4 months in, is the AF100 worthy?

J

jdv

Well-known member
AF100 hit the shelves (well, people's mail boxes any way) about 4 months ago. Haven't paid too much attention to this thread b/c I have so much dough in Canon stuff and I do like the DSLR form factor. But as the Mark III looks to be a fall (at the very earliest) release, my wandering eye is, well, starting to wander.

Outside of the Canon DSLR cams, the 2 cams that would seem to be of most interest to a guy who makes B horror movies (me) are the AF100 and the F3. The F3 costs nearly three times as much as the AF100, so of course I'm looking more closely at the Panny.

I've good footage from both, and read reviews that both trash and praise these two cams. Recently, however, I've been reading more in-depth reviews by respected guys of the AF100 in the field, and they haven't been as positive as I'd hoped. I mean, everyone seems to agree that it handles like you want a "true" video camera to handle (and then some), but that the image doesn't quite seem to be there the way you might think. One common complaint seems to be noise at any exposure level and reluctance to use it for green screen shots due to the 8 bit output. "Looks video-y" is something I've read in several reviews (although I must say it looks fine to me in the clips I've seen).

But whatevs - what I want to know is this - are you current owners happy with the AF100? I don't have a pony in this race b/c I haven't invested in 2011 camera tech yet (and my understanding is that my Canon glass will work for either the AF100 or F3 w/ an adapter) and am honestly curious as to what "real" users think of the AF100.
 
Most of that has been talked about and shot down on a lot of the threads on here. Some people seem to be heavily invested in the DSLR thing, and it seems to me that a few of them tried to create a storm around any of the new large chip cameras. The image doesn't look "video-y." There are progressive frame rates. There are plenty of matrix, gamma, and sharpness settings to create a lot of options. Most people do their final look in post on any camera, especially like say a Red. I have my settings how I like them, and I don't have any problems with noise, beyond what one expects at this price. There are samples after samples of people who pull great looking keys on a green screen with the on-camera codec. At three times the cost, the F3 has improvements in image quality. Though to make that investment worthwhile, you might as well buy a nice external recorder for the F3, which is going to increase the cost even more. If you don't want to use a DSLR, there aren't that many options for a digital cinema camera. You could buy the AF100, F3, one of the Red Epics, or the 8 bit Sony FS100, which will be closer in price to the AF100. The FS100 isn't out yet, so it is hard to know what it will do beyond a few samples.

All of those cameras have different strengths, and the benefits come with paying more for gear. That said, all of those options look really great for 1080p HD. Good production and post-production go far. If you can't make a good film with them, the problem isn't with the gear.
 
I would say it's very worthy. If you just have the body with an old Nikon Prime on it, it weighs almost exactly the same as a 5D with standard 24-105mm Zoom on it. With the top handle removed it's much closer to it size wise.

FS100 is unproven as of yet so it's a non-issue for me but if you can wait and feel like it might be a better camera then go for it.

The AF100 is HARDLY video-y and is almost as sensitive as my 5D is. They inter-cut very well together but the AF100 comes out on top for its features as a camera, the codec although some would disagree is pretty robust, audio inputs, etc.

F3 sounds like overkill for what you're doing. The AF100 is very sensitive and would suit your needs just fine. If cost isn't as much of an issue then go for it though...because it's an amazing camera with more dynamic range and very clean at high ISOs.

To me the AF100 feels like the perfect camera in-between a DSLR and something like the F3. The FS100 to me just doesn't seem to have enough to attract me feature wise. It looks like it'll be a solid camera but just not for me I think. HD-SDI alone on the AF100 can make it worth it for some, but I don't know your situation.

Lots to consider here, but it sounds like you're not a guy who has to use DSLRs and can afford something more suited for typical film work out of the box. The accessories I have for my AF100 would basically be interchangeable with a DSLR, F3, or FS100 so it's of no concern. All those camera would need some other stuff to be fully ready in my opinion but the AF100 seems to be the best option in the middle with the great film camera features, DSLRish size/sensitivity, and it's very much ready to go as long as you have a lens.

All opinions here but I chose the AF100 and don't regret a thing. I'm actually finding that my 5D will be an excellent camera to use as B-cam for specific shots.
 
Hey Kyle, thanks for the input. Yeah, it's not about DSLR vs true video Camera issue - I like the DSLR form factor, and in certain circumstances they're the perfect tool. Not selling any of my DSLRs, but I do want to invest in the next round of tech, and the AF100 is the first out of the box - it has a zillion pro features and a nice price point. At a certain point, Canon has to crap or I'll get off the pot.

But does it really sing for the real world user? For better or worse, I tend to value "the guy on the street's" view a little more then some of the heavy hitters. And that's what I'm trying to get at with my question...

And there doesn't seem to be a recent thread that addresses it. Most of the thread (naturally) address much more tech oriented issues.
 
blackcat said:
If you can't make a good film with them, the problem isn't with the gear.
Click to expand...

+1

I'm very happy with the af100. Personally I think that many of the issues that people have with it are moot for experienced camerapersons. I make the best with what I have, I guess. Too much noise in the shot? Well, then shoot it differently, light it differently or use noise removal in post, use an external recorder or maybe your story is so good who cares about some noise? Or buy a camera that has no noise.

My goal with the camera was to get something that had removable lenses and control over depth of field. I had started to go down the path of a lens adapter on my hpx170 but just never continued to pursue it. I've also worked on some 5D/7D shoots and started thinking along those lines but again didn't purchase anything. When I heard about the af100 with proper audio and sdi, I decided it was for me. You can compare all of those cameras, but in the end most of us have x amount of dollars to spend and the af100(and all the accoutrement) was within my price range.

I just saw a short film shot with my af100 that I had worked on(as AC) projected on a big screen(30x13) it looked pretty good to me. And the settings we used hadn't really been pushed to the limit so as we've shot more projects the picture has gotten better as we've tweaked settings.

I'm a happy owner/operator...on a side note I still use my HPX170 a lot.

Bob
 
Last edited:
I don't own the Af100...but if you go to the AF100 Screengrabs/Footage section there are some great examples of not only footage from the camera, but in many cases, what the users thought about the AF100 for doing their work. The very first one by Oliver Rush looks great and he loved the camera. There are many glowing reviews by real world users. Also, on B and H's reveiw section I'd guess it's a 90% 5 star camera.
 
jdv said:
But does it really sing for the real world user?
Click to expand...

Think of the tried and true history of the DVX/HVX cameras, but imagine putting different lenses on it. That's basically what you get IMO. You can't really lose here. There isn't so much new about this camera that you couldn't compare it to the typical quality of the other popular Panasonic models.
 
I've had mine for a week. Used it on my friends job at a wedding and loved the feel and button placements, lcd, nd filters, 2 xlr's and everything else about this camcorder. I use it on my first job this saturday. I decided to get one as I was waiting on the FS100 and after the May release was canceled and was told July and now hearing as late as august I can't shoot on DSLR's for that amount of time without being frustrated. For the meantime I picked up the AF100. I love it. Well worth it to me. Some complaints but I'm content.
 
"Poppycock."

Again, this is just something I've read in reviews - not saying it is true or false. Don't do a lot of green screen work, so I don't have a great frame of reference in terms of what 8, 10, and 12 bit outputs actually mean in the real world. I hear so much horrendous stuff about DSLRs, yet if treated with love, they make pictures that are very pleasing - at least to my eye. But again, I've never tried to key with one.

Numbers don't mean a whole lot to me... and they certainly mean even less to my audience. Either they'll say it looks good, or it doesn't.
 
jdv said:
"Poppycock."

Again, this is just something I've read in reviews - not saying it is true or false. Don't do a lot of green screen work, so I don't have a great frame of reference in terms of what 8, 10, and 12 bit outputs actually mean in the real world. I hear so much horrendous stuff about DSLRs, yet if treated with love, they make pictures that are very pleasing - at least to my eye. But again, I've never tried to key with one.

Numbers don't mean a whole lot to me... and they certainly mean even less to my audience. Either they'll say it looks good, or it doesn't.
Click to expand...

I have yet to see a sample of any problems with the on-board codec and a green screen. Some people voiced concern early on--when only the camera specs were known--about an 8 bit camera and pulling a key. Now, people have been using 8 bit cameras with a green screen for long before the AF100. Some 8 bit cameras were more troublesome than others. However like Matt demonstrated in the sample, the AF100's new and higher bitrate AVCHD codec does fine with a green screen.

8 bit means there is less color information than 10 bit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/8-bit_color

In the real world, it means that an 8 bit camera is more likely to show posterization. The differences in gradual variations of similar color, like blue in the sky, will look more natural in a 10 bit or 12 bit camera. Most likely, those of us shooting with cameras in the price range of the AF100 will be using 10 bit cameras when the next major round of cameras come out in about 2 to 3 years. 8 bit can be fine; 10 bit is nicer. For now, you have to pay a premium for it.
 
jdv said:
Outside of the Canon DSLR cams, the 2 cams that would seem to be of most interest to a guy who makes B horror movies (me) are the AF100 and the F3. The F3 costs nearly three times as much as the AF100, so of course I'm looking more closely at the Panny.

I've good footage from both, and read reviews that both trash and praise these two cams.
Click to expand...

First off, thank you for spreading Zombie and Vampire awareness with your work. I think it's a problem too few people admit is real. :-P

Just messing. I love horror. Keep at it.

Second, I would suggest that it takes less skill to type a crabby review than to learn how to properly use a camera, and how to judge/admit its proper application.

I've shot seven projects since I picked mine up in February, in somewhere around 10 weeks... A little under one shoot a week. I have a bunch of glass for it, and zero complaints that have to do with the camera. I do, however, have a wish list, that includes a lens turret (ahem, c'mon metal workers, help a guy out). I just shot a friend of mine who works out of space at DuArt (which closed its negative labs recently); he is one of the last (if not the last freelance) negative/match cutter in NYC. I sent the footage out for an edit to a friend of mine that does editing and gfx for a few studios out in LA. His comments to me: Zero complaints... from a guy that handles footage shot on a dozen formats by the best guys in the biz, and lays off on everything from tape to godknowswhat. For $5k, I couldn't ask for anything more (well, you can always ask for more, but I'm happy with what it is).

I owned a DVX and, in my mind, this camera has been a decade in the coming. I would have gauged my eyes out if I was shooting exclusively on a DSLR because I was so spoiled by a properly engineered camera. I digress... guys I know roll on the Alexa every week, they still rag on it for... well, something. You can always nit-pick. 10 bit vs 8 bit, 1080 vs 4k, whatever. Who gives a crap? Seriously, who cares.

Did you see Restrepo? I wonder if anyone asked what it was shot on. It was damn good, it could have been shot on an iPhone for all I care. Watch Armadillo? I haven't the slightest clue what they shot it on, nor do I care, because the stories were damn good, and the camera took the g__ d____ picture. If someone is happy with the F3, or the Varicam, or whatever, then godbless 'em. This one is the bang for your buck... the AF100, is the cat's meow. For me, well, baby, it purrs.
 
Great post! I try not to get obsessed with which camera I have and posts like this help!
grimrebes said:
First off, thank you for spreading Zombie and Vampire awareness with your work. I think it's a problem too few people admit is real. :-P

Just messing. I love horror. Keep at it.

Second, I would suggest that it takes less skill to type a crabby review than to learn how to properly use a camera, and how to judge/admit its proper application.

I've shot seven projects since I picked mine up in February, in somewhere around 10 weeks... A little under one shoot a week. I have a bunch of glass for it, and zero complaints that have to do with the camera. I do, however, have a wish list, that includes a lens turret (ahem, c'mon metal workers, help a guy out). I just shot a friend of mine who works out of space at DuArt (which closed its negative labs recently); he is one of the last (if not the last freelance) negative/match cutter in NYC. I sent the footage out for an edit to a friend of mine that does editing and gfx for a few studios out in LA. His comments to me: Zero complaints... from a guy that handles footage shot on a dozen formats by the best guys in the biz, and lays off on everything from tape to godknowswhat. For $5k, I couldn't ask for anything more (well, you can always ask for more, but I'm happy with what it is).

I owned a DVX and, in my mind, this camera has been a decade in the coming. I would have gauged my eyes out if I was shooting exclusively on a DSLR because I was so spoiled by a properly engineered camera. I digress... guys I know roll on the Alexa every week, they still rag on it for... well, something. You can always nit-pick. 10 bit vs 8 bit, 1080 vs 4k, whatever. Who gives a crap? Seriously, who cares.

Did you see Restrepo? I wonder if anyone asked what it was shot on. It was damn good, it could have been shot on an iPhone for all I care. Watch Armadillo? I haven't the slightest clue what they shot it on, nor do I care, because the stories were damn good, and the camera took the g__ d____ picture. If someone is happy with the F3, or the Varicam, or whatever, then godbless 'em. This one is the bang for your buck... the AF100, is the cat's meow. For me, well, baby, it purrs.
Click to expand...
 
jdv said:
..... am honestly curious as to what "real" users think of the AF100.
Click to expand...

We used it currently for some special shots together with an ALEXA. It's our go-between cam. The one we can send an assistant off with to grab some special images for our dramatic work. We use it for our research, for short things we plan to do in the future, for layouts and we may actually use it for low-budget work for TV. An I have it with me a lot of times for cases that something appears I want to put in my archive and maybe use later in a movie. I don't peep pixels and don't sniff out codecs. It just works nicely.
 
For $4900, FOR SURE! Totally worthy. Great camera! I do not regret buying it as I was thinking about the FS100. But the ND filter wheel is such a blessing!
 
AF100 quality

AF100 quality

I've had the AF100 for over a month now and I'm loving the images coming out of the camera. I still have some issues in dark spots (it sucks for any kind of event simply due to the lack of a servo zoom) but over all I think it is great. I also own a 5D and it really is hard to compete with the images from that camera, for me however the AF100 offers so much more on the video side.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top