60D or AF-100

B

boulder

Well-known member
I'm possibly getting a budget for my movie. I'm about 1/3rd the way through and have been shooting with a 7D then a 60D. I've had some moire issues in about 5% of the footage and have spent about an hour or two fixing it. I'm happy with the Canon looks and have been doing dual sound which is annoying. I have a couple EOS lenses (about $600 worth). I'm considering switching to the AF-100, but that will mean switching lenses and buying new ones.

I know this is kind of a personal preferance but I would still like to get any feedback. I'm expecting 100k or less and I need to invest heavily in effects so it's not like I'll have tons of money to throw around. I would also be taking a leave of absence from my work so I will have to pay my wage with this too.

Bottom line is this camera is a really big descision for me so I don't want this to sound like I'm a big whiner, but you guys are probably the ones to ask.
 
I personally haven't used the AF-100 so I can't comment. I love my 60D, though.

How do you fix the moire issue in post?
 
Sux but animated masking and blurs and color replacement. I unfourtuanly have a character who wears a suit which the camera goes bonkers with in any medium close-up or close-ups. I animate a mask over the suit and color replace and blur
 
Go for the AF, you want be sorry. Use your current lenses with an adapter. The difference in the sound alone is worth it not to mention moire etc, etc...
 
Thanks Paul. Of course you realize I can't use the EOS lenses with the AF because they are electronic, but probably just take the hit. Hopefully the budget comes in above 50 and closer to 100 then I'll probably do it.
 
Your problem is not the camera.... If you buy an Af100 you would have to switch your entire set up. I would spent the extra money on set design and effects like you said. The camera is the least of your problems, hurry up and finish that film so you can take less days off of work & lose the least money possible.
 
vision_filmz said:
Your problem is not the camera.... If you buy an Af100 you would have to switch your entire set up. I would spent the extra money on set design and effects like you said. The camera is the least of your problems, hurry up and finish that film so you can take less days off of work & lose the least money possible.
Click to expand...

duly noted.
 
vision_filmz said:
Your problem is not the camera.... If you buy an Af100 you would have to switch your entire set up. I would spent the extra money on set design and effects like you said. The camera is the least of your problems, hurry up and finish that film so you can take less days off of work & lose the least money possible.
Click to expand...

In the grand scheme of things, switching between AF100 and a 60D really isn't much money.
 
Is it the aperture or focus on the auto canon lenses you are concerned about. I have a aperture aperture adapter for AF to Canon somewhere around here that will the former.
 
I didn't know they had an electronic aperature adjust. The ones I knew about actually have an aperature in the adapter itself which seems to me to be a bad solution. I know they were working on an electronic one but don't know if it's done yet and heard it was going to be around $700-800
 
Last edited:
HansSteinert said:
In the grand scheme of things, switching between AF100 and a 60D really isn't much money.
Click to expand...

This is true, but if he knows how to use his 60d and has it down packed, it will only slow him down to learn the af100 and get the proper rigging for it. This is my opinion. I fully understand that the Af100 is in another league & a more professional tool, but the Canon can deliver some great quality as well. If I were shooting a film like I said the camera would be the least of my worries.
 
Visions comments carry a lot of weight. Although it would be great to have the AF, I probably get more visual bang putting that money towards effects and sets as I get a decent picture. the moire is dreadful and I really have to be careful with the suit and I HATE dual sound, but weighing that against visual candy in the film for the audience it may come up short.

I'm thinking if I get my full 100 then I go for it, but any less I throw everything at what's on screen (should have asked for 105 ;) )
 
Last edited:
Us filmmakers notice moire and aliasing much much more than our audience, by the way. I was trying to show my friend an obvious example of it, and I literally had to point to it for him to notice it.
 
I love the AF100. In my opinion far superior to DSLR's. I have used them several times. Worth the investment. Plus, it's shipping with the 14-140 lens right now.
 
andythefilmer said:
I love the AF100. In my opinion far superior to DSLR's. I have used them several times. Worth the investment. Plus, it's shipping with the 14-140 lens right now.
Click to expand...
Yes, but you have to now deal with the crop factor + that camera was really not made to be handheld like dslrs are. I can pull up dozens of excellent films shot on a Dslr & to tell you the truth I highly doubt the audience can tell the difference between an Af100 and a Canon Dslr. If I were going to buy a Camera it would be the Sony Nex-FS100U
 
How much time do you estimate you would spend fixing moire and syncing audio in post? Multiply your estimated number of hours by your approximate hourly wage and find out whether that number is higher or lower than the difference between the 60D and the AF100. That would be the objective way of doing it, and when dealing with budgets, objectivity is generally the best approach to take.

Vision, the AF100 is actually much better for handolding than a 'naked' DSLR. The larger size and more horizontal design mean that your hand placement can be further from the centre of gravity, and commbined with the heavier weight it reduces camera shake. The top handle is very useful too. And the crop factor difference is minimal, considering that the DSLR's have to crop the top and bottom of the sensor to 16:9 whereas the m4/3 chip uses the full image circle for 16:9.
 
* first of all, CONGRATULATIONS!!
* in most cases, I wouldn't worry too much about moire, because you usually can avoid it with a different shot design, but: in your case, this seems not to be an option, so I'd say go for the suggestion by deltoidjohn and price your time and see how expensive the "clean moire in post" process actually ishttp://www.dvxuser.com/V6/member.php?39820-deltoidjohn
* I'd also go for the FS100 instead of the AF100 if I went for a real camcorder (instead of a DSLR)
 
DSLR carries all the way to the top as long as you back up its flaws. You have your AE painter fixing moire, you have your company partner fixing all possible rolling shutter scenarios, etc. AF100 is the indie filmmakers dream IMO (or FS100, although it's less of a complete camera).
 
yeah, there are a number of m4/3 to _____ adapters that will physically control the aperture of an electronic lens.
i have a rayqual that i use with my gh2 and it works great
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top