But this actually is the beginning of the end, right?

[ydgmdlu]

I was genuinely curious as to who was their target demographic based on Panny's proposed pricing structure.

I don't understand this. It was made explicit in the press release. It's being released by Panasonic Broadcast, rather than Panasonic Consumer. Its features are on par with other camcorders in its price bracket. HDSLRs didn't cause huge price drops in prosumer and professional camcorders, did they? So I don't really understand your bewilderment here.

Let me ask you, as a GH1, T2i (coming soon), and HDR-SR11 owner, will you be purchasing this proposed Panny camera? (Real question, not snarky)

I am seriously considering it. Despite the list of inexpensive cameras in my signature, I previously owned an XH-A1, with a Letus Extreme, and I was saving to buy an EX1 before the 5D Mark II dropped. I am sad to say that I've spent several thousand dollars on equipment.

Why exclude what has happened in the last year from your equation, as if DSLRs being used for quality video in professional, indie productions is not real or valid? Technology and economics have changed very fast.

I excluded DSLRs for three reasons, which should've been obvious in my post:
1) to show what indie filmmakers have always been used to paying for gear
2) because the AF100 is much less comparable to a DSLR than to other prosumer camcorders, especially in combination with DOF adapters
3) people are still using prosumer camcorders on plenty of indie productions

Something else that you seem to have forgotten is that most serious indie productions use an array of expensive support gear in order to make DSLRs as usable as traditional camcorders. The AF100 does all of that out of the box.

Another thing that you seem to have overlooked is the difference in customer support between Panasonic Broadcast and Panasonic Consumer. You'll find plenty of users who will attest that they've received wonderful support from the former for even entry-level products, while the latter's support is as shoddy and frustrating as that of any other consumer-oriented company. So you can be sure that part of the price of the AF100 goes to the superior customer support.

People continue to point out that this is a replacement for the HVX200. Maybe because of a similar price, but looking back at Joe Facchini's NAB videos, is it? We'll have to wait and see REAL specs. But P2? AVC-Intra or DVCPRO HD/50?

Here's a list of even more expensive camcorders that don't do P2, AVC-Intra, or DVCPRO HD: Sony PMW-EX1R and PMW-EX3 (XDCAM EX), Canon XH-G1S and XL-H1S (HDV), and Canon XF300 and XF305 (Canon XF codec).

(Panasonic themselves define AVCHD as a consumer codec.)

Look at the other product announcements from P2 readers to P2 player/recorders, etc. And then there's the pitch for the HPX370, complete with AVID's blessing on the AVC Intra codec. That's what they consider a "pro" cam.

Wrong. The AF100 is an AVCCAM product. AVCCAM products, such as the HMC40 and the HMC150, are considered professional products by Panasonic Broadcast. AVCCAM is more robust (as Barry has demonstrated) than the even more "professional" XDCAM and XDCAM EX codecs. It should even match or outperform Canon's new professional 50 Mbps MPEG-2 codec and the new 50 Mbps XDCAM HD, with the exception of the chroma subsampling.

I thought that you were "aware of the recent history in regards to prosumer video technology"?

BTW, you can order Pizza Hut breadsticks or a personal pan pizza at a Taco Bell drive-thru. At least in LA.

:2vrolijk_08:

Yes, I was aware of that. There are Pizza Hut and Wingstreet (another Yum! brand) combos, and other similar arrangements, here and elsewhere. But the products are still kept distinct within brands, and each brand develops its own products.

 

[f64manray]

I forgot one. The HMC40 was announced to be available for $3295, but when it actually was released it was $2295.


I would always take them at their word, that way you won't be disappointed and can only be pleasantly surprised. Therefore I expect an MSRP of $5995, and I expect a "street price" of $5995 until the initial demand is fulfilled. That's what happened with the HVX200 -- nobody discounted it because they didn't have to, it was incredibly popular and in unbelievably short supply for the first six months. After there were adequate supplies the street price adjusted down to about $5300.

So I expect something similar for the AF100. Those who "gotta have it" first, will pay full retail (which, at this time, I would estimate at $5995 based on them saying "about $6k"). Those who can wait, will benefit from lower cost. However, if you're a pro, waiting is silly -- if you can't make $300 from an AF100 in the first week you own it, you're doing something wrong. I paid off my entire HVX200 kit on its first job!

There is so much to learn from my 5DII and T2i. I think I'll take Rockmore's stance and shoot on these until I can't stand it anymore and watch the competition unfold. I'm just not going to buy any support gear unless it can also be applied to another camera in the future. These are very exciting times. I've got enough camera now so that I'm not going to be to anxious to get soaked for MSRP with some new product.

I know 6K is a really good value for all that the AG-AF100 offers, but it seems that the DSLR has pushed the price performance bar really low. I think people (at least a certain demographic segment) are going to be holding their 5DII in one hand and trying to rationalize spending thousands more. I know video people see this as a steal of a deal. In audio you use to pay at least 100K plus for flying faders, and then Roland offered it on the 2480 for $3,400. That's a pretty big price performance jump all of a sudden. I think perceived value needs to be adjusted in light of the developments over the year or so. Things are changing fast and the price performance bar seems to be moving just as fast. I can do 6K if need be. Let's just hope it don't need be . I'm thinking a package like this could come in at 3,500-4,000 and still be very profitable. We'll see what the competition says. Thanks again, to you and this forum. It has been helpful in so many ways. It's saved me much time and heart ache in many areas.

 

[ydgmdlu]

You mean, "Yes, its only advantages were its big sensor and interchangable lenses." That technically is something other more expensive cameras can't do or don't have. I know you meant things like, more expensive cams have better codecs, audio features, hdmi out etc. but having a large sensor interchangable lens video camera as if that isn't substantial. Are large sensors and interchangable lenses ALL that matters? No, but it is substantial.

I don't disagree that those are substantial. But there are so many other things that many people consider to be just as important, if not more so. Jason Ramsey, the DVXuser admin, has said that he would rather have a 2/3" Scarlet (perhaps even the fixed-lens version) than any DSLR. You, or others like you, are making large sensors and interchangeable lenses out to be the most important, most defining aspects of video cameras. And that's the flaw in the argument.

Large sensors and interchangeable lenses versus small sensors and fixed lenses is a lot like HD versus SD. So in that sense, comparing the GH1 to the EX1 is like comparing the HDR-HC1 (the first consumer HDV camcorder) to the DVX100 (the first prosumer 24p DV camcorder). (A bit ironic, I know: Panasonic vs. Sony, then Sony vs. Panasonic.) HD has been a very substantial aspect, and it was a deal-breaker for me. But the DVX100 remains a better camcorder in all ways, and almost everybody would choose it over the HC1 any day. So just because the HC1 brought HD videography to the masses doesn't mean that anyone had good reason to complain when the HVR-Z1U and the HVX200 were released at four or five times the price.

I was just saying, I can understand why GH1 users feel a little shafted simply cause there are so few m4/3 video enabled cameras.

I don't disagree with you at all. Clearly there are GH1 users who are not happy about the price (a few have expressed such disappointment here at DVXuser), and they have reasons. My position is that their reasons just aren't particularly good, so they should just get over it. So my replies to you have also been aimed at them.

 

[ydgmdlu]

I know 6K is a really good value for all that the AG-AF100 offers, but it seems that the DSLR has pushed the price performance bar really low. I think people (at least a certain demographic segment) are going to be holding their 5DII in one hand and trying to rationalize spending thousands more. I know video people see this as a steal of a deal. In audio you use to pay at least 100K plus for flying faders, and then Roland offered it on the 2480 for $3,400. That's a pretty big price performance jump all of a sudden. I think perceived value needs to be adjusted in light of the developments over the year or so. Things are changing fast and the price performance bar seems to be moving just as fast.

See my HD vs. SD argument above.

(I really am starting to turn into Buzz Killington!)

 

[Richard J. Johnson]

Damn you Buzz! and you better not have book of sketches with you.

 

[daveswan]

Well I'm holding out on image acquisition and putting my hard-earned into a good tripod / head (Thinking Satchler / Miller combo) since I already have an HVX for video and a 5D (Original) for stills. When I can combine cine and stills in a single body without the present compromises and at a price I can afford I spring. Until then . . . .
(This doesn't mean I don't think the AF100 will be a brilliant cam)
Dave

 

[morgan_moore]

One thought on chip size

I think a small chip is less of a disadvantage if you have suitable glass

say 14mm

with DSLR glass 2.8 is not a cheap lens

scarlet (and potentially others) have prime lenses designed for this chip size

Even the EX1 is 1.8 or something

What does not work (well) is chucking cheap and readilly avaialble DSLR glass on small chip cams

S

 

[GRENCH]

I'm looking forward to owning the AF-100. No...REALLY! !

Can't wait. I also want to hear more about the 3D Camera they are releasing. Looks awesome.

(I really am starting to turn into Buzz Killington!)

Starting? LOL

 

[Green Hornet]

I am happy with my DSLR's and my HMC150.

I won't buy another $6,000 camera until they sort it all out,
and add the DSLR lens/sensor combo

in a Video camera format.

Until then, I am fine with the combo I have.

 

[Ben_B]

I am happy with my DSLR's and my HMC150.

I won't buy another $6,000 camera until they sort it all out,
and add the DSLR lens/sensor combo

in a Video camera format.

Until then, I am fine with the combo I have.

You mean like the AF-100? It's a DSLR lens/sensor combo in a video camera format with the problems sorted out.

 

[Green Hornet]

You mean like the AF-100? It's a DSLR lens/sensor combo in a video camera format with the problems sorted out.

I mean native ability to take Canon or Nikon lenses and give full functionality of the lens.

The AF100 may be able to take the lens (with an adapter) but will not give you the full functionality of the lens.

My shooting style needs two things:

1) Long format

or

2) Shallow depth of field and short takes.


THE HMC150 does what I need to do in long format.

The DSLR slows me down so I work better at getting the shots I WANT.

4/3rds is almost there, but for me, I don't need or want the change untill it is the full 35mm (or aps) The AF100 does not give me more, only the same in a different format.

I also do a lot of still photogrpahy so I would rather spend $6,000 on a still DSLR that does more of what I already do, than to have another camera that is not adding anything to the table.

 

[Ben_B]

You get full control over most Nikon lenses with the proper adaptor. Electronics are sort of irrelevant. A bolt adaptor gives you aperture control over the lenses that need it, and most older Nikkors have aperture rings. As for EOS glass, if you want to use that then you're stuck using a Canon camera, that's just how things work...so what you're saying is that you want a Canon version of the AF100. Problem here: EOS has a huge flange distance so you can't use many different kinds of glass on it. M4/3 allows you to use a huge variety. I think the advantages of being able to use a massive variety of glass, including PL mount (without body modification) lenses (with full functionality I might add) more than makes up for the lack of functionality when using EOS lenses. I'd rather be able to use any lens ever made other than EOS than only EOS.

 

[MadHMC150]

likewise... just sold a few eos that would only work on my canon... now going with lenses that will work on the gh1, this new AF100, a 35mm adapter for my HMC, etc.. it just makes sense.

 

[ROCKMORE]

Makes me reconsider investing in any Canon glass, or any lens with the aperture control on the lens removed. No matter what camera I have ever used either film or video the auto iris control is always off, and I control it manually.
It's an interesting long term corporate strategy of keeping the systems close to home. Canon removed the external aperture controls making the Canon camera bodies more lens friendly to keep consumers in the Canon family. If you think this was an coincidence, think again. When Canon projects sales of 2 to 4 million DSLR units, they don't want to make it easy to jump ship. You don't see any external aperture controls removed on Canon broadcast lenses at $7,000 to $20,000 a pop. If they did pros wouldn't buy them.

 

[Ben_B]

Makes me reconsider investing in any Canon glass, or any lens with the aperture control on the lens removed. No matter what camera I have ever used either film or video the auto iris control is always off, and I control it manually.
It's an interesting long term corporate strategy of keeping the systems close to home. Canon removed the external aperture controls making the Canon camera bodies more lens friendly to keep consumers in the Canon family. If you think this was an coincidence, think again. When Canon projects sales of 2 to 4 million DSLR units, they don't want to make it easy to jump ship. You don't see any external aperture controls removed on Canon broadcast lenses at $7,000 to $20,000 a pop. If they did pros wouldn't buy them.

Also worth noting that the FD system was around for 20 years until canon changed it as a way to make money. Guess how long EOS has been out? 20 years. I don't trust these guys.

 

[TATmedia]

March 7th, Redrock M2e arrived at my door...March 8th, tested it with my HV40, 2 weeks later, shot my first scene with it....4 days ago, sold HV40 on ebay, 3 days ago purchased 7d,2 days ago sold RR M2e, Found out about new Panny today, won't even see the 7d till tomorrow, and I want the new Panny already....Technology has to slow down a bit, I can't keep up with all of this new stuff. I'm actually happy that the Scarlet is taking a while, give's me a chance to actually use the stuff that we buy. I shoot music videos, but I refuse to shoot a video that looks like it was shot on a "Video" camera, thats why we bought the dslr. But if this new panny can do the same without the comprimise, thats what we get next...till the canon "Big Ol So and So" comes out next.

 

[TimTheFoolMan]

I'm baffled at the apparent issue of secondary audio. Unless you're doing ENG or truly run n gun shooting, it seems you always get better results when you have someone focused on JUST audio. The issues with vDSLR's are (generally) the same ones film guys have worked around for years, but separate audio strikes me as something that almost forces you to do things right, instead of allowing you to be sloppy.

With that said, I'm all for advances in tech, even if it makes my T2i or DVX-100a obsolete. I'd even move toward integrated audio, if it gave me more control and/or better results. - Tim

 

[PhilJackson]

I'm baffled at the apparent issue of secondary audio. Unless you're doing ENG or truly run n gun shooting, it seems you always get better results when you have someone focused on JUST audio.

I am completely shocked that if you have someone completely focused on one part of production you get better quality... When has this not been the case?

 

[ROCKMORE]

Also worth noting that the FD system was around for 20 years until canon changed it as a way to make money. Guess how long EOS has been out? 20 years. I don't trust these guys.

Business first, cameras second. Canon and Panasonic make a lot of consumer products. Corporate strategy and corporate conspiracy are really the same thing, business. In this case the consumer seems to be winning.
I'm gonna keep my eye on the 20 year EOS lens deadline, good call Ben, you are probably right.
Now I actually feel lucky I had to take the 18-55mm with the 550D or I would have spent twice as much that day. The little lens actually turned out to be a great every day pocket lens to carry around.


In the mean time I'll just keep collecting old Nikon lenses before the next EOS ice age arrives.

 

[morgan_moore]

Eos mount was introduced to enable AF

It gave them three years over nikon who decided to battle with the F mount (Im glad they did !)

S