yet.

                  I don't like the thought of a $250 firmware upgrade for the AF. Panasonic need to reconsider.
                  I'm not sure I'd want either my AF100 or GH2 on a RC copter! Let alone my lenses! Yikes!;)

                  You may not need that particular upgrade. It provides for 1080/60p from my understanding. It's not something I would get right away. I shoot almost exclusively in 24p but it's nice to know it's available and it may prove valuable for your commercial pursuits as broadcasters, I believe, are the target for the upgrade.

                  It's hard to know why one upgrade costs something and another is incremental. I guess because some vendors like Red have made it a part of the culture to "future proof" their cameras they have created and alternate ethos around these types of charges. I dunno... if I needed 60p with audio, I'd think it worth $250 since I don't have to go buy a new camera to get it.

                  Comment


                    #24
                    Why would the low pass filter effect jello? I don't see any reason why AF100 would have significantly less jello. I also don't see a lot of evidence that GH2 is dramatically worse for aliasing.

                    Comment


                      #25
                      The AF does have less jello, but I haven't seen the GH2 have worse aliasing. I own both. Just trust me.
                      Pudgy bearded camera guy
                      http://mcbob.tv

                      Comment


                        #26
                        Originally posted by pomoville View Post
                        Why would the low pass filter effect jello? I don't see any reason why AF100 would have significantly less jello. I also don't see a lot of evidence that GH2 is dramatically worse for aliasing.
                        The AF100 has less jello because it scans it's sensor faster (which I assume is why Pany has now been able to add 1080p60, whereas Vasily has not been able to do so on the hacked GH2). Nothing to do with the LPF, though.
                        ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        Cameras: AF-100, G7 (formerly G6, GH2, HMC-40) -- Lenses: Lumix, legacy Nikons with Speedbooster -- NLEs: Premiere and AfterFX CS6 and CC on PC

                        Comment


                          #27
                          Jello oops.. I think I said that. Rolling shutter is improved in the AF100. That's obvious to me I have both. Not sure why. Refresh maybe? The OLPF for aliasing and moire. Also HUGELY reduced on the AF100. That is my understanding but I admit it is somewhat above my pay grade and my GH2 is unhacked currently.

                          Comment


                            #28
                            af100 is more flexible in terms of features
                            blackmagic youve got the main thing: 12 bit raw footage. a lot of the features would probably a hassle to do on the touchscreen but totherwise it does what generally everybody wants. shoot raw at 13 stops.
                            i still think af100 useful. i plan t sell it. but if i dont get any buyers, i could might as well keep it for VFR.
                            fs700, hurts my wallet too much. i love it but i gotta stick to reality and focus on whats important, storytelling

                            Comment


                              #29
                              Originally posted by hscully View Post
                              I'm not sure I'd want either my AF100 or GH2 on a RC copter! Let alone my lenses! Yikes!;)
                              I have the same misgivings as you, one of the reasons the GoPro is on the shortlist. If and when I develop confidence in the reliability of the kopter, I might risk a GH2 on occasion. Payload would not support a AF100.

                              Comment


                                #30
                                Check this out from a while ago! I had to find it. These shots are just sick. It's AF100 on some kinda copter http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread...ghlight=copter

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X