A suggestion for panasonic whilst thinking about any af100 successor

Darren Levine

Darren Levine

Veteran
let me preface by saying that i do like my af100, it's still the only camera in the price range that does what it is that i want a camera to do.

that being said, i hold no manufacturer bias, and if the fs100 wasn't shaped like an oversized square pear and had built in nd filters, that would be the camera for me.

the af100 is solid, but one cannot ignore what other cameras are doing, and the big tiny elephant in the room is the gh2. if it weren't for the hack, there would be so much less to complain about, but the hack does exist, and it has caused many people to make that annoying decision: optimal quality vs usability.

the d4 is near, the 1dx is near, the EOS C is yet to be announced but possible by summer, and no word whatsoever as to what panasonic is doing. from this, i can only wildly guess they are doing one of either two things: creating an af100 successor, or targeting another market entirely(f3/scarlet/c300)

and i have a suggestion for them for either of those plans: give is af100 users an upgrade option.

i don't know if i'm alone, but i LIKE the af100's body, it makes sense for me, and if panny are planning a successor, i would say: use the exact same body! so few things need to be worked on to make the af100 a clear leader in its class, and i don't think the body is an issue at all, and if panny kept the body, it would seem that that would make it rather easy for them to offer an af200, and at the same time, offer af100 users an upgrade: send in our bodies(camera, not human) and switch out the sensor/cpu board/watever. do so for a reasonable price, and make all us users happy as crap that we don't need to sell yet another camera just to get the latest and greatest.

and if panny is targeting another market altogether: offer the upgrade as just described! don't match the new camera, just improve what we have. and i think we have some ideas....

the sensor: those of you who have watched my crop tutorial http://vimeo.com/19940853 know that i couldn't care less what size the sensor is as long as its 2/3" or up, so i'd say keep m43(easier to swap out too), but between the sensor and the cpu, something obviously needs to change, it's not resolving like some other cameras, and in this day in age, i do demand that my cameras can actually resolve as many pixels as it's recording(or at least come very close)

the codec: it DOES look good, but as we know, it isn't comparing. no excuses, UP it. don't give us raw or anything ridiculous, but ya know I frame would be nice, in the 50-100mbit range.(driftwood is kicking you arse) the 422 50mbit mpeg2 has its merits too.

the peaking: this is my peeve coming from sony cameras: panasonic, your peaking sucks, im sorry, it just sucks as compared to what sony does. pick up an ex1 and try peaking, try it at low, medium, and high, it's incredible. i don't care how you do it, but your peaking needs to be improved, and yes i've used EVF detail and it's a horrible excuse to try and improve peaking. i need to see how my image actually looks AND focus, not one or the other. maybe its' the lcd, whatever it is, fix it.

sdi 10 bit: guess what? i don't care! give us the improved codec and i'll bet others wont care either.

p2: don't do it, i can already hear others yelling at me, but just don't do it. probably wouldn't be able to anyways in this mystical upgrade we're talking about, but let me put it this way: in your other p2 cameras, if there were an MxR or MxM adapter for p2, many would be using it. i'd prefer CF, but im perfectly content as it is, leave it.

ghosting: i've seen some of this any my buddy swears its only with the nd clear. im not sure if nd clear actually has glass in there or not but fix that up, its nicht gut.

and that's really it, and i can't say im an engineer or have taken apart the camera but i have to imagine that those things could be upgraded for a price, and thats all i want, to be able to send in my camera, have some bits replaced, and gladly pay an upgrade price.

i need to send my af in anyways because my EVF has turned red!

sincerely,

me
 
ND0 has glass because if it didn't, the focus would be off at ND0.

When I had my AF100, I really did like it. Body wise, I just don't like the built in EVF. That's one thing I really like on the FS100 is it's a bit smaller without it. Don't get me wrong, the FS100 has some serious ergonomic flaws about it, but I feel the AF100 did as well. What it didn't lack is usability. The ND alone was amazing. The waveform was amazing. On the FS100, the histogram is really hard to read in comparison. It's better than nothing, but I miss that waveform A LOT.

I'll even say, the cropping was NEVER an issue for me.

What I also didn't like is the buttons under the LCD, I had to open the LCD to get to them. And of course, focus assist. I really wanted to keep the AF100 along with the FS100 but I couldn't. There are many shoots where I really miss the AF100. Other times, I am glad I have the FS100.

I want an AFS100 :)
 
The af100 resolves more on the wringer chart. Anyway it only looks soft due to the OLPF. The difference isnt night and day
 
With single chip cameras you can have an image relatively free of aliasing, slightly lower res, AF 100, or slightly higher res but somewhat more prone to aliasing FS 100 , F3. that's sort of where we are right now. Personally , on simply a practical level I'd rather have the image more resistant to aliasing because that reduces "in the moment headaches" in the field on the shoot.

There is much more to an image than resolution, you can count composition, lighting ,subject matter and mise en scene among those things that might supersede resolution.
 
Mark Smith said:
With single chip cameras you can have an image relatively free of aliasing, slightly lower res, AF 100, or slightly higher res but somewhat more prone to aliasing FS 100 , F3. that's sort of where we are right now. Personally , on simply a practical level I'd rather have the image more resistant to aliasing because that reduces "in the moment headaches" in the field on the shoot.

There is much more to an image than resolution, you can count composition, lighting ,subject matter and mise en scene among those things that might supersede resolution.
Click to expand...

In practical use, I consider the FS100 alias free. I've NEVER had a shot with it that I've seen it. Same with the AF100. I can make both the FS100 and AF100 alias, very easily actually, just shoot a guitar in a dark room with light just on the guitar. To me, either one has really great performance. In fact, in most videos where aliasing has been shown on the FS100, the footage was interpreted wrongly by the NLE.

But, I've never had to shoot a guitar luckily in that setting for a client.

Now, 7D/5D/Txi/60D, which I've shot with them all, I've lost MANY shots unfortunately. Some I've had to reshoot because even the extra coverage was suffering from it.
 
i should state what i really want: a 2/3" ex1, yep. that would be my be all end all cam :)

actually im very interested in the ikonoscope, but too many other things will be coming out in the next 6 months i can afford to wait and see
 
I do have to say, the next 1 to 2 years is going to be VERY interesting in the video world. It's really exciting to me to see all this new tech moving pretty quickly.
 
imdjay said:
sdi 10 bit: guess what? i don't care! give us the improved codec and i'll bet others wont care either.
Click to expand...

Disagree. I care. 10-bit for external recorders would be SO sweet.

Maybe we shouldn't list what upgrades we think the camera SHOULDN'T have; It would be a shame if Panasonic was going to add something, and then dropped it because one or two posters here said they felt they didn't need it. ;)

I think an AF200 (or whatever the successor is going to be called) should have:

- Better sensor, with higher resolution (1080 actual lines, or close too it), better low-light performance, more lattitude (i.e. catch up with the FS100); personally, I'd like to see them go to S35, but I suspect they never will. Unfortunate, because this will then be brought up in just about every comparison EVER as a weakness/con.

- Fix the damned highlight handling issue already.

- Better, higher-rate codec, as many others of outlined (i.e. don't cripple the thing when we all know what you could really be doing, Panasonic *cough* GH2 *cough*).

- 10-bit HD-SDI output

- HUGE HUGE HUGE: Upgradeable firmware (no more excuses; it's 2012), and a commitment to upgrade with features and fixes (like Sony is doing with their cams)

- Pixel-for-pixel / zoom focus assist. Oh gawd, don't get me started. I still can't believe this didn't make it into the AF100. <sigh>

- Get the WFM and Zebra buttons OUT FROM BEHIND THE LCD COMPARTMENT. Another brain-dead design decision I just can't believe. Go look at the Canon C300 with Focus Assist, Peaking, Zebra and WFM all in a row, not hidden behind an LCD or door. Perfect.

- Quick ISO selection by thumbwheel, for those who have been asking for it.

- Mirrored recording to both SD cards, for redundancy.

- Small, silly things:
ND dial should be 0, 1, 2, 3 (instead of 1, 2, 3, 4 - i.e. 0 for clear) or 0, 2, 4, 6 (for actual stops). "1" doesn't make sense in this context.
Clips should start at 001, not 000. "0' doesn't make sense in this context.
Skin Tone Detail is misnamed, or it should be swapped to mean ON=show detail, OFF=prevent detail (smoothing); right now it's the opposite, and makes no sense at all (i.e. currently you turn Skin Tone Detail to ON if you want to REMOVE the detail from skin; BRAIN DEAD).

That would do it for me, and I think many others. None of the above is crazy talk. Just about everything is either technology available to Panasonic, features or UI elements they already have in other cameras in their line, or things found in competitors' cameras.

I would even pay $2,000 more for all this (say, MSRP of $6,995 for an AF200). I think these features at this price would KILL. Seriously, who would buy an FS100 (upsold) or C300 (undercut) then?

Please listen, Panasonic. Please.
 
Last edited:
That's a really good list. The one thing about S35 I cannot argue with is the pixels are bigger, so you have more light gathering capability. Granted, FF35 can have even bigger pixels, however, I myself think that S35 is the perfect balance of DoF and light sensitivity myself. But, with everything, we all have different needs.
 
Okey, my list of what needs improvement on the AF100:

1. Better focusing aids. 1:1 PX and improved peaking. You really have to use third party gear to be able to critically focus in my opinion.

2. Better highlight handling, this can be worked around but it is terrible compared to other cams.

3. Imager/processing. Whatever it takes to get rid of banding problems. Possible a better sensor, or different processing. This is not an 8 bit problem, it is something else wrong in this camera. It can be worked around as well but we should not have to, other cams in this price class don't have these problems. A lot of the softness of this camera is because shooters don't nail focus in my opinion. But it could be sharper (higher resolution).

4. Native 8bit (or better) 50mb/s (or better) 422 recording.

5. An EVF like on the EX3 or better yet movable, no one does this yet, it would be really great to have an EVF that can be positioned in any place you like.

6. A more robust lens mount. I like the MFT because of the # of lenses it can use with adapters, but a more rugged construction would be great.

7. SD cards, I would prefer CF cards. Faster and more robust and a little harder to loose. Why use P2 or SxS when CF will perform as well.

What I do like:

1. The Price point.

2. ND filters

3. Size/weight

4. MFT mount (will take almost any lens) and the DOF of this size chip.

5. Scopes great! All cams and monitors should have this.

6. Body, I like the base with multiple threaded holes, removable handles leaving rugged mounting threaded holes.

7. LCD screen.

All and all I really like the AF100, it can produce beautiful shots but it is a pain to work with, as are all its competitors. I think it can definitely be improved upon. But for this price point it is great, no other manufacturer can compete at this time in my opinion.
 
The beautiful (and confusing) thing about most of these requests in that Panasonic already has the technology developed and built. It's just a case of moving the tech from other cameras..

Sensor: GH2
Codec: AVC-Intra (to SDXC)
mirrored recording: software update
 
id prefer avcintra on p2
or
50mbs 4:2:2 avcultra on sdhc

mirrored recording requires hardware as was said in the af100
 
I would like.

S-Log type mode but not for $5K upgrade.

Improved highlight handling. Not huge but could be better.

Improved codec. AVC INTRA would be sweet

Stay with SD or Compact flash cards. Please no P2.

Heavier lens mount.

Panasonic designed electronic lens adapter for EOS/Nikon lenses. I know this wont happen but why not?

Improved focus assist. 1x1 would be great. Also feeding the EVF at all times when using HDMI and SDI out.

More modular approach to the design. Panasonic should design a shoulder mount and EVF for the camera. If they did I bet the camera itself would look different. As we have all seen building a rig isn’t easy around the design of the camera.

I’m sure I can think of more but gota go……...

 
imdjay said:
i should state what i really want: a 2/3" ex1, yep. that would be my be all end all cam :)
Click to expand...

Yes, I will say that i was/am totally bummed that Scarlet morphed away from this concept. I don't think we will see this from Panasonic or Sony for a long time as the marketplace would want them to sell it way below what their 2/3" broadcast cameras sell for.

Interesting how the behemoth cameras of yesteryear are in a sort of no man's land of value right now. They used to be the gold standard. Now a $1,500 GH2 setup can get images people always wanted to get.
 
Bassman2003 said:
Yes, I will say that i was/am totally bummed that Scarlet morphed away from this concept. I don't think we will see this from Panasonic or Sony for a long time as the marketplace would want them to sell it way below what their 2/3" broadcast cameras sell for.

Interesting how the behemoth cameras of yesteryear are in a sort of no man's land of value right now. They used to be the gold standard. Now a $1,500 GH2 setup can get images people always wanted to get.
Click to expand...

I think the ENG camera needs a fresh approach. We all keep trying to make our cameras act like one. If the camera companies made modular camera bodies that have shoulder mounts and evf arms for handheld it would be great.
 
What would be cool:

1. A 4k full frame sensor that can crop in camera to a 1080 M4/3 sized sensor.
2. 120fps in M4/3 mode
3. Micro 4/3 2.0 mount with zoom ability and backward compatibility.
4. dual link SDI and 3G SDI 10bit.
5. AVCUltra P2
6. cooked dinner
7. did laundry
8. etc...


What will likely happen:
1. Better sensor
2. GH2 sized sensor.
3. AVCIntra P24. 10 bit SDI
 
Last edited:
I *really* like the idea of modular cameras. I hope that trend continues. While Sony calls the FS100 modular, to me, it's anything but. Where are the modules? :) To me the balance is between only having to power/carry what you want BUT also building something that is dependable. Nothing scares me more than a modular piece and a crappy connector. This is what I liked about the Epic/Scarlet approach. I've seen those cameras now in a BUNCH of configurations.

There are people who like small cameras, and people that like large cameras. I don't see why a camera cannot satisfy both with the right support equipment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top