AF100-Successor in 2015!!!!

I am bewildered by some of the comments here. Hey, Panasonic called. They appreciate all the benefits of the doubt we're giving them, about what they can do and for how much. They're also thankful for people revealing the most they're willing to pay.
 
I don't think it matter what is said here. Obviously they have not produced an AF-200 after how many years of people asking for it? The main reason I don't think $1,700 works is that is already around the price of an existing still camera which they will sell way more of than a dedicated video camera. The low price point people are not taking economies of scale into account here. They will sell less AF-200's than GH4's so they have to sell the AF-200's at a higher price. Add P2 and no question it will be over $4,000 to $5,000 and they should not bother unless it has P2 with the 10bit codecs.
 
I don't think it matter what is said here. Obviously they have not produced an AF-200 after how many years of people asking for one? The low price point people are not taking economies of scale into the equation. Panasonic will sell way more GH4's than AF-200's in the marketplace. So they have to price the AF-200 at a higher price as it is more of a specialty product. However much you kick and scream, Panasonic will never put P2 in a $1,700 product. And I don't think they should bother with another camera if it does not have P2 and the 10bit codecs.
 
Apart from all that 1700$ talk.

What I want/expect, realisticly is:

GH4 sensor
M43s lens mount
Higher recording formats like 4K 10bit 4:2:2, 1080p 10bit 4:2:2, 1080p 50mbps 4:2:2
Higher frame rates, at least 120p at 1080p without loss is quality. 60p at 4k would be desirable (in FS7)
Internal NDs
XLRs with good audio
SDI output, Timecode, Genlock
EVF and LCD as nice as GH4's, with all the peaking/zebras/waveform/histogram options
Dual SD slots (or double anything, just not one)
Effecient batteries

For less than 6K. That would be a great FS7 /C100 mk ii competitor.

What I would like but not too realistic,

A high quality s16 crop mode
2K shooting mode at 17:9 aspect ratio
Raw output through SDI
A nicer LOG gamma profile than Cinelike D, something that has good colours like all the other profiles!
An ability to turn the digital sharpneing completely in the picture profile, unlike the GH4, which gives people the immediate impression it's videoy
A full anamorphic mode that shoots at 4:3 aspect ratio, and desqueezes the image for monitoring through the LCD/EVF
LUT support, with ability to load ones from Da vinci, burn them to footage or just display when shooting LOG (on EVF, LCD, HDMI and SDI images)
A Body that doesn't look like an AF100, make it sexier, like your other broadcast cameras! ;)
 
Jim Martin said:
No, nothing to announce... they were just looking for input & opinions....but if I did know something, out of respect, I wouldn't want to say anything because I wouldn't want to take any "thunder" away from Panasonic....it's not the right thing to do.

Jim Martin
Click to expand...
I may be reading far too much into those words, but if they are only now "just looking for input & opinions" it doesn't sound like too much should be expected anytime soon. It takes months, if not a couple of years, to go from concept to finished product - and if they are still interested in the basic thoughts and opinions expressed here, I tend to read it that any saleable product must still be a long way off.

If that's not the case, if anything is imminent - well, it's likely too late for any fundamental ideas expressed here to make it into the design.

And yet again, there is no way the sort of thing being talked about here is going to go for $1,700. Nobody should make the mistake of confusing manufacturing cost per unit with sale price per unit, and predicting the latter from the former. Yes, the latter will be higher - but the difference doesn't solely go to profit. Fixed costs, let alone R&D, have to come out of that margin before profit can even be thought about. And the fewer the units sold, the bigger the margin has to be to even break even.

Yes, improving technology has been - and likely will continue - driving costs down/quality up fairly rapidly, but - using the FS7 as an example - that is ASTONISHING value for money compared to what was state of the art only a couple of years ago. But to expect anything comparable, but a quarter the price, any time soon, simply is not realistic.

Price the product so low - below cost - as to sweep the board? Well, if it happened it would likely lead to such losses in the division that Panasonic would simply close it down. They are a business, they want to show a profit, and whilst it may be in everyone's interests to please their customers, they're not a charity.
 
combatentropy said:
Why would you want an external monitor if the flip-out one is finally decent? Maybe 4" diagonally or so. 1920 x 1080 resolution.
Click to expand...

I can think of a few reasons, based on experiance. The first is I doubt they'll make it with a 4" diagnal LCD, as most these days seem to be 3.5". Even then, 4" isn't that large. The second is that no matter how decent, I've never seen a camera LCD that was calibratable. Being able to have a color correct image can make life a lot easier. Third I often work where I'm not the director and/or producer. In those cases, the directo/producer want to see the shot. It can be hard to do without them getting up into my business. And that leads into the fourth... back when I worked for a local network affiliate, it wasn't uncommon for productions or promo spots that were larger than one man bands. That means everyone involved needs to see the shot... not just the director/producer, but also the lighting guy, the makeup artist, and possibly the art director. An AF200 that is effectively a PX270 backend with a Varicam-ish sensor is tailor made for those type of productions... and every TV station does them (when I left a year and a half ago, the promo department had just started using an AF100). Plus, figure in all the independant commercial productions that go through an ad agency that are similar in make-up. SDI is far better suited to that than HDMI.
 
slidemaster said:
I really dont see that $1700 being realistic at all. Been around manufacturing all my life and that just not going to happen.
Click to expand...
No, but the Sony X70 sells for something pretty close, about $2,200. It has 10-bit 4:2:2 long-GOP HD, XLRs, and 3G-SDI. The 4K upgrade will be a paid one, and unfortunately it will be the same 8-bit UHD as on th AX100. But since the X70 is otherwise virtually identical to the AX100, the 4K format that they've selected undoubtedly could've been included, for free, from the start. And since the X70 supports 10-bit XAVC-L HD, it likely could've supported a 4K variant. Pricing, timing, and speccing the upgrade seems, in this case, more a marketing matter than a technical one.
 
Tzedekh said:
No, but the Sony X70 sells for something pretty close, about $2,200. It has 10-bit 4:2:2 long-GOP HD, XLRs, and 3G-SDI.
Click to expand...
But bitdepth, colour space etc don't really tell you anything about how good the sensor is, how good the processing is, how good the lens is, etc etc. You could have two cameras with identical recording codecs, but vastly different image quality - the latter is far more a function of the front end of the camera than codec. (The whole point of any codec is that it shouldn't have any noticeable impact on the pictures, certainly for normal first-generation basic viewing.)
 
Thank you for the even better example, Tzedekh.

What is wrong with this forum? It constantly argues against what would be good, with whatever shred of doubt it can find.
 
harddrive said:
But bitdepth, colour space etc don't really tell you anything about how good the sensor is, how good the processing is, how good the lens is, etc etc. You could have two cameras with identical recording codecs, but vastly different image quality - the latter is far more a function of the front end of the camera than codec. (The whole point of any codec is that it shouldn't have any noticeable impact on the pictures, certainly for normal first-generation basic viewing.)
Click to expand...
True, but not really the point. It was stated that it's almost certain a pro-ishly specced 4K camcorder couldn't be produced for $1,700, and I made a case that the X70 is pretty close -- and that considering the X70 and AX100 were effectively the same camera, the omission of 4K from the initial release of the X70 wasn't because cost-cutting rendered it technically incapable of handling 4K.
 
From Combat: What is wrong with this forum? It constantly argues against what would be good, with whatever shred of doubt it can find.

Some have coined it 'motivated reasoning'. Both sides of any argument will ignore facts, twist facts, or make up facts in order to defend their position. It happens all the time on any subject. We all do it. For some reason, our brains prefer our beliefs rather than facts. That's why it's pointless to discuss religion and politics and those two topics that are often banned on forums.

It's nearly as pointless to continue the discussion such as this when it has reached this point in the discussion. Both sides have expressed their views and are now making no advance on the discussion. Each side tries to make a point - the other side ignores it and tries to make a point for their side. 19 pages and just what have we learned about the AF200? Many people want one and as for price, well......
 
Forget $1700, I'm hoping Panasonic deliver a C100 Mkii contender for all of us who are not invested in L lenses and looking for that ergonomic all-in-one upgrade from the amazing GH4.

I've been in the Panasonic camp for 5 years, love everything they have produced but sold my AF100 because it made sense at the time to spend the same money on several GH2s, lenses and mics etc. to start my wedding film business given the comparable image quality.

And this is where I think I differ from a lot of people here. I really don't want them to just stick the GH4 sensor in an AF100 body. I want a custom 8mp sensor, with competitive dynamic range and large photosites for great lowlight.

If an AF200 is in the pipeline, I'm confident Panasonic will get the ergonomics right, and deliver features beyond any of the competitors, but most of all I want a beautiful image out of camera that doesn't have me looking over the fence.
 
James Fisher said:
... I really don't want them to just stick the GH4 sensor in an AF100 body. I want a custom 8mp sensor, with competitive dynamic range and large photosites for great lowlight...
Click to expand...
But, if they don't have that sensor now, would they develop it just for this model? Sony was able to get away with 12 MPX on A7s but that was an FF camera and targeted at a video market. (and it just might appear in other Sony FF products as well)

To me, the economies of scale make it far more likely to have the AF-200 with the same GH-4 MFT sensor, higher quality processing and a 4:3 (w/anamorphic) 24/48p capability that will deliver a 4.5K image.

The 8.9 MPX S35 sensor went into their $55,000 Varicam.

Chances that it will end up in AF-200? None.

Chances that it will end up in some future $20,000-$25,000 camera? I'd put it at 50/50 (depending on how the Varicam fares in the sales department)
 
DLD said:
The 8.9 MPX S35 sensor went into their $55,000 Varicam.

Chances that it will end up in AF-200? None.
Click to expand...

Hi DLD,

I wouldn't expect Panasonic to use the same sensor, I'm also not wishing for an S35 sensor in a potential AF100 successor; the m43 format is great and makes the perfect progression from GH-shooting with the same glass (before you get into the rental price bracket). But if Canon can put that fantastic S35 8mp sensor in a C100 Mkii package for $5500, then I don't see why Panasonic couldn't have prepared an equally fantastic 8mp m43 sensor? They've had their 3 years...

I think I'm just saying that as stupendous as the GH series is, a re-housed GH4 would feel like a cop-out for a tailored video camera. It really needs to excel on all fronts at the $5k price point to be a contender, otherwise we might all be starting an "AF300 wishlist" sooner than we would have liked =(
 
The GH4 sensor produces one of the best images out there. It really is a stunning image especially when downscaled to 1080p, it looks close or on par with the FS100, FS700, C100, C300. Yes I sold the camera because I didn't personally like the image aesthetic, but I have to admit it's a great image when you're willing to make a little effort, like use a speedbooster for the image aesthetic, get the picture profile right, turn off sharpening, use vintage lenses, use anamorphic, use a little lighting, spend a little grading time to get pleasing skin tones and so on. Is it as easy as a c100 in making a pretty filmic image? No. But when you spend a little work on it it can look like the c100 and even better. It's a very high league image. An AF200 with the same 4K sensor but with better picture profile controls and better colours, compression (10bit 4:2:2) will make it a very competitive image to all large sensor camcorders out there. I have no complaints about the GH4 sensor, I hope they use it. And if possible improve low light performance a little.

The AF100 was a 5.5K camera, the successor will not be 1700$. It's simple reason. Plus they're already selling the GH4 at that price point. They can't sell a consumer small mirrorless for 1700$ and sell a high-end professional camcorder with SDI, 10bit, 120p, XLRs, NDs for 1700 too. Canon is selling their version (high end large sensor camcorder) for 5.5K, Sony for 8K, AJA for 9K, BM for 6K, it makes absolutely no sense they price it at 1700$. I would stop that conversation, who came up with that specific price anyway? Why not 1600? 1750? 2000? Why not 700?

It's simple reason and marketing the AF200 will be priced around the 5K range, plan your decisions accordingly.
 
James Fisher said:
Hi DLD,

I wouldn't expect Panasonic to use the same sensor, I'm also not wishing for an S35 sensor in a potential AF100 successor; the m43 format is great and makes the perfect progression from GH-shooting with the same glass (before you get into the rental price bracket). But if Canon can put that fantastic S35 8mp sensor in a C100 Mkii package for $5500, then I don't see why Panasonic couldn't have prepared an equally fantastic 8mp m43 sensor? They've had their 3 years...
Click to expand...

Hi, James.

Sensor technology is a lot more difficult to peg per given camera release. Yes, rumor always abound but one never knows until the final announcement. With that in mind, Panasonic went all in on the MFT and I think it would made sense for them to design a better MFT sensor than to change sizes within a given price range (i.e, the price range where they can also sell their lenses) As I had mentioned previously, the GH4 sensor is capable of ~ 13 stops (according to DxO) of DR when in Raw photo mode and one should be able to wring more out of that with the dual/multiple exposure. In that sense, its total potential for video hasn't been realized yet.

Imagine a camera with 4.5K (~ 16 MPX in 4/3) resolution with 14 stops of DR and the all the features of a high end camera! And for $5,000 too!

Is it possible?

I'd say we're a year away.
 
I only want a camera with global shutter. I'll admit that it doesn't come into play that often, but how can so many people care about 4K --- which won't be appreciated in most circumstances --- and not care about the integrity of motion?

subway.png lightning.png fan.png guitar.png golfer.png
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top