its literally about as big as a square box of tissues give or take an inch. but with a viewfinder.
AF100 / AF101 - initial report
- Thread starter Barry_Green
- Start date
RieniO
Well-known member
That goes for everybody I guess. The smaller and lighter the better. In some forums you see people joke about how silly the AF100 looks, I don't get that... please give me the ugliest camera in the world just as long as it produces top quality images.
Ticheli
Well-known member
The most physically attractive video camera is without doubt the Arri Alexa. Why? Because it was designed with the spirit of form follows function, not the other way around. From what I've seen, the AF100 also incorporates the same design philosophy, it's just not so "Euro" beautiful. Add a nicely machined carrying handle with multiple tapped holes, and it will look much more "professional." Does the look of the AF100 really matter? If it does to you, well, I'll be deferential and not say.
Neophytes may prefer a camera that looks like it was designed by an arrogant cartoonist with a martial fetish and operational function be damned, but I can assure you that working with such a beast is unpleasant.
Back to the AF100, it looks like a camera designed to be operated without an assistant, so no readout on the assistant's side; this also cuts the cost. Easily remedied by the addition of a small LCD for the assistant. Loaded up with plate, rods, follow-focus, matte box, SDI recorder, and an Anton Bauer battery, the AF100 will present a professional visage to those concerned about the "PR" aspects.
Here's what really matters: The camera has to function reliably and efficiently and make acceptable pictures. I'm betting the AF100 will deliver all that and more.
Good shooting and best regards,
Leo
Neophytes may prefer a camera that looks like it was designed by an arrogant cartoonist with a martial fetish and operational function be damned, but I can assure you that working with such a beast is unpleasant.
Back to the AF100, it looks like a camera designed to be operated without an assistant, so no readout on the assistant's side; this also cuts the cost. Easily remedied by the addition of a small LCD for the assistant. Loaded up with plate, rods, follow-focus, matte box, SDI recorder, and an Anton Bauer battery, the AF100 will present a professional visage to those concerned about the "PR" aspects.
Here's what really matters: The camera has to function reliably and efficiently and make acceptable pictures. I'm betting the AF100 will deliver all that and more.
Good shooting and best regards,
Leo
Rick Burnett
Section Moderator
I'm gonna have to cast some doubt into your statement as I think the Alexa is the ugliest of the new cameras. Not a fan of it's form factor AT ALL. I put it behind the AF100 in fact in terms of aesthetic appeal.
I've shot with larger and smaller cameras and for *me* without question, I like the smaller the camera as long as it has weight. In terms of cameras designed for motion capture first, the Epic is my favorite design. First is the size it can be minimally, but second in the design of the modularity of it.
This is why I like the AF100 as well. I can replace the top handle and the side handle with aftermarket or self fashioned solutions to get grip designs that more closely match what I want AND not make the camera crazy big.
And with a really long lens on the AF100, I will love my leaf blower
I've shot with larger and smaller cameras and for *me* without question, I like the smaller the camera as long as it has weight. In terms of cameras designed for motion capture first, the Epic is my favorite design. First is the size it can be minimally, but second in the design of the modularity of it.
This is why I like the AF100 as well. I can replace the top handle and the side handle with aftermarket or self fashioned solutions to get grip designs that more closely match what I want AND not make the camera crazy big.
And with a really long lens on the AF100, I will love my leaf blower
Ticheli
Well-known member
Do you really think camera size is a design choice? That a camera maker would design in empty space and extra weight? Aside from the Bauhaus esthetic, the Alexa is beautiful because every control is right where it should be for the most efficient and intuitive operation. It's based a highly refined design that springs from the experience of generations of camera operators and assistants.
As for the Epic design, it's certainly an improvement over the Red One, but I'm not certain that the modular approach is as wise as it sounds at first blush. I hope it all locks together securely and that electrical contact points don't fail. Since a finished Epic design has not been released, I can't really say how operator friendly the control and readout placement is. There's a reason for providing readout on the assistant's side, rather than the back, and for grouping cable connectors intelligently so you don't end up with a Gordian knot, Frankencam.
Good shooting and best regards,
Leo
As for the Epic design, it's certainly an improvement over the Red One, but I'm not certain that the modular approach is as wise as it sounds at first blush. I hope it all locks together securely and that electrical contact points don't fail. Since a finished Epic design has not been released, I can't really say how operator friendly the control and readout placement is. There's a reason for providing readout on the assistant's side, rather than the back, and for grouping cable connectors intelligently so you don't end up with a Gordian knot, Frankencam.
Good shooting and best regards,
Leo
Rick Burnett
Section Moderator
My only point with my comment is that it is subjective, and that I was offering another viewpoint. Camera size is ABSOLUTELY a design choice, as is a ton of other characteristic targets that drive all the parameters for the design. As you mention, the RED ONE, is quite large and heavy, and it's been a complaining point for some people for a long time. Especially people doing remote work, say up a mountain, where they are carrying their equipment while hiking or what have you (or underwater). For me, I love to run with a hand-held stabilizer. People have different requirements for what is important to them, and I am sure, that will be a selling point between the Epic and the Alexa in terms of what fits need the most. They both produce absolutely beautiful images.
And I agree that the Alexa design lends itself to a history of designs that will feel right at home for those used to working with that sort of design in a camera. That's a good thing for those people. For me, EPIC and AF100 represents a desire I have for smaller equipment (and hopefully lighter than older equipment). I mean, the difference between working with some film cameras that we used on a 3D film compared to the HVX200 is a great example of where you end up with A LOT MORE FREEDOM in what you can do with the camera. There was NO hand held on that film camera.
With the AF100 and the lens I already use, I know I should be < 4lbs mostly. That's perfect for me. After shooting on a 7D for quite awhile, I love the size. I don't love the lack of controls and the non-articulation of the LCD screen. I also love, as I said, that Panasonic made the handles removable so I can fab some different type of handles. On the 7D, I used a cage for awhile, but it was always in the way of the readouts and such (http://www.idcphotography.com/kart/index.php?p=product&id=124&parent=30). I will DEFINITELY be building some different grip options as I explore a lot of hand-held use with my AF100 as it will be replacing my 7D.
Of course, with the EPIC, you could keep stacking modules on the back to make it the size of the Alexa if you wanted!
(And yes, I agree, the connectors do bring about questions. Hopefully they are very robust).
And I agree that the Alexa design lends itself to a history of designs that will feel right at home for those used to working with that sort of design in a camera. That's a good thing for those people. For me, EPIC and AF100 represents a desire I have for smaller equipment (and hopefully lighter than older equipment). I mean, the difference between working with some film cameras that we used on a 3D film compared to the HVX200 is a great example of where you end up with A LOT MORE FREEDOM in what you can do with the camera. There was NO hand held on that film camera.
With the AF100 and the lens I already use, I know I should be < 4lbs mostly. That's perfect for me. After shooting on a 7D for quite awhile, I love the size. I don't love the lack of controls and the non-articulation of the LCD screen. I also love, as I said, that Panasonic made the handles removable so I can fab some different type of handles. On the 7D, I used a cage for awhile, but it was always in the way of the readouts and such (http://www.idcphotography.com/kart/index.php?p=product&id=124&parent=30). I will DEFINITELY be building some different grip options as I explore a lot of hand-held use with my AF100 as it will be replacing my 7D.
Of course, with the EPIC, you could keep stacking modules on the back to make it the size of the Alexa if you wanted!
(And yes, I agree, the connectors do bring about questions. Hopefully they are very robust).
Barry_Green
Moderator
Picture coming tomorrow... :thumbsup:And with a really long lens on the AF100, I will love my leaf blower
Barry_Green
Moderator
Not sure what you mean here. The LCD on the AF100 can be flipped and set to face outwards, directly towards the AC, so you don't need anything additional, it was indeed designed to be operated by one or two. With an AC, you'd set the LCD facing outwards, giving the AC the ability to use the focus readout and zoom readout and focus assists, and the operator would then use the viewfinder.
Barry_Green
Moderator
ustein;2140040Mens both a active at the same time? That would be nice (sorry I compare with the VG10 :-) )[/QUOTE said:
What do you think of the view finder on the AF100, Barry? Mr. Bloom thought it was a little sub par.
heavyG
Underwater Giraffe Member
That's always the problem with pre-production / not final version showing up for the 'initial test'. Even if they swap out a better viewfinder in the shipping version (which has been indicated several times), everyone will remember that "Mr. Bloom thought it was a little sub par".
G.
Yeah, I heard that it may not be the final version, but I wasn't aware that this was from the horses mouth. It seems to be second hand sources that have suggested it will be improved on at least from what I've read in the comments section in Phil's blog. Maybe this would be a good place for Jan to butt in and officially say something in regards to this matter since she seems to be posting today. Hope her Italy trip went well.
Barry_Green
Moderator
Tie that into...
Bloom said the one he has is "75% done". That means it's the same one, or similar, to the one I had in Europe. And that had just any old viewfinder they could find and stick on it, because it was a handmade pre-production prototype. They told me right off the bat "this is not the viewfinder you'll see on the final unit, it will be much better."
The unit I've used most recently is an "85% done" model, with substantial improvements in build quality. I would say it has a perfectly satisfactory viewfinder. It's not super-large like a ZFinder on an LCD screen, obviously, so if someone wants to say that that's the only acceptable kind of viewfinder, then they won't like this. But if someone wants a crisp, true real viewfinder, the new one is very good. Very sharp, very clear. In terms of total magnification it's about the same perceived size as the HMC40's, but about seven trillion times sharper. It's profoundly superior to that found on the HMC150. Same basic size, but way sharper/clearer.
Barry_Green
Moderator
Absolutely verified and confirmed. I was told that the viewfinder was not the final, on the first day I got it.
If Philip is saying it's "sub par" based on the 75% version, then he really should edit that out of his article because that viewfinder has no relationship to the shipping product.
Thanks so Much for the reply!
Homunculus
Carbonite Member
Barry you used 85% version, what improvements did it have? Any dynamic range or image quality improvements? Or just form factor stuff like VF etc
Barry_Green
Moderator
Will report later on what I did with it. It's kind of fun.
This is the version that Jan was talking about, that has the manual white balance setting, and the colored peaking and the real viewfinder and much better construction quality. It's a whole lot better looking too. And it has more ISOs enabled, although frankly there aren't enough features working to 100% that I would feel comfortable doing in-depth studying on its functionality. For example, like Jan said -- the 3200 ISO is enabled, but it looks the same (brightness-wise) as the 2000 ISO setting. So clearly they haven't fully enabled that.
There's still two months till shipping. Lots of time for things to be improved and to get the rest of the functions fully enabled.
This is the version that Jan was talking about, that has the manual white balance setting, and the colored peaking and the real viewfinder and much better construction quality. It's a whole lot better looking too. And it has more ISOs enabled, although frankly there aren't enough features working to 100% that I would feel comfortable doing in-depth studying on its functionality. For example, like Jan said -- the 3200 ISO is enabled, but it looks the same (brightness-wise) as the 2000 ISO setting. So clearly they haven't fully enabled that.
There's still two months till shipping. Lots of time for things to be improved and to get the rest of the functions fully enabled.
heavyG
Underwater Giraffe Member
Just in case you missed it: "THERE'S STILL TWO MONTHS TILL SHIPPING. LOTS OF TIME FOR THINGS TO BE IMPROVED AND TO GET THE REST OF THE FUNCTIONS FULLY ENABLED."!!!!!!!!