AF-100 Another DSLR $9,000 4:2:0 is a solution?
- Thread starter pallllaaaaa
- Start date
- Status
Rick Burnett
Section Moderator
Cause there is always people on boards that cannot afford a piece of gear that are going to convince themselves (and as many people they can to back them up) through every possible negative aspect that they don't need it anyways. 
Which is fine by me, means there will be one more camera for those that want one. Which then of course devolves into this cycle:
1) Camera doesn't do X or have Z feature, it's not professional nor doesn't meet my needs, company doesn't listen to what I want
2) Professionals use it, see here!
3) Who cares what equipment you have, just make movies
4) Yeah, but camera Y that is 100x expensive have these options, why not this one?
5) Forget any of this, I cannot stand the 2x crop
6) Barry has to come in at this point and correct crop discussions
7) Mention obligatory quote from Jim Jannard, for instance "Everything is subject to change"
8) Someone posts random sample footage from the internet
9) Someone begs for raw footage or it didn't happen
10) Jan has to step in and respond to calm the herd
11) Someone mentions the GH13 hack and hoping it will happen on the GH2 and the AF100
12) goto step 1
I don't trust videos posted anyways. No offense, as I don't believe it is intentional, but good shooters are going to shoot good shots that look good. They don't want to post anything that looks bad as the first comment always is "Why did company X gives this camera to an idiot to shoot". Everyone wants to see the best it can do. I personally want to see the worst it can do, which is what I test on all cameras. Not for any other reason than to figure out where the limitations are on the camera to use it.
Sure, people can say "Well I never shoot at ISO2000 and no professional would do that, they'd just light the scene", which I understand, but from a technical standpoint, I personally like to see where I can push a camera in usable terms so when I am shooting and have to make a decision based on factors outside of my control, I can know what will work and what will end up being a waste of time. I also try to save time, and when the camera can do more for me, it means less time wasted.
Which is fine by me, means there will be one more camera for those that want one. Which then of course devolves into this cycle:1) Camera doesn't do X or have Z feature, it's not professional nor doesn't meet my needs, company doesn't listen to what I want
2) Professionals use it, see here!
3) Who cares what equipment you have, just make movies
4) Yeah, but camera Y that is 100x expensive have these options, why not this one?
5) Forget any of this, I cannot stand the 2x crop
6) Barry has to come in at this point and correct crop discussions
7) Mention obligatory quote from Jim Jannard, for instance "Everything is subject to change"
8) Someone posts random sample footage from the internet
9) Someone begs for raw footage or it didn't happen
10) Jan has to step in and respond to calm the herd
11) Someone mentions the GH13 hack and hoping it will happen on the GH2 and the AF100
12) goto step 1
I don't trust videos posted anyways. No offense, as I don't believe it is intentional, but good shooters are going to shoot good shots that look good. They don't want to post anything that looks bad as the first comment always is "Why did company X gives this camera to an idiot to shoot". Everyone wants to see the best it can do. I personally want to see the worst it can do, which is what I test on all cameras. Not for any other reason than to figure out where the limitations are on the camera to use it.
Sure, people can say "Well I never shoot at ISO2000 and no professional would do that, they'd just light the scene", which I understand, but from a technical standpoint, I personally like to see where I can push a camera in usable terms so when I am shooting and have to make a decision based on factors outside of my control, I can know what will work and what will end up being a waste of time. I also try to save time, and when the camera can do more for me, it means less time wasted.
Last edited:
BobDiaz
The Professor
If you step back and look at the thread, you can see that there are people who wish the camera was something different. It's a nice wish, but the camera is what it is; one has to decide if it fits your needs or not.
Now I understand the wish for the camera to be 50 Mbps 4:2:2 and still sell for only $4,995, but it's not and no amount of debate or logical arguments will change that. You're beating a dead horse.
Bob Diaz
Now I understand the wish for the camera to be 50 Mbps 4:2:2 and still sell for only $4,995, but it's not and no amount of debate or logical arguments will change that. You're beating a dead horse.
Bob Diaz
heavyG
Underwater Giraffe Member
I've ordered two - they will fill a definite need in our production schedule and when they don't fit the bill we'll use another camera system we own or rent what we need. Film is fluid and every job has different requirements; a lot of people expect to own a camera that fills all their needs.
"What do you mean the ARRI 535 doesn't record sound? I have to buy a second recorder and synch in post? Blasphemy! my $600 iPhone even records video with sound."
G.
"What do you mean the ARRI 535 doesn't record sound? I have to buy a second recorder and synch in post? Blasphemy! my $600 iPhone even records video with sound."
G.
Rick Burnett
Section Moderator
Yes, if you build a mount to attach your cellphone to the hot shoe
TheReverend
Well-known member
I just need to know if it will upload video directly to facebook via wifi or 3g. k thx
lol
lol
Rick Burnett
Section Moderator
Again, if you use the cellphone mount with say an iPhone4, you can place the iPhone recording the LCD display and use the iPhone to upload directly to facebook. The advantage is, you get TRIPLE recording! Once internally, once using the HD-SDI port with something like the Ninja and then the iPhone4!!! It's like a camera RAID system with 3 different quality levels for your customer needs!
Steve Kahn
Well-known member
Link(s) please...
TheReverend
Well-known member
Sorry... No hard links to give. Every AVC encoder works differently and AVC profiles are extremely complex. Assuming that Panasonic is using a decently high profile level for there codec (and even if they don't), AVC is built for smaller bitrates. Extremely high bitrates do not necessarily improve visual quality or information. I'd have to dig all over doom9 forums to find anything to back what I'm saying, but I know I'm right. I'm not a full out compressionist, but I will claim LARGE amounts of experimentation with AVC profiles, options, and bitrates. When dealing with AVC macroblocking, more bitrate doesn't really "solve" problems because it's more in the detection side of your compressing algorithm.
Bottom line, bitrate isn't everything, and 24000kbps is an ENORMOUS amount of bitrate for AVC. I can't imagine virtually any scenarios that could break the codec.
NOW, that doesn't mean it's perfect. I'm just saying that with my experience with AVC tells me I'd be very happy working with this 24000kbps footage, and I'm used to DVCPROHD. Full raster 1920x1080 and lower file size and at approx 100% the quality of DVCPROHD? Where do I sign up?
Steve Kahn
Well-known member
Understood. Thanks for your educated opinion. Much appreciated!
This I don't quite understand, though. What factors go into the detection side of an algorithm? Is this more of a cpu/hardware issue?
TheReverend
Well-known member
First off, what i will describe here is general AVC encoding NOT AVCHD or AVCCAM. Different implementations work differently. What I'll try to describe is the quick rundown of what AVC can do, and how bitrates can be allocated.
AVC is highly advanced because in some implementations bitrate can vary (similar to VBR MP3s). It can vary per frame and even then each section of the "picture" gets detected for whether to encode a 1x1, 2x2, 4x4 or even 8x8 macroblock. This is the beauty of AVC, because bitrate is distributed throughout the "picture" in an intelligent way. So you end up with high bitrate detail where you need it, and lower bitrate in less detailed areas. Now that might sound bad, but in the end with a good detection algorithm, it is the same as if bitrate was 2x higher and even across the whole image. When you say 24mbps (average per the second NOT frame), bitrate is distributed throughout each picture and between frames (24,30,60i) where it is most needed. This provides for great perceived and effective quality.
MPEG2 is similar in this regard, but AVC is much more precise, efficient, and capable. So basically, 50mbps MPEG2 longGOP gets it's a$$ handed to it by a 24mbps AVC. Particularly with a good implementation.
Nick Navaro
Well-known member
Ok Jan. I'm going to give it a go. But what's the release date????
And why are there no specific lenses? This is another reason which makes me think they've rushed this to be the first to have a "HDSLR" camcorder.
And for the others, I already mentioned that I'm filming mostly in the field and didn't want to attach more boxes and cables to record at higher bit rate. Ok for studio tho.
Barry_Green
Moderator
December 27th.
Because Panasonic Broadcast doesn't make lenses. Look at all their other cameras, and you won't find any interchangeable lenses made by Panasonic Broadcast. They instead include Fujinon or Canon glass. So with the AF100 you can use any of the Lumix, Olympus, Noktor, Sigma, or Voigtlander m4/3 lenses, or you can use an adapter and use any lens. Just don't count on Panasonic making their own, because (from the broadcast division) they don't do that.
bgundu
Veteran
Ha Ha... nice done. Personally, I'm very excited about the camera. I have my order in and can't wait. Brings back the old feelings of when I bought my DVX100, and then the HVX200.
Bob
Bob
Yeah that is what I said. didn't say it would be ours, but there will always be a "next" camera.
Nick Navaro
Well-known member
So, Panasonic make a "bad marketing decision"
But the AF101 will be 4:2:2 from the SDI....
http://www.hdwarrior.co.uk/category/hdcamcorders/
But the AF101 will be 4:2:2 from the SDI....
http://www.hdwarrior.co.uk/category/hdcamcorders/
Cause there is always people on boards that cannot afford a piece of gear that are going to convince themselves (and as many people they can to back them up) through every possible negative aspect that they don't need it anyways.
1) Camera doesn't do X or have Z feature, it's not professional nor doesn't meet my needs, company doesn't listen to what I want
2) Professionals use it, see here!
3) Who cares what equipment you have, just make movies
4) Yeah, but camera Y that is 100x expensive have these options, why not this one?
5) Forget any of this, I cannot stand the 2x crop
6) Barry has to come in at this point and correct crop discussions
7) Mention obligatory quote from Jim Jannard, for instance "Everything is subject to change"
8) Someone posts random sample footage from the internet
9) Someone begs for raw footage or it didn't happen
10) Jan has to step in and respond to calm the herd
11) Someone mentions the GH13 hack and hoping it will happen on the GH2 and the AF100
12) goto step 1
.
LOL
)
Jan_Crittenden
Veteran
While I don't have time to wrap myself into that thread, I can only address it from where I might have made a similar decision. In fact I have one on my table right now. Do I sent the camera to Jackson Hole Wildlife Symposium or to a local but large show in Florida, I think it was. Well my choice was Jackson Hole. But I made that decision 4 weeks ago and if given the same choice today I might still make the same choice. Point is to say that one vs. another is a bad marketing choice is just foolhardy. You don't know, nobody does. For me, Jackson Hole has a much higher end of shooters and a very targeted group of potential customers that could very well easily step into using the AF100. Not sure of the other group.
Anyhow, just my 2 cents worth,
Jan
Last edited:
HDWarrior
Active member
Reply to Jan
Reply to Jan
Hi Jan,
Jan when your European distributer is at ProVideo 2010...Holdan, and they requested the AF101 to be at the show would you not agree with your own distributer who just may know their own marketplace. Major UK Panasonic dealers were also at ProVideo 2010, Preston Media and Creative Video.
Panasonic had to phone DPs to attend Wild Screen, this came from a customer of Preston Media who I spoke to myself...it's a joke.
The best show in the UK for the AF101 was ProVideo 2010 and to prove it even your General Manager of Broadcast AV Systems Europe, Mr Takashi Uchida attended ProVideo 2010.
Reply to Jan
Hi Jan,
Jan when your European distributer is at ProVideo 2010...Holdan, and they requested the AF101 to be at the show would you not agree with your own distributer who just may know their own marketplace. Major UK Panasonic dealers were also at ProVideo 2010, Preston Media and Creative Video.
Panasonic had to phone DPs to attend Wild Screen, this came from a customer of Preston Media who I spoke to myself...it's a joke.
The best show in the UK for the AF101 was ProVideo 2010 and to prove it even your General Manager of Broadcast AV Systems Europe, Mr Takashi Uchida attended ProVideo 2010.
- Status