Sorry to say it. But not by Panasonic or Sony and Canon. Why would they shoot themselves in the foot like that? Once you release a fully-featured professional large-sensor camera for this price you will never be able to charge much more for a high end camera. Of course, it depends how you define fully-featured professional large-sensor camera. If you think the Blackmagic cameras are fully professional then you might be on to something. But if you expect something like a FS7 for this price, forget it, and the FS7 is where I would cut the line for fully-featured professional large-sensor camera.
AF100-Successor in 2015!!!!
- Thread starter tobbihe
- Start date
Sorry to say it. But not by Panasonic or Sony and Canon. Why would they shoot themselves in the foot like that? Once you release a fully-featured professional large-sensor camera for this price you will never be able to charge much more for a high end camera. Of course, it depends how you define fully-featured professional large-sensor camera. If you think the Blackmagic cameras are fully professional then you might be on to something. But if you expect something like a FS7 for this price, forget it, and the FS7 is where I would cut the line for fully-featured professional large-sensor camera.
A few more bits to ponder - with Atomos Shogun and Convergent Design Odyssey Q7+ now recording 10-bit 4K via HDMI into ProRes 4:2:2 HQ (Atomos is promising 4:4:4 soon ... Q7+ does DPX), the market has achieved a 4K ProRes unit for about $4,000 with GH-4 and NX-1 and ~ $5,000 with A7s, including a 7"ish OLED/IPS monitor. BM4KPC has these features for $3,000 but without a monitor.
Assuming AF-200 won't want to compete with itself, A7s + Shogun/Q7+ combo provides a full frame sensor at this $5,000 price point and it's unlikely that anything but an s35 will do.
From the 4K entry tier, there are a bunch of rumors hinting that Canon and Sony are readying a new line of camcorders with a 1" sensor (to be announced at/just prior to the CES'15 that is commencing in three weeks).
This squeezes a potential MFT camera in between these two levels, bringing it closer to the $2,500-$3,000 range. Under the "double-the-price" lineup, this could allow for a $1,500 GH-4, a $3,000 AF-200 MFT and $6,000 s35 piece. Panasonic also is rumored to release a 4K entry level MFT hybrid model a la GX-7 ... which would be a nice fit at $750.
Assuming AF-200 won't want to compete with itself, A7s + Shogun/Q7+ combo provides a full frame sensor at this $5,000 price point and it's unlikely that anything but an s35 will do.
From the 4K entry tier, there are a bunch of rumors hinting that Canon and Sony are readying a new line of camcorders with a 1" sensor (to be announced at/just prior to the CES'15 that is commencing in three weeks).
This squeezes a potential MFT camera in between these two levels, bringing it closer to the $2,500-$3,000 range. Under the "double-the-price" lineup, this could allow for a $1,500 GH-4, a $3,000 AF-200 MFT and $6,000 s35 piece. Panasonic also is rumored to release a 4K entry level MFT hybrid model a la GX-7 ... which would be a nice fit at $750.
filmguy123
Veteran
I think you're in the right ballpark though I might guess $500 higher on your "AF200" estimate (remember other features, built-in ND filters, etc.) and perhaps another $1000 to the s35 piece (still under-cutting FS700).
But yeah - I think that is where I would put my $$ as well for a bet of what to expect price-wise, at least for this next 2015 wave.
Yes to the $1,500 GH4 - but I don't think there's room for both of the other two.
I somehow just don't see the "$3,000 AF-200 MFT" - I take in principle all the points about being able to produce in volume and keep the price down - but I just don't see a camera of this type meeting that. Fantastic for a few - but the masses will find the GH4 (GH5?) just a better bet. And "enthusiasts" will find the GH4 and a Mk2 bolt-on unit good enough and much better value for money. Without those volume sales, I then don't see it being $3000 anyway.
I think it's got to be remembered that the video capabilities of the GH4 are much higher than the GH1 (on which the AF100 was based). Would the AF100 even have seen the light of day if the GH1 had been better enabled for video use, and such as a YAGH unit had been there?
I feel the "$6,000 s35 piece" is far more likely, and also likely to be the AF200 of the thread title. Maybe even a bit cheaper than $6,000, maybe even $5,000? I take monks19 point about the list cost now of the AF100 - but really, I'd be interested to know how many get sold for that now? I suspect not many - people may be buying AF100s - but secondhand. But it's keeping a price marker there, and IMO it would make sense if this s35 AF200 came out around the same price, probably more like $5,000. It would enable Panasonic to say "look, hardly any more expensive than the AF100 was - and look how much better it is!" and undercut the FS7 as well.
In terms of value, Panasonic has a slew of options, if it's willing to offer some of its lenses as a part of the package. Even at the long held $6,000 price point, C-100 was being sold with a Canon 24-105 F/4 lens and that perfectly suited its intended purpose and had given it a leg up on other brands.
As a stand-alone camera, however, the first step of my plan (had I been a revered Panasonic executive) would be to ask my engineers to match the value of the GH-4 + Shogun combo (~ $3,500 at the moment) in a single body. That would require a higher recording bit rate and/or better codec, such as HEVC, and a flip-out screen or two, with a commensurate feature set.
Then I would try to combine the existing, if no longer revolutionary, technologies to improve the performance visavis GH-4. This may be a BSI sensor, a higher pixel count than 16 MPX, etc. For example, a 24 MPX BSI MFT sensor with a full screen readout would be a major step up from the current models.
Adding everything up, this $3,500 AF-200 might have a ~ 5.5K resolution, 60-72 FPS in 4K, better dynamic range and high ISO performance, adjustable speed auto focus, newer codec, compatibility with the MFT lenses, OLED/IPS screen/s with touch control, etc.
IMO, this would make for a very competitive and compelling product both for the run&gun and the narrative projects.
As a stand-alone camera, however, the first step of my plan (had I been a revered Panasonic executive) would be to ask my engineers to match the value of the GH-4 + Shogun combo (~ $3,500 at the moment) in a single body. That would require a higher recording bit rate and/or better codec, such as HEVC, and a flip-out screen or two, with a commensurate feature set.
Then I would try to combine the existing, if no longer revolutionary, technologies to improve the performance visavis GH-4. This may be a BSI sensor, a higher pixel count than 16 MPX, etc. For example, a 24 MPX BSI MFT sensor with a full screen readout would be a major step up from the current models.
Adding everything up, this $3,500 AF-200 might have a ~ 5.5K resolution, 60-72 FPS in 4K, better dynamic range and high ISO performance, adjustable speed auto focus, newer codec, compatibility with the MFT lenses, OLED/IPS screen/s with touch control, etc.
IMO, this would make for a very competitive and compelling product both for the run&gun and the narrative projects.
I think, and always have thought, that many of these suggestions make sense - and are viable options. However, as has been said over and over and over again, Panasomic Consumer and Panasonic Broadcast are two separate divisions and, seemingly either don't talk to each other or are in competition with each other.
Broadcast has many relatively high-end cameras that represent it's core market, and the grousing - on this forum and others, some of it legitimate, much of it not - that met the AF100 during it's first six month of production has probably turned them off to any desire they may have had to dominate this market (some people actually posted that they thought Panasonic should give them full credit back for the 100 when the 100a was introduced - try that with Jeep).
They could have won this battle, but coupled with the financial issues the company as a whole was experiencing, I'm sure they just thought "What the hell, let Canon or Sony have it". Too bad, and as always, if wishes were horses.
Broadcast has many relatively high-end cameras that represent it's core market, and the grousing - on this forum and others, some of it legitimate, much of it not - that met the AF100 during it's first six month of production has probably turned them off to any desire they may have had to dominate this market (some people actually posted that they thought Panasonic should give them full credit back for the 100 when the 100a was introduced - try that with Jeep).
They could have won this battle, but coupled with the financial issues the company as a whole was experiencing, I'm sure they just thought "What the hell, let Canon or Sony have it". Too bad, and as always, if wishes were horses.
The number one reason why there will be no Panasonic successor to the AF100:
There's no aftermarket - Panasonic has virtually no professional MFT lenses to sell its customers.
Look at Panasonic's list of AF100-compatible lenses:
http://pro-av.panasonic.net/en/sales_o/02products/products/ag-af100a/lens_compatibility.html
What do we see here? With just one exception, a very short list of consumer-grade MFT lenses, followed by an even shorter list of legacy Four-Thirds lenses. According to Panasonic, there's only one pro zoom available for the AF100: the Olympus 14-35mm f2.0 zoom. What about the rest of the Olympus line, and Sigma's new MFT lenses? Did Panasonic literally give up on AF100 lens compatibility testing out of futility?
Now let's consider Panasonic's current line of MFT lenses:
http://shop.panasonic.com/shop/came...ogle_cov_lenses-brand_lenses_03192014_imaging
Of these, there are three lenses that stand out:
* Lumix 12-35mm f2.8 GX
* Lumix 35-100mm f2.8 GX
* Lumix Leica 42.5mm f1.2 DG
While Panasonic's f2.8 zooms initially looked promising, their Power-OIS mechanisms have turned out to be plagued with micro-jitter, making them useless for video shooting. In addition, their nominally fixed f2.8 maximum aperture is subject to noticeable exposure glitches during zooming - an inherent drawback common to virtually all Panasonic and Olympus MFT and Four-Thirds zoom lenses.
The sole exception, the Pana-Leica 42.5mm f1.2 is indeed a fine lens, truly professional quality. However, its focal length puts it in the portrait photography range, making it a rather inflexible choice for a video camera like the AF100.
Of course, there are a number of third party lenses that can be used or adapted to work with the AF100, and that's one of its strongest features. But there's little profit to Panasonic in that proposition and the AF100 cannot be considered a marketing success. What motivation would they have to revisit that discouraging experience?
There's no aftermarket - Panasonic has virtually no professional MFT lenses to sell its customers.
Look at Panasonic's list of AF100-compatible lenses:
http://pro-av.panasonic.net/en/sales_o/02products/products/ag-af100a/lens_compatibility.html
What do we see here? With just one exception, a very short list of consumer-grade MFT lenses, followed by an even shorter list of legacy Four-Thirds lenses. According to Panasonic, there's only one pro zoom available for the AF100: the Olympus 14-35mm f2.0 zoom. What about the rest of the Olympus line, and Sigma's new MFT lenses? Did Panasonic literally give up on AF100 lens compatibility testing out of futility?
Now let's consider Panasonic's current line of MFT lenses:
http://shop.panasonic.com/shop/came...ogle_cov_lenses-brand_lenses_03192014_imaging
Of these, there are three lenses that stand out:
* Lumix 12-35mm f2.8 GX
* Lumix 35-100mm f2.8 GX
* Lumix Leica 42.5mm f1.2 DG
While Panasonic's f2.8 zooms initially looked promising, their Power-OIS mechanisms have turned out to be plagued with micro-jitter, making them useless for video shooting. In addition, their nominally fixed f2.8 maximum aperture is subject to noticeable exposure glitches during zooming - an inherent drawback common to virtually all Panasonic and Olympus MFT and Four-Thirds zoom lenses.
The sole exception, the Pana-Leica 42.5mm f1.2 is indeed a fine lens, truly professional quality. However, its focal length puts it in the portrait photography range, making it a rather inflexible choice for a video camera like the AF100.
Of course, there are a number of third party lenses that can be used or adapted to work with the AF100, and that's one of its strongest features. But there's little profit to Panasonic in that proposition and the AF100 cannot be considered a marketing success. What motivation would they have to revisit that discouraging experience?
Last edited:
Not disputing anything you say above - but it does presuppose that a "Panasonic successor to the AF100" would be 4/3........?
And as I've speculated many times before in this thread, I suspect we may see this "AF200" - but it will be s35 based.
And if you want 4/3, Panasonic will sell you a GH4/YAGH at the moment - and maybe a GH5 variant before long.
But no, I simply don't see another dedicated video 4/3 camera. A few may see it as ideal, but I suspect way too few to make it viable, and it would just be seen as falling between the stools of the two options above.
Someone may answer your points above by saying "they could always expand their lens range, bring out new ones with quality to rival s35 ranges". Well, they could...... But they would then be expensive, and once you start spending that sort of money surely it's more future-proof just to go the whole hog and go s35.....? As it is, the range is fine for the GH market, and that's where I see 4/3 keeping a strong market share. Start spending much more money and better to go with the flow and s35.
GH-4 made a ton of money for Panasonic, regardless of their lenses. If they deliver a high value MFT model in the $2,500-$3,000 range, they can still sell their higher grade consumer lenses for "everyday use" and yield - perhaps temporarily - to Olympus and Voighlander for the upscale primes. Since MFT format is open to anyone willing to hop on board, the variety of products should be greater than with other mounts. Let's not forget Samyang/Rokinon and the recent Veydra primes.
Then again, IMO, it makes sense for the Panasonic itself to up their MFT selection, as the format grows in popularity more and more.
I'll speculate that the Jan, 5 CES related announcements will cover smaller sensor, fixed-lens camcorders.
Then again, IMO, it makes sense for the Panasonic itself to up their MFT selection, as the format grows in popularity more and more.
I'll speculate that the Jan, 5 CES related announcements will cover smaller sensor, fixed-lens camcorders.
Spartacus
Veteran
But lenses never where Panasonic Broadcast's aftermarket.
P2 was.
Probably still is.
For every 2/3" broadcast camcorder, Fujinon or Canon sold the lens, not Panasonic.
Same goes for the new Varicam.
There where big question marks when the AF100 came without P2. Sure some people where happy to not have to buy into the expensive P2 cartridges.
But after years of selling P2 as the "must-have-reliable-and-professional" recording media (which it was and is), saying "SD cards are fine too" made a lot of people wonder.
Especially people and companies who had invested a lot of money into P2.
Cost was mentioned as the prohibiting factor against P2 in the AF100, stating it would have cost thousands to add P2.
But if I recall the non-P2 HMC150 had around the same list price as the P2 HVX200, around release (please correct me if I'm wrong).
With the Varicam35 taking the high end, a bold move for a AF200 would be a fixed Leica lens.
Most C100s constantly either have the 24-105 or 17-55 attached to them.
They could even include a build in SpeedBooster like lens element to offer the S35 look, while using the GH4 sensor.
Adding microP2 on top, would even give Panasonic their aftermarket.
Digital Camera Watch, a well respected Japanese based photo gear site, just released an interview with the Panasonic execs. Here the link to the Japanese page (I ran it through Google Translate afterward, but adding imprecise translation to the typical management double-speak makes the read ... not so readable)
http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/special/dcm_int_2014/20141230_681628.html
I guess the overall trend is higher resolution - 6K in the short term, 8K going toward 2020 (Tokyo Olympics); faster sensor readouts where 240 FPS rolling shutter sensor is deemed as good as the global shutter; bigger sensors to augment their MFT lineup; a bunch of lenses in development, including a fish-eye and long telephotos; other gradual improvements in terms of auto focus, image stabilization, communication between the body and the lens, etc., ; bringing 4K "down in size" to compacts depends on the ability to solve the thermal problems.
https://translate.google.com/transl..._2014/20141230_681628.html&edit-text=&act=url
Google Translate version
http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/special/dcm_int_2014/20141230_681628.html
I guess the overall trend is higher resolution - 6K in the short term, 8K going toward 2020 (Tokyo Olympics); faster sensor readouts where 240 FPS rolling shutter sensor is deemed as good as the global shutter; bigger sensors to augment their MFT lineup; a bunch of lenses in development, including a fish-eye and long telephotos; other gradual improvements in terms of auto focus, image stabilization, communication between the body and the lens, etc., ; bringing 4K "down in size" to compacts depends on the ability to solve the thermal problems.
https://translate.google.com/transl..._2014/20141230_681628.html&edit-text=&act=url
Google Translate version
Lack of lenses certainly hasn't stopped Sony from making a quarter million different E-mount bodies. There aren't many native lenses there, and their performance is generally nothing special.
Canon has a slew of EF/EF-S lenses, but most everyone buys the same small set for video work... all their zooms are just OK-ish.
With all the available adapters, anti-lens arguments just don't work against either MFT or E, in my opinion.
There's still a niche to be filled. The FS7 is slightly too large, the C100.2 is comically under-featured, the C300.2 unknown and most likely overpriced, the JVC LS300 is a mostly unknown quantity (but certainly ticks boxes like mad).
So, as we had bandied about the recording bit rate and whether it makes sense to go with proprietary cards or to include Raw option, Panasonic just announced (at the CES'15) its new SDHC/SDHC card that has a max 95 MB/s read and a 90 MB/s write speeds.
And this is way more than GH4 can muster up (200 Mbps/25 MB/s in 1080p). Maybe an AVC-Ultra at 400 Mbps max will be a part of this AF-200 cam.
And this is way more than GH4 can muster up (200 Mbps/25 MB/s in 1080p). Maybe an AVC-Ultra at 400 Mbps max will be a part of this AF-200 cam.
James Fisher
Active member
I don't see a lack of lenses? I think Canon's lens line-up advantage is eroding fast, the m43 line-up is becoming very mature:
– Panasonic X zooms 12-35mm, 35-100m f/2.8 OIS
– Olympus PRO zooms 12-40mm, 40-150mm f/2.8 (7-14mm coming soon)
– Olympus 12, 17.5mm, 25mm, 45mm, 75mm f/1.8 prime set
– Pana-Leica 15mm, 25mm, 42.5mm prime set (a 12mm f/1.2 rumoured apparently)
– Voigtlander 10.5mm – 42.5mm f/0.95 when you can roll with full manual
– etc.
My feeling is Canon's actual current lens advantage is that a lot of people already own a set of L lenses and would have to sell them. I think if these people got a chance to try some of the m43 lenses they might wonder why they were holding onto them so tightly.
So fingers crossed for a feature-rich, ergonomic AF200 to use all the beautiful m43 glass on.
– Panasonic X zooms 12-35mm, 35-100m f/2.8 OIS
– Olympus PRO zooms 12-40mm, 40-150mm f/2.8 (7-14mm coming soon)
– Olympus 12, 17.5mm, 25mm, 45mm, 75mm f/1.8 prime set
– Pana-Leica 15mm, 25mm, 42.5mm prime set (a 12mm f/1.2 rumoured apparently)
– Voigtlander 10.5mm – 42.5mm f/0.95 when you can roll with full manual
– etc.
My feeling is Canon's actual current lens advantage is that a lot of people already own a set of L lenses and would have to sell them. I think if these people got a chance to try some of the m43 lenses they might wonder why they were holding onto them so tightly.
So fingers crossed for a feature-rich, ergonomic AF200 to use all the beautiful m43 glass on.
The Panasonic lenses above are all premium quality photographic lenses. None of them are well suited to a full-size video camera like the AF100 or potential successor. The f2.8 zoom lenses are particularly unsuitable as they are plagued with OIS jitter and visible aperture glitches during zooming.
While there is indeed a wide variety of third-party lenses available for all types of MFT cameras, there is no profit potential in that market for Panasonic. Consumer cameras and lenses like the GH4 and Power-OIS zooms sell in large enough quantities to justify their development and marketing costs. A new model of a professional camera like the AF100, with limited aftermarket potential, would be severely challenged to make a worthwhile profit on far fewer sales. I doubt Panasonic would be optimistic after their disappointing experience with marketing the AF100 .
Last edited:
James Fisher
Active member
What are Canon's lenses if not photographic lenses?? With the C100 (which the majority agree would be the targeted market for an AF200) the best pick of the lenses have actually been design for full frame sensors so I don't see the perfect sensor and lens union that some people bang on about. I have also read that some of Canon's lenses don't have good IS for video, although the 17-55mm f/2.8 and 24-105mm f/4 are very highly regarded. I don't believe Canon even have an 85mm IS lens like the Nocticron, and the IS on that looks very good from examples. Not that IS is the be all and end all of a successful video camera...
I've owned the 12-35mm and currently the 12-40mm and neither have aperture flicker zooming issues. The 12-35mm was sorted with firmware so that's a non-issue.
Maybe there will be an AF200, maybe there won't, but the lenses are coming steadily from Panasonic (and co) and they of a very high standard.
Panasonic ( and Oly) does indeed make some outstanding still lenses. If they were to come out with a quality motion oriented 12 or 14mm to 80-140mm 2.8 zoom , I suspect they would turn the M43 format into a serious format among pro users. The lack Of a high quality cine zoom is a big bump in the road to get over IMO.
Regarding the alleged failure of the AF100 in the marketplace... It was too little too late (with another crappy VF). I deliberately sat out the AF100 due to it's transitional /temporal nature. If they are to come out with a AF200, it would be a mistake to cater to the DSLR tier. That's what bit them in the butt with the AF100. To wander along without coming out with a cine zoom will be more of the same.
I want a system that I can invest into, rather than dance around with. Canon has done it, Sony is doing it. As much as I believe in the M43 format (owned GH2, own GX1, GH4 & GH4/ 20, 25,12-35,35-100), I'm still not "all in" for motion work given the lack of a non-DSLR camera and lack of a cine zoom.
My three cents.
What other systems have a non-adapted "cine zoom," though? The Canon 24-105 sure as heck isn't. The Sony 18-105 sure as heck isn't. The Sony 28-135 seems to be close, but is an awfully inconvenient focal length range for S35. Lots of S16 cine zooms available for the BMPCC, but then the camera itself creates a few inconveniences. Sure, you could buy a Fujinon Cabrio for just about anything for the low low price of two arms and four legs, but realistically every system is saddled with compromise.
There are palpable advantages in micro 4/3, mostly size, weight, and adaptability. I like being able to choose a very small M43-native prime or zoom or go with an S35 or full-frame lens from just about anybody, depending on the needs of the project. I like having slightly deeper focus for documentary work (but not small-sensor deep), or super shallow focus with speedboosted lenses. I like tossing a 3-lens pro zoom set into a small shoulder bag. I'd say there is now a glut of S35-sensored camcorders out there, and putting out yet another doesn't really differentiate them unless they go wacky with the feature set, system size, or price. JVC has a potentially wonderful solution... I think... but am cautiously awaiting sample footage and real-world usability assessments.
There are palpable advantages in micro 4/3, mostly size, weight, and adaptability. I like being able to choose a very small M43-native prime or zoom or go with an S35 or full-frame lens from just about anybody, depending on the needs of the project. I like having slightly deeper focus for documentary work (but not small-sensor deep), or super shallow focus with speedboosted lenses. I like tossing a 3-lens pro zoom set into a small shoulder bag. I'd say there is now a glut of S35-sensored camcorders out there, and putting out yet another doesn't really differentiate them unless they go wacky with the feature set, system size, or price. JVC has a potentially wonderful solution... I think... but am cautiously awaiting sample footage and real-world usability assessments.