AF-100 Wishlist/Suggestion Discussion Thread
- Thread starter Luis Caffesse
- Start date
- Status
Otis Grapsas
Carbonite Member
It's not a transcoding. It's 0 generation because it starts with uncompressed. It's also standard WMV. Both have the same jpeg compression on top. A 36mbit DNxHD also looks much better than any 20-24mbit mpeg2/mpeg4 encoding but that's to be expected. If I get some time I will do a mpeg2/h264/dnxhd/uncompressed comparison at different rates using an uncompressed source. But it might be misleading since no camera should be expected to match the multipass offline encodings in quality.
HPX vs HMC will be interesting due to the similarities. The HPX should be better than the HMC in any test that involves motion.
mjmcneese
Veteran
I'm sure a lot of people would prefer to record to P2, but I don't see Panny getting enough pressure to create a new P2 recorder. The HPG20 is a great little device, and I can't imagine them "dumbing it down" for use with the AF100. It has great functionality, and I wouldn't want to spend any less on buying such a recorder and lose any of those functions.
You could always rent the HPG20...I think I rented the one I used for $200/day. Well worth it in those situations when you NEED the robustness.
You could always rent the HPG20...I think I rented the one I used for $200/day. Well worth it in those situations when you NEED the robustness.
Yak
Well-known member
Yes this is true but I think many of us would prefer a smaller module like sony's HVR-MRC1 which easily clips on to the camera
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/580065-REG/Sony_HVR_MRC1K_HVR_MRC1_Memory_Recording_Unit.html
the AG-HPG20 is a larger unit with Battery, screen ect. If the AF-150 won't have P2 cards then please include a "small" P2 recorder that clips on the camera and can be powered by the camera as well as be started and stopped by the camera's record button.
Not everyone wants to shoot ENG style with the Camera on the shoulder which using a rig with a AG-HPG20 would most likely entail.
Barry_Green
Moderator
Yes, of course, but it requires more light or a wider-angle lens.
In any given situation, the HMC150 will easily have deeper DOF than an AF100. Given any specific framing and light, an HMC150 will be much deeper. It's pretty difficult to get substantially shallow focus on an HMC150, whereas it's trivial to get it on an AF100 or other m4/3 camera.
Well, it depends on what field of view you want. If you want a super wide angle, then deep depth of field will be easy. But if you want telephoto, and deep DOF, that's going to be a lot harder. You have to use a very tiny iris to get really deep DOF on a large-sensor camera like the AF100. And you need a lot of light in order to be able to get that tiny iris.
Outdoors in daylight, no problem. Outdoors at night -- yeah, that's gonna be tough.
Barry_Green
Moderator
Well, yeah, but recognize you're talking about something entirely different. That Sony unit doesn't supply a new codec, it just records what the camera is already feeding it via firewire. It's a simple data recorder, not an actual video input/codec engine like the HPG20 is. Something like that Sony unit could never be used with a non-HDV/DV camera, because it doesn't actually have a codec chip in it, or any sort of video input. It's a dumb (i.e., no intelligence in it) unit that just copies data from the incoming firewire port over to a compactflash card.
Whereas what people are asking for here is a new unit that would take an incoming video input stream and convert it through a codec into a recordable data stream. That's the job the Sony doesn't do; it relies on the camera's built-in codec chips to supply it with a recordable data stream.
And with that Sony, it doesn't need a screen because it can feed its data back to the camera, through firewire, for display on the camera's screen. You can't do that with something like the AF100 because there's no video inputs at all.
So, in short -- I wouldn't expect it. I think maybe a dumbed-down HPG20 would be the most you could hope for, with no screen and just one slot, but ... it doesn't sound practical. Would you really want a recording unit that can't play back footage?
P2 snap on module
P2 snap on module
I second that. Modular is the way to go. For those of us considering an AF-100 purchase, the ability to upgrade to P2 recording would make the purchase much easier. If, as Jan says, P2 would add 2k to the price of the camera, charge $2500 for the recording module, then people will buy both the AF-100 and the module if they need P2. I think there's money to be made by going the modular route.
P2 snap on module
well i think it would be great for panny if they did the clip on module thing..
they will definitely sell the camera a lot more since people who want the optional p2 module would buy it, while people who dont need p2 can still buy it.
of course this is just a dream
I second that. Modular is the way to go. For those of us considering an AF-100 purchase, the ability to upgrade to P2 recording would make the purchase much easier. If, as Jan says, P2 would add 2k to the price of the camera, charge $2500 for the recording module, then people will buy both the AF-100 and the module if they need P2. I think there's money to be made by going the modular route.
Mike Harvey
Veteran
Even if it's a dumbed down version of the HPG20, if it can easily attach to the AF100 and be slaved to the cameras record button, I think that would make a ton of people happy
Starshine Video
Well-known member
Well they have stated the handle is removable, perhaps they are going to make a P2 module that cilps in place of the handle, much like the SRW1 HDCAM SR decks for the Panavison Genesis and Sony F35/F23.
If Panasonic doesn't do this then I am willing to bet that some aftermarket company will, Focus Enhancements or Convergent Design or someone else.
If Panasonic doesn't do this then I am willing to bet that some aftermarket company will, Focus Enhancements or Convergent Design or someone else.
Yak
Well-known member
How many expected that there would have been a AF-100 Mockup at NAB? I belive this thread is called Wishlist/Suggestion, I think that many people would like a option like this module.
It is possible that by using the on board battery, screen, and controls of the AF-100 a unit smaller and lighter than the HPG20 could be made to work. If Panasonic does not offer a P2 option they risk giving up market share to another format. It is in Panasonic's interest to have as many people using ACV-Intra and P2 as possible.
Whatever. I just want to stress that it is critical that Panasonic comes out with an affordable camera. If that means AVCHD, that's just fine and dandy. I'm not opposed to ACV-Intra or P2 as long as it's optional or an add on - and critically, as long as it doesn't in any way raise the price of the base affordable AVCHD version. I dare say the market for lower priced gear is much much bigger, and Pana would be wise to keep that in mind... and judging by Jana's posts, it seems they are well aware of it.
And as Barry says - it's BS to slag on AVCHD as not suitable for the big screen. It's the product every single time, not the gear - if the story is engaging and well acted, it could be shot old used and abused Hi8 tapes, and it'll do just fine... and conversely, there's a ton of slick garbage shot on the best gear out there.
I vote strongly for Pana to keep these two elements in mind: give us the best low light performance at the best price, and you'll have a runaway hit on your hands... but if you cater only to the hi-end snobs, it'll be middling at best. Low light + Low Price = Win.
And as Barry says - it's BS to slag on AVCHD as not suitable for the big screen. It's the product every single time, not the gear - if the story is engaging and well acted, it could be shot old used and abused Hi8 tapes, and it'll do just fine... and conversely, there's a ton of slick garbage shot on the best gear out there.
I vote strongly for Pana to keep these two elements in mind: give us the best low light performance at the best price, and you'll have a runaway hit on your hands... but if you cater only to the hi-end snobs, it'll be middling at best. Low light + Low Price = Win.
strangways
Well-known member
If it's only SDHC cards it's a definite 'pass' for me.
I've had too many problems with certain brands and sizes of cards being incompatible with certain devices (like Zoom H4 audio recorders and GoPro HD Hero crash-cams) and when you add in the fact that many cards are only branded by a company that will switch manufacturers during the life of their product, and that manufacturers have problems with ghost shifts and outright counterfeits, it's hard to know for certain you are getting a good card.
Even when you do, SDHC cards simply don't have the write verification and ability to re-try writing when bad blocks are encountered that P2 cards do. There are users on this board who have lost important once in a lifetime footage to bad SDHC cards.
I'll stick with P2, which probably isn't perfect, but it hasn't let me down yet, and it's far less likely to ever do so in the future. Go ahead and hurt my wallet, just so long as you don't lose my footage.
I've had too many problems with certain brands and sizes of cards being incompatible with certain devices (like Zoom H4 audio recorders and GoPro HD Hero crash-cams) and when you add in the fact that many cards are only branded by a company that will switch manufacturers during the life of their product, and that manufacturers have problems with ghost shifts and outright counterfeits, it's hard to know for certain you are getting a good card.
Even when you do, SDHC cards simply don't have the write verification and ability to re-try writing when bad blocks are encountered that P2 cards do. There are users on this board who have lost important once in a lifetime footage to bad SDHC cards.
I'll stick with P2, which probably isn't perfect, but it hasn't let me down yet, and it's far less likely to ever do so in the future. Go ahead and hurt my wallet, just so long as you don't lose my footage.
Agreed. I have to say that I already lost footage in a CF card while shooting with my 5D. Call it bad luck, but it happens. P2, however, never failed me (knock on wood!)
Otis Grapsas
Carbonite Member
One should probably stick to an 1/3" camcorder if deep DOF in low light is a requirement. A 4/3 SLR needs more than 10x as much light to match the DOF of 1/3", and a full frame SLR needs more than 50 times as much light. The SLR sensitivity advantage over the 1/3" could cover some of the light loss, but not 50x. If ISO4,000 on the 4/3 and ISO20,000 on the FF is as clean as ISO400 on the 1/3" the problem is solved of course.
Mike Harvey
Veteran
The SDHC thing is overblown. Is it less reliable than P2? Yes, but compared to P2, EVERYTHING is less reliable. I have yet to have an issue with my HMC150. The same can't be said about any tape based camera I've owned. You will occasionally get a bum card (it IS consumer media, after all), but there are ways to check it before hand before you put it into service that helps cut down on that them crapping out when it counts. I have 10 SDHC cards.. most I've owned for over a year, all get used routinely, and none of them have had issues (knock on wood).
- Status