Af100 still worth investing in?

S

swanny

Well-known member
Do you guys think the AF100 is still worth investing in as another camera, or is the current crop of DSLR's taking the cake?
 
As a hobbyist, stick to the DSLR. If you care about not having to lug around a bunch of accessories, and to having moire issues the Af100 is a great buy. I have a GH2, D800E, Af100, and Scarlet and my Af100 still makes me money.
 
I'm not fond of DSLRs for shooting motion pictures. I have a GH2 and I wouldn't consider shooting work with it in place of the AF100. The control and tools you have with the AF100 make it hands down better and since I can control so much with the image, particularly detail, without the rolling shutter and artifacts make it much better. The better I get the better it looks and you can't beat the price. Really I think the AF100 is hugely underrated.
 
Last edited:
I'm not shooting for hobby at all. I have a GH2, AF100. I am very happy with the AF100 and the ease of use. I like the quality of the image from the AF and the GH2, but I'm curious if I should purchase a camera from a newer crop to stay on the curve instead of purchasing another AF100. The D800 has me very interested as full frame would be nice for wider shots. I'm still not sure if I wouldn't like the aesthetics of full frame as well. Never used one and it kind of intrigues me.
 
If the AF100 will get your work done better than other options, and/or get you more jobs simply because it can deliver something you can't already provide, then it's a good purchase. It's currently the same price as the 5D3 and D800, and far more well-equipped for video, so it's (arguably) the best deal out there if you don't already have something of the large-chip variety.

If you're considering purchasing one because producers may be specifically asking for it, I haven't noticed that they are. P2 cameras, EX cameras, and 5D's seem to be what DC-metro producers are specifically requesting, when they specifically request (except when they're requesting RED Epics for no compensation on Craigslist, but that's another matter). Not sure about New England.
 
I think it depends on how happy you are with the wide lenses you have for m4/3. Hey, it could be fun but I'm not really interested in full frame myself right now. I admit I was in a commercial shot on 5D and it looked pretty good when they were done with it but I will never forget the the griping sound guy! Plural Eyes anyone?
 
If you're considering the D800 for only video, I'd say get the rumored D600. I use the Gh2 for stealth mode especially because it has an electronic viewfinder built in. This is harder to do with the D800 as you have to rely on the LCD or external EVF which doesn't feel very stealthy.
 
Yes the AF100 is still worth investing in. The camera still looks great, plenty of lens options and an overall decent value.
I've had mine since it came out and has been in use since. I believe a purchase now will see a rather quick return.
I thought my Scarlet would retire this camcorder, but that doesn't seem to be the case.
Btw, purchased the 35-100 Olympus F2, I highly recommend this lens. That and a wide angle you should be covered for under $8-9K w/accessories.
 
The AF-100 is a great camera and at the price it is now it’s the best deal out there now. But since you have one already we don’t need to tell you how good it is. If you want another one buy used and get some extras.

How much money do you have to spend? So many choices these days for sure.

What type of lenses do you have?

What do you shoot?

I’m looking forward to the Blackmagic camera, at $3K this camera is going to be everywhere. It won’t replace my AF-100 but add to the toolbox. My goal is to have a shed instead toolbox. :)
 
Last edited:
jmarkham said:
I'd wait for the BMC to see how that turns out.
Click to expand...

+1.

If I were in your shoes, I would see what happens with this Black Magic. I have an AF and am planning on getting a BMC sometime in the future if it doesn't turn out to have too many kinks. 2.5k raw at an affordable price is too good to pass up IMO. My drawback if the I didn't have the AF would be the lack of its slo-mo and time lapse setting but since you have one, too, you're good to go.
 
James Bridges; Btw said:
How difficult is it to focus the 35-100? I have heard it is not parafocal and that bugs me for a zoom lens over $2000.00. However it would be really nice to have a 2.0 zoom to crush the background focus. 35-100 has been a really nice range for shooting interviews.
Click to expand...
 
As someone who had an AF100 and sold it, I still think it's a great buy if you need the features it has. No other camera out there has everything it offers in a single package. I was always the guy poo-pooing the image side of things, and it's still not my favorite by any means, but I miss a lot of things it had to offer and I'm anxiously waiting for someone to make something similar at that price point.

The BMC cam looks great but it's new tech, and doesn't have a lot of what I liked about the AF100 like the sturdy handle, internal ND, slow-mo, etc.
 
Bucknfl said:
How difficult is it to focus the 35-100? I have heard it is not parafocal and that bugs me for a zoom lens over $2000.00. However it would be really nice to have a 2.0 zoom to crush the background focus. 35-100 has been a really nice range for shooting interviews.
Click to expand...

It is fairly easy, I use it as a variable prime (mainly for interviews). I have a Zacuto EVF attached with peaking cranked. Sorry for the large photo, on the road, doing this from the IPhone.
imagejpeg
 
If you pixelpeep this camera it doesn't look good but if you stay away from that most things you shoot with it looks fine. If you compare it to a camera that can shoot flat with wider dynamic range it's also lacking in comparison.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top