tflak
Veteran
Is that an AF-100a? If it's an original AF-100 when did you get the quote? As of a couple of weeks ago B&H wasn't at all interested in buying any AF-100s - only AF-100a's.
AF100-Successor in 2015!!!!
- Thread starter tobbihe
- Start date
Is that an AF-100a? If it's an original AF-100 when did you get the quote? As of a couple of weeks ago B&H wasn't at all interested in buying any AF-100s - only AF-100a's.
combatentropy
Veteran
Off topic, y'all.
combatentropy
Veteran
I'm on a high horse just because I basically say I don't like how this thread is getting off-topic? Which is putting it gently. To me, it's more than off topic, it's spam, because I don't care about an AF-100 but do care about an AF-100 successor, so I'm tracking this thread.
In what way is the Marketplace disorganized? All I have to do is scroll through the subject lines. It doesn't take long to sift through the past few days, which may be all the time I have, because things do sell there. I guess it could be better, as could anything, but I don't think that this is the answer either.
In what way is the Marketplace disorganized? All I have to do is scroll through the subject lines. It doesn't take long to sift through the past few days, which may be all the time I have, because things do sell there. I guess it could be better, as could anything, but I don't think that this is the answer either.
hscully
Veteran
I don't know if we would recognize an AF00 successor. The GH4 is hugely popular with the DIY crowd. It's winning there and taking up more of that space. The AF100 came up as an alternative to DSLR but that's not a good strategy anymore. People who shoot DSLRs like them, they have a whole world of new equipment to manage audio, ergos, etc. The new AF100 has to be higher end.
I think it would need to be pretty different to compete in the current "digital cinema" ecosystem. We used to ask for 1080p 10 bit 4:2:2. It would need to do that, UHD, and 4K. In order to compete with the FS7 it would need to have some kind of log profile and luts to futz with, and some path to raw. Plus they could adapt a different shape for shoulder and get away from the camcorder ergos. It will compete with Cion, FS7, C300 in that $8K range - something to bridge the chasm between GH4 and Varicam.
I assumed it would be S35 taking tech from the Varicam. However, one recent development points to a path for a higher end cinema camera in m4/3, and that is the emergence of the Veydra and Kowa m4/3 cinema lenses. I would have grabbed them up 2 years ago. Panasonic has a wonderful opportunity to keep m4/3 viable if they choose to do so. They need to hurry up though
I think it would need to be pretty different to compete in the current "digital cinema" ecosystem. We used to ask for 1080p 10 bit 4:2:2. It would need to do that, UHD, and 4K. In order to compete with the FS7 it would need to have some kind of log profile and luts to futz with, and some path to raw. Plus they could adapt a different shape for shoulder and get away from the camcorder ergos. It will compete with Cion, FS7, C300 in that $8K range - something to bridge the chasm between GH4 and Varicam.
I assumed it would be S35 taking tech from the Varicam. However, one recent development points to a path for a higher end cinema camera in m4/3, and that is the emergence of the Veydra and Kowa m4/3 cinema lenses. I would have grabbed them up 2 years ago. Panasonic has a wonderful opportunity to keep m4/3 viable if they choose to do so. They need to hurry up though
IMO, they'll be limited by their technology - in the sense that matching the Varicam features and build is a forlorn hope - but, at the same time, they can certainly match something like JVC LS-300 on features and the price point and that should give them a "movie worthy" camera for under $5K.
As been discussed, the concept won't be difficult - shoulder capable, MFT mount, full sensor readout, all the needed audio and video connections. All that already exists on GH4 and YAGH combined in some form or other. The Log is allegedly coming soon to GH4. They could add H265 and/or higher bit rate AVC-Ultra onto an SSD ... looks like a killer $5K camera to me.
As been discussed, the concept won't be difficult - shoulder capable, MFT mount, full sensor readout, all the needed audio and video connections. All that already exists on GH4 and YAGH combined in some form or other. The Log is allegedly coming soon to GH4. They could add H265 and/or higher bit rate AVC-Ultra onto an SSD ... looks like a killer $5K camera to me.
EidolonFilms
Well-known member
FWIW at the GVExpo yesterday the Panasonic reps either didn't even know what the AF100 was (one Japanese guy) or didn't know anything about an AF100 successor. In fact, the other rep flat out said it's not happening, but then switched a bit to say it was in development at one point, but was delayed due to the new Varicam development. Who knows where the truth lies, but my general sense is that they've given up on this market.
Mike Harvey
Veteran
You would need UHD / 4k to compete with the FS7, but not to compete with the C100 Mark II. If there really is a market for the C100 II, Panasonic could target that group.
But realistically I think it has to offer more than a GH4 to be viable. Hell, even a GH4 in a AF100 body would sell to a number of people.
There is a point where people pay so much attention to pixel peeping that they forget about workflow. Having a camera in a good camera body is such a huge deal & can make such a huge difference.
P2 seems a bit pricy for a ~ $5,000 camera unless they include the internal Raw recording.
Now, they may include Raw just to piss off the new FS-7 owners! (and sell more P2 cards)
But they probably won't, in case there's an F5 tier camera that might include that, as well as the S35 sensor, PL mount, etc.
Was the Panny rep's name Sergeant Schultz-san?
Last edited:
EndCredits
Well-known member
So true!
Why a forlorn hope? Wouldn't that be the exact equivalent of what Sony have done with much of the F5 electronics (especially sensor) - reuse much of that in first the FS700, and now the FS7?DLD said:
So, like hscully (and as I've said before) then it's the approach that I believe would make most sense for Panasonic. It certainly seems to have worked for Sony. And the interesting thing there is how whilst there may not be huge differences in image quality between them, they seem to have differentiated pretty well. FS7 buyers still seem to be amazed that they're getting so much, so cheaply, but people working on high budget productions still seem to think the F5/55 worth it.
I hear what you're saying, but I come back again to the point about economies of scale. They've already got a video-optimised sensor for s35 - it's the one for the Varicam. If they decided to do what you'd like (make any "AF200" 4/3) the only options are to develop a new 4/3 video-optimised sensor, or use a stills-optimised existing sensor as used in the GH4. The first option I suspect would be ruled out simply by cost. The second option may be welcomed by some (no doubt yourself) but runs the risk of always being negatively compared to such as the s35 competition. It's one thing if it if it had some other killer advantage such as being a lot cheaper, but I don't think that's what's expected here....?
And the engineering side of me always thinks that in any system it's normally a good idea to match individual parts quality wise. You wouldn't put a massively powerful engine in a small car with cheap tyres and low performance brakes, would you? Here, if a user is going to the expense of quality cinema performance lenses, then why not go the whole hog and go for s35?
I think Panasonic ARE keeping 4/3 as a system viable - but with such as the GH4, and I think they're doing a good job there for it's target market. This discussion may now be going round in circles, but I just don't see a big enough market for a 4/3 AF100 successor.
As far as using RAW, then the big issue there may be bitrate/filesize. Even with the Varicam, Panasonic don't seem to have any compressed RAW option, and I don't see it remotely likely that they'd introduce such into a much cheaper camera whilst it's unavailable for the Varicam. Even compressed RAW can be challenging for memory, and I think even P2 may not be up it? (Just as I don't think the F5 records RAW to SxS - it needs faster memory - and that's with RAW compressed!)
I believe the max quoted transfer speed for P2 is 1.2Gbs, unless something new has come out?
Uncompressed RAW 4k to the best of my knowledge is about 3.5Gbs at 24fps, and I think about 8-9Gbs for 60fps. Panasonic are not offering any RAW compressed option even with the Varicam, so I don't see you getting it with a far cheaper camera. Even with compression, P2 cards would probably still struggle, even at 24fps.
filmguy123
Veteran
I'd love to see both a killer M43 form factor (picture a big, beautiful 5.5-7" IPS HD screen BUILT INTO THE CAMERA! with full internal 4K & XLR exceeding GH4 capabilities, a built in SSD port with option for SD cards as well, built in ND filters, faster CPU for improved slow motion, and a $4k price point. Basically the GH4, the YAGH unit, the AF100, and the Shogun all getting together and having a love child.
And then an S35 version to compete head on with the Sony FS7.
Regarding M43 it really is a pretty killer format now that its matured, and in the coming years as sensor tech improves will only continue to be that much better. With electronic speedboosters and now once 10.5mm Voigtlander is out, well, lets just say I heart M43 more than I *ever* thought I would.
And then an S35 version to compete head on with the Sony FS7.
Regarding M43 it really is a pretty killer format now that its matured, and in the coming years as sensor tech improves will only continue to be that much better. With electronic speedboosters and now once 10.5mm Voigtlander is out, well, lets just say I heart M43 more than I *ever* thought I would.
The 4K pro market was different two years ago. The implementation of 4K FS-700 with its digital interface and the R5 recorder was almost $25,000, once you added up the accessories for the package. Everything is much more condensed now and will be much tighter going forward.
The way I see it is that Panasonic will make an AF-200 as a high end/pro version of GH4 and they may bring out an F5/C500 s35 competitor that will sit around the $20,000-$25,000 range but, with that, they will also have to be careful not to cut into the Varicam sales. (the other side of the argument is that, if they don't do it, someone else will)
FS-7 is still crippled, IMO, due to the need to protect the invariably upcoming F5/F55 replacements.
My mistake ... confused the bits with bytes when verifying the info.
That said, one would think that the P2 cards will get faster and the compressed Raw - and how compressed, you might ask - will be a pretty significant improvement over AVC-Ultra, unless they are also thinking of a faster bit rate for that.
GH4 is recording at ~ 80-100 Mbps. AF-200 should theoretically hit the XAVC's 220-240 of FS-7 at the very least. If it exceeds it - say, to the AVC-Ultra max of 400 - it will have a leg up on its competition at least in that regard. The sensor size will still be smaller.
Varicam Junior, if it ever comes, should then have some form of compressed Raw or 4444 ProRes.
The other option is some version of H265, where the sub-$10K should soon migrate. Then it'll have the advantage in the codec as well (presuming the editing suites can decipher it)
By the way, BMD is no longer shaking up the industry as it did two years ago (as I had said, the 4K choices are much greater than they were then) but URSA is still packed with features for $6,000, including the internal Raw. You'd think the big boys have that as a target.
Last edited:
Sure. You'll just have to call it GH4 II (or GH5).
For 4k, yes, but my point was really to do with the concept of reuse of tech, and especially regarding sensors. The cost of such is largely in the design and development - much less in the unit production cost. Using the same item in both high end gear and lower is a win-win all round if carefully managed. It gave the FS700 a high quality 1080 mode - state of the art at the time - and (then) even getting such a 4k RAW option at all was pretty amazing. (I don't think it cost quite as much as you say, but yes, expensive.)
And yes, things change, and 4k implementations show such. Witness the FS7, and how it's got the ability to record logs and 4k coded to XAVC - that wasn't even an option on the F5 when that came out, though it is now. But I was responding to your specific point of:
And talking SPECIFICALLY about RAW options, then even if Panasonic get a RAW compression technology, then current P2 is unlikely to be reliably fast enough for that. You're looking at something faster - whether it's called "P2 deluxe", or whatever!
But surely the new Varicam IS the F5/C500 competitor!? Not in price - but in features, performance etc? Compared to the F5, they are oh so similar in so many ways. There may be some differences, and which one is most suitable for any single user will depend on circumstance - if you think you may go for a RAW workflow, then the F5 is the clear winner over the Varicam? And the F5 is even cheaper than the figure you give above - below $20,000 even with v/f and full accessory kit - http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/983249-REG/sony_pmwf5kclcd_pmw_f55_camera_kits.html - the basic body is less still.
Look at the FS7 threads on these forums and that's not at all how the people buying it see it. They seem to think they're getting quality, features and workflow that they could only dream about a year ago back - at least for that price. And after seeing an FS7 I'm inclined to agree. Whilst a true high end pro may not be so impressed by choice of lens mount, it's exactly what it's target market want, for just one example. In no way is that "crippling", just sensible market segmentation.
I think you are still confused over bitrates and exactly what AVC_Ultra is. The Panasonic paper is at ftp://ftp.panasonic.com/pub/panason...itepapers/Panasonic-AVC-ULTRA-white-paper.pdf and..... it's confusing, but AVC-Ultra seems to be a name for a family of codecs, what the document gives detail for are by and large all the HD variants - not 4k. (It only mentions 4k at the end, and then without full bitrates.)
With XAVC, it's easier to find out. As far as the FS7 goes, then it's max bitrate is 600Mbs - not "220-240". I think you're getting confused with normal HD where the max is 222Mbs at 60 fps. For 4k (more accurately - QFHD) it's easy to remember - for the XAVC Intra 422 variant, the bitrate will be 10x the frame rate in Mbs - so 240Mbs for 24fps, 600Mbs for 60fps etc. I believe the corresponding figures for AVC-Ultra are very similar. (Hardly surprisingly.)
I don't expect H265 any time soon - not in a sub-$10K camera anyway. Remember that coding can be far more difficult than decoding, and there is a huge gap between non-real time and real time encoding - and you obviously need the latter in a camera! H265 is still at an early stage. It may well gain increasingly in significance, but real time hardware encoding is likely to be (at the very least) expensive for some time to come. "Advanced" does not necessarily mean "better" in workflow terms, and (for example) there are very sound reasons why Sony still see XDCAM as very significant alongside XAVC.