TheReverend
Well-known member
I plan on updating the original post with a better layout, and more info. If you could give accurate mm numbers for me, that would be appreciated as I had trouble find accuracy on the web. Horizontal and vertical mm.
AF100 Crop Factor: 35mm Motion Picture film and Micro 4/3s
- Thread starter TheReverend
- Start date
J Davis
Veteran
see post 10 of this same thread. 18.9 x 10.22
You have to realize that the 5DIII will be FF without the codec issues that the 5DII has and will be priced at $2,500 or cheaper. Digic V will be a video centered processor. It's just the nature of things. people will not pay $10K for audio. They'll use double system sound which is how indie films are done anyway. Hell, if they just include a headphone mini jack with recording levels on the screen while recording like Magic lantern, they won't stand a chance of selling significant numbers of a dedicated FF video camera for $10K. PRICE PERFORMANCE BARRIERS CHANGE. ...and they change drastically. We are on the cusp of such a price performance revolution in film making now. The past means nothing. The AF100 is twice as much as the 5DII and with what it offers, that's about right. You can turn out a high quality motion picture with either of them.
That was before the AF100. The AF100 is going to restructure price performance in what the industry offers at 4,995.
Last edited:
Ryan Patrick O'Hara
Veteran
Or any 35mm motion picture camera from the last good portion of a century.
Well, close to, anyhow.Barry_Green
Moderator
Has there been some press release from Canon that asserts this? Because as long as it shoots stills, it would seem to me that it would be inevitable that it would still have the aliasing/moire issues. Unless they came up with some sort of swappable filter thing, where you could swap out the stills OLPF for a video-oriented OLPF...
Has canon said anything about the Digic V being oriented towards video? I haven't heard anything like that, but I haven't been keeping up on DSLR press info either, so I don't know.
LoganMackay
Well-known member
Canon has said nothing about this. He is drawing conclusions on a camera that isn't even rumored to be close to production.
Homunculus
Carbonite Member
wow you KNOW the Mark III final specs already when the camera is not even announced yet and may never even exist? That's incredible! Can you please tell me the specs to AF200 so I can know whether to wait for it or to buy the AF100. Thanks!
Barry_Green
Moderator
Let's not be combative please; f64manray has been here for years and has earned the right to the benefit of the doubt. It's probably speculation but I figured it was worth asking if there was revealed info from the company. If it is speculation, it certainly seems reasonable to speculate among those lines, but no matter how much people may want it to go that way, I just don't think it's gonna. DSLRs are first and foremost primarily and entirely dedicated stills cameras, and as long as they shoot high-def stills, they're going to have the same aliasing issues they've always had. Just like the GH2, the most video-oriented stills camera out there, has aliasing on all fine detail. It's part and parcel of the "convergence" of stills and video.
But if there had been an announcement about some new technology or commitment from Canon to make artifact-free video their priority, then that would be big news and I'd definitely want to be pointed towards that announcement.
But if there had been an announcement about some new technology or commitment from Canon to make artifact-free video their priority, then that would be big news and I'd definitely want to be pointed towards that announcement.
David G. Smith
Steak Knife Member
This discussion is becoming very frustrating. It is my understanding that most folks are going to be using the AF-100 for fictional narrative filmmaking, with some acknowledgement to event shooters and documentarians. With that, my question is, outside of architecture detail or music video oddity shots, what EXACTLY are you going to be shooting where you are going to need an angle of view wider than 20mm with the AF-100?
Stephen Mick
Totally Usable
It the discussion is frustrating, just move along.
The fact is that any new piece of gear is going to attract attention from a wide range of potential end-users, many of whom will have vastly different backgrounds. If YOU understand and are comfortable with the field-of-view differences that exist between these cameras, then beautiful. But many will not be as experienced with traditional narrative focal lengths, or the differences between formats.
As far as identifying exactly what requires a wider FOV than 20mm on the AF-100 will give, I can think of a number of situations where I'd like to have that option. (Scenic wides, for one.) The look of the 7-14mm lens on the GH1 is a very distinct and specialized one. Someone, somewhere, will find it perfectly useful for something they're shooting.
Hey, Barry
Sorry, no official Statement from Canon other than leaks from different places that seem reasonable.
I've heard several things. One was that the 1DsIV was pulled from Photokina for further development due to Digic V not being ready.
One from Northlight Images on October 16th (they seem reputable to me)
We're told (thanks) that the 'next 1Ds' was delayed for some bigger jumps in technology and to hold it's 'top camera' spot for longer. DigicV will allow for handling of binning, better video and 'software removal' of the need for an AA filter at 35+MP. The camera might not ship until later next year.
There was also another source I remember reading that was saying that Digic V was going to be video centered hence the delay of the 1DsIV.
It seems reasonable and not to much of a stretch to say that Canon is striving to improve the imaging and now video of their stills camera especially given how the 5DII has taken the industry by storm. It certainly is known they have been listening to and responding to DPs in the industry. I'm sure they have heard the aliasing/ moire complaint until their ears are ringing. There was also an interview with Charters and the other DP of 24 whos name escapes me at the moment in which they stated that Canon reps told them that they will be responding to these issues. It seems reasonable that Digic V will be video centered and not just another cool way to buffer 30MP images at 8 fps. Cinnafilm has certainly demonstrated that aliasing can be scrubbed using software.
Is this really so far out in left field to think that Digic V can handle these issues via software? I didn't think it was especially after watching Hurlbut's interview regarding Cinnafilm's solution to these issues.
Sorry if people got their feathers ruffled by these assertions.
Last edited:
Homunculus
Carbonite Member
no feathers ruffled i apologize for over acting. but to comment on the aliasing scrubbing software.
i'm sure barry is familiar with this coming from a game programming backgruond but i seem to remember back in 1996 the nintendo 64 system had already introduced ANTI-ALIASING real time into their games so i would think anti aliasing (i.e. smoothing of the jaggies/stairsteps) has already been around for 15 years. why can't they apply this in camera to the footage
thats ridiculous.
if the sensor captures what it captures now, an anti aliasing filter will just make it blurry and you will absolutely end up with something less than 720p resolution
If it shoots high megapixel stills, it wont shoot unaliased video. maybe software based will help but i dont think it would be that significant.
i dont think canon will make their DSLRs focus on video. it will still be foremost a stills camera. the people who buy it for stills are a bigger market than people who buy it just for video. thats a fact. they cant abandon it for a smaller market.
if canon releases a video centered camera without still, it wont be as cheap as you think.
sorry f64manray , but rumors are rumors. its not even better than red's vaporware announcements.
if the sensor captures what it captures now, an anti aliasing filter will just make it blurry and you will absolutely end up with something less than 720p resolution
If it shoots high megapixel stills, it wont shoot unaliased video. maybe software based will help but i dont think it would be that significant.
i dont think canon will make their DSLRs focus on video. it will still be foremost a stills camera. the people who buy it for stills are a bigger market than people who buy it just for video. thats a fact. they cant abandon it for a smaller market.
if canon releases a video centered camera without still, it wont be as cheap as you think.
sorry f64manray , but rumors are rumors. its not even better than red's vaporware announcements.
Last edited:
Homunculus
Carbonite Member
rumors or not i doubt any of this stuff will appear any time soon. nor will the red scarlet. the AF100 IS gonna be here and is here to stay. af100 will enjoy months if not a year if not more than a year to 2 years of sheer dominance until these vaporwares come to fruition
Well, yes Canon's DSLRs are most certainly stills cameras, but I think were just starting to see a divergence in Canon's thinking on this with the introduction of the 60D which is most definitely targeted at the video DSLR craze with it's tilty swivly flip out screen and it's manual audio controls. It seems pretty apparent that Canon is tipping its hat to the video crowd with the 60D while still maintaining its stills 7D & T2i. If you were just getting into this video DSLR thing, it would be a no brainer that the 60D would be the one to buy at $1,000 US dollars.
I mean, look it was quite remarkable how Canon responded with it's firmware upgrades actually adding features to an already released product ie; manual controls, manual audio and 24p to the 5DII. That was really unheard of for them. The film makers spoke and Canon listened! It was really quite remarkable. It was like they were just as excited as all of us were and just as surprised. Those were really heady times. It was so long ago now, I don't know if anyone remembers
.If somehow canon's software wizards can fix some of these niggly codec issues, I'm rooting for them! If it turns out that the 5DIII is just a warmed over 5DII with little video advancement which I just find hard to swallow, but if it is, I'll have my AF100 as well. Personally, I just don't see them saying "That's it, this is the best it can be." especially after they were so stoked about the possibilities just not very long ago.
I'm just as excited about the AF100. We're truly on the cusp of a revolution in this industry with just a few little details to be worked out. Maybe a little cleaner codec, just a little more dynamic range maybe. What a great time to be a budding film maker just getting into this stuff.
Last edited:
bgundu
Veteran
Yes closer to 1.2 with any lens, not just PL lenses when comparing to cinema FOV.
TheReverend
Well-known member
Reorganized the OP and added sensor/film sizes for comparison, and a whole new section describing things for people of different backgrounds.
I wrote this post with the intention of it being a sticky for those coming in the forum looking for the general info on the sensor lingo and banter that gets around and confuses people. If you have anymore additions or thoughts on the OP, let me know. Thanks!
I wrote this post with the intention of it being a sticky for those coming in the forum looking for the general info on the sensor lingo and banter that gets around and confuses people. If you have anymore additions or thoughts on the OP, let me know. Thanks!
J Davis
Veteran
If you crop to scope (1:2.39 is 1080p cropped to 1920x803) and try to do an interior establishing shot in a standard sized room I guarantee you will need wider than 20mm.
I needed 15mm to get head to feet on two actors entering the shot from a door 12 ft away and that was with aps-c size sensor which is larger than m43
TheReverend
Well-known member
It all depends on how you shoot of course.
I took time to watch some of these films in the OP that were shot 35mm anamorphic, and it's really amazing that there ARE NOT tons of wide shots. It's extremely common in these films for shots with heads and upper bodies, but not tons of head-to-toe+ size shots. Not to say that getting those wide size shots indoor are bad, just that maybe some need a change in perspective to look at the "crop" factor as a good self-imposed limitation to force oneself to shoot more movie-like.
On the other hand, maybe that's been a "limitation" that being lifted by cams like the 5dMkII will bring better shots that we haven't been able to see before. Which may be the case already.