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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Barry_Green said:
Understood. But if you search around on these forums a bit, you'll see that I'm the guy who's usually out there testing things hardcore. I'm the guy who's got maybe $5,000 worth of professional test chart. I'm the guy who torture-tests codecs and finds out what the real limits are, so that I can advise people what products will work for them and which ones won't. I'm the guy who broke the news on CMOS sensors because I tested the hell out of them and reported on all the rolling shutter artifacts. Everybody acts like rolling shutter stuff is common knowledge now, but when I first posted that article they were calling for my head.

I don't tell people what they want to hear. I tell them what stuff does. Sometimes that makes me popular, because what the stuff does happens to line up with what they want to hear. Sometimes it makes me quite unpopular (such as when I showed exactly what DSLRs do, when people wanted to be told that a $799 SLR was just as good as a $35,000 Red One kit). But I don't do it for popularity. I lay the facts out there and let the reader decide what facts and issues are relevant to them.

And I don't care what any manufacturer says. I go and test the products and find out for myself. And then I report back here.
Click to expand...

Ok, that's cool. You're obviously a well educated guy. I hope I haven't offended you with my bluntness.

I'm new to this board and jumping in the deep end is how I roll (see what I did there). It's a great board from what I can see, and I intend to come back now and again for whatever reason, so I'll be well behaved.

Would like to sincerely thank you for spending your own time in sharing your knowledge. When I'm as great as Scorcese you can say you helped educate me. :-)
 
Nick Navaro said:
Is the image REALLY going to change tho? Probably not?? I mean the chip is in there, the codec is there.... The 25% left will most likely be features??

I guess Barry is the best guy for this too....
Click to expand...
Wait a month and find out.

And yes the image is going to change. The version I have now, they haven't even implemented ISOs above 2000. They're in the menus, and you can select them, but they don't actually change the image beyond 2000. Which means that the match test that Philip did, at 3200 ISO, wasn't. The camera will be a lot more sensitive than that. And the engineers have specifically told me they're refining the noise/sensitivity/dynamic range balance, so yes it'll change.

But already it's much better than any DSLR. The banding, fixed-pattern noise, and aliasing are GONE.

And that's why I keep saying that you gotta cut Philip some slack and look at his test as nothing more than a brief overview of a not-fully-functional prototype. I sincerely doubt that whoever got that camera to him, even bothered to tell him all the things that weren't working yet! Surely he wouldn't have done an ISO3200 test if they'd told him "oh yeah, ISO 3200 doesn't work" and he never would have said "the viewfinder's subpar" if they had told him that the viewfinder wasn't the final one, it was just some spare part that they bolted on to the handcrafted prototype he was using. Whoever got that camera to him did Philip, and the community, a disservice by not letting him know what wasn't working, what he should test, and what he should ignore.
 
Last edited:
BARRY,
since youve had it for a long time..
resolved resolution.. i knw it probably shits on the dslrs
but is it comparable to sony EX cams?
or you cant divulge that yet
 
Nick Navaro said:
Ok, that's cool. You're obviously a well educated guy. I hope I haven't offended you with my bluntness.

I'm new to this board and jumping in the deep end is how I roll (see what I did there). It's a great board from what I can see, and I intend to come back now and again for whatever reason, so I'll be well behaved.

Would like to sincerely thank you for spending your own time in sharing your knowledge. When I'm as great as Scorcese you can say you helped educate me. :-)
Click to expand...

finally you took off the troll costume. well it's halloween after all ;-) welcome to the board
 
I'll make this my last post so we don't go too far off topic, but to clarify - those were all specifically shot on Super 35. There are some older interviews online where he and Russell Carpenter extol the benefits of shooting on the format. (You're right - Cameron did shoot 2:35 mostly on the format, though he shot Terminator and Aliens on 1:85 Super 35.)
 
Nick Navaro said:
It's a great board from what I can see, and I intend to come back now and again for whatever reason, so I'll be well behaved.
Click to expand...
Thanks, we'd appreciate it. We don't go in for fighting here, we're about educating and informing and sharing. So we do ask people to please check their testosterone at the door and prepare to engage in civil discussions. Thanks for understanding and pledging to be "well behaved"! :)
 
Barry_Green said:
Thanks, we'd appreciate it. We don't go in for fighting here, we're about educating and informing and sharing. So we do ask people to please check their testosterone at the door and prepare to engage in civil discussions. Thanks for understanding and pledging to be "well behaved"! :)
Click to expand...
hey there's women here too. i think. so estrogen needs to be checked as well
 
dcloud said:
BARRY,
since youve had it for a long time..
resolved resolution.. i knw it probably shits on the dslrs
but is it comparable to sony EX cams?
or you cant divulge that yet
Click to expand...

Substantially sharper than a DSLR right now. But it is not finalized so I can't say for sure. In the ballpark with EX1, but I haven't been able to put them up side-by-side, and I'd have to rent an EX1 to do so, and it'd be wasted money because the hardware isn't finalized. But in this prototype it is noticeably sharper than what a DSLR can deliver. I find myself shooting tons of wide shots JUST BECAUSE I CAN! :D
 
Barry_Green said:
Thanks, we'd appreciate it. We don't go in for fighting here, we're about educating and informing and sharing. So we do ask people to please check their testosterone at the door and prepare to engage in civil discussions. Thanks for understanding and pledging to be "well behaved"! :)
Click to expand...

No worries.

Just read your BIG post about short-comings on the AF100.

I've never used a DSLR for video, and TBH, even though they give a certain "film-look", the overall look to me, is just horrible on most people's work. Out of focus a lot, very jerky etc...

I've always used video cameras so the AF100 really is "between" the two isn't it... I'm also at a stage in my career where I'm about to sign a new lucrative 2 year exclusive contract and I need to up my game and image like 2 months ago!! Technology is not moving fast enough for me. And usually moves too fast for some.

The lack of magnified focus assist is not good at all. Bloom was wrong about the viewfinder then too. That really did put me off also. As for it being CCD and 4:2:2 etc etc, then the technology really isn't there yet is it, for a chassis that small. Unless they're holding it back. Which is a shame.

And the crew.tv guys say that the recording externally has no positive effect on the image at all. In fact, it picked up MORE noise in the blacks! That's not good hey.
 
Bloom was 100% wrong about the viewfinder, yes. Not his fault, they should have told him that the viewfinder on there was leftover junk and not representative of the real finder. The real finder uses an LCoS panel, probably the same one in the HPX300/HPX370, a viewfinder which Philip called "superb." So I think it's fair to say that when he reviews the newer camera body, he will say that the AF100's viewfinder is also "superb" (because it is; I have the one with the newer VF).

As for technology and holding back -- the sensor doesn't exist. The closest there would be is the one that Dalsa built for their Origin, a camera that nobody ever used. Or the sensor in the Sony F35 -- there's a large S35-sized CCD sensor. But the F35 is $350,000.

You want a camera in the $4700 price bracket with a large sensor, it's gonna be CMOS. I wish it could be otherwise, but this is the way it is.
 
why is dalsa always at the forefront of innovation yet their cameras are unused. aren't they the only ones that also have a camera with global shutter under 50k
 
Barry_Green said:
Bloom was 100% wrong about the viewfinder, yes. Not his fault, they should have told him that the viewfinder on there was leftover junk and not representative of the real finder. The real finder uses an LCoS panel, probably the same one in the HPX300/HPX370, a viewfinder which Philip called "superb." So I think it's fair to say that when he reviews the newer camera body, he will say that the AF100's viewfinder is also "superb" (because it is; I have the one with the newer VF).

As for technology and holding back -- the sensor doesn't exist. The closest there would be is the one that Dalsa built for their Origin, a camera that nobody ever used. Or the sensor in the Sony F35 -- there's a large S35-sized CCD sensor. But the F35 is $350,000.

You want a camera in the $4700 price bracket with a large sensor, it's gonna be CMOS. I wish it could be otherwise, but this is the way it is.
Click to expand...

Like I said, I'm more DP than DoP, so limited knowledge for sensors etc... But typical, the one I want is $350k! Pffft... I guess most people would take it if they could tho. When that sensor is in a body the size (not necessarily the shape) of the AF100, I will be a happy man. Till then part of me will feel missing. haha :-)

Well if the AF100 will perform better than the 7D and it has the XLR's for tripod/TV interviews, then it may just work for me. Just need the right lenses and to work we go. And I would have LOTS of footage to parade then too...

Hey, do you think Panny would sponsor? I do a 30min TV show every 4-5 weeks watched by up to 2 million people globally, actually goes into in tens of millions of home via satellite (astra) and cable...
 
Homunculus said:
why is dalsa always at the forefront of innovation yet their cameras are unused. aren't they the only ones that also have a camera with global shutter under 50k
Click to expand...
Can't really say, as I've never used one of their cameras (which apparently puts me in large company). Dalsa is one of the major chip manufacturers; maybe their chips are better than their cameras are? And who knows who's using Dalsa chips... Sony, Panasonic, JVC, Canon, Nikon, there might be all sorts of companies who are buying their chips without us knowing it. So you may be using a Dalsa chip right now and not know it. :thumbsup:
 
Nick Navaro said:
Well if the AF100 will perform better than the 7D and it has the XLR's for tripod/TV interviews, then it may just work for me.
Click to expand...
If a 7D is working for you (with its CMOS flash/skew issues and lack of video lenses) then the AF100 will work for you too. But if those factors on the 7D don't work for you, then the AF100 won't work for you either, because it's also CMOS and will have flash/skew issues Should be better skew performance than the 7D though. And the 14-140 provides a pretty good simulation of a conventional video lens, which you don't get on the 7D.

Hey, do you think Panny would sponsor? I do a 30min TV show every 4-5 weeks watched by up to 2 million people globally, actually goes into in tens of millions of home via satellite (astra) and cable...
Click to expand...
They get a dozen requests a day. And the answer is almost always no, although with the 3-D camera they did develop a fleet of them and loaned them out to various producers to shoot a wide variety of types of 3D footage and report back to them, so ... anything's possible. But prepare to stand in a very long line.
 
Nick just keep in mind if you really want to use pro stuff like cinema glass that you're talking about, i.e. zeiss ultra primse, arri master primes, cooke s4's etc...at least you CAN use them on af100. slap a PL mount and you're set. but on your beloved full frame sensor 5dmkii? nope. you'll have to modify the entire camera for thousands of dollars , remove the mirror, and do all sorts of crap
 
Dalsa is no longer a camera company. They closed down their camera department about two years ago.

As to why it wasn't very popular: the thing was a rhino. Huge back-end that required a full size camera crew and a couple of data guys to move around and work.

But Dalsa still makes chips, and who knows where those chips are ending up (ahem, RED?).

I agree with most of what's been said about the superiority of the AF100 to a Canon DSLR, except for one exception: DR. Claims to the contrary, I'd like to put up a Canon DSLR and an AF100 (when it's in production) and really run it through the paces in terms of Dynamic range in video mode.
 
Doctor Wu said:
Dalsa is no longer a camera company. They closed down their camera department about two years ago.

As to why it wasn't very popular: the thing was a rhino. Huge back-end that required a full size camera crew and a couple of data guys to move around and work.

But Dalsa still makes chips, and who knows where those chips are ending up (ahem, RED?).

I agree with most of what's been said about the superiority of the AF100 to a Canon DSLR, except for one exception: DR. Claims to the contrary, I'd like to put up a Canon DSLR and an AF100 (when it's in production) and really run it through the paces in terms of Dynamic range in video mode.
Click to expand...

I'd like to see this as well, although as you probably already know Barry himself tested early model of af100 at 10.5 stops of dynamic range on aprofessional chart, and he and others have tested the DSLR's at 8 to 8.5 stops. But I guess we will see.
The only direct comparison so far is the alfa romeo test footage from crews.tv that shows the white car highlights blow out/ clip on the 5dmkii but not on the af100 which indicates higher af100 DR but some people complained 5d wasn't on proper settings so ...I guess we'll see
 
Regarding that 14-140 lens. How does it zoom? Is it intelligently connected to the camera? Is there a rocker? Or just manual on the lens?

The auto-focus lens is not made yet right? Especially with the face recognition thingy? Not that it's that important but nice to know.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top