ALL: AC160 vs AF100 - ?

HotConductor said:
So the AF100 can see in the dark, provided the right lens is in place...? When the AF100 came out I heard great reviews... Then in the last few months I have heard quite a bit of grumbling. To my ears and eyes it seems like most AF100 users are frustrated that the lowly GH2 can perform so remarkably given its price point.
Click to expand...

I have a gh2 and af 100. The af 100 is far superior and I rarely use the gh2.
 
Aside from all of the audio controls, variable framerate, etc... What is superior about the AF100 in terms of image quality? I am sold on all of the benefits of the actual camera, I am only speaking of the final product output.
 
HotConductor said:
Aside from all of the audio controls, variable framerate, etc... What is superior about the AF100 in terms of image quality? I am sold on all of the benefits of the actual camera, I am only speaking of the final product output.
Click to expand...
In relation to the GH2? it's kind of a moot point, isn't it? I mean, it's like asking "does it matter if you flew first class, or if you hitchhiker, so long as you got where you were going?"Both will produce great footage. The whole point of the af100 is to add the features and connectivity and functions that transform the journey into a first class flight.
 
I understand your point and I guess that answers my question. The $2000 difference between the GH2 and the AF100 is all the 'stuff', but there is no upgrade on the sensor or on-board recording codec at 1080p/24.

Don't get me wrong, I am not minimizing the 'stuff'. I for one need a camera, not just the 'brains' only to buy every other part later on. So to buy the AF100 and essentially have a GH2 with a rig, is a benefit. I was mainly asking is there any difference in terms of the final output quality, that would tilt to the AF100.

Again, thank you for all the help
 
Better look at the auto focus issue that we are coming across before you go with the AC160. Check the Ac160 vs Hmc150 thread for video's of this issue.
 
andrewkiu said:
Any Footage i can see for the DOF AC130/160
Click to expand...

There have already been a handful of posts around here with samples of the AC130/160 footage. Short answer, the DOF is much deeper (more at the wide end) than you get with the AF100 and it's larger sensor and larger selection of lenses, but you can achieve a pretty shallow DOF on the AC130/160 by keeping the iris mostly open and going toward the tele end of the lens. Again, you can see those posts all around the forum or do a search on Vimeo or Google.
 
dhardjono said:
yes my dvx 100 a and b plus my hmc 150 was better than my ac 160 any little thing throws it of i have done 5 job 4 was wedding and a volley ball game, weddings i would get out of focus on all 4 jobs .
It could be my ac 160 defective?
Click to expand...

Learn to shoot in manual focus. :happy:
 
And to the OP... I have both the AF100 and the HMC150. As Barry said, utterly different animals. It depends on what the bulk of your work is. I do enough of everything that I have absolutely no intention of getting rid of the HMC150 anytime soon, and if I do, it's going to be replaced by the AC160.
 
HotConductor said:
I understand your point and I guess that answers my question. The $2000 difference between the GH2 and the AF100 is all the 'stuff', but there is no upgrade on the sensor or on-board recording codec at 1080p/24.Don't get me wrong, I am not minimizing the 'stuff'. I for one need a camera, not just the 'brains' only to buy every other part later on. So to buy the AF100 and essentially have a GH2 with a rig, is a benefit. I was mainly asking is there any difference in terms of the final output quality, that would tilt to the AF100.Again, thank you for all the help
Click to expand...
Af100 has better color and gamma control.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top