4 months in, is the AF100 worthy?

There is a very good Chroma key thread here where the AVCHD codec is
compared to NanoFlash- XDCAM MPEG 422.

Other than lines of resolution, there are many ways to augment the AF100
to get it to do what you need. DSLRs are limited in this regard.

So, i think it's well worth the < 5k price tag. We still shoot with our 5DMkII's,
but less and less. I'm certainly not investing in them anymore.

jeff
 
Last edited:
I think the original question here was a bit flawed. Every post here is going to be opinion and not based on your current needs, money, time, etc. so to put it plainly the AF100 is totally worthy, the question is do you want it and why or why not?
 
well said.

for me, it's gotten to the point where advancements in cameras are not the reasons my films become any better or worse.

Technology seems to no longer be the limiting factor. Which is great.
 
Hey guys. Just finished a pilot for a feature; " Norbert and the System ." My AF100 performed perfectly. I shot to both onboard SD cards as well as to a Ki Pro Mini (apple pro res HQ). I shot 1080p at 30fps. It's a sci fi film and will have lots of VFX.

I love this camera and love the resolution! I used my assortment of Nikkor primes all 2.8 or less.
What really astonished me was what I saw on the monitor - Panasonic HD 17". Basically, I could see the veins in everyone's eyes. And they were all wearing goggles. I mean, I've never seen this before with a varicam nor with my HVX. When we downloaded the visuals, the resolution was still incredible. I am totally sold on this camera. I have some images up on my blog if anyone is interested. I don't think this is a great way of viewing the images, but I guess you will get the idea.

Can't wait to try some Panavision lens on it!!

In terms of a production camera, it works like that and more. In terms of pulling a good key on a green screen, I was doing this with my HVX. It really is all about lighting, positioning, exposure,
etc. We did a green screen on this shoot and post hasn't done the key yet. I can tell just by looking at it that they should have no problem.

Anyway, that's my two cents.
 
I wouldn't make any judgements on either camera based upon this test. Not every camera shoots well in low light. The ability to shoot in low light shouldn't be the sole basis of judging any camera. I'm not usually caught having to raise the gain(iso) and always light my scenes. It's always about what you can do with the camera not if an individual function isn't up to par with other cameras. The people who shoot with DSLR's put up with a lot of technical problems and still produce fantastic visuals. IMHO I think that is what it's all about. Phillip's test shows which camera seems to work better in low light. Should we make decisions on which camera to use based on this, I don't think so.
 
i love the fact that your complaining at 6400iso when this wasnt even possible about a year ago.

for me, i lvoe the af100 at everything it does. yeah its not as great at 3200ISO but i never shoot that high. 1250 is my limit, anything else, needs to be lit.
and that doesnt mean i wouldnt use an fs100. I would love to use one... at night or at a set.
 
Fun to wonder which one Kubrik would have chosen for "Barry Lyndon" with these options.

Right tool, for specific job... then apply.
 
We've hit that point where the tech has outpaced the talent. AF100 is plenty worthy, but really, how many people are going to actually make a feature with it instead of nitpick tech flaws to death or wait for the next best thing? You can't really blame the camera now.
 
Isaac_Brody said:
.....how many people are going to actually make a feature with it instead of nitpick tech flaws to death or wait for the next best thing? You can't really blame the camera now.
Click to expand...

Sure you can.

In the "old days" it was: If I had a Panavision or an Arri .... and the "Barry Lyndon" 50 mm and 35 mm f 0.7.... and hundreds of candles.... I would be the next best Kubrick.

http://www.visual-memory.co.uk/sk/ac/len/page1.htm

Today we all wait for the 6K, 444, 19.5 stop latitude, 128000 ISO noise free camera for 2500 $ that comes along with a set of Voigtlaender f 0.7 cheapos and the "iDear"-super-script-software that writes a success movie after the other.

Unless these demands are met, everything else is crap.... ;-)
 
I don't think Philip had that AF100 set up right as I've seen footage much cleaner than that out of it. But really, why all the fuss about super lowlight? I mean I wonder how all them movies we've all seen to date with night scenes ever got away with it. OR, is high ISO just going to make us lazy and not light anymore. Also, the Sony's are ISO 800 rated. The FS100 will need plenty of NON-EXISTANT ND to be able to shoot outside during the day. Worried about lowlight? THis video proves that the AF100 is up to the task: http://vimeo.com/18620886
 
TornFusion said:
That test is kinda depressing....af100 didn't hold up that well at all.
Click to expand...

I've shot with the AF100 under similar conditions. The grain does not look that way in my experience. Something was wrong with the camera setup. I've shot in near black conditions, ISO 3200 and not seen that kind of grain issue on a correctly set up camera. Perhaps it needed to be black balanced?
 
dustylense said:
But really, why all the fuss about super lowlight? I mean I wonder how all them movies we've all seen to date with night scenes ever got away with it. OR, is high ISO just going to make us lazy and not light anymore. http://vimeo.com/18620886
Click to expand...

For non-dramatic work like docs or event/weddings, being able to get good lowlight footage without having to drag around lights is a big deal, and both these cameras are being aimed in part at that market. This is a big consideration for me in deciding which one of these cameras to purchase next, so how well it performs in lowlight is a big factor for me.
 
There was something wrong with the setup on that AF100. Have a look at Mr. Bloom's own video of six months ago:

http://vimeo.com/16000333?ab

This video image was burned into my mind. I think that AF100 does fine lighting cigars in the dark!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top