AF100, my first impressions and some questions.

[Adamsenoj]

So I got to use the AF100 for the first time. I have to say I'm both positively and negatively surprised. Positively because the camera was a total joy to work with, in most cases. I love having features like the built in waveform. But there are a few things that I didn't like at all, which I hope was just operator error.

1. The focus assist is plain horrible! Plain and simple. I don't know how else to put it. Coming from an EX3 which has a fantastic focus assist this just doesn't cut it. Yes I know about the flashlight workaround trick to highlight the eyes, but what about wide outdoors daylight shots? Sometimes the dreaded thin and weak red outline would just not show! No matter what I did. I tried the EVF detail peaking and it wasn't much help either. I looked in the menu and manual to see if there is a way to increase the red outline intensity, ala EX3 and there doesn't seem to be one. I turned the EFV to black and white and it didn't help much either. I have no idea why Panasonic would leave the magnifying option off the camera, but this is not cutting it. Are there any other tricks I can use to get better and easier focus?


2. Am I right that both zebras wont show at the same time ? You have to toggle between Zebra 1 and Zebra 2 but can never see both at the same time? If so, what a downer! Specially in day outdoor shots where you normally need to find a compromise it's very useful to see both.


3. I had the zebras set to 70% and 95%, but yet, the same place that would show 95% zebras would show 70% zebras and basically in the same amount once I toggled to it. There was basically no difference between 70% and 95% . I got pretty much on the same places and amounts. Is this normal? Normally the 2 zebras settings will also look very different in other cameras, with one of them being much thicker and also reversed to make it easier to differentiate.


4. The highlight handling is horrible, dreadful, absolutely repugnant!
Please tell me it was operator error. I had the zebra set to 95% to make sure not to blow anything. But once I got back and watched the footage on a bigger screen, it's full of ugly, electronic looking, plastic, yellow blowouts. Yes, I used the waveform. So it basically blows out at 95% as well. Also any highlights on the cheek, face, fingers etc look like it was shot with a $200 consumer camera. You absolutely can't let anything blow, not even specular highlights or it ruins your footage. I thought there would maybe be a way to turn down highlight saturation but couldn't find it in the menus. Is there a way? What can I do to get decent highlights short of terribly underexposing all my stuff? So far I have to say I'm disappointed with the camera. I wasn't expecting it to handle like a $10K camera but so far it's not handling even like a cheap $200 camera. I'm hoping somebody will hope in here and call attention to how dumb I am and how much I did wrong and all is operator error. As it stands it's truly sad.

I used the Abelcine Range cine file.

 

[Shooter]

My first comment or question is why would you use anything but default scene settings while you are familiarising with a new camera?

Maybe wrong but I believe all the Abel Cine setups are based on interior testing and they them selves state..they are a starting point"

FWIW - I did all my initial AF102 testing indoors andwith Default Camera settings. They are on this site somewhere.

Focus...my AC has no issues in this regard. I always know when he is using the focus Assist tools because I can see the red edging. We do use external monitors and onboards as well to be fair. Very rarely look down the pipe though.

Zebras in combination with WFM is what we use. Mostly WFM..and we have never seen a need for 2x zebras simultaneously. ( Can any camera display both Zebras?)

DR: This camera definitely needs to be exposed with protection of the highlights. Particularly spectral ones. Absolutely correct when you say you can not let "anything blow"...but I apply that to all cameras.

Post up some some frame grabs from your shoot so we can see your experience and how you shot your scenes.

Hope there are no shots of cats or the insde of your kitchen!

 

[mcbob]

Yes, the FA does suck. It's hard to see the red peaking, and worse yet, it's inaccurate. My solution was a DP6 monitor - even when handheld, I put the thing on there with its hood like a bigass viewfinder. Smaller EVFs might be handier, but I needed the multi-useiosity of the larger screen. I can't trust my eyesight any more with small screens.

Only one zebra at a time, yes. Hard to say why you were getting the zebra results you were getting... they work as in any other camera when exposure goes above their set point. Never noticed anything funny about the zebra function.

As to the highlights... ah, yes, the highlights, that ballyhooed pariah... best I can say, it takes some finesse, knowing how your scene file will behave, experience, a somewhat calibrated LCD or monitor, and a maniacal aversion to overexposure and accurate white balance. I'd argue that the white balance is the most critical element: if that's spot-on, things will sometimes blow out to white like one might expect.

As mine arrived, the LCD and EVF were set WAY too dark, and it was impossible to eyeball exposure. I tried. I failed. The WFM really is a lifesaver here. I trust that pretty much above everything else... lots of scenes that I've thought were far too underexposed came out wonderfully in the edit.

A last possibility: what is your edit system? My first workflow was with a Mac running FCP7, for which I'd dutifully transcode via log and transfer. Mystically, everything I digested this way came out about a stop and a half darker than it should have... prompting me to bump up my exposures on the next shoot, and thus ruin my footage by overexposing, second-guessing the WFM. This is due to the oft-maligned "QT gamma bug." Apparently a transcode via 5DtoRGB can bypass the problem. I wound up cross-grading to CS6, which handles it natively and well - but there's still some posterization on the extremes due to unknown crap going on behind the scenes; a fast color correction with output level range bumped to 15-235 (or thereabouts) aids greatly. No clue how FCPX handles it. Having never used an external recorder on this, I have no idea how much of the problems are to be blamed on the AVCHD codec and OSX's crappy handling of it.

 

[Shooter]

@the O.P

did you Black Balance the camera before using it?

 

[John Andersson]

It takes some time to get to know this camera and when you do it's a nice tool but until then you'll probably run into several downers. I would say you always need an external monitor of some sort to be sure focus and exposure looks good. As said, white balance is crucial and the way you expose. I use the spot meter and try to expose faces around 50-60 IRE.

With regards to highlights yes it will turn yellow sometimes but with time you'll know how it will turn up in the NLE and how to avoid it. It takes some time to get the juice out of this camera for sure.

 

[Adamsenoj]

My first comment or question is why would you use anything but default scene settings while you are familiarising with a new camera?

Because I read over and over and over and over that the camera sucks out of the box and needs major tweaking. I was filming outside in harsh sun light mixed with tree shadows. So I thought I would use one of the flat scene files out there. I chose Abelcine Range which is said to be meant to stretch the dynamic range.

Zebras in combination with WFM is what we use. Mostly WFM..and we have never seen a need for 2x zebras simultaneously. ( Can any camera display both Zebras?)

Yes, the EX1 and EX3 for example.

DR: This camera definitely needs to be exposed with protection of the highlights. Particularly spectral ones. Absolutely correct when you say you can not let "anything blow"...but I apply that to all cameras.

I would say this camera needs to actually be underexposed to look anywhere decent.

@the O.P

did you Black Balance the camera before using it?

Yes! Of course. I bought Barry's DVD and followed all instructions.

 

[dustylense]

Make sure to turn your EVF to see B&W and this way focus assist works FAR better. I just takes a bit of time to feel the camera and know how to shoot it under different situations. Once you got it, the camera makes great images.

 

[Adamsenoj]

Yes, the FA does suck. It's hard to see the red peaking, and worse yet, it's inaccurate. My solution was a DP6 monitor - even when handheld, I put the thing on there with its hood like a bigass viewfinder. Smaller EVFs might be handier, but I needed the multi-useiosity of the larger screen. I can't trust my eyesight any more with small screens.

I hope this is not the only way. What's the point of buying a camera with an EVF anf LCD just to have to add another extra larger LCD and more weight to it? If that's the case, then it's not different than a DSLR. The whole proposal of the AF100 was to be a self contained DSLR, meaning it has pro features that the DSLRs don't including a EVF. Adding a LCD would basically negate all the promo marketing.

Only one zebra at a time, yes.

Oh man! I was really hoping I was just too stupid to find the way to activate both at the same time. I guess I got spoiled working on the EX3. The EX3 is starting to look like a super 4 years old camera.

Hard to say why you were getting the zebra results you were getting... they work as in any other camera when exposure goes above their set point. Never noticed anything funny about the zebra function.

I will do some more tests today with more time. But honestly, it did behave the way I described.

As to the highlights... ah, yes, the highlights, that ballyhooed pariah... best I can say, it takes some finesse, knowing how your scene file will behave, experience, a somewhat calibrated LCD or monitor, and a maniacal aversion to overexposure and accurate white balance.

Yes, all I can say to the highlight handling is fugly and useless! I took my phone out of my pocket and it handled highlights better than the $5000 ($3500) camera. I always heard the complaining about the highlights and then other users saying it was just because people didn't know what they were doing and kind of went with that. But I'm a cameraman with over 20 years of experience. I have shot on Betacam SP, DVCAM, Digibeta, HDCAM, DVCPRO and although not from my time have also played with M2, U-matic and some other older formats . Shot with 2/3", 1/2" and 1/3" camcorders. I have shot 35mm and 16mm film. I think I know how to expose and I think the only way out of this AF100 mess is to underexpose, even if one wants to call in properly exposing.
So I think I got the "experience" part of your post down. An extra calibrated monitor? Well, I already voice my opinion about that above. I white balanced and black balance before every shot so got that covered too. What else is left? oh yes, the maniacal aversion to overexposure. I knew it. You totally have to underexpose with this camera. Call what your want. it's underexposing. Because I have shots where my WFM was down to the middle and it still shows nasty yellow highlight blowups. It doesn't matter if the camera has 10.5 stops of DN. You wont be able to use this for the highlights. You have to avoid highlights like it's cholesterol and be happy with a underexposed image. Really starting to see what some poeple

I'd argue that the white balance is the most critical element: if that's spot-on, things will sometimes blow out to white like one might expect.

Nope! Because I WB abd BB before every shot and still got unusable footage.

A last possibility: what is your edit system?

Honestly, I watched it in every player I had, Windows movie player, VLC, Mediaplayer Classic and it looked the same. I don't think it's the player. It's the footage. It also looks crappy in my Avid.

 

[Adamsenoj]

It takes some time to get to know this camera and when you do it's a nice tool but until then you'll probably run into several downers.

Well, a professional camera is a professional camera. This is one of the advantages of professional conventions. You can shoot on one camera you can shoot on any. They are designed to be familiar to cameramen. At least this was the consensus back with 2/3" shoulder cameras. There's always an adaptation curve. But it shouldn't have to be a full relearning process. Not after operating cameras for 20 years.

I would say you always need an external monitor of some sort to be sure focus and exposure looks good.

I wish people would stop saying this as if this was normal. You paid money for a proper EVF and LCD. You shouldn't have to add anything extra for something as basic as exposure and focus. Not expecting it to be a color grading accurate monitor. Just to be able to deal with the basic operational needs of the camera it's attached too.

As said, white balance is crucial and the way you expose.

As I said i WB and BB before every shot as to Barry's recommendations.

I use the spot meter and try to expose faces around 50-60 IRE.

I exposed skin tones to 70% as to Barry's recommendations. Maybe I have to under expose them at 50-60 to see if that will work.

With regards to highlights yes it will turn yellow sometimes but with time you'll know how it will turn up in the NLE and how to avoid it.

I don't think it will take any time as the only way I see it working is underexposing. You just can't have ANY highlights at all in your footage. Cheek patches will blow nasty yellow. As ridiculous as it may seem, you need to expose to the cheek highlight patches (specular highlights) in order not to get them blowing nasty yellow and then the rest of the face is underexposed. I exposed that to 70% and it still looked nasty.

It takes some time to get the juice out of this camera for sure.

Let me correct that for you. It takes time to find workarounds to things that should work properly and get used to the downers and just accept what you have.

 

[Adamsenoj]

Make sure to turn your EVF to see B&W and this way focus assist works FAR better.

As I said in my original post, I did turn the EVF to B&W. No dice. It's better, but it still a very incompetent focus assist system. But I think I could live with the retarded focus assistant. It's just disappointing. And the whole concept of having to add a flashlight to the top of a $5k camera so it can focus properly is just silly in my opinion. Specially when offering a simple magnification function wouldn't be any hard. I think people have paid enough for that and if not I would gladly exchange it for silly functions such as white and black fade. What is that, an 80's consumer VHS camcorder? I need magnification more than I will ever need in camera fades and I think 99,9999% of people would agree.

But what is hard to accept is the ugly highlights and having to underexpose all your footage in order to get decent footage.

I just takes a bit of time to feel the camera and know how to shoot it under different situations. Once you got it, the camera makes great images.

You know, I was pretty hype about this camera and had pretty much managed to cut through all the negativity in the web and chucked it down to people just not knowing how to use it. But after having used it myself I can say that I'm no longer hype about it. I'm just waiting for somebody to come, grab me by the arm and smack me around silly and show me what I did wrong. But somehow I don't think it will happen. I think this is just what this camera is. I have to say that so far I'm far more impressed with the GH2. As a camera it sucks. But at least it only cost a few hundred and i was never expecting it to behave like a professional video camera.

 

[Adamsenoj]

Going to go out in the sun and heavily underexpose everything to see where that takes me. Here's hoping I will be able to work things out and still use the camera since I really like everything else about it besides the 4 points I brought up.
It's unfortunate that points 1 and 2 are what they are. I guess I just got spoiled by the EX3. This also shows how good of a camera the EX1 and EX3 cameras really are, even being a 4 years old design. I honestly don't see much reason for the new PMW-200 replacement. The 50Mbps 4:2:2 is nice but it still MPEG2. I rather use an external recorder with a EX1 or EX3 if I need that. The upgrade doesn't seem worth it for me.

But back on topic, I really wish I could have both zebras simultaneously and that there was a better way to focus. The zebras I can live with. The focus, well, it will depend if I can find a workflow that will give repeated in focus images without much hassle, and the flashlight trick doesn't work as most of my work is in broad day light. Maybe the AF100 is intended as a studio only, for controlled light environments camera and Panasonic just didn't tell us.

Point 3 is still to be confirmed. I will test it again.

Point 4 is the miserable part of this camera. As it is, it's just unusable. I will do some more tests and hope I have something set up wrong. I'm really hoping I can work things out. I really like shooting with the camera. I definitely like using it way better than a FS100 or FS700 which I have also used and din't care for it, specially when it comes to the functions and form factor.

 

[diegocervo]

I miss the af100 when I think about ergonomics, weight, 3 NDs and the ability to use a manfrotto pfi controller for focus and iris with some good panasonic lenses. I enjoyed the EVF and the LCD as well.
That being said, I spent several months trying to get the images I wanted out from it but with no success and big frustrations. That's why I sold it with (almost) no regrets.
It's not a bad camera and for the price it is a steal, but I just didn't like the images it produces and the way it resolves details and handles highlights. It made me nervous every time I looked at my footages.
I'm still looking forward to a hopefully better AF200.

 

[ulisses]

http://vimeo.com/28595003

 

[Adamsenoj]

http://vimeo.com/28595003

Yes, beautiful footage. But what does it proof? I didn't see one single skin tone, which is the case at hand. This was just sunny scenes. Expose to the sky and shoot!
Now when you have skin in the shot is where the problem arises because of the skin highlights. Expose to the skin and the highlights blow ugly yellow. Expose to the highlights your skin is underexposed.
Having said that, although the footage is beautiful I still saw yellow blown highlights. It's just that it's not so distracting, obvious or ugly on rocks as it's on people and the rocks were already orange.
It also looks digitally sharpened. Some like that look. I'm not a big fan. But this is just personal preference of course.

 

[masnart]

I've done more than a dozen tv commercials and a lot of other work with my two AF100's since buying them. They have more than paid for themselves. Is it the perfect tool for every situation? No. Is it an amazing camera for the price and what it delivers? Without a doubt in my book.

I do use an external monitor with it, but I did so as well with my two 170's. I like having a large view of the focus and exposure. I usually shoot pretty flat and do the rest in post. I've only had one occasion where a few highlights had a noticeable yellow tint to them in the beginning, but they were not a problem within the context of what I was shooting. I do tend to underexpose with the camera, but that's my own tendency as I did it as well with my 170's. You can always add punch to your image, it's tough to remove it if it's problematic. I have a 20 year history in post production, so I'd play with the footage regardless.

These are probably the last cameras I will purchase and/or own personally for a while. Camera technology is changing so quickly it doesn't make sense to try to chase the technology. You can rent whatever you need for a particular project and have the option to work with what works best for your needs.

Sounds like the EX1 & EX3 were a good system for you. Why frustrate yourself? Use the tool that works for you.

 

[mcbob]

Crap, I wish I'd documented better just how I dealt with the yellow outdoor skin... but I did manage to get it under control and it hasn't been a problem for quite a while (year or more). Gist of it:

- white balance
- protect highlights
- scene file with reduced chroma level (-6 or so)

I think there are a few options on gamma and so forth, I generally go for CineV or D and Norm2, although BPRESS with a knee can sometimes help rolloff.

In comparison with the EX1/3, yes, they've always been very capable cameras... but keep in mind they're still selling for 2-3x what the AF does and it tends to reflect in the non-augmented useability. Reports are that the FS100 also has highlight rolloff problems, so that may be an issue of large sensors... I don't know for sure. I do know It took me a few months of working with this particular camera and rethinking my usual approaches to get really happy with what I was producing.

 

[Erik Naso]

although the footage is beautiful I still saw yellow blown highlights. It's just that it's not so distracting, obvious or ugly on rocks as it's on people and the rocks were already orange.
It also looks digitally sharpened. Some like that look. I'm not a big fan. But this is just personal preference of course.

The yellow frindge is called a sunset.
No sharping was done in post.
I guess sharp lenses are a bad thing.

 

[Erik Naso]

Maybe post some of the problem footage so people can see the issues and assist you a better.

 

[John Andersson]

Well, a professional camera is a professional camera. This is one of the advantages of professional conventions. You can shoot on one camera you can shoot on any. They are designed to be familiar to cameramen. At least this was the consensus back with 2/3" shoulder cameras. There's always an adaptation curve. But it shouldn't have to be a full relearning process. Not after operating cameras for 20 years.

AF100 have a familar set of controls but every camera don't share the same kind of sensor, signal processing thus you need to get to know each camera.

I wish people would stop saying this as if this was normal. You paid money for a proper EVF and LCD. You shouldn't have to add anything extra for something as basic as exposure and focus. Not expecting it to be a color grading accurate monitor. Just to be able to deal with the basic operational needs of the camera it's attached too.

You can get things in focus and exposed properly with the EVF and LCD on the AF100 but I think an external monitor makes things easier and assure you that what you get looks good.

I exposed skin tones to 70% as to Barry's recommendations. Maybe I have to under expose them at 50-60 to see if that will work.

Faces shouldn't be to hot and I wouldn't consider 50-60IRE underexposed.

I don't think it will take any time as the only way I see it working is underexposing. You just can't have ANY highlights at all in your footage. Cheek patches will blow nasty yellow. As ridiculous as it may seem, you need to expose to the cheek highlight patches (specular highlights) in order not to get them blowing nasty yellow and then the rest of the face is underexposed. I exposed that to 70% and it still looked nasty.

You can have highlights but if you do you have to know what you are doing or it will turn to shiiiit.

Let me correct that for you. It takes time to find workarounds to things that should work properly and get used to the downers and just accept what you have.

I do not consider proper handling of the AF100 to be workarounds. You just have to know the camera. I don't work my way around any shot I just use the camera based of my experience with the AF100.

 

[Mike Harvey]

I was always been taught since my first internship a bazillion (okay, 15) years ago that if your zebra is set to 80% that only the shiniest part of the face (usually a forehead or cheekbone) should ever have a zebra pattern on it. And I'm like Editman, I try to keep faces right in the middle on every camera I shoot on. Even if they aren't blown out, overly hot faces look weird to me.

That said, Panasonic recommends in the manual for both my AF100 and HMC150 that on the Cine-Gammas, you should underexpose about 1/2 stop. There is no gradual roll off or knee for the Cine-Gammas like there is on the other gammas. As near as I can tell, this recommendation is in the manuals for most of their cameras, at least in the sub $10k range (I couldn't find anything in the HPX3100 manual).