Af100 hmc150 gh2

Just to help in gettins something of real value... what do people want to see most of all? I'm not big on shooting charts but I'll try and pick somethings that might be "usual" types of situations and some to push the limits of the camera....
 
Justyn said:
Just to help in gettins something of real value... what do people want to see most of all? I'm not big on shooting charts but I'll try and pick somethings that might be "usual" types of situations and some to push the limits of the camera....
Click to expand...

I think some landscapes would be nice or city scenes, and then maybe a couple of portrait type scenes....I think anything you come up with would be great. Thanks for doing it! I agree charts are only important when trying to grasp pure capability, I think we're all thinking about usability/matching and aesthetics.
 
I would like to see the kind of shots that would be used in a cinematic type film, using each camera's strength. A master shot of a scene(150), a closeup of someone's face in low light(gh2), change focus/dof to a second character across the table(gh2), back to a wider shot(150).

I would be looking to see how well the ungraded shots meld together. Then maybe, after grading, see how well they go together and what you had to do to get them to look seamless. What had to be lost, if any? Dynamic range, midtones, softness/sharpness.
 
chauncythedog said:
I would like to see the kind of shots that would be used in a cinematic type film, using each camera's strength. A master shot of a scene(150), a closeup of someone's face in low light(gh2), change focus/dof to a second character across the table(gh2), back to a wider shot(150).

I would be looking to see how well the ungraded shots meld together. Then maybe, after grading, see how well they go together and what you had to do to get them to look seamless. What had to be lost, if any? Dynamic range, midtones, softness/sharpness.
Click to expand...

+1 These are great ideas!
 
Justyn thanks for doing the tests. By the way if you have a 3700 lying around you might as well use that as well.
 
I don't know if this is of any use to anyone, but I just started playing with the AF100 & HMC150 to see how they might cut together. This is really quick and I matched setting in the scene files. Shot at the same time. No correction.
Tried to get them as close as possible...again just a starting point. No science here. Natural light & my favorite model! ...lets call her "Stella":happy:

AF100 w/Nikon 85mm
AF100Head.jpg


HMC150 (stock lens...I didn't set-up the RedRock M2 yet so I can see a Nikon here too)
HMC150Head_2.jpg


I'm thinking with a little tweaking, these might just cut together nicely? If I can dig out of this snow and talk a couple people into coming over, I'll shoot, tweak, cut & post...but there's even more snow on it's way!:shocked:
 
Awesome!!! I have really been wanting to see some comparison to the HMC150. I can't tell you how much I appreciate this. Bring it on!!! I love to see any comparisons between these cameras.

Same to you Justyn...looking forward to seeing what you do too.

Regards,

G.
 
Bravo. Obviously with the exception of the depth of field, they look pretty close, the AF 100 looks a little sharper. I think these cameras can work together. Thanks.
 
Me, last year, I filmed a show with two HMC150, one HVX200a and one GH1.

You can see a sample here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4SQDJwNd4hM

The GH1 was on the stage (I used it less frequently). The HVX200a was on the left of the stage. The two others were the HMC150.

I noticed that the GH1 codec is weak because I had some banding when the light was low. But this issue should be gone with the better codec on the GH2.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top