AF100 / AF101 - initial report

David S. said:
The remaining unknown for me is how the cam interacts with Nikon/Canon/Panasonic lenses, particularly with options for AF and zoom.
Click to expand...
Well, as of TODAY, there is no electronic connection for Nikon or Canon lenses. But, then again, there's no AF100 either, so that's irrelevant.

It has full electronic connection with Panasonic and Olympus m43 lenses, and also with 4/3 lenses when using the Lumix 4/3->m43 adapter. Autofocus and auto-iris are enabled, and the lens will report back to the camera what its zoom position is. And, the remote control ports will let you control focus and iris and record start/stop.

In the next couple of months you should see press releases regarding adapters for the other types of lenses that provide equal performance for Canon and/or Nikon. So, before the camera ships, we should have a comprehensive solution available that provides full electronic control of all functions of those lenses.

As for zoom -- there are no zoom controls on the camera. There are no zoom motors in the lenses. There is no way to control zoom. However, there is feedback from the lens to the camera about what the current zoom position is, so it'll show Z00 at full wide angle, and Z99 at full telephoto, etc.
 
grimepoch said:
My only hope now is that someone comes out with an electronic adapter so I can use my EOS lenses on it as well (Since I still use a still camera). I'd seriously consider one at this point.
Click to expand...
Start seriously considering then, because that's gonna happen. :thumbsup:
 
grimepoch said:
Oh Just out of curiosity, could I take this adapter and rent a GH1 and try it with my lenses then?
Click to expand...
Of course. Once it's available, it should work with any m43 camera.

And thanks for all the detailed information. I really appreciate it. I know they may not know this yet, but any target on dynamic range? What they think they can hit?
Click to expand...
I heard no such discussion. While I couldn't record it, I did have the chance to point the earliest prototype at a backlit DSC chart and counted 10.5 stops. But that may change -- they may tighten it up to reduce noise, or they may expand it, or it may stay where it is. We will see.
 
grimepoch said:
Oh! So are they downresing in camera from ~5k down to ~2k? ie, not using pixel binning. This would be one BIG reason aliasing is so reduced.
Click to expand...
We don't know that. We don't know the specifics of how they're doing it. Only thing they've announced is that they're using a properly-engineered OLPF.

You know what? We don't necessarily know that it even uses a Bayer pattern! I've said it is, but that was actually assuming. We don't know what the camera does to get its performance. This sensor is optimized for video recording, so who's to say that it's not using some sort of expanded bayer pattern with the same color covering multiple pixels, and then binning those pixels together? That could turn a 4k image into a 1080p image by using a 2x2 bin, and increase sensitivity, etc... it'd hurt stills res, but who cares?

Point being -- we don't know what it's doing. All I know is that the results, while not perfect, were darn promising!
 
xmephestox said:
one of the most stellar things i've heard all day! that is amazing, AMAZING news. any chance you have enough nagging power to convince them that 10 bit SDI is a necessity and they have no choice about it? :)
Click to expand...
There's a term called "political capital", and I'm afraid I may have spent my capital with them. I made myself very, very, very, very unwelcome with my vociferous demands that certain features operate in a certain way. While they are listening to cinematographers in the design phase, that doesn't necessarily mean they got everything exactly right. Like I said before, I'll share positive feedback here, and negative feedback goes to the manufacturer to give them a shot at fixing/improving/enhancing what's there. The SDI question isn't settled yet; no spec has been given. I've made it quite clear to them that 10-bit would be a great advantage. However, frankly, I don't expect it, because none of the other AG-series cameras offer it. And the nanoflash wouldn't take advantage of it anyway.

But, yes, trust me, lots of nagging has been done. :thumbsup:
 
mcgeedigital said:
That rocks. Can't tell you how happy that makes me with my investment in Canon L glass.
Click to expand...
For clarification (I think this has been made clear, but if not, I'll clarify again): the adapter I speak of is *not* coming from Panasonic, it's coming from a third party manufacturer.

And I agree, it's excellent news. I think it's a no-brainer; there's soooo much Canon and Nikon glass out there, and so many AF100's will be sold, plus the bazillions of GH1s that have been sold, that it was inevitable that a manufacturer would step up to the plate and take advantage of this opportunity.
 
but the ki pro mini would, since the announcement people have been putting this camera with that handy device in their minds almost instantly.

but thanks for the nag front! 8 bit needs to be left to die, we are trying to move forward here, standards have changed
 
Steve Kahn said:
I'm afraid I agree. I really don't want to start to think about an AF113
Click to expand...
Hey, that would be fun to have as an option though. Who wouldn't want to see Vitaliy work his magic and give us a 50-megabit 4:2:2 codec?

I think the GH1 pretty much requires Vitaliy's PTool hack to make it a workable product. I don't think it's necessary for the AF100, but I sure wouldn't turn it down if he was able to provide it!
 
I'm always confused by how a thread about amazing new technology eventually ends up with a lot of strange, negative and/or irrelevant posts.

I'm not one of the people or companies that can just afford to preorder one of these things immediately...I may indeed have to stay on DSLRs for awhile. But I'm extremely excited about the AF100 and definately see the value, and will get one as soon as I can afford it!
 
xmephestox said:
but the ki pro mini would, since the announcement people have been putting this camera with that handy device in their minds almost instantly.
Click to expand...
Understood. I looked at the Ki Pro Mini. I can see why Apple users would be amped on it; it's a little less appealing for Windows users but still -- it's a grand less than the NanoFlash. It's thicker and I think overall bigger than the Nano. Nano needs a price reduction to remain competitive, but I think I liked the design of the Nano better, when thinking about mounting it on the camcorder itself.

See, the AF100 would be ideal for use with one of those, because you can remove the side grip and it reveals a flat plane with four mounting holes and even a cold shoe. Someone will undoubtedly make a mounting plate for one or the other.

I think the Ki Pro requires a 12v XLR, whereas the Nano can be driven off a little plug-in jack on as little as, what, 7 volts? Which means there may even be a way to power the Nano off the camcorder's battery, if someone makes a tap off the battery. And actually I spoke to a dealer in, I think, Italy, who has already launched a line of batteries that have power taps on them. I don't think it was a D-tap, but some sort of power tap available, which might be appropriate for driving a Nano with little to no hassle.

Then there's the low-budget Ninja. Didn't see it on the floor, but ... I get the appeal of the price, but its use of HDMI-only is really disappointing to me. HD-SDI is so much better -- it's a locking BNC connector and it outputs timecode. HDMI is a non-locking connector and no timecode. Micro-budget guys might be tempted by the Ninja, but I would think working pros would prefer the AJA or the Nano if, for no other reason, because they support proper HD-SDI.
 
I have my reservations about the ninja. SSD, and normal sata hard drives in general weren't built to withstand being plugged and unplugged hundreds to possibly even thousands of times, the connections won't last. CF has a better longevity, and agreed on the SDI, it's a professional connection for a reason.

though for the extremely indie market ki pro may be a bit of a stretch, in general professional manner pro res is widely accepted, no in Avid right next to FCP. and Premiere on a mac will take pro res just fine. In the end a 4:2:2 10 bit intraframe codec has a long of sway, and for acquisition it's the best for the low to mid bracket, even accepted at top level.

not everybody can afford a cinedeck, hdcam sr recorder, or some othe 12 bit recording format. This really puts everything, camera package, recording, in a sweet spot. It would be worth it to just record the 10 bit from a 8 bit sdi anyway, you are still starting at a higher quality acquisition format, and yes you aren't gaining for 10 bits of information but the wiggle room there is important.
 
Last edited:
Barry_Green said:
Then there's the low-budget Ninja. Didn't see it on the floor, but ... I get the appeal of the price, but its use of HDMI-only is really disappointing to me. HD-SDI is so much better -- it's a locking BNC connector and it outputs timecode. HDMI is a non-locking connector and no timecode. Micro-budget guys might be tempted by the Ninja, but I would think working pros would prefer the AJA or the Nano if, for no other reason, because they support proper HD-SDI.
Click to expand...

HDMI is alright for a monitor, but if you're depending on data from it, I wouldn't want to take chances on a paid shoot.

Not that the Nano is much better, even with HD-SDI. It can be seriously buggy depending how you powercycle the camera and the device.
 
hd sdi is also integral for video village, and multiple monitoring sources. i'm not up to speed on all the hdmi devices, but generally from what i've experienced on set an otherwise, nothing beats SDI runing a couple hundred feet, going through genlock splitters giving multiple viewing options, including LUT boxes and so on. HDMI has a hard enough time with a single splitter box... and will only run you 75-100 ft or so before you start losing signal. Not to mention it's a CONSUMER attachment, thus it stands a higher likelihood of being phased quickly. SDI has been around for a very long time, and is proven.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top