AF101 BBC/EBU test results posted

Status
Not open for further replies.
danap said:
This summarizes the point I tried to make earlier. What I want to emphasize is that this discussion about clean resolution is not an issue of "taste" but rather, here in Scandinavia, and elsewhere in Europe, a clear legal issue, which might involve either the Consumer Protection Authority, or worse, the Marketing Authority (to protect the market from false advertisement).

I am expecting legal complaints to be filed against Panasonic for misleading advertisement here in Europe. This is why Panasonic would be wise to come out of the box rather quickly, since the AF100 "issue" is gaining momentum in the professional community and the company's silence (antedating the quake btw) may damage their business reputation.
Click to expand...

I would imagine that a company like Panasonic is well aware of the technical-legal aspects of their business. If anyone believes they can bring, and win, a lawsuit against Panasonic based on the findings of these report, they are delusional.
 
Last edited:
David G. Smith said:
I would imagine that a company like Panasonic is well aware of the technical-legal aspects of their business. If anyone believes they can bring, and win, a lawsuit against Panasonic based on the finds of these report, they are delusional.
Click to expand...


Seriously. Please, sell your camera to someone who will go shoot and enjoy it. I know I have been happy with the images I have been getting out of mine. 800 lines or not.
 
Again -- I have asked Panasonic for some clarification on how they measured the advertised specification. I am certain that they are very aware of any legal complications they would encounter from advertising something that doesn't live up to it, which is why I'm sure they have some methodology that explains how they arrived at those numbers. And, as has already been said, it clearly does reach 800 TVL and beyond, when measured on the diagonals.

Until such a statement is made, anyone who is so upset that they're thinking of filing a lawsuit -- sheesh, why not just sell the thing and move to something else that makes you happy?
 
LoganMackay said:
Seriously. Please, sell your camera to someone who will go shoot and enjoy it. I know I have been happy with the images I have been getting out of mine. 800 lines or not.
Click to expand...

I have been delighted with the images I get out of mine. I do believe that if they advertise 800 TVL, it should deliver 800 TVL, so I will await their official response. Until then, it performs fantastically.
 
LoganMackay said:
Seriously. Please, sell your camera to someone who will go shoot and enjoy it. I know I have been happy with the images I have been getting out of mine. 800 lines or not.
Click to expand...

Uhhh, I am not dissing the camera. Actually, I have not bought one yet. I am on track to purchase an AF-100 at the end of April. This report, while appreciated, has not dissuaded me from buying one.
 
Barry_Green said:
And, as has already been said, it clearly does reach 800 TVL and beyond, when measured on the diagonals.
Click to expand...

Just to clarify, Panasonic have claimed 800 TVL horizontally as stated in the manual Vol 1 pg 48. "Horizontal reolution 800 TV lines (standard) (in the center of the screen)" whatever that means.
 
David's and Barry's comment may apply to the US where consumer and market protection are comparatively weak. Here in Europe I would not need to go to court, but just file a complaint to the relevant authority. Additionally, the premium price we pay (USD =EURO !), is routinely, these companies explain, due to the extended protection buyers enjoy in Europe. Apple Computers and other large companies have experienced the efficiency of such market protection in other cases that would have been non processable in the US. So I would not discourage European buyers to file a complaint.

Panasonic's business reputation is another serious issue, which should worry this company infinitely more than legal finesses. The days are gone when consumer can be fed like geese. I think Canon has understood the message when they changed radically their consumer support with the Canon 5D Mark II and initiated a remarkable upgrade politics.

No I did not intend to buy a pixie toy but a pro tool.
 
Last edited:
ASG said:
Just to clarify, Panasonic have claimed 800 TVL horizontally as stated in the manual Vol 1 pg 48. "Horizontal reolution 800 TV lines (standard) (in the center of the screen)" whatever that means.
Click to expand...

I guess the question now is what's the difference between diagonal and horizontal resolution in terms of the resulting image sharpness and detail?
 
A couple of things, its called the cutting edge because it'll make you bleed.

If you're dissatisfied for buying a non-vetted camera, then well, you know next time wait until a camera is vetted.

BBC and Adam Wilt or my personal camera nerds that I listen to before I spend a dime on a purchase. The only camera under $10k that I might buy sight unseen is the scarlet, but thats still a gamble and with no set timetable. And honestly I feel thats more of a religious decision than a pragmatic decision.

And even the F3 still hasn't been fully vetted -- vetting takes months of both real world reports from users and from the grand poobahs of third party reviewers like Wilt.

So if you feel you got burned by the af100, just grow up. Practically every camera made in the last 10 years has under delivered. I don't blame you for getting your hopes up, but look in the mirror and ask yourself if you're not a little to blame for buying into the hype before a verdict was in.

But also look at it this way, you helped the rest of us make a decision!
 
Yeh I agree- if you need a vetted camera for BBC work, wait until the BBC has vetted the camera before buying.

Personally the AF101 delivers what I bought it for- most of the desirable image qualities of the 7D without the crippling aliasing and Moire, with most of the good ergonomics of a real video camera. And slowmo. Job done.

Am I satisfied? Yes.

Did I get value for money? Yes.

Am I blown away? Not really. I don't feel the image quality is streets ahead of the HVX200 or the dSLRs, in terms of sheer beauty of the most beautiful footage I've shot thus far. But that's fine.

Maybe RED will make a camera to blow me away at a budget I can afford this year, at which point I'll consider buying that. The AF101 will have been earning its keep in the meantime as I put my efforts into improved production design, staging, blocking, cinematography, sound recording and all the other things which will make more beautiful movies.

Cheers, Hywel
 
Barry_Green said:
I have been delighted with the images I get out of mine. I do believe that if they advertise 800 TVL, it should deliver 800 TVL, so I will await their official response. Until then, it performs fantastically.
Click to expand...

Thanks for asking Panasonic Barry. Just reading your book and getting to grips with the af so haven't had a chance to have a proper play yet.

To the people saying you should have waited nonsense. Hmmm, don't you think those who purchase a camera that's marketed as being full 1080p have a right to be concerned at reports of it being sub-720p? The HVX was forgiveable, back then no cams were resolving even close to full HD at this price point. Now that standard should be upheld, or am I asking too much?
 
I can't say I'm surprised by these test results at all. I started a thread weeks ago along the lines of 'everything looks a little soft' and pointed out that footage looked a lot like okay 720p material to my eyes. There was much talk of lens adapter issues but I quickly established there was nothing wrong with my Nikon lenses or the Voigtlander adapter and that the camera is just not resolving anything close to full 1080 - much like the DSLRs. Taken together with the trailing aftefacts, I think I made the right decision to return our camera (it was with us on approval) but I do think that it is still good value for money and I must say that - whatever the zone plate readings are - I did not see any aliasing/moire issues on anything we shot, so if you're not shooting for a major HD broadcast commission, you're not a freelance cameraman working for big broadcasters and resolution is not a major concern, this camera is a viable alternative to a DSLR. I had just hoped for more!
 
I'm not too happy with the AF100 (because I find image of the GH2 better so the choice between cheap and expensive cam is easily made) and considering selling it but I don't think it's missing sharpness at all.

Also I assume the BBC test is for shooting feature shows only and that the AF100 would be accepted for shooting documentaties etc. Someone mentioned Discvery Channel and if they accept the Panasonic cam footage of Mike Row's Dirty Jobs they'll accept AF100 footage too.

Edit: also, people who are looking for a razor sharp image shouldn't chose for the AF100 in the first place... I would think it's a pseudo cinema cam with a bit soft cinema look. Then if the image makes you happy, why bother about tests?
 
Last edited:
RieniO said:
I'm not too happy with the AF100 (because I find image of the GH2 better so the choice between cheap and expensive cam is easily made) and considering selling it but I don't think it's missing sharpness at all.

Also I assume the BBC test is for shooting feature shows only and that the AF100 would be accepted for shooting documentaties etc. Someone mentioned Discvery Channel and if they accept the Panasonic cam footage of Mike Row's Dirty Jobs they'll accept AF100 footage too.

Edit: also, people who are looking for a razor sharp image shouldn't chose for the AF100 in the first place... I would think it's a pseudo cinema cam with a bit soft cinema look. Then if the image makes you happy, why bother about tests?
Click to expand...

Dirty Jobs uses full size HD cams for their primary cameras. They use smaller cams in between. I did see a Sony HDV camera on the show once. The cameraman was using it to get into a tight crawl space.

Like all of you, I was very intrigued by the arrival of the AF100. But I wasn't going to become one of the first owners and a beta tester. I left that to you more braver souls. So now it isn't surprising that we begin to see a few issues with the camera. I do appreciate you guys going in first and muddying the waters.
Sony's NXCAM S35 (maybe called the FS100) is up next. And again, I will be on the sidelines as there is a rush of buyers trying out the first cameras. They will find out its strengths and weaknesses through real-world usage. After many months of trial and error, we'll get a good indication regarding this camera is a viable production tool. And I will thank the new users of the NXCAM as well.

One poster here stated that the AF's already paid for itself by generating income. That makes the AF100 a very successful camera.
For now, I will be using my XF305 to shoot my productions. But I didn't buy the camera until it was out for 10 months. And I thank the early users of that camera.
 
PAL vs NTSC legacy

PAL vs NTSC legacy

Panasonic clearly designed the AF100 for former NTSC/60Hz (neverthesamecolor) lands of Japan and North America. These markets might be happy both with the resolution vastly superior to old NTSC and similar to 720HD and with the "true" 24p. We in Pallandia have less reasons to be happy. Our 625 line PAL/50Hz standard is also available in 16:9 and the colors are great. We skipped the 720HD altogether, as there was no visual diference with PAL (except when in true 50p mode). We expect a true 1080HD resolution and decent 25p. Not so easy with the AF101. We get +600TVL resolution and only psf25 (progressive segmented frame) recording, both on SD card and via SDI. Theoretically the 25psf should be put together into real progressive by the display, but here it might encounter 50Hz/60Hz transcoding (computer screens, Playstation3, some plasmas). Weird artefacts (contrasty edge ringing on panoramas) might result.
Many differences of opinion can be attributed to the place of their origin: Europe/Australia or North America/Japan . We have to be aware of that as well. I am afraid for the former, AF101 unsuitability for broadcast environments is a foregone conclusion. For the latter the AF100 might still defend its position.
 
nugat said:
I am afraid for the former, AF101 unsuitability for broadcast environments is a foregone conclusion.
Click to expand...
Really? You did read where Alan Roberts said that he expected the AF101 to be approved by the BBC as an HD camera, right? And that creativevideo.co.uk has already tweeted that the AF101+nano was qualified for the BBC... although I'm still looking for a second source of confirmation for that.
 
Shot with the AF100 & Olympus Zukio 14-35MM yesterday. The package is astoundingly sharp.

Don't know what the official resolution is, but I am amazed by this camera / lens combo. -m
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top