5D MArk III vs. AF100

M

M1CEtro

Active member
Hey guys,

I shoot music videos, event recaps, documentaries, and years down the line eventually into films. I have been using my 7D which I am satisfied with, but I often don't have access to optimal lighting conditions and hate that I have to up the ISO. I usually shoot with a 1.8 lens. The improved noise performance on the mark III makes it very attractive. I've researched the mark III for awhile but a friend of mine suggested looking at the Panasonic AF100. I've looked it up a little and searched this forum for similar posts, but I'm still not understanding clear cut differences between the 5D DSLR and the actual video camera AF100. I know the AF100 is built suited for video, but what does that really "mean" as far as video quality and capabilities. Looking at test footage between the two cameras do look "different" but I'm having a hard time determining which one is "better". I guess with my inexperience with actual video cameras, I'm not sure what to look for when comparing the two footages. Could someone explain these out for me, maybe post videos explaining the points they are making? What's the advantage of using an actual video camera, and the cons? At this point I'm leaning towards the 5d, but I am open to switching, I just want to understand better. I should explain that budget is also a factor. I'm open to getting an AF100 but not if the advantage over the 5d doesn't justify the price difference to me.

Thanks guys

Roger
 
Both cameras are the same price, $3500 (after rebate on the AF100).

The 5D has a bigger sensor, and will have shallower depth of field. And it can take still photos.

Other than that, the AF100 has dozens and dozens of things that it does, that the DSLR doesn't. Just a multitude of things. Things like having an HD-SDI output for connecting to pro video monitors, and XLR inputs for attaching professional microphones, and ND filters for getting proper exposure under any lighting conditions without needing external ND filters, and variable frame rates for a wide variety of fast-motion and slow-motion shooting options, and pre-record for actually starting a recording *before* you press the record button, and proper timecode and the ability to synchronize timecode across multiple cameras for effortless multicam productions, and a flexible lens mount that lets you use practically any type of lens ever made for any camera, vs. the comparatively restrictive Canon EF mount on the 5D which limits you primarily to Canon and Nikon lenses... Plus you can record for 12 continuous hours in one take on the AF100, vs. a max of 30 minutes on the 5D... plus simple things like having a rotateable/articulating LCD panel, which makes getting high and low shots infinitely easier than on the DSLR which has the fixed flat LCD, plus having a separate viewfinder so you can see footage in bright daylight, something that's nigh unto impossible on a DSLR unless you buy an additional external viewfinder loupe. There are just many, many things that a legitimate video camera does, that are suitable for the process of shooting video, that a stills camera doesn't do.

At one point I made a list of "things the AF100 does that a DSLR doesn't do", which doesn't necessarily apply directly to the 5D Mark III because it's fixed a few things (such as having a headphone jack and upping the recording time limit from 10 minutes to 30 minutes), but a lot of the rest of it probably still applies.

Now, just because the AF100 does many many things the DSLR doesn't, doesn't necessarily mean that it's the better choice for YOU and your particular circumstances. This list just points out all the things that a real video camera does, that a DSLR doesn't do. You have to evaluate your particular needs against what the two cameras do, to determine which is the more appropriate for you. If I was advising you, I'd say no question, the AF100 is the better choice, especially for doing events and docs.
 
The 5DmkIII is a full frame sensor, takes great stills, is good in low light, and is capable of the much overused ultra shallow depth of field. The AF100 has a M4/3 sensor which is similar in size to your 7D, and has a fairly complete toolset with features like full Rez HDMI and SDI outputs, focus aids, bars & tone, waveform monitor, balanced XLR audio inuts, headphone out monitor, variable frame rate recording, and other features that make it a great low cost production camera.


Edit.. I see Barry beat me to it.
 
I would like to see an image quality comparison like the recent 5DMKIII & D800 posted by Dave Dugdale. The AF-100 has a lot of use advantages but the people wil forgo all of that if they can get better image quality out of a different camera.
 
Bassman2003 said:
The AF-100 has a lot of use advantages but the people wil forgo all of that if they can get better image quality out of a different camera.
Click to expand...

"the people" who are the people?

I own a handful of different DSLR cameras, but I only shoot with one when it's the right tool for the job. A proper video camera with a complete toolset is always my first choice. There is always more to consider when selecting a camera for a job than just the resolution, or picture style. And while we are at it, what is a better image quality? Some people think a soft cornered anamorphic look is the ****, while others prefer an over saturated ultra shallow 5D look. Some folks earn a living with their cameras, while others live to shoot test videos for YouTube. Different strokes for different folks.
 
I have a 5Dmk3 and an AF100/101. They are so different and yet they can look similar. I would be hard pressed to say one or the other is better in image quality when shooting video but the AF100/101 is much easier to shoot with thanks to the extensive tools inside the AF camera.
 
David W. Jones said:
"the people" who are the people?
Click to expand...

The people I speak of are the masses that are using the consumer GH2 hacked while the price of the professional AF-100 drops like a stone. The same people have migrated to all DSLRs that are a pain to shoot with. They follow the image they want first then deal with the ergonomics. For some reason the AF-100 has lost a lot of value in a short amount of time. I am guessing that the image quality is not what people had hoped for because the camera has every other feature one could want.
 
In the last month we have worked with... HDX900, EX3, F3, Epic, AF100, FS100, Red One MX, GH2.

The GH2 was only used for a car mount shot.

While its true that the masses may be using consumer DSLR cameras, the masses do not represent the higher end professional market.

I'm not trying to knock these DSLR cameras, as we have 4 different ones in our kit. Just saying in my little world people are still using real video cameras with professional features.

All the Best!

Dave
 
I would like to thank everyone for their inputs on this post. Especially Barry_Green for that informative post. Could you post the link to your list of things AF100 that dslr doesn't? I'd like to read that as well

If anyone could post video links explaining some visual differences I'd greatly appreciate that as well!
 
M1CEtro said:
If anyone could post video links explaining some visual differences I'd greatly appreciate that as well!
Click to expand...

M1CEtro - Ditto to everything Barry said. That said, if you have not already done so, it may be helpful to look at a cross section of videos from the Vimeo AF100 group: https://vimeo.com/groups/af100/videos/
...and from the 5D Mark III group (even though the camera is fairly new, there have been a few good videos posted): https://vimeo.com/groups/5d3/videos/

Both cameras produce awesome images, but everything else being equal, I would lean towards the 5D Mark III because of your low light sensitivity requirement (see the AF100's performance in Philip Bloom's 2011 Christmas shootout) - but be prepared to crouch down on the floor if you want a low angle shot and don't want to spend the extra bucks for a monitor.

Like poor Philip Bloom lying down on the beach during his 5D Mk III review :-)

photo-2-6.jpg

With the AF100, you'd just rotate the LCD upward. This is just one of many DSLR challenges that a camcorder solves.

Good luck with your decision!

Bill
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top