AF100 or FS100?

P

Prendi

Well-known member
Hi everyone,

They pretty much have the same name, and they are both looking equally nice to me. I've been reading others opinions, watching youtube shizzle, reading specs and all that. But I still can't decide.

FS100 with a Ninja

or

AF100 with a Samurai

Help me out, give me some reasons. Especially if you've worked on either.

Just so you know, it will undoubtedly be taking some knocks and be shooting in sub zero nearly all the time. One reason I'm not like the looks of the Sony so much. If anyone has used either cameras in bright snowy conditions, I'd love to see a link.

Oh and if you have a solid argument for neither, I'd like to hear it. But please, not the Scarlet :)
 
Honestly, having owned both the AF and the FS, I'd probably say go with the AF. It just feels like a more solid build quality to me, and the built-in ND filters are really nice in difficult environmental conditions, where you don't want to mess with an external ND.

The bigger issue is your choice of external recorder. The Atomos products are nice (enough), but I'd seriously question their ability to handle environmental extremes. You might be better off looking at something like the NanoFlash or the Sound Devices PIX. Having used the NanoFlash, I can tell you it's a tough and battle-tested performer. I did see the PIX at NAB, and it looked beefy and solid. My concern would be relying on any kind of external screen/monitor in sub-zero conditions.

Best to check the specs on each unit to see what temperature extremes each can handle.
 
As someone who was dreading the no NDs, I have to say, it hasn't been a big deal. With run & gun jobs, I usually stick with one lens anyway, so I don't have to keep unscrewing my Heliopan. It's also nice to be able to fine tune a variable ND filter. I know this has become the gospel, but if you do get an FS100, make sure you get the heliopan.
 
Kyle McConaghy said:
As someone who was dreading the no NDs, I have to say, it hasn't been a big deal. With run & gun jobs, I usually stick with one lens anyway, so I don't have to keep unscrewing my Heliopan. It's also nice to be able to fine tune a variable ND filter. I know this has become the gospel, but if you do get an FS100, make sure you get the heliopan.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the Heliopan really is pretty awesome. And variable NDs in general are wonderful things to have/use. My only concern is in the conditions the OP might be shooting in, messing with an external ND like the Heliopan might not be optimum. In sub-zero conditions, I'm always a fan of having fewer moving parts both outside and inside the camera. :D
 
Thanks for the info. I really appreciate this forum!

Just to explain, we are shooting snowboard films. It's mainly back country and hiking. Hence the reason I said that it will take a bit of a bashing and will be open to the elements.

Last year we shot in Japan and it snowed 4 feet in 6 hours. So although I understand that a superior image is potentially possible from the FS, the AF is still looking more practice.

Thanks for the info, this is an awesome forum!
 
Prendi said:
Thanks for the info. I really appreciate this forum!

Just to explain, we are shooting snowboard films. It's mainly back country and hiking. Hence the reason I said that it will take a bit of a bashing and will be open to the elements.

Last year we shot in Japan and it snowed 4 feet in 6 hours. So although I understand that a superior image is potentially possible from the FS, the AF is still looking more practice.

Thanks for the info, this is an awesome forum!
Click to expand...

Yeah, I have to say for that kind of stuff, the AF would be my choice. (Not everyone's, mind you.) But it may not be a bad idea to also look at the GH2 or Canon 60D. In extreme conditions, I'm always a fan of having multiple camera bodies, and the DSLRs make that a much more reasonable idea. I was shooting down in the Amazon with two Canon 7Ds a couple of years ago. It was about 95 degrees with 99 percent humidity. One camera would overheat, so I'd take out the other and keep shooting. And if one of the cameras bit the dust, I could still do what I needed to do.

Worth considering, perhaps?
 
I already have a GH1, and I'm going to buy a GH2. Anything more than that, I can't really afford. We are also buying a TS3Cine, so our budget will be FULLY blown, hehe.
 
With the AF and snow, I would be most worried about the dynamic range of the AF-100. The ND's, and many other attributes are great with that camera but highlight handling is it's most noticeable weakness to me. In many situations, it would not be considered a real issue, but with snow and hard sunlight - think about it. I have owned and shot with both. On the upside, the AF is easier to keep in focus with the m43 which could be a huge help. Maybe just underexpose a pinch to preserve some highlight detail.
 
I had this issues (minus the external recorders) when i wanted to upgrade. The only positive the af100 had over the fs100 was the ND filters, hdsdi is an advantage but not to me and more native lenses on the af is an advantage but again that didnt matter to me. The s35 sensor, the short flange distance, the body build, the 1080p60 with sound (i shoot ALOT of action sports so this is very nice) and the amazing low light is why i chose the fs100 over the af100.
 
God damn! You're making it harder, haha :)

There are pros and cons to both. I can see that.

But I guess I was waiting for someone like rx8 to say the AF100 could be bad in snow conditions. Now that really makes my ears prick up. So what is the DR difference between the two? I mean, is it as bad as the GH1?

My issue with Sony is the build quality. I have nearly always gone with Sony, but after the EX1, I realized that exposing it to snow and -30 wasn't a good idea. I managed to turn two into paper weights within 3 months. Whereas the Panasonic kids never seemed to have an issue.

Decisions decisions...
 
Prendi said:
I have nearly always gone with Sony, but after the EX1, I realized that exposing it to snow and -30 wasn't a good idea. I managed to turn two into paper weights within 3 months.
Click to expand...

this is interesting to me, i know at least 4-5 people that use ex1s for ski filming (anywhere from +50 to -50 F) and have been using the same ones for like 4-5 years and haven't had any problems with the cold.
 
Please don't get me wrong. I love the Sony products. I just feel that the EX1 was more suited to less challenging environments. I by no means disliked it, I used it for the past 3 years. It just seems that the Panasonic is less likely to let water in, get hurt from bumps and knocks, have buttons popping off for no reason. I would say that the build quality of the FX1 was better than the EX1, at a fraction of the price.

At the end of the day, no camera states that it can be operated in less than zero degrees. So I have no reason to complain.

So what about the FS100, will it survive?
 
Prendi said:
Please don't get me wrong. I love the Sony products. I just feel that the EX1 was more suited to less challenging environments. I by no means disliked it, I used it for the past 3 years. It just seems that the Panasonic is less likely to let water in, get hurt from bumps and knocks, have buttons popping off for no reason. I would say that the build quality of the FX1 was better than the EX1, at a fraction of the price.

At the end of the day, no camera states that it can be operated in less than zero degrees. So I have no reason to complain.

So what about the FS100, will it survive?
Click to expand...

I think a lot of it has to do with how you treat your gear. I have no problems with my FS100. I baby it.....because its my money maker.
Sometimes I have to take it out in the elements and shoot. Since I bought it, I've had it out in absolute POURING rain two times.
Both times were before the rain cover for it had come out. I used the old 'garbage bag' method to try to keep it out of the
rain as much as possible. Both times, though the garbage bag helped a lot, the camera did end up getting pretty wet. I was wiping it
off whenever I saw it getting wet, but it was just raining so hard and blowing so hard, there was no way to keep it totally out
of the weather. It never even gave me an error.....just kept working. I think it is fine, IF you are careful with it. When I spend
upwards of 5 grand on a camera, I tend to treat it VERY gently. Even when I shot the Iditarod, I made sure my old PD-150 was kept as
protected as I could, and the old tape based camera worked just fine........even in some VERY cold temperatures. However,
that being said, if you know it's going to get knocked around a lot and you aren't going to be taking care of it, the AF100
may be a better choice. And some GoPro Hero's might be good inside the waterproof cases as well. But that FS100 picture is
just SOOO nice! Good luck :-)
 
If you are worried about the build quality of the FS100, then don't be, I mostly shoot sport 85% of the time, and not Golf.... ALL extreme sports, including Snowboarding, Surfing, Downhill Racing, etc... and my camera get's thrashed all the time, constantly having dust flicked at it/in it, being in extremely hot conditions/extremely cold conditions. And it has coped fine, and to be 100% honest with you, I don't break the whole thing down and clean it every time. I just give it a wipe and back out she goes!

I normally shoot at around 4-8 and have the shutterspeed at 1/2500, so I don't use ND filters at all.

The only real advantage I can see the AF100 having over the FS100 for shooting something like Snowboarding, is the handle, that's it really, and you can just go and buy a handle for the FS100.

Cheers, Liam
 
I'm at a similar road except I've gone the AF100 route already.

Not to derail the thread but I've just recently sold my AF100 and will be looking at the FS100. I'm going to miss the features of the AF100 but not the image quality.
It was all convenience factor at the sacrifice of image and end product.

Anyone that has used both cameras can you comment on IQ between each. I (opinion/observation) believe the FS100 has the softer milky type image (Think 5D?)
than the AF100. And not as much highlight problems to my knowledge...sometimes it can't be helped within the scene (Run & Gun).

Anyway my question is is the FS100 going to feel nice and sate my IQ wants potentially?
 
Again, this information is invaluable. Thank you all.

Well, you've pretty much swung me. I am still skeptical with regards to the build quality. And this is coming from someone who takes a lot of care his stuff. But sometimes things happen. The biggest problem with the EX1 was taking it from extremely cold, wet snow conditions, and then into a warmer gondola, or even the heat from having it on my back. It gave the sensor a purple vignette... twice. Weird!

But all in all, I've now heard from people who use it in similar conditions and someone who sold the Panasonic for the image quality of the fs100.

FS100 it is :)

Thanks everyone
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top