But this actually is the beginning of the end, right?
- Thread starter Chamber005
- Start date
NextWaveG
Well-known member
That's fine for you, but I want a "Video" camera. Not a stills camera that shoots video. As it's been said before, first one that gets it into the market gets my money.
And according to Jan Crittenden, Product Manager at Panasonic, “There will not be aliasing as we actually have a clue about what causes that.”
Now assuming rolling shutter is gone or at least drastically reduced and we officially have a game changer. I can live with 4/3...FF would be great, but 4/3 will work. And it sounds like I'll be able to use my Zeiss ZF's on there so count me happy
That's fine for you, but I want a "Video" camera. Not a stills camera that shoots video. As it's been said before, first one that gets it into the market gets my money.
And according to Jan Crittenden, Product Manager at Panasonic, “There will not be aliasing as we actually have a clue about what causes that.”
Now assuming rolling shutter is gone or at least drastically reduced and we officially have a game changer. I can live with 4/3...FF would be great, but 4/3 will work. And it sounds like I'll be able to use my Zeiss ZF's on there so count me happy
Well if it's fine for me why do you care and feel the need to make it a point? A video camera, photo camera or whatever does not really matter. All you need is something that can shoot and make the material. IF you had an actual film camera you would have to deal with many of the same things as an HDSLR.
Also by then a newer version of the 5D, 7D will be out and better than ever. Paying 6K for a camera is crazy when you can shoot amazing footage with a Gh1, 5d, T2i etc. for less.
But hey I'm gone from here, but I just see no benefit what so ever to owing a 6K camera when we are achieving amazing results with the these HDSLRs for a fraction of the price.
ATL Media Group
Veteran
Really doesn't it depend on your needs?
You might be just fine capturing 12 minute clips with separate audio in post, but many of us would really like to have the quality of the HDSLR but with long record times (really long with SDXC) and pro audio synced in cam.
Hey, to each his own right? Many people paid nearly $5K for a Sony NXCam which also shoots AVCHD but doesn't have interchangeable lenses and shallow dof... It still sold didn't it?
The real question is what they are doing to achieve their image. If there is any jumping through hoops (ie. pixel binning, line skipping, etc.) then maybe not such big a deal. At this sensor size they are going to have to have some serious processing power and a very good AA filter.
Personally though, my biggest concern is still the glass. To take full advantage of the broad range of still lenses means that sensor size still needs to go up. When you have 25-30 different lenses as I do (including anamorphic adapters) and each has a specific reason for being and resulting look to it and yet still costs less all together, than half the price of one Masterprime, you want a camera that is going to let them shine at their proper focal length. On top of that when you have several camera bodies for multicam shoots it's even more critical.
Personally though, my biggest concern is still the glass. To take full advantage of the broad range of still lenses means that sensor size still needs to go up. When you have 25-30 different lenses as I do (including anamorphic adapters) and each has a specific reason for being and resulting look to it and yet still costs less all together, than half the price of one Masterprime, you want a camera that is going to let them shine at their proper focal length. On top of that when you have several camera bodies for multicam shoots it's even more critical.
cowpunk52
Veteran
I think Cieloent is missing the point of the AF100. This a camera that you can show up with on a professional shoot and expect professional results from in nearly any shooting situation. As brilliant as footage can be from the DSLR's, they are not appropriate for many shooting situations, and that limits their usefulness. Issues like moire, aliasing, clip limits, overheating, softness, ergonimics, etc - DSLR's are not the most elegant solution to getting beautiful footage. What the AF100 does is bring the best of these DSLR's (sensor size) and combine it with standard pro video features, proper codecs, better ergonomics and proper HD imaging; if that seems pointless, then it's not a camera aimed at your demographic. If $6k for a camera like that seems too high, it's not aimed at your demographic.
As revolutionary as the convergence of still cameras and video has been, there are always comprises when a camera is geared toward one type of shooter or another. If you primarily shoot stills, but want the option for video every so often, then stick with a vDSLR - because it's made to shoot high quality stills, not video. But if you want true, high quality HD video with the DoF & FoV of a large sensor at prosumer prices, this is the only in option for the foreseeable future.
And the fact that it's going to exist before the year is out is pretty freakin' phenomenal.
As revolutionary as the convergence of still cameras and video has been, there are always comprises when a camera is geared toward one type of shooter or another. If you primarily shoot stills, but want the option for video every so often, then stick with a vDSLR - because it's made to shoot high quality stills, not video. But if you want true, high quality HD video with the DoF & FoV of a large sensor at prosumer prices, this is the only in option for the foreseeable future.
And the fact that it's going to exist before the year is out is pretty freakin' phenomenal.
If I can make $1000+ per music video and do two a week with a $1000-3000 camera then I would say I have a market cornered. My love is Music Videos, there is so much work you have no idea what to do.
This is an ongoing battle that people understand or don't, as this topic will never end all I can say is I hope everyone can buy that camera and enjoy, I am more than happy with what I have
:happy:
Hahahahahahahahaha...make $1000 per music video? That's rich, hahahahahah! :evil:
[/rant against cheap-ass musicians]
rogar-Dum(DBG):
Zak Forsman
Major Contributor
I hope someone will make a deep depth of field adapter for this. red rock?
Burritoclock
Active member
This is a pretty dumb comment... first of all just like some of us can't afford a $6,000 camera, some musicians can't afford $10,000 music videos. What a stupid thing to say. (Edit* Misinterpreted subtleinspiration's point, would like to retract, ha!)
Besides I'd kill to make $2,000 a week doing what I love.
But on topic - for $6,000 I can get a t2i, lights, tripod, mics, audio, and a good computer for all the post work.... So no I don't think this changes anything yet, people like me buying t2i's are not going to buy this product.
And close to when this tech gets reasonably priced the line between dslr and cams will be so blurred they will all just do the same things. Much like GPS's, small cameras, and everything else has blurred into the cell phone market. Yes if only the video cam makers responded to competition then cameras would surpass, but both industrys will be making advances at close to the same rate dslr's will not always have rolling shutter and moire, if anything dslr's are so far ahead on pricing already that if anything it's video cams that will be left in the dust.
Sorry for any non standard language, not sure what the lingo is for video cameras is... haha
Last edited:
Lenilenapi
Carbonite Member
This is the announcement I've been expecting and assume Sony wil also follow suit. There's plenty to pay way more than $6K for - like decent audio, monitoring ability, less compression, a decent viewfinder and menus that make sense. Because they won't be making a chip that also has to service a still camera they might be able to produce a dedicated 2K (1920x1080) camera that has far more resolution than the HD just we're gettingf rom the Canon's.
Hold on to those old Nikon lenses because I doubt whether the apertureless Canon's will be right for this camera.
Lenny Levy
Hold on to those old Nikon lenses because I doubt whether the apertureless Canon's will be right for this camera.
Lenny Levy
cowpunk52
Veteran
Oh my god - they should totally make one for medium format glass! or even better. LF! I want a 10" diameter spinning ground glass!
:shocked:
Let me guess the Sony Cinema Cam will probably only shoot to Sony brand cards, only be editable with Vegas on Viao computers, and then only playable on Vega TV's and PS3's. I F-ing hate Sony... Hopefully Canon will get something out there also, I can't stand considering Sony as a choice for anything.
Some very valid points, cowpunk52. And, for the most part, I agree.
If you are a working professional, a 6k business expense is not really all that earth-shattering. If it is, it's time to find another profession.
I just find it interesting that the announced product purportedly solves many technical ailments and workflow hoops found in their current m4/3 consumer offering but at a cost of 10 to 1. Obviously, there's quite a difference in mechanics, layout, and certainly under the hood, but the majority of the sales bullets read like a proposed GH2... at least by the potential GH2 market segment that's found on forums like these.
IMHO, a groundswell of indie videographers and hobbyists/enthusiasts are the ones that exploited still cams like the GH1, 7D, 5DmkII, etc. to produce professional-looking video. Now knowing these cams limitations and looking for solutions, this would seem the perfect product. But are they going to pay 6k?
Perhaps there is no intention of bringing those users along. Maybe they are just a very small, but very vocal, market segment.
iHartVideo
Well-known member
I thought you were LOL'ing at "2-3 per week". Unless you're in a HUGE city I find it hard to believe that you'll find that many willing to pay $2-3k for a video.