Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AF100a, any takers?

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

    #46
    You need the OLPF. I really don't like shooting with a dslr because of that. I think Panasonic would kill it with a 1920 X 1080 m4/3 4:2:2 10 bit camera that has an slog or something like it. Raw option maybe? I'm not sure what recording options they have but 1920 X 1080 would be plenty for me
    Last edited by hscully; 01-25-2013, 12:12 PM.

    Comment


      #47
      I'm a realist. It is all nice and inspiring to throw great specs out there in a wish list and forget the practical implications. Honestly, most people ask too much and then when you call them out on it they quickly bring up the BMCC. Well, the BMCC is way cheaper to make because it doesn't have 1/8th of the features a camera like the AF100 or F3 do. For example, it's cheaper to offer uncompressed recording than compressed recording even though compressed recording is cheaper to post. So when you tell people that 10 bit 4:2:2 internally for $4,500 is asking to much they bark back at your face that the BMCC does RAW for $3K. Yes it does, but it cuts all the other useful features from the camera to give you this "marketing commodity", which in the end few people will really use in a full production. Bringing the BMCC up as an argument in this case truly shows a lack of understanding and even some ignorance. There's a reason the Hyperdeck started recording uncompressed only.

      If the camera was to be kept in the same price bracket, I would be happy with an AF100 replacement that was still M4/3 but with a more up to date 1080p sensor that would be closer to real 1080p, handled highlights more competently and found a better balance between sharpness and an artifact free image. In terms of internal recording I would be more than Ok with just what the GH3 offers now. 10 bit 4:2:2 internally is unrealistic at this price point for today's standards. But it would need to have real 10 bit 4:2:2 out of the HD-SDI. Ergonomically the only thing I would change is having less buttons in the inside of the LCD. But I know it's unrealistic to wish for a true shoulder camera at this price point and with all these features. Besides that I wouldn't change a thing. The AF100a feature set is fine with the now added focus expand and 50/60p and it still has things that most other cameras don't, such as the waveform monitor built in.
      So basically give me an "AF150" with a new and better M4/3 sensor, higher bit rates ACVHD, true 10 bit 4:2:2 HD-SDI, a slightly updated body with less buttons inside the LCD (a better LCD would also not hurt) for the same price as the AF100 and I would buy it tomorrow.
      Cameras: Panasonic AF100, GH2 (x2) and Sony EX3.
      Lenses: Zeiss CP.2 primes

      Comment


        #48
        As AF100 owner/operator and fan I hate to put it in these terms but I think Panasonic is done in this sector. The AF100 is universally reviled by the stylemasters, to the point I'm not sure there is any future utility to the AF designation. From a business standpoint I think Panasonic would be better off buying someone like kinefinity or gopro (I'm pretty sure gopro is not for sale) and burying the AF line and concept forever. Tough time to be in the camera business.

        Comment


          #49
          I love so much of of the AF100 & hope Panasonic sees a market for better camera at a higher price point. The FS700, C100, C300, all miss important features leaving plenty of room in the marketplace.

          Comment


            #50
            Originally posted by LyleGorch View Post
            As AF100 owner/operator and fan I hate to put it in these terms but I think Panasonic is done in this sector. The AF100 is universally reviled by the stylemasters, to the point I'm not sure there is any future utility to the AF designation. From a business standpoint I think Panasonic would be better off buying someone like kinefinity or gopro (I'm pretty sure gopro is not for sale) and burying the AF line and concept forever. Tough time to be in the camera business.
            You know, I have to agree with you, to a certain point. The AF100 has picked up such a bad rep that abandoning the AF designation wouldn't be a bad idea. It could clearly be an AF100 successor, with M4/3 and all but call it something else. Maybe spring for their professional division designations and call it a HPX-something. Maybe even labeling it a Varicam. After all, it is a varicam. It worked for Sony with the F3 and even EX1/EX3. But the AF name has gone too deep into the **** hole.

            But I wouldn't go as far as dropping the whole AF line concept forever. The M4/3 cinema line worked. GH2s and GH3s sell like hot cakes to independent filmmakers. The AF100 sold well initially before all the bad rep started. Most AF100 users love the m4/3 format flexibility. No reason to drop it.

            Of course, all this bad rep would go away real quick if a feature film was shot on an AF100, looked great and achieved any level of success, because you know, people are just unoriginal sheep.
            Cameras: Panasonic AF100, GH2 (x2) and Sony EX3.
            Lenses: Zeiss CP.2 primes

            Comment


              #51
              Originally posted by Adamsenoj View Post
              You know, I have to agree with you, to a certain point. The AF100 has picked up such a bad rep that abandoning the AF designation wouldn't be a bad idea. It could clearly be an AF100 successor, with M4/3 and all but call it something else. Maybe spring for their professional division designations and call it a HPX-something. Maybe even labeling it a Varicam. After all, it is a varicam. It worked for Sony with the F3 and even EX1/EX3. But the AF name has gone too deep into the s*%t hole.

              But I wouldn't go as far as dropping the whole AF line concept forever. The M4/3 cinema line worked. GH2s and GH3s sell like hot cakes to independent filmmakers. The AF100 sold well initially before all the bad rep started. Most AF100 users love the m4/3 format flexibility. No reason to drop it.

              Of course, all this bad rep would go away real quick if a feature film was shot on an AF100, looked great and achieved any level of success, because you know, people are just unoriginal sheep.
              The best tactic at this point might be working "from the bottom up", the Lumix GH series has a huge user base/culture. Maybe Panasonic should quickly come up with a "Super GH3", just add a little more professional connectivity, some more in-camera codec options, dump the pop-up flash, include a removable OLPF and cage with 15mm rod support.

              Comment


                #52
                Originally posted by Bern Caughey View Post
                I love so much of of the AF100 & hope Panasonic sees a market for better camera at a higher price point. The FS700, C100, C300, all miss important features leaving plenty of room in the marketplace.
                I think the camera I suggested above would already be considerably better than a FS700 and C100 without having to cost more than an AF100. Unless you mean a S35 camera with the option to record 4K like the C300, in which case, yes it would need to be at a higher price point.
                Cameras: Panasonic AF100, GH2 (x2) and Sony EX3.
                Lenses: Zeiss CP.2 primes

                Comment


                  #53
                  Originally posted by LyleGorch View Post
                  The best tactic at this point might be working "from the bottom up", the Lumix GH series has a huge user base/culture. Maybe Panasonic should quickly come up with a "Super GH3", just add a little more professional connectivity, some more in-camera codec options, dump the pop-up flash, include a removable OLPF and cage with 15mm rod support.
                  They already did that. They called it the AF100. ;)

                  This is what the AF100 was. A "super GH1" with more professional connectivity and features. A "super GH3", in concept would be nothing more than an AF100 successor.

                  Besides, the divisions that make the GH3 and the AF100 are separated as far as I know.
                  Cameras: Panasonic AF100, GH2 (x2) and Sony EX3.
                  Lenses: Zeiss CP.2 primes

                  Comment


                    #54
                    Originally posted by LyleGorch View Post
                    As AF100 owner/operator and fan I hate to put it in these terms but I think Panasonic is done in this sector. The AF100 is universally reviled by the stylemasters, to the point I'm not sure there is any future utility to the AF designation. From a business standpoint I think Panasonic would be better off buying someone like kinefinity or gopro (I'm pretty sure gopro is not for sale) and burying the AF line and concept forever. Tough time to be in the camera business.
                    I guess the first thing you need to do is define "this sector". I don't know who "the stylemasters" are, nor do any of my clients. I have a business to run, and the AF100 makes me money. None of my clients ever come to me and ask about the camera I use, all they care about is if they like the image (which apparently they do).

                    I don't do movies, I don't make films. I do primarily corporate work with this camera. It's a tool, and for me it's the best tool for the job. For someone else, it may not be. Get the best tool for your job. But no one should really be buying a tool because it's the "in" tool that the "stylemakers" like. I understand the reality that some producers specifically request certain cameras because they're ill-informed and going with the "in" thing (see the earlier "I shoulda bought a DSLR" thread). But the folks I work for really don't give a rat's rear end what some online filmmaker somewhere thinks after doing a bunch of pixel peeping. All they care is that I can either bring their vision or their client's vision to reality... that I know what the heck I'm doing. 1mm DoF or a DSLR doesn't allow me to do that... I don't care what the "stylemaker's" say, they aren't signing the check I'm being paid with.

                    By the way, I really hope this doesn't come across as snarky, it's not meant to be. I'm fully aware of the AF100's shortcomings, but it also makes the most business sense for me. I'm just tired of hearing what is in effect a keeping up with the Jones argument.

                    That being all said [/soapbox], I think Adamsonej's specs are pretty dead on. Improve the sensor, give it a s-log type setting, and record 10bit 4:2:2 to AVC-LongG with true 10bit 4:2:2 out of the SDI port. Give it a dual record ability and it's pretty much a grand slam. Keep everything else the same. It ought to be able to come in at around $5,000. There wouldn't be anything on the market that could touch it... and we could finally be able to quit having these discussions

                    Comment


                      #55
                      I think the AF100a is an OK upgrade. I don't think it's necessary to have anymore than 4:2:0 on board. I guess if that "dithered" 10 bit works then it is a pretty good upgrade. But to really do it for me, and one of the things the new Canons and Sony's have is slog for better DR and highlight handling. I'm not sure how it works on the Canon but the F3 has it and it works great. Yes, I know, I would pay more 6 - 7.5K?. That's a big difference between AF100 and the other new cameras and is of enormous value, slog. 4:2:2 10 bit out board is fine.

                      I admit I didn't even put it on the list when Jan was asking months ago but since I've seen it on the F3, I really think slog is important for shooting cinema.
                      Last edited by hscully; 01-25-2013, 02:36 PM.

                      Comment


                        #56
                        Originally posted by Adamsenoj View Post
                        They already did that. They called it the AF100. ;)

                        This is what the AF100 was. A "super GH1" with more professional connectivity and features. A "super GH3", in concept would be nothing more than an AF100 successor.

                        Besides, the divisions that make the GH3 and the AF100 are separated as far as I know.
                        Go back and read my first post. My point being that anything called an AF100 is disliked because "everyone knows you can't make good imagery with that pos camera". I didn't say I subscribed to that point of view, I just suggested that it is a commonly held view, and I think I'm right. I also never said there was any logic or fairness to the online camera wars, but I think everyone would have to agree that there are definitely winners and losers. I'm not saying Panasonic should do another AF form factor camera, I'm saying that if the Lumix GH series is much more successful (largely based on its video performance) why not go with the flow and expand on that?

                        I also congratulate anyone who hasn't been asked if they have a 5d or a C300 in the past year.

                        Comment


                          #57
                          Originally posted by LyleGorch View Post
                          Go back and read my first post. My point being that anything called an AF100 is disliked because "everyone knows you can't make good imagery with that pos camera". I didn't say I subscribed to that point of view, I just suggested that it is a commonly held view, and I think I'm right. I also never said there was any logic or fairness to the online camera wars, but I think everyone would have to agree that there are definitely winners and losers. I'm not saying Panasonic should do another AF form factor camera, I'm saying that if the Lumix GH series is much more successful (largely based on its video performance) why not go with the flow and expand on that?

                          I also congratulate anyone who hasn't been asked if they have a 5d or a C300 in the past year.
                          Yeah, that's all alright. I'm pretty sure I don't give a turd about what people say about the AF100. It's a great camera. I'm hanging onto mine. I'm using it for all sorts of projects and I love it and my clients love the images I'm giving them. We were talking about the current upgrade.

                          I have a GH2. One of my really good friends loves theirs. I don't shoot video on mine. I just don't like it and I think that the AF100 is a way better camera for that... for me. Maybe you mean some marketing magic by your suggestion but frankly I just find it really harsh and provocative.

                          Comment


                            #58
                            Originally posted by Bern Caughey View Post
                            We were in Haiti last week for a documentary, & while I brought the AF100, I used the GH3 setup exclusively. The other cameraman used the AF100 & I'm interested to see how they cut together.

                            I also love how quick it is to work with the GH3. Changing ISO, WB, Shutter/Aperture, & Frame Rate, is so easy that I hope Panasonic Broadcast learns a few tricks from Consumer.
                            Bern- what are your early thoughts on the GH3, other than changing settings such as ISO, WB, etc?
                            Operation, image, etc.
                            Other than Edelkrone/Cavision, anything else? EVF or monitor?

                            And when you can, please let us know how it cuts with the AF100.
                            thanks

                            Comment


                              #59
                              Originally posted by Bern Caughey View Post
                              I love so much of of the AF100 & hope Panasonic sees a market for better camera at a higher price point. The FS700, C100, C300, all miss important features leaving plenty of room in the marketplace.
                              Could not agree more. I love everything about the AF100 except for the image. While it's not by any means a bad image, it's a bit uninspiring and I've grown tired of battling the poor DR in doc-style environments.

                              I love the 24p image out of the C100 but it's missing a lot of features for $6500. The GH3 looks lovely as well, but I don't want to go back to syncing audio and screwing on ND filters.

                              It seems like a no-brainer to put the GH3 sensor and features in an AF100 style body for $6-7k. I would snap that camera up in a heartbeat, especially with the Metabones SB for m4/3 coming soon. Why is Panasonic bothering with releasing an AF100a that nobody is interested in? I realize that business model worked for the DVX100 series but times have drastically changed.

                              I have a short window to sell my AF100 body for around $2800. My options are GH3 and syncing audio or C100 with lack of features. I'm honestly having a tough time deciding, even with the vast price difference. Or I could keep my AF100 and by the time NAB rolls around, take a bigger loss and sell it for 2k.

                              Anyone think we'll see something interesting at NAB from Panasonic?
                              Join my facebook group for other group buys and special pricing on video kit.

                              https://www.facebook.com/groups/cinekitlist/

                              Comment


                                #60
                                Originally posted by traviswears View Post
                                Could not agree more. I love everything about the AF100 except for the image. While it's not by any means a bad image, it's a bit uninspiring and I've grown tired of battling the poor DR in doc-style environments.

                                I love the 24p image out of the C100 but it's missing a lot of features for $6500. The GH3 looks lovely as well, but I don't want to go back to syncing audio and screwing on ND filters.

                                It seems like a no-brainer to put the GH3 sensor and features in an AF100 style body for $6-7k. I would snap that camera up in a heartbeat, especially with the Metabones SB for m4/3 coming soon. Why is Panasonic bothering with releasing an AF100a that nobody is interested in? I realize that business model worked for the DVX100 series but times have drastically changed.

                                I have a short window to sell my AF100 body for around $2800. My options are GH3 and syncing audio or C100 with lack of features. I'm honestly having a tough time deciding, even with the vast price difference. Or I could keep my AF100 and by the time NAB rolls around, take a bigger loss and sell it for 2k.

                                Anyone think we'll see something interesting at NAB from Panasonic?
                                I guess your camera has paid for itself like it has for the rest of us.
                                It's a very uninspiring thought wondering about its second hand prize.
                                I'll guess I'll keep mine until i grow old or get bankrupted
                                Igelkott Film is Hedgehog Film
                                www.igelkottfilm.com

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X