TubEfingers
Well-known member
Agreed - Usable ISO up to 12,800 and 16 stops DR in a 3-4K cam from the Panasonic consumer division is complete hocus pocus
AF100-Successor in 2015!!!!
- Thread starter tobbihe
- Start date
Agreed - Usable ISO up to 12,800 and 16 stops DR in a 3-4K cam from the Panasonic consumer division is complete hocus pocus
Barry_Green
Moderator
Can we use this as a test case of whether or not to just ban these goofy rumor sites once and for all?
As in -- IF Panasonic introduces a new AF-100 series with this new wonder-sensor, then yes, we admit the rumor sites have some validity.
BUT -- if Panasonic makes no such announcement, at all, then can we finally once and for all just agree that these sites are not only useless, but they're worse than useless -- they're actually harmful (at least to the company). Because if Panasonic doesn't introduce this new wonder-cam the sites speak of, who will the sites' readers be mad at? The rumor site, for propagating horsecrap? Of course not, they'll be angry at Panasonic for "holding back" or "failing to deliver" or whatever. These sits spread rumors and gossip which only breeds ill will and discontent.
I guess for this test to have validity, you have to narrow down what is or isn't being discussed. If the rumor is that there'll be, as the title of this thread says, an AF100 successor, then surely we're talking about an interchangeable-lens large-sensor cinema-style camcorder with professional audio and video connections (XLR/SDI, etc). I sincerely doubt that if the consumer division introduces a... I don't know, what, a little point 'n' shoot compact camera with this wonder-sensor, I sincerely doubt that most of us would see that as an AF100 successor, right? Or if they put out a 1/3" interchangeable-lens camera that wouldn't count either. Or a large-sensor HPX250-style camera with a fixed-lens -- that wouldn't qualify as an "AF100 successor" in my mind, don't know about yours, but I'm trying to narrow it down so we know what we're talking about. In order for this to be an "AF100 successor" it would have to be an AF100-ish camera (or FS100/FS700 or something like that) with a large-ish sensor (most likely m4/3 as the rumors say) and with an interchangeable lens mount, right? That is what is being discussed here, right?
So -- is the test on? If there's a true AF100 successor announced at NAB 2015, I'll shut up about the rumor sites and acknowledge that they were right. And if there's NO AF100 successor (as described in the paragraph prior to this one) then -- we can officially rename any "FT" rumors as "Full of Turds" and rank their rumors on that scale -- FT1 = slightly "Full of Turds", and FT5 = "completely Full of Turds".
I'd love for there to be such a beast -- a true AF100 successor with 16 stops and 4K resolution. I just don't think, like Jim, that there is any such product coming. If there is, I would be quite happy to buy one.
Last edited:
Barry_Green
Moderator
Now that would be interesting. But would you consider it an "AF100 successor"? I'd consider something like that pretty much a whole different line, a large-sensor version of their existing handhelds. Well, yeah, exactly like you called it, a "PX200", in the same vein as the PX270...
combatentropy
Veteran
Yes.
Come to DVXUser if you want to talk about what's out, or what at least has been officially announced by the manufacturer themselves.
There's nothing wrong with keeping tabs on tech rumors, and if you want to do that, you can go to canonrumors.com, photorumors.com, mirrorlessrumors.com, 43rumors.com, fujirumors.com, nikonrumors.com, techradar.com, etc. And you can subscribe to them by RSS, so that you can have the latest rumors pushed to you, and not have to visit each site individually. Furthermore, you can even comment on their sites.
I don't want to become absolutely legalistic that you can never ever post a rumor here. But man is there a lot of noise. These sites are financially motivated to post sensationalistic rumors. They are biased against filtering the rumors out. And DVXUser is biased toward getting all worked up about them. I'm tired of the ups and downs. It's time to normalize the signal
Bassman2003
Veteran
In my mind, an interchangeable lens version would be the AF-100 successor but the sensor size and camera approach is how I think of it. It is a large sensor camera. So if they made it with a lens I would still consider it an AF-100 successor. But enough time has passed that does it matter?
The fixed lens approach would offer more functionality imho as long as the lens is high enough quality. They would most likely have to make both versions as a fixed lens version will turn off a lot of folks. I just do not like to change lenses and lug around a bunch of glass. But I know I am in a minority here.
The fixed lens approach would offer more functionality imho as long as the lens is high enough quality. They would most likely have to make both versions as a fixed lens version will turn off a lot of folks. I just do not like to change lenses and lug around a bunch of glass. But I know I am in a minority here.
maranfilms
Veteran
Rumor threads are frustrating, I would love to ban them on DVXUSER, U HAVE MY VOTE!
Look - these rumor sites have only one reason for existing: to generate click traffic and boost their advertising income. Period. So it follows that they'll write/publish anything at all - exaggerated, speculated or outright invented, just so that you'll click and drive traffic to them. Now, if they provide no value to the community of interested filmmakers, why exactly would you cooperate in providing them with income for useless fictions? It's not like in exchange they provide a valuable service - quite the opposite, as Barry mentions. My only question is why they weren't banned long ago.
As far as sparking discussion and speculation, we can do it all by ourselves. We frequently start threads about what we'd like to see in a piece of gear, or what we think might be over the horizon and when and at which price point. We don't need the "contribution" in bad faith from these sites - they add nothing to the discourse here. I say run this test case and then can them for good.
As far as sparking discussion and speculation, we can do it all by ourselves. We frequently start threads about what we'd like to see in a piece of gear, or what we think might be over the horizon and when and at which price point. We don't need the "contribution" in bad faith from these sites - they add nothing to the discourse here. I say run this test case and then can them for good.
Matt Gottshalk
Resident Preditor
Amen.
Yep. Rumor sites are much like politicians... what they say sounds good, but often becomes reality only by coincidence.
THEORETICALLY, the elements might be there... organic sensor, solid codecs, lens possibilities (how hard would it be to start from the Olympus 4/3 12-60 formula and optimize it for cinema?)... and of course we all wish for these things, but...
THEORETICALLY, the elements might be there... organic sensor, solid codecs, lens possibilities (how hard would it be to start from the Olympus 4/3 12-60 formula and optimize it for cinema?)... and of course we all wish for these things, but...
Jim Martin
DVXuser Sponsor
Barry, as usual, right on target!.....I do tire of wish lists that become rumours that become "I got the strait dope, it's coming"
Even if it does have 15 stops (and now I'm counting on it due to the rumor), I will be really upset with Panasonic if it isn't priced at $1700.
But seriously, while I appreciate the sentiment about rumors, I disagree with the idea that it sets up unreal expectations. Sure it makes people salivate and get excited, but professionals know better. If the average idiot accepts rumor mills as fact and get upset, well, stupid is as stupid does.
I remember how everyone was enjoying the Zacuto camera shootout..... until some nonsensical articles were published. Then suddenly, everyone got upset and said how unfair the shootout was and pointed out all the flaws. People actually thought that clients were going to spec a GH2 for their next shoot. Get real.
But seriously, while I appreciate the sentiment about rumors, I disagree with the idea that it sets up unreal expectations. Sure it makes people salivate and get excited, but professionals know better. If the average idiot accepts rumor mills as fact and get upset, well, stupid is as stupid does.
I remember how everyone was enjoying the Zacuto camera shootout..... until some nonsensical articles were published. Then suddenly, everyone got upset and said how unfair the shootout was and pointed out all the flaws. People actually thought that clients were going to spec a GH2 for their next shoot. Get real.
Well, I have to disagree. Over the last couple of years, the rumor sites broke the news of several major models - GH4, NX-1, even the 6K Alexa - a long time prior to the official announcements. Some folks here - like Jim above - are connected to the manufacturers via various channels and are privy to the official and unofficial info that circulates around LA and New York. Others, like myself, are de facto outsiders to whatever is the latest trend might be and have to rely on the internet. For me, the rumor sites provide a pretty decent snapshot (often by publishing the official product road maps that are rarely found elsewhere) of the manufacturers thinking going forward.
Now, of course, this is a private forum and the owners/mods can set any guidelines they wish. Speaking only on my own behalf, I don't think I have ever started a thread based on a rumor but, if a thread on the given topic already exists, I don't see anything wrong by adding a reasonably sounding hearsay to the thread. Some DVX User members may not enjoy these "what if" discussions. Others do. As long as no toes are being stepped on, I don't see harm in these discussions.
YMMV.
Now, of course, this is a private forum and the owners/mods can set any guidelines they wish. Speaking only on my own behalf, I don't think I have ever started a thread based on a rumor but, if a thread on the given topic already exists, I don't see anything wrong by adding a reasonably sounding hearsay to the thread. Some DVX User members may not enjoy these "what if" discussions. Others do. As long as no toes are being stepped on, I don't see harm in these discussions.
YMMV.
walkaboutcamera
Active member
Indeed, rumor sites are not just after mouse clicks. They have to have some level of accuracy or people will just ignore them. The more accurate their rumors are, the more important a site they become. So I don't see them as random rumor generators. There is usually something behind it.
I don't pay any attention to rumor sites, but those that do will only pay attention to the sites that add value, not the ones that make up stories.
I don't pay any attention to rumor sites, but those that do will only pay attention to the sites that add value, not the ones that make up stories.
I have to say that I agree with much of what DLD, TheDingo, and Paul F say above.
The only thing I would add is that I think the person who runs some of these sites (43rumors and mirrorlessrumors at least) is sometimes a bit enthusiastic to believe particular specs that seem far-fetched. In the case of this particular rumor, I believe the spec that jumps out is the 16+ stops of dynamic range. That figure should raise anyone's suspicion. However, two things: one, he quotes his direct source as saying "up to 15 stops" (which, granted is better but not by much). The 16+ stops is a quotation from yet another site, so a third-hand rumor. Also, he did give it a 61%-80% chance of the rumor being accurate.
You can actually fairly easily get a general idea of the accuracy or lack thereof of these sites by going back over their rumor posts and comparing with what came out in the end. I've done that and feel that they are more often right than wrong. As in, more than 50% right, by a large enough margin to eliminate coincidence.
Still, Barry, I like the Full Turds designation too. If this test turns out that way, I would go along with it. Perhaps instead of banning them outright, there should be an automatic disclaimer whenever someone posts a link from one of these sites: "warning: information from rumor sites have a significant chance of being inaccurate. Read at your own risk and avoid basing any critical decisions on these rumors."
The only thing I would add is that I think the person who runs some of these sites (43rumors and mirrorlessrumors at least) is sometimes a bit enthusiastic to believe particular specs that seem far-fetched. In the case of this particular rumor, I believe the spec that jumps out is the 16+ stops of dynamic range. That figure should raise anyone's suspicion. However, two things: one, he quotes his direct source as saying "up to 15 stops" (which, granted is better but not by much). The 16+ stops is a quotation from yet another site, so a third-hand rumor. Also, he did give it a 61%-80% chance of the rumor being accurate.
You can actually fairly easily get a general idea of the accuracy or lack thereof of these sites by going back over their rumor posts and comparing with what came out in the end. I've done that and feel that they are more often right than wrong. As in, more than 50% right, by a large enough margin to eliminate coincidence.
Still, Barry, I like the Full Turds designation too. If this test turns out that way, I would go along with it.
Perhaps instead of banning them outright, there should be an automatic disclaimer whenever someone posts a link from one of these sites: "warning: information from rumor sites have a significant chance of being inaccurate. Read at your own risk and avoid basing any critical decisions on these rumors."combatentropy
Veteran
Yuck. Reminds of lawyers, who like to clutter the world with disclaimers, which, to 99% of the world, are dead obvious. "This coffee may be hot." To 1% of the world (the very young or stupid) they are not obvious. To another 1% (not the same 1%) it makes them think they can't sue (which isn't true).
When in doubt, throw it out. The world has enough clutter. This site has enough bogus commentary.
alpi69
Veteran
Yes, it's called the FS7.
The FS7 has the worst LCD any camera-manufacturer will put on any camera in 2015.
Since most of us rely heavily on LCDs these days...that alone is a deal breaker for me on the FS7.
Yes, we also rely on 3rd party screens/viewfinders etc...but then I can build just around a BM pocket cam as well.....
What people want is a C300 with 5D mojo and FS700 frame rates and so far nobody has come up with it. Basically we want 2015 to have a HVX launch all over again - only with a big chip.
I was about to pre-order a JVC GY-LS300 as a successor to the AF100 - because I could use my accumulation of Lumix, Olympus and Canon EF zooms as well as all my primes - but was told by a friend that it won't have an active MFT mount - that seems like a monumental mistake, licensing issue I guess - So it looks like I'll haver to pin my hopes on Panasonic again.
combatentropy
Veteran
Google is my friend, and he disagrees. "The mount’s electrical connections are compatible with many auto focus, iris and power zoom lenses—even when using an adapter." --- http://www.newsshooter.com/2015/02/...dget-super-35mm-camera-with-a-micro-43-mount/