AF-100 Another DSLR $9,000 4:2:0 is a solution?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hi,

I can't say whether it is or is not a mistake, it may be that they had already made commitments. When there are only so many cameras to go around, you don't know. missed opportunity maybe, but it isn't a mistake. There just isn't enough to go around. I have the same problem here. There are a number of shows that I am not doing but they would be good. What I can say, that it is always easier to judge than to make the decisions and that someone is always sure to feel slighted.

Best,
Jan
 
Jan one further question, why are Panasonic so protective of denying the so called public a look at this camcorder because it's only 75% finished when you are giving the camera out for review to a select few, thats one decision I do not understand, surly it would be better to hand out finnished camcorders with all the menus working etc and get a true evaluation than open yourselves up to frustrated reviewers who can't even perform the simplest of tasks like a white balance.
 
I imagine that sometimes Panasonic would like to know how some professional shooters/productions need some features to work... and so putting it in the field helps them to better develop it - like many products from phones to textbooks, that go through "field testing." Until that's complete it's hard to make performance claims or assessments.

I feel like Panny has been surprisingly open about this product despite the fact it's not feature-complete (as far as we know.)
 
Who says you can't white-balance it?

And as dialing-wand said, part of this is about field-testing and seeing what works and what doesn't, how people would like it to work, giving it a test-run. It's all part of the development process.

Why would you think that's a bad thing?
 
I think it's probably quite common for companies to put their products in the field prior to their public release. What is, perhaps, less common is for those early experiences to be exempt from an NDA so that people like Yves and Joe can talk about them here.

The best way to build a great camera is to have filmmakers in on the process.
 
Yep. I have huge respect for Jan and Panasonic for letting people put this information up. I can imagine it feels a bit like sitting your head on the chopping block, regardless of how great the product is. Public scrutiny is harsh, inconsiderate, and often misinformed.

I also have huge respect for the shooters who have shot the footage so far - they are working with a pre-production camera and putting up footage which they know tens of thousands of people will be looking at. That's a lot of trust in the ability of the product to deliver something they want to put their name under.
 
BobDiaz said:
I've said this before, but it's worth saying again:

The Perfect Video Camera does NOT exist.
Click to expand...

Not true...


I got the Sony VX1000 and it was the perfect small-budget videocamera.
Oh wait I then got the DVX100, which was actually the perfect videocamera.
Oh, and then I got the HVX200, which is actually the really perfect videocamera...

Hmmm....Panasonic seems to make the perfect cam...for my taste at certian times.

Af-100 will indeed NOT be the perfect videocamera, but it will be a big step in the right direction (if it holds its promises)
 
Alpi69,
please read the quote before posting. you agreed with what BobDiaz said, however in your entire post you assume he said something different.

Please don't start trouble on the forum for no reason.

Clearly both of you agree in stating 'the PERFECT video camera does NOT exist'.....

alpi69 said:
Not true...


I got the Sony VX1000 and it was the perfect small-budget videocamera.
Oh wait I then got the DVX100, which was actually the perfect videocamera.
Oh, and then I got the HVX200, which is actually the really perfect videocamera...

Hmmm....Panasonic seems to make the perfect cam...for my taste at certian times.

Af-100 will indeed NOT be the perfect videocamera, but it will be a big step in the right direction (if it holds its promises)
Click to expand...
 
alpi69 said:
Not true...


I got the Sony VX1000 and it was the perfect small-budget videocamera.
Oh wait I then got the DVX100, which was actually the perfect videocamera.
Oh, and then I got the HVX200, which is actually the really perfect videocamera...

Hmmm....Panasonic seems to make the perfect cam...for my taste at certian times.

Af-100 will indeed NOT be the perfect videocamera, but it will be a big step in the right direction (if it holds its promises)
Click to expand...

Just so we'll 100% clear of the context of the comment, video cameras are a trade-off between many things. So, for one "perfect" might be a 2/3" image sensor for low light, but the increased cost won't be perfect to another. CMOS allows for a higher pixel count and reduced power, BUT with CMOS comes the rolling shutter issues. In choosing a video camera, there's always something of a trade off that has to be made compared to another model.

Now it is possible to have a camera model that offers someone lots of plus features compared to any minus features. In that case, the person might ignore any limitations and consider all the plus features as "perfect". However, this is very subjective.


I hope that helps. :smile:


Bob Diaz
 
Barry_Green said:
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.
Click to expand...

Barry,

I'm thinking of getting this lens for low-light situations. Would you agree it would work ok on the AF100?

http://www2.panasonic.com/consumer-...L-X025.S_11002_7000000000000005702#tabsection

And could you recommend a suitably good all-purpose zoom lens for the AF100 too please? Or anyone?

I'm a DP, not DOP. Lenses are my weak point.

Thanks in advance.
 
Nick Navaro said:
Barry,

I'm thinking of getting this lens for low-light situations. Would you agree it would work ok on the AF100?

http://www2.panasonic.com/consumer-...L-X025.S_11002_7000000000000005702#tabsection

And could you recommend a suitably good all-purpose zoom lens for the AF100 too please? Or anyone?

I'm a DP, not DOP. Lenses are my weak point.

Thanks in advance.
Click to expand...

That is the Leica Summilux rebranded. Excellent lens.

Personally I think Olympus Zuiko top of the line f2 zooms for standard 4/3 with an adapter are the best bet for the AF 100. If Panasonic is on their game, they will support auto-iris and maybe also auto-focus.

http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/cpg_digital_slr.asp?section=lens
 
Last edited:
Nick Navaro said:
I'm thinking of getting this lens for low-light situations. Would you agree it would work ok on the AF100?
Click to expand...
Should work, yes. Haven't tried it but it definitely should work. If you want a lens for low-light conditions, consider watching the voigtlander Nokton 25mm f/0.95 also. That's over a stop faster than this Panasonic 25mm. The Panasonic will be an electronic lens, so you can do some manner of autofocus and auto-iris etc., but the Nokton will let in over twice as much light, so ... depends on your priorities.

And could you recommend a suitably good all-purpose zoom lens for the AF100 too please? Or anyone?
Click to expand...
The Lumix 14-140 is almost a must-have. It's a great lens, great range, great OIS, video autofocus, excellent feedback to the camera on focus and iris position, it holds focus throughout the zoom range, and the lens/camera combination work together to eliminate barrel distortion and CAC. It's slow at f/4, but then again it's cheap and powerful. Excellent default lens.
 
Barry_Green said:
Should work, yes. Haven't tried it but it definitely should work. If you want a lens for low-light conditions, consider watching the voigtlander Nokton 25mm f/0.95 also. That's over a stop faster than this Panasonic 25mm. The Panasonic will be an electronic lens, so you can do some manner of autofocus and auto-iris etc., but the Nokton will let in over twice as much light, so ... depends on your priorities.


The Lumix 14-140 is almost a must-have. It's a great lens, great range, great OIS, video autofocus, excellent feedback to the camera on focus and iris position, it holds focus throughout the zoom range, and the lens/camera combination work together to eliminate barrel distortion and CAC. It's slow at f/4, but then again it's cheap and powerful. Excellent default lens.
Click to expand...


Barry, if you had a choice (and money no object), would you go for the Lumix 14-140 or this > http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/product.asp?product=1335
 
Well, you're comparing a $2500 3x zoom against a $700-ish 10x zoom. Nothing similar.

If you need the high speed, get the Olympus. If you need the range, the autofocus, the video-style functionality, the wide angle, the telephoto, and the rectilinear barrel distortion correction and ability to hold focus through the zoom, get the 14-140.

For sheer functionality, the 14-140 is dominant. For sheer speed, the Olympus is dominant. But they don't do the same job, so it's hard to compare them.

Whether I had the money or not, I'd still go with the 14-140, because of the flexibility and the capabilities it offers. The Olympus lenses are nice glass, no doubt, but they're much more expensive and the only thing I can see that really justifies that is if you absolutely need the (very nice) high speed they offer.
 
Hi Nick -- I have both of these lenses and, while I absolutely love the 35-100, I'd have to say my go-to lens is still the 14-140 due to all the reasons Barry has mentioned. If there's enough light, the 14-140 is hard to beat overall. And the increased ISO capabilities for the AF-100 (compared to GH1) that are starting to be shown in initial footage are encouraging for perhaps making the 14-140 even more useful.

EDIT: Here's a zoom showing the constant 2.0 capability of the 35-100. Which is cool - but the lens is, unfortunately, not parfocal.

Password = constant2

 
Last edited:
DOF is a key selling point of Af100 though. If DOF wasn't important, one could get a less expensive CMOS Panasonic. Olympus 14-35 f2 and 35-100 f2 are very nice because f2 allows AF100 to get shallow DOF that matches a 7D with f2.8 lenses and a 5dII with f4 lenses.

Low light is also important. f2 allows 2 to 3 stops lower ISO vs the 14-140 zoom. ISO400 instead of ISO1600 and ISO3200. In modern sensors ISO400 is very clean while ISO3200 has high noise and much lower dynamic range, and in the GH series, horizontal stripes from electrical interference. I can see these stripes in Bloom's ISO3200 sample also.

EDIT: So the question is: Would you pay 4,000 euro extra to improve the shallow DOF, the low light, and the dynamic range performance in low light by 2 to 3 stops? I would.
 
Last edited:
Assume you have a low light wedding to shoot. I can offer you two packages:

A: 9,000 euro, 0db gain noise look, 10 stops of dynamic range, excellent compression performance, 1.5x crop f2.8 SLR shallow DOF (AF100+f2 zooms).
B: 5,000 euro, 12db gain noise look, 8 stops of dynamic range, mediocre compression performance, 1/2" f1.6 deep DOF (AF100+14-140 f4).

and if you need to use telephoto it becomes:

B: 5,000 euro, 18db gain noise look, 7 stops of dynamic range, bad compression performance, 1/2" f2.2 deep DOF (Af100+14-140 f5.6).

Fast glass can transform any camera. It's where good light gathering and shallow DOF comes from.

Even if we ignore shallow DOF, one can see how ISO affects a sensor of this type in dynamic range here:

http://www.dxomark.com/itext/review_panasonic_gh1/dynamic_range.jpg

The color precision here:

http://www.dxomark.com/itext/review_panasonic_gh1/color_sensitivity.jpg

The noise levels here:

http://www.dxomark.com/itext/review_panasonic_gh1/snr_18.jpg

If it's ISO100 f2 vs ISO400 F4, it's not that bad. But if it's ISO400 f2 vs ISO1600 f4 or ISO3200 f5.6 it's world of difference.

EDIT: For weddings the 14-140 will be more useful, with lots of light, but this could also be a filmmaking manual lens situation.
 
Last edited:
pallllaaaaa said:
Iam not saying that sony are best, for nothing, Idont like sony anyway, what I said is sony Put a low price, but I dont want to buy this cam without audio and a lot more of things. what I said is why always you buy a camcorder, the next year your cam is obsolete like my Hpx 170, and I know if I buy AF-100 the next year for competence reasons, you may have AF-100 obsolete two, like sony do with the sony EX1, And next year you find the EX1r. all I am saying is please bring good camcorders to us, not to fix the competitors, because us are important too.
Click to expand...

Your HPX170 is not obsolete. It's global shutter CCD with an intraframe codec and it has much better motion quality than the EX1. It can compete with an HPX500 in many things and it has better motion quality than any Sony or Panasonic GOP camera, even the $20K ones. It's lower resolution than the CMOS competition but everything else about it is very professional. And why do you care about it being obsolete? You must have used it for 2 years or something. That's less than $6 a day. You must have used it for something important at least a couple of times. If it's obsolete you can sell it at 50% its price and it will end up costing $3 a day. Even if you are not using it professionaly, I can think of a dozen hobbies that would cost more than that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top