Can somebody point me to some sharp 1080p AF100 footage?

KyleProhaska said:
Here's some shots of mine...

http://www.kyleprohaska.com/oldstuff/af100/af100_sharp1.jpg
http://www.kyleprohaska.com/oldstuff/af100/af100_sharp2.jpg
http://www.kyleprohaska.com/oldstuff/af100/af100_sharp3.jpg
http://www.kyleprohaska.com/oldstuff/af100/af100_sharp4.jpg
Click to expand...


Is the footage from where this was captured available somewhere? Is there moire on the house roof in the first picture?

Do you remember the settings you used for the second shot or at least the gamma curve? Almost no details in the shadows.

#3 is my favorite. Settings or gamma? I'm wondering if all the 10.5 stops of DR are crunched in there. Some of the shadow areas look quite dark. Would love to see full 1080p footage of it if possible. Of all of it actually. ;)

#4 reminds of the Bloom test for some reason. :)

Nice shots.

Thanks for posting.
 
Interesting how close the Alexa, the F3 and the AF100 are considering their price points. Not that I'm equating the AF100 with either of them, just pointing out that it's a great camera for the price.
 
Problem with charts is that they don't always represent real life. Do they ever actually?

What's the difference between measured and physical resolution?

If those are line pairs and the AF100 is doing 509 it means it actually puts out 1018 TV lines. That would mean the AF100 resolution is higher than the EX3 which puts out 1000 TV lines? Something is not adding up. I specially can't believe the Canon DSLRs put out almost 900 TV lines.
 
Adamsenoj said:
Is the footage from where this was captured available somewhere? Is there moire on the house roof in the first picture?

Do you remember the settings you used for the second shot or at least the gamma curve? Almost no details in the shadows.

#3 is my favorite. Settings or gamma? I'm wondering if all the 10.5 stops of DR are crunched in there. Some of the shadow areas look quite dark. Would love to see full 1080p footage of it if possible. Of all of it actually. ;)

#4 reminds of the Bloom test for some reason. :)

Nice shots.

Thanks for posting.
Click to expand...

Most of them are Cine-V I believe. They're also graded. There's detail in that nature shot on a broadcast monitor but yes it's small. There's more there in the raw footage.

I dont' really understand what you're looking for here? Haven't you seen enough to be satisfied? Surely you can decide if the AF100 is worth your time by now given the examples you've seen. Not bashing you here, just saying...
 
KyleProhaska said:
Most of them are Cine-V I believe. They're also graded. There's detail in that nature shot on a broadcast monitor but yes it's small. There's more there in the raw footage.

I dont' really understand what you're looking for here? Haven't you seen enough to be satisfied? Surely you can decide if the AF100 is worth your time by now given the examples you've seen. Not bashing you here, just saying...
Click to expand...

Sure I have seen enough. But I can never get tired of looking at great looking footage. ;)

Some like porn, some like online gambling. I love watching beautifully shot footage.
 
Adamsenoj said:
Did you shoot that? Most of the shots with the girl looked extremely sharp. In one of the medium close ups of her lying on the bed the hair was super sharp. Was that the Zeiss?
Were the wide shots in the room shot with a higher F-stop? It looked almost all in focus.
The bedroom shots are so saturated and brightly lit that it's hard to tell if you are looking at resolution or just color contrast. But it definitely looks sharp! Thanks for the link.
Click to expand...

Hey, yes I shot that.

The wide shots are shot with the Olympus. The one of her in bed... depends which one...!

I think the sharpness achieved is due to different factors...

#! - the camera is sharp.

#2 - I did some comparative test between the zoom and the Zeiss glass I have, and it is true that the Olympus zoom tends to be more contrasty, and you could actually say that it decreases a tad the dynamic range of the cam in some way... if really you are looking...

#3 - the wide shot looks sharper probably because.... it is wider!, but I did not change the stop (the widest range of this zoom is 14mm... everything usually is sharp at the focal lengh...).

We made it a little brighter in post, and shifted the hue to the warmer side. That said, the raw footage was already pretty damn sharp....
 
timtorpedo said:
Hey, yes I shot that.

The wide shots are shot with the Olympus. The one of her in bed... depends which one...!

I think the sharpness achieved is due to different factors...

#! - the camera is sharp.

#2 - I did some comparative test between the zoom and the Zeiss glass I have, and it is true that the Olympus zoom tends to be more contrasty, and you could actually say that it decreases a tad the dynamic range of the cam in some way... if really you are looking...

#3 - the wide shot looks sharper probably because.... it is wider!, but I did not change the stop (the widest range of this zoom is 14mm... everything usually is sharp at the focal lengh...).

We made it a little brighter in post, and shifted the hue to the warmer side. That said, the raw footage was already pretty damn sharp....
Click to expand...

Thanks.

I'm talking about the shots at 00:57 when she opens the box, 01:26 and 01:35 when she is lying on the bed. Do you remember the lenses, focal length and f-stop?

What about the first two shots of the room, wide master and closer shot of her brushing her hair?
 
All those shot were with the Zoom if I remember properly.

The shot when she opens the box was 14mm (probably around 2.8), when she is lying in bed, it was like around 20mm (3.5 / 4), the shot of the room at the beginning where also with the olympus, 15mm, then 20mm, (3.5).

That was one of the early video I shot with the AF. I think the detail was set a little too high for my taste. If I'd shoot it again, with the experience I have of the cam, I would shoot with less detail (around -6 or -7), to get a more natural sharpness, and maybe a classic soft 1/4 to get something more cosy for the eye...
 
Interesting. Do you remember from the top of your head if there were any shots in the room with the Zeiss? Which Zeiss is it by the way, the Contax Jenna?

What detail setting and gamma did you use for this? Thanks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top