af100 & gh13

tired

tired

Well-known member
Hi guys,

I had a quick look around but I'm running out of time. Just got my new AF100 and I've booked a last minute shoot on Wed and wondering if I can mix these 2 cams. The GH13 will just be some coverage and closeup but I don't want to create a nightmare in post.

I'm assume it's a scene file that will get me close but what? or should I just stick with 2 GH13's

I'm just dying to use the bloody thing!
 
David W. Jones said:
I have used them together on over a dozen shoots so far. You should have no problems.

Good Luck!

Dave
Click to expand...

Dave I'm curious what setting you used on both the AF100 and the GH13 to get them to match? I had an interview shoot canceled a while back where I was going to used both cameras. I stopped trying to match the footage between the two cameras once the shoot was canceled.
 
My main problem in matching the AF100 AF101 with my GH13, is that the GH13 feels much much sharper (or sharpened) and resolves or seems to resolve far more details.
 
I tend to not shoot the same subject/scene with two different cameras, for example a talking head with one camera set and the second camera getting a closeup. Instead I use the GH13 in situations where it might be a better call than using the Red or AF100. The last commercial I shot mainly with the AF100 except two scenes. One handheld interior with the GH13 in a very tight cubicle, and the second an exterior with me perched above a drive thru ATM machine. It was just easier to use the little camera in those situations on the given budget. And they cut together just fine for a TV commercial.
 
danap said:
My main problem in matching the AF100 AF101 with my GH13, is that the GH13 feels much much sharper (or sharpened) and resolves or seems to resolve far more details.
Click to expand...

I've been using the AF100 and a GH1 for the same interviews for many shoots now. They can cut together easily. I have been using the GH1 as a pretty tight side angle CU, so that helps in cutting them together. I agree that the GH1 does appear to be sharper somehow, but it's not so obvious the way we cut them together because in a CU you expect to see more detail in the person's face. Sometimes matching the looks can be difficult as the GH1 definitely crushes the blacks more and is more saturated than my AF100 settings.
 
EidolonFilms said:
Sometimes matching the looks can be difficult as the GH1 definitely crushes the blacks more and is more saturated than my AF100 settings.
Click to expand...

The GH2 doesn't have the dynamic range of the AF100 either, but as been stated, cuts well enough when used on different scenes.

Regards,
Bern
 
Would be a very interesting test for those of us who are thinking of having both in our bags for gigs. Still waiting on Barry's comparison between the two, unless I missed it?
 
PaPa said:
Would be a very interesting test for those of us who are thinking of having both in our bags for gigs. Still waiting on Barry's comparison between the two, unless I missed it?
Click to expand...

I have been keeping the GH1.3 in my bag, and while I have not shot anything where I have used it along side my AF100 (like I have with the HPX) I have found it so handy to have in situations where I am not allowed to have he AF100. At large concert I was shooting backstage for the artist it was worth its weight in gold, and I was so happy I kept it in my bag.
 
ah okay, sounds good.

Does anyone have any footage or links to stuff shot with both the AF100 and the GH13?
 
David W. Jones said:
I tend to not shoot the same subject/scene with two different cameras, for example a talking head with one camera set and the second camera getting a closeup. Instead I use the GH13 in situations where it might be a better call than using the Red or AF100. The last commercial I shot mainly with the AF100 except two scenes. One handheld interior with the GH13 in a very tight cubicle, and the second an exterior with me perched above a drive thru ATM machine. It was just easier to use the little camera in those situations on the given budget. And they cut together just fine for a TV commercial.
Click to expand...

Ideally I'd love to use both my AF100 and my GH13 as part of an inexpensive interview package. What you seem to be doing is what I've already done on 2 occasions so far. I used the GH13 for a car scenes in a music video, the rest was shot on the AF100, and I used the GH13 on a corporate video where some of it had to be shot in an elevator, the rest of the video was shot on my AF100. Different scenes can look close, but the same scene needs to look really close.
 
PaPa said:
ah okay, sounds good.

Does anyone have any footage or links to stuff shot with both the AF100 and the GH13?
Click to expand...

I shot a series of videos for atmosphere to promote their new album. My AF100 and 2 GH13s. There's a number of things I wish I could of done differently but it turned out alright. It was my first real shoot with the camera and I had no test day to try and match cameras.

http://www.ralphborka.com/
 
The way we shoot has changed over the years, but back when we were shooting multiple cameras same scene, we would start by charting the cameras with waveform monitor/vectorscope then A/B tweak until they matched as closely as possible. It was a lot easier to A/B using the camera CCU into a switcher back in the day. It's way more time consuming now with all the camera menus to go through.

Good Luck!

Dave
 
Barry_Green said:
This got shoved way down my priority list. Maybe someday, but not anytime immediately soon.
Click to expand...

Barry - wondered what you thought of the slashcam.de chart tests of the AF100/101 here and the GH2 here? I understand that charts are not the be-all-and-end-all for evaluations of image quality, but it seems to me that, at least in this test, the GH2 has better resolution and less moire?

Thanks for all that you do for us,

Bill
 
Last edited:
Definitely not better resolution. You're seeing the difference in contrast, the GH2 is looking "sharper" because the lines are blacker. We perceive "sharpness" based on two factors, resolution and contrast. Go into PhotoShop and put light gray text on a white background, and then write the same text in the same font in black on that white background. One will look much "sharper" than the other, even though both are identical resolution. In that slashcam test they didn't equalize for contrast so the AF100 is looking softer because the contrast is less, but if you set them up the same you'll see the AF100 is every bit as sharp. Besides, that chart doesn't show the true limiting resolution anyway, as both cameras are easily resolving the resolution wedges. They need to go to an 800-line chart to see the limits.

But that's one test, performed not simultaneously, probably not with the same lens, and it's a simple chart test. In real world terms, the AF100 shows less aliasing and less moire than the GH2 does. Those are documented facts. Rick Burnett got together with someone to get to the bottom of this, they shot all sorts of super-alias-testing tests on both the GH2 and AF100, and came to the conclusion that the GH2 shows more aliasing and moire than the AF100 does, period.

I know everyone wants to believe in the tooth fairy and in getting something for nothing and that a $899 camera is outperforming a $4700 camera, but it's just. not. true.

Never, in my history, up until the AF100, have I encountered a situation on a chart which wasn't easily replicatable in the real world. But the AF100 is it. You'd think, looking at charts, that it has all sorts of aliasing issues, but it just doesn't. Absolutely doesn't.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top