AF-100 and Alfa Romeo

After using a DSLR all summer long to get to know it (and liking much of the results despite quirks — but none of the workflow) I put my money where my mouth is and pre-ordered an AG-AF100.

If all that Panasonic delivered was roughly the same image (dynamic range, low-light performance) less the moire, jello, aliasing - but with all the video features I was so happy with on the HVX/HPX cameras I've been using for the previous 4 years... I'd be satisfied.

Apparently, the AG-AF100 will deliver even more.

I am actually looking forward to the SD card-based AVC footage. For one, the raw-footage storage requirements for our productions will be about 1/2 what they were with the DSLRs and 1/3 what they were with DVCProHD. Additionally, we can actually budget the SDHC Cards into each production as if they were tapes and just put them on the shelf, locked, as an additional safeguard. While I'm not entirely convinced of their long-term viability - they should last for the 1-2 years I'd need the raw footage available for.

Of course, we're all entitled to want what we want. We may not, however, get what we want. So adjust expectations accordingly. Just a few pennies from my personal insanity.
 
Last edited:
The AF100 for me is the "I don't have to worry about X anymore" camera.

I don't have to worry about recording audio separately.

I don't have to worry about carrying ND filters around.

I don't have to worry about moire, aliasing, or jello.

etc.

It will be nice to go back to the days where all I had to worry about was exposure, white balance, levels and focus. Ahhhh the good old days :)
 
NextWaveG said:
The AF100 for me is the "I don't have to worry about X anymore" camera.

I don't have to worry about recording audio separately.

I don't have to worry about carrying ND filters around.

I don't have to worry about moire, aliasing, or jello.

etc.

It will be nice to go back to the days where all I had to worry about was exposure, white balance, levels and focus. Ahhhh the good old days :)
Click to expand...

Exactly - and now with your choice of lenses!

My own realization was... used a DP for a documentary in November who was all about DSLRs - a talented photographer actually. We used an HVX-200 for that production. He did a magnificent job.

In the spring, I picked up a T2i to see what it was all about - since I would have been labelled a "disbeliever". I became a reluctant believer. Shot about 10 productions with the T2i I had and 5DmkII that previously-mentioned photographer owned. It was in the using of those two cameras that I was pointed back to the Panasonic cameras I was so happy with before. We kept running into situations where the tool wasn't right for the job. That's all it was/is.

DSLRs won't be going away, not by a long shot. Nikon and Canon want our money one way or another.
 
That would be the perfect lens for all the wide angle stuff. That or the nikon 12-24mm f2.8. Similar in price range.
 
Downloading now, excited to watch. But to clarify for everyone talking about compression, the footage was recorded to a nanoflash. we'll still have to wait to get any indication of how nice avchd plays with another round of compression...
 
NextWaveG said:
The AF100 for me is the "I don't have to worry about X anymore" camera.

I don't have to worry about recording audio separately.

I don't have to worry about carrying ND filters around.

I don't have to worry about moire, aliasing, or jello.

etc.

It will be nice to go back to the days where all I had to worry about was exposure, white balance, levels and focus. Ahhhh the good old days :)
Click to expand...

I concur.
 
Also anyone who does knock the HMC150 hasn't used one. I love my little beast and if I sell it, I'll get probably 80 percent of what I paid for it back and 2 years of usage. That works out to like 250 bucks a year in depreciation or less than 10 percent. A well invested camera.

I'm just happy to not have the inconveniences of the DSLR. That is what they have to them and wrapping some of it up in anything other than that isn't fully realizing sometimes what you would have to do to get the same thing out of a proper camera. Now, I'm not saying I wasn't so blown away with the footage that I didn't think I'd sell all my stuff and get a 7D or a 5D, and now a GH2, sure I do... but it's the extra 10 calories I would have to spend after a long day of shooting to pick up either the DSLR or the 150. 150 wins a lot due to it's convenience and that I know I"m not going to have an unpleasant camera accident.
 
As far as cost is concerned, in order to put the 5D on par with the AF100 you have to add …

Several ND filters - $375
Zoom H4n - $300
Juiced Link Preamp - $200
Zacuto Z-Finder - $380

And so, I’d say it’s about a $1200 difference, give or take a hundred.

Right? At least those have been my costs. Of course, I’m leaving out lenses, microphones, extra batteries and CF cards.
 
Finster said:
As far as cost is concerned, in order to put the 5D on par with the AF100 you have to add …

Several ND filters - $375
Zoom H4n - $300
Juiced Link Preamp - $200
Zacuto Z-Finder - $380

And so, I’d say it’s about a $1200 difference, give or take a hundred.

Right? At least those have been my costs. Of course, I’m leaving out lenses, microphones, extra batteries and CF cards.
Click to expand...

What about a monitor with peaking and waveform? $500-$1000
SDI output? HDMI to SDI - $400
And then there are things like variable framerates that you can't do on the 5D.
 
I love how the footage looks, but I think I would have benefited from something closer to a true side by side comparison, where there was more similarity in the images I was comparing.

Still, the footage looks great.
 
Last edited:
Jim Brennan said:
I love how the footage looks, but to be honest, I am not seeing some of what you guys are talking about. I'm no DP and still shoot a fair amount of standard def stuff. I think I would have benefited from something closer to a true side by side comparison, where there was more similarity in the images I was comparing.

Still, the footage looks great.
Click to expand...
How did you watch the footage?

The first time I watched the clip was on Vimeo in Standard Definition, and I didn't see much of a difference between the two cameras.

But when I watched the downloaded 1080p file, the AF100 shots just absolutely smoked the 5D in terms of aliasing, moire, and true resolution.
 
Last edited:
I downloaded it. Most of what I edit is HVX and Red. I have only done one thing with DSLR footage (7D), which I hated. So I guess I am not as attuned to some of the issues you guys are used to seeing. I'll have to look again.

I still think it would be helpful to have the cameras side by side for a comparison.
 
Jim Brennan said:
I downloaded it. Most of what I edit is HVX and Red. I have only done one thing with DSLR footage (7D), which I hated. So I guess I am not as attuned to some of the issues you guys are used to seeing. I'll have to look again.

I still think it would be helpful to have the cameras side by side for a comparison.
Click to expand...
Look at the grate under the stairs in the 5D shot at 21 seconds.
Look at the red stripes on the hood of the car in the 5D shot at 48 seconds.
 
agcohn said:
Look at the grate under the stairs in the 5D shot at 21 seconds.
Look at the red stripes on the hood of the car in the 5D shot at 48 seconds.
Click to expand...
I saw aliasing in EVERY 5D shot as well as reduced resolution and less dynamic range.
 
Steve Kahn said:
I saw aliasing in EVERY 5D shot as well as reduced resolution and less dynamic range.
Click to expand...
Now to be fair there is some aliasing on those same red stipes on the hood of the car in the AF100 shot around 1 minute, 17 seconds where the car drives up from far away and pulls up right close to the camera, but it is really only a miniscule amount when the car is in the distance and the aliasing has long since disappeared as the car nears the camera. But it is really just a tiny amount, and barely noticeable in motion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top