AF-100 Wishlist/Suggestion Discussion Thread
- Thread starter Luis Caffesse
- Start date
- Status
Nityananda_SCSMath
Active member
I'm hopeful for a plethora of well implemented focus-assist features, including the feature to mark focus points and have the camera do a constant-speed focus pull from one point to another, or atleast set focus start-stop boundaries to achieve the same purpose (kind of like the Manfrotto 521PFI)
Last edited:
Barry_Green
Moderator
Well, that would only be of relevance on one of the Micro Four Thirds lenses, but if you were using one of those then it would very likely even work with that same Manfrotto 521PFI.
mcsmooth
Well-known member
I can attest to AVCCAM working wonderfully in most situations, yet it seems that the codec is still one of the biggest concerns of this product. They could really boost it's reputation with a few tweaks.
The most difficult part of making changes are keeping them within the "AVCHD" specs for compatibility.... but is that so important with the target market? Panasonic's recent consumer 1080p60 cams work around this by simply having a mode that stores files outside of the AVCHD structure. Once you are free of those limitations, profiles, framerates and bitrates are unlocked.
Using High 4:2:2 Profile would address some of the biggest complaints about the AF100 (though applies to AVCCAM in general) by allowing a 4:2:2 colorspace and 10 bit color depth. Encoding is actually more efficient than 4:2:0/8bit at the same bitrate. This would put it up against Canon's new 4:2:2 mpeg-2 format.
We know 1080p60 is possible, but at the same time, so should be 720p120 and other resolutions. A way to get those withing the AVCHD spec is to jam those higher frame rates into the existing formats (ex: dump 60fps into 2 seconds of 1080p30 using variable frame rates) using a faster card.
The 1080p60 cameras use a higher bitrate, which is needed for the extra information. Class 10 cards can easily handle twice the bandwidth of PH mode. That could be put to good use with 4:2:2, 10bit, and/or 1080p60. Even without those features, a bitrate bump would get the picture closer to intra quality and help with dynamic scenes.
Even staying within AVCHD specs, the lower bitrate modes could really use some progressive options! For example, 720p24 would make a lot more sense at the lowest rates. Perhaps there is a technical reason, but it would be nice to have all of the format choices at all bitrates (or be independent of each other).
The most difficult part of making changes are keeping them within the "AVCHD" specs for compatibility.... but is that so important with the target market? Panasonic's recent consumer 1080p60 cams work around this by simply having a mode that stores files outside of the AVCHD structure. Once you are free of those limitations, profiles, framerates and bitrates are unlocked.
Using High 4:2:2 Profile would address some of the biggest complaints about the AF100 (though applies to AVCCAM in general) by allowing a 4:2:2 colorspace and 10 bit color depth. Encoding is actually more efficient than 4:2:0/8bit at the same bitrate. This would put it up against Canon's new 4:2:2 mpeg-2 format.
We know 1080p60 is possible, but at the same time, so should be 720p120 and other resolutions. A way to get those withing the AVCHD spec is to jam those higher frame rates into the existing formats (ex: dump 60fps into 2 seconds of 1080p30 using variable frame rates) using a faster card.
The 1080p60 cameras use a higher bitrate, which is needed for the extra information. Class 10 cards can easily handle twice the bandwidth of PH mode. That could be put to good use with 4:2:2, 10bit, and/or 1080p60. Even without those features, a bitrate bump would get the picture closer to intra quality and help with dynamic scenes.
Even staying within AVCHD specs, the lower bitrate modes could really use some progressive options! For example, 720p24 would make a lot more sense at the lowest rates. Perhaps there is a technical reason, but it would be nice to have all of the format choices at all bitrates (or be independent of each other).
mcsmooth
Well-known member
I mainly use low bitrate modes for longer time-lapse shots where I will be throwing out most of the frames. This might not be necessary with interval recording. I'm hoping that interval recording and variable frame rates allow for some creative freedom.
I used to desire VFRs like 1fps - 12fps (as on a hacked HVX), but interval recording with interval times of 2 frames to 1 second could cover that purpose. It would be great to have greater flexibility for specifying interval time. The ultimate freedom would allow you to enter interval time in mins:sec:frames. Then you no longer need a separate DSLR for timelapse. Another big wish to go along with this is longer shutter speeds!!! 1/2/4/8/15/30/60 seconds, as long as interval time, etc.
I haven't seen too many details on variable frame rates (separate from "variable HD formats"), but would expect most of the standard ones from HVX. The real question is, why not at 1080? I can't think of any technical reason if they are able to do it at 720 with this codec. Then the biggie everyone is begging for, 1080p60!
720 is good enough on a pixel shifted HMC/HVX/HPX, but is a much bigger sacrifice with an all new chip designed for 1080p performance. Depending on the design, isn't it likely 720 on this chip could have the same aliasing problems VSLRs have?
I used to desire VFRs like 1fps - 12fps (as on a hacked HVX), but interval recording with interval times of 2 frames to 1 second could cover that purpose. It would be great to have greater flexibility for specifying interval time. The ultimate freedom would allow you to enter interval time in mins:sec:frames. Then you no longer need a separate DSLR for timelapse. Another big wish to go along with this is longer shutter speeds!!! 1/2/4/8/15/30/60 seconds, as long as interval time, etc.
I haven't seen too many details on variable frame rates (separate from "variable HD formats"), but would expect most of the standard ones from HVX. The real question is, why not at 1080? I can't think of any technical reason if they are able to do it at 720 with this codec. Then the biggie everyone is begging for, 1080p60!
720 is good enough on a pixel shifted HMC/HVX/HPX, but is a much bigger sacrifice with an all new chip designed for 1080p performance. Depending on the design, isn't it likely 720 on this chip could have the same aliasing problems VSLRs have?
BryantStanton
Well-known member
$10,000?
Yikes.
I mean, not horrible in the camera world, but almost double the projected price. Maybe it will be lower when it hits our shore.
http://gizmodo.com/5636422/panasoni...+af100-will-cost-10000-in-japan-this-december
Yikes.
I mean, not horrible in the camera world, but almost double the projected price. Maybe it will be lower when it hits our shore.
http://gizmodo.com/5636422/panasoni...+af100-will-cost-10000-in-japan-this-december
This is what Jan said in another thread about that Japanese Yen number:
But for all we know that just could be the cost in Japan. The prices are generally higher over there.
Barry_Green
Moderator
They have some decent footage that they shot, and showed in the booth and at the press conference. They should post that, it was pretty good.
No mention of a windowed mode. I have asked repeatedly for it.
No mention of a windowed mode. I have asked repeatedly for it.
shoulder mount!
shoulder mount!
a bottom plate that either slides or folds out back to give instant shoulder mounting!
All these midform cameras could need it! I hate those bulky shoulder things that you have to buy from dvtec or whomever, they need an extra suitcase and I travel A LOT!
I want some sort of clever bottom plate! Please!
all the other wishes are ok with me too, but this one is my PRIME woe with these small cams.:crybaby:
shoulder mount!
a bottom plate that either slides or folds out back to give instant shoulder mounting!
All these midform cameras could need it! I hate those bulky shoulder things that you have to buy from dvtec or whomever, they need an extra suitcase and I travel A LOT!
I want some sort of clever bottom plate! Please!
all the other wishes are ok with me too, but this one is my PRIME woe with these small cams.:crybaby:
Rick Burnett
Section Moderator
Yeah, at the moment for under $6k I am in. For $10k I am not. For $10k I will hold out for the S35 at that price point. At $6k it just seems like too much camera to not get 
Homunculus
Carbonite Member
Barry, all the extras, form factor, attachments and other stuff aside, just taking into account the actual IMAGE quality as compares to original Red (non MX) and GH1 - how would you rate the AF100 so far that you've seen? Well not rate in the sense of 1-10 but rather how does the image so far compare to hacked gh13 and original Red? Does it noticeably look as good and/or better, how does colorspace, dynamic range, resolution, etc compare???
Luis Caffesse
Admin
I think it's safe to say that now that Panasonic has unveiled the preproduction model of the AF-100 that this thread has served it's purpose (and run its course).
Seems clear that they have once again listened to quite a few of our requests - so thanks to all of you who chimed in with suggestions and ideas.
We have many threads going right now on the current state of the AF-100.
In the interest of keeping things organized, we are going to close this thread down now.
Seems clear that they have once again listened to quite a few of our requests - so thanks to all of you who chimed in with suggestions and ideas.
We have many threads going right now on the current state of the AF-100.
In the interest of keeping things organized, we are going to close this thread down now.
- Status