AG-SFU100 Software Update

Barry_Green said:
There was never an AF300 being developed, so there was nothing to cancel.
Click to expand...

Barry, my sources said otherwise over a year ago and was then told it was canceled recently. I was also told that no S35 sensor was allowed to even be OEM'ed. That certainly turned out to be the case at NAB. I was also told the AF100 was not a big seller, but I'm pretty sure the same could be said of the FS100 and F3. If a DSLR can be had for $2500 or less, ANY video camera at 2X or more won't have a big impact. It will be interesting to see how the Canon 5D Mk III does, since it costs more money.

The reality is that if a young shooter has never used a real video camera before, he or she will think that a DSLR is all they need, especially when the price is so low. I've seen posts by this demographic who write things about the C300 like, "why would I spend over $10,000 for XLR inputs?" They probably thought the same thing of the AF100/FS100/F3.

For me, the C300 was simply about getting a large sensor camera with in-camera 4:2:2 codec, even if 8-bit. In the rental business, I get more tech issue phone calls from set about external recorders than any other piece of gear. Not putting 50Mbps 4:2:2 in the F3 was a big error on Sony's part, IMO, no matter how many external recorder options exist.
 
Last edited:
jmarkham said:
Thanks for the feedback. Have you made use of the Canon-Log yet? We're trying to decide whether to get
the C500 when it comes out ( loving the 3G-SDI ) or get another Scarlet...

jeff
Click to expand...

Jeff, this remains to be seen. One of the top Bay Area cine rental houses told me that they never upgraded any of their F3's to S-Log because clients weren't asking for it or 4:4:4, just as their Alexa's always record in-board to ProRes. The C300 is the opposite of a Scarlet--it's really made for broadcast and corporate projects with fast turnarounds. The C500 obviously is different, and is more suited to RED type projects.

I think overall, shooting RAW, S-Log, 4:4:4 is more of an LA thing, with the exception of some high end commercials and indie films. In the case of the former, the camera packages usually come from LA, the latter are RED One owner/operators who do their own post.

I wouldn't shoot Canon-Log unless I had complete confidence in who was doing grading, even though it isn't as extreme as S-Log. Fact is, the work flow for RED and even S-Log or C-Log is beyond the time and budget constraints of many clients and/or knowledge levels.

It's easy to think that the only video cameras being sold are compact, large sensor cameras, but the reality is, our most popular cameras are small sensor cameras like the HPX250 and EX1 for corporate projects. The HPX2700 still works a lot as well, because it's easier to shoot a lot of setups in a day vs. large sensor when the crew is very small, and those who know how to get the most out of 2/3" sensors can get a shallow DOF when wanted. ENG form factor is still the best doc camera, IMO.
 
Dino said:
Barry, my sources said otherwise over a year ago and was then told it was canceled recently.
Click to expand...
Then your source is/was wrong. There has been no work done on a successor because it isn't time for that yet. I spent substantial time at NAB talking to the engineers, the development people, the designers, the regional sales folks, etc. large sensor was the subject of much discussion. I can assure you, whoever told you about any "AF300" was just plain wrong, there never was going to be a successor shown at this NAB. I cannot say what was discussed beyond that.

was also told that no S35 sensor was allowed to even be OEM'ed.
Click to expand...
Not sure what your source is hearing or how it's being interpreted, but they showed the plan for a 4K VariCam with "at least" an S35-sized sensor.

I was also told the AF100 was not a big seller, but I'm pretty sure the same could be said of the FS100 and F3. If a DSLR can be had for $2500 or less, ANY video camera at 2X or more won't have a big impact. It will be interesting to see how the Canon 5D Mk III does, since it costs more money.
Click to expand...
AF100 sold incredibly amazingly well when it was first introduced. Obviously sales have slowed down now that there are nigh unto a dozen large sensor cams on the market. I spent some time with the bigger dealers trying to get the "ground truth" and yes, the FS100 is in the same boat.

I wouldn't read much into the 5DM3's sales though, as prob 95% of its sales are for stills, so if sales to video guys doubled (or plummeted) overall sales would still look the same.

The reality is that if a young shooter has never used a real video camera before, he or she will think that a DSLR is all they need, especially when the price is so low. I've seen posts by this demographic who write things about the C300 like, "why would I spend over $10,000 for XLR inputs?" They probably thought the same thing of the AF100/FS100/F3.
Click to expand...
Absolutely agreed, especially when a t2i or gh2 are ~$600. And if those young shooters don't know why the better camera is worth more, then they are prob better off with the DSLR for now, until they exhaust it's capabilities and understand why the next tier exists.
 
Dino said:
It's easy to think that the only video cameras being sold are compact, large sensor cameras, but the reality is, our most popular cameras are small sensor cameras like the HPX250 and EX1 for corporate projects.
Click to expand...
EXACTLY!!!


Now follow that through and ask yourself if you had limited resources and only a few development teams, would you be in a big rush to put out the next large-sensor low-cost camera, just to have it compete against everything from NEX 5N's up to C500's... When your current camera is barely over a year old... Or would you pour your development efforts into updating your five-year-old workhorse HPX500? And introducing updated and better-ized versions of your mammoth blockbuster hits (like the HPX255, now with paintbox capability)?

When were they supposed to be working on the "AF300" with these other projects coming to fruition? Answer: they weren't. And they never were. I knew that eight months ago. The AF100 is and remains a current model and when you look at it in context with its competition, there's nothing anywhere close to it at its price point.

There's no rush to replace it, and the "AF300" rumor is going on the same trash pile where the "imminent lumix 12-50 f/2.5-3.3" and "OIS version of lumix 7-14" lens rumors ended up.

Those who say there are no plans for a successor definitively are wrong. And that's all I will say about it.
 
Barry, with the BMD camera about to come out, were I Panasonic, I'd keep my powder dry as well. I think Japan put the brakes on at some point, that there were plans for an AF successor to be shown at NAB. Sony was quite capable of updating their even newer FS100, so no reason to believe that Panasonic couldn't have shown a P2 version of the AF100 if they chose to. I wouldn't want to be competing in the large sensor compact HD camera space as a manufacturer, it's definitely not for the feint of heart! Regarding the 4K Varicam, one can claim anything about a camera that is under glass. Everyone I spoke to was underwhelmed by Panasonic at this year's NAB. Having said that, we will by an HPX255 as soon as it ships. Already have the EC4 paint box.
 
I'm curious, maybe someone could set me straight... What is the deal with this on-line push to bigger and bigger sensors? I just finished another project with my AF (combined with my 250) and saw it on a HUGE screen and it looked pretty darn good - better than 35 did 10 years ago - I also just saw a feature that was at Sundance (Prairie Love) that was shot on a EX-1 with (I think) a Letus adapter - it looked like a movie, which is good enough for me.

S-o-o-o, if you can get better than "good enough" from smaller sensors and have the advantage of using smaller, lighter lenses, what's the appeal? - I know people talk a lot about color grading and green screen and low light capabilities - but where are these people planning on screening their films anyway? Especially in an age when a growing majority of people watch films on their computers, IPads and IPhones...

I also just went back to update a project I shot with my HPX500 - DVCPRO HD, 72024/pn.. I was shocked - I forgot how good that codec looked - really "filmic" (that used to be the Holy Grail, remember?) but for many the craze for resolution has eclipsed good image-making.
 
Your point is certainly well-taken. There is the "cinematic" space for video and then there's broadcast / corporate use space.
For whatever reason, the "cinematic" space has appeared to settled on the S35 sized sensor with between 2K and
4K of resolution. I dont' think there's a clear mandate on latitude ...
How many projects done using cameras in the cinematic space wind up on the large screen? I suspect not as many
as wind up on flat-screens .. but .. that doesn't stop the DP's from asking for them (in fact being quite
insistent on them).

jeff
 
the Pany is still good for me, all i wish is if they would add more futures to their Payed update even if it will coast more then a current offer.... and i would gladly pay to make my Pany even better.
 
Seconded. Like someone already mentioned, 4:2:2 and super slow mo for me would easily warrant a couple hundred quid! Alas I doubt it will ever happen :(
 
Mac said:
I'm curious, maybe someone could set me straight... What is the deal with this on-line push to bigger and bigger sensors? I just finished another project with my AF (combined with my 250) and saw it on a HUGE screen and it looked pretty darn good - better than 35 did 10 years ago - I also just saw a feature that was at Sundance (Prairie Love) that was shot on a EX-1 with (I think) a Letus adapter - it looked like a movie, which is good enough for me.

S-o-o-o, if you can get better than "good enough" from smaller sensors and have the advantage of using smaller, lighter lenses, what's the appeal? - I know people talk a lot about color grading and green screen and low light capabilities - but where are these people planning on screening their films anyway? Especially in an age when a growing majority of people watch films on their computers, IPads and IPhones...

I also just went back to update a project I shot with my HPX500 - DVCPRO HD, 72024/pn.. I was shocked - I forgot how good that codec looked - really "filmic" (that used to be the Holy Grail, remember?) but for many the craze for resolution has eclipsed good image-making.
Click to expand...



There is a segment of the market where a large sensor, extremely shallow depth of field look is a religion. I've noticed that music videos employ this look alot, while using multipule dslrs without having to deal with sync sound. Not my cup of tea.
 
Barry_Green said:
It probably could, in SD compatibility mode, but just using that card wouldn't give you new codecs like AVC-Ultra...
Click to expand...
Is avccam under avc ultra? Will they still keep the avccam line? Seems like its better to have avc ultra across the line. Have the prosumer the avclong-g up to intra100 , then have anything above be the pro line.
 
AVCCAM is for professional products using the established AVCHD format.

AVC-Ultra is a totally separate thing.

To do what you're asking, it would have to be a combination AVC-Ultra and AVCCAM product. Could they do that? I would think it's possible, but I don't know if it would work with their brand distinction or whatever.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top