Continuing Investing in Dslrs or go the Af100 , Fs100 or RED route?

V

vision_filmz

Carbonite Member
I have about $5000 and was wondering if I should continue buying lenses and support gear for My dslr or just step it up to an Af100, Sony Fs100 or keep saving for a while more and find some investment partners and really step it up towards a RED camera?


I mainly shoot Music Videos and short / documentary style projects. Just really trying to find a way to figure out whats best.

Thanks
 
Personally I think the Af100 Red all look very excellent, but is the cost worth the price of admission? I honestly feel that a project shot on a Canon DSLR camera can shine next to any footage. Sure it might be lower res , introduce compression artifacts & even moire + alias, but proper color correcting, grading and lighting I have seen some truly amazing projects shot on these Canon Dslr cameras.

Just really need some opinions on this matter that actually has been keeping me up all night.
 
If you get good manual Nikon glass, you will be able to use it on any camera you get.

I have used all of my Nikon glass on the RED, AF-100, 5dmkii, 7d, and now both of my AF-100s.

Good glass is forever.

As far as what is best for you, that all depends.

Personally I am fed up with all of the DSLR limitations and don't care if I ever shoot on them ever again.

That is why I own 2 af-100s.
 
I've been in the same boat as you man. I'm just not sure yet. On the front end, you can get a little more for your money going the dslr route (esp. if you choose a 60D or 7D), but I haven't decided if the others are worth it.
 
mcgeedigital said:
If you get good manual Nikon glass, you will be able to use it on any camera you get.

I have used all of my Nikon glass on the RED, AF-100, 5dmkii, 7d, and now both of my AF-100s.

Good glass is forever.

As far as what is best for you, that all depends.

Personally I am fed up with all of the DSLR limitations and don't care if I ever shoot on them ever again.

That is why I own 2 af-100s.
Click to expand...

What old Nikon glass are you referring to? Which ones do you use?
 
I started off with a set of manual Nikon primes from the 70's/80's.

20 through 135mm f1.4 and f2.0

Now I have a complete set of Zeiss ZF.1s with the Duclos Cine mod.

And I also own "The Howitzah" 50-300mm Nikon too:

Howitzer.jpg
 
Last edited:
Keep a simple DSLR rig as B cam and use a Fs100 or AF100 as main camera, with that you´re adding a nice plus to your videos.
 
Red eats computers, post time, money, cant be handheld (on a doco) etc .. and of course shoots great stuff

An FS100 has a huge bonus of onboard sound, and marginal 20% improvement in picture quality over a DSLR

my main thing was to get onboard sound for solo projects

now with a pop vid sound comes from somewhere else

personally I thing an FS is great, but if you are working with a sound person some of the goodness goes

whatever I would want to have a lot of spare money and not stretch your self

spare batts and even bodies is a professional approach

so it could be an FS, or maybe multiple DSLRs

or as suggested before an AF or FS plus a cheap DSLR

Im happy with FS and 5d at the mo

S
 
mcgeedigital said:
If you get good manual Nikon glass, you will be able to use it on any camera you get.
Click to expand...

Any good manual aperture lenses would be well-worth the money. The tech is changing so fast right now, that I would invest in glass and support gear (rods and such) as opposed to a camera.
 
Gary Huff said:
Any good manual aperture lenses would be well-worth the money. The tech is changing so fast right now, that I would invest in glass and support gear (rods and such) as opposed to a camera.
Click to expand...

this is so true. investing in lenses with manual controls means easier transitions from one system to the next. technology is just moving too fast for me to be comfortable heavily investing in any modern lens system.
 
I have been doing Heavy research on the Red and Epic cameras and feel that the post processing work is probably to much rite now. The amount of Hard Drives and actual management for the camera is probably more than I would want to deal with. What Im thinking is some some nice glass for my DSLR camera with a proper rig and invest in either an AF100 or Sony FS100.


For anyone that has used these cameras, how much better is the AF100 to a Canon dslr?

Also what is the actual comparison of the AF100 vs the FS100?


Are these cameras going to be supported for a long time or are they something that's in the trial stages?


Finally will Canon ever release a camera like the AF100 or the FS100 anytime soon?


Thank you to everyone
 
The AF-100 is better than any DSLR is just about EVERY way.

Far less moire or aliasing
Better codec
Sensor designed for video
Pro Audio inputs
Superior hs-sdi video outputs
Better built in monitor
 
vision_filmz said:
For anyone that has used these cameras, how much better is the AF100 to a Canon dslr?
Click to expand...
The AF100 is better in every imaginable way except one - the Canon shoots better stills.

Also what is the actual comparison of the AF100 vs the FS100?
Click to expand...
Both are shallow-DOF cameras that shoot 24p. The Sony seems aimed more towards the graduating DSLR user, and is skewed heavily towards the no-lights shooter. The AF100 is a traditional pro video camera, with a larger sensor. The FS100 has a larger sensor and higher sensitivity. The AF100 has SDI output, ND filters, pre-record, a viewfinder, and about 48 other things the FS100 doesn't. The FS100 has about 20+ things the AF100 doesn't.

You can make absolutely identical looking footage with either. The difference is in how you like to work.

Are these cameras going to be supported for a long time or are they something that's in the trial stages?
Click to expand...
They're the first generation of the pro video manufacturers responding to the DSLR situation. They, or something like them, will be popular for quite some time, I'm sure.


Finally will Canon ever release a camera like the AF100 or the FS100 anytime soon?
Click to expand...
Canon will unquestionably release something like them. But the question is: soon? I sincerely doubt that we will see anything from them prior to 2012.
 
Barry_Green said:
The AF100 is better in every imaginable way except one - the Canon shoots better stills.


Both are shallow-DOF cameras that shoot 24p. The Sony seems aimed more towards the graduating DSLR user, and is skewed heavily towards the no-lights shooter. The AF100 is a traditional pro video camera, with a larger sensor. The FS100 has a larger sensor and higher sensitivity. The AF100 has SDI output, ND filters, pre-record, a viewfinder, and about 48 other things the FS100 doesn't. The FS100 has about 20+ things the AF100 doesn't.

You can make absolutely identical looking footage with either. The difference is in how you like to work.


They're the first generation of the pro video manufacturers responding to the DSLR situation. They, or something like them, will be popular for quite some time, I'm sure.



Canon will unquestionably release something like them. But the question is: soon? I sincerely doubt that we will see anything from them prior to 2012.
Click to expand...

Thank You Barry as always. My needs are very different than Most professionals though as I really work on Music videos which involve a lot of cuts an effects and are basically only viewed online. Up to this point DSLR cameras have worked perfectly. If there is anything I would like to improve on is higher resolution and being able to shoot all of my slow motion shots in 1080 instead of 720. Finally since I do a lot of my work as a 1-2 man crew I don't know if the Af100 would be too much?


My support gear is also very small, from tripods to car mounts. Which have worked fine since these DSLR cameras are very small. Dont know if an AF100 or FS100 would be too big and require a whole bunch of new support gear, or maybe I can keep My dslr for a lot of those type of views.

One thing I love about DSLR cameras is the DOF with a fast lens and how I am able to get some very interesting angles that simply would not be possible with other cameras.
What I dislike about DSLRS is the moire, alias , lack of detail in wide shots and no 1080p 60fps. Just really trying to think If I should save up for an FS100 as Barry mentioned it seems to be a camera for DSLR graduates.


As always thank you!!
 
vision_filmz said:
One thing I love about DSLR cameras is the DOF with a fast lens and how I am able to get some very interesting angles that simply would not be possible with other cameras.
What I dislike about DSLRS is the moire, alias , lack of detail in wide shots and no 1080p 60fps.
Click to expand...

So you want a GH2. Smaller than the Canons yet, with shallow DOF, and vastly superior when it comes to moire and aliasing.


vision_filmz said:
Just really trying to think If I should save up for an FS100 as Barry mentioned it seems to be a camera for DSLR graduates.
Click to expand...

If you can swing the $, then FS100 is what you want, because not only is it the best of breed when it comes to low light (to get any better you'll pay multiples of what you'd pay for the FS100), but it is actually a pretty small camera - smaller than the AF100. But, there is one downside - it is more expensive than the AF100, not by street price (small difference), but because you need to spend more to equip the FS100, for example, ND filters are mandatory.

IMHO, your choice is between going low budget - GH2, or higher budget - FS100. Those are your choices.
 
Barry_Green said:
The AF100 is better in every imaginable way
Click to expand...

Hmm

The AFs image quality in a lab may be better in every way but..

The AF has a pretty small sensor, which means you cant really enjoy affordable lenses unlike a DSLR - in fact where do you get a nice wide for it at all

The AF is big and heavy (in terms of cheap steadicams, car mounting or running up a mountain or flying hand lugguage only)

The AF highlight roll off is harsh to my eyes

THe AF is more expensive - and that can make a difference in the technology race - ie you are not going to get burned with a sub $1k cameras (DSLR) that becomes obsolete

etc etc

S
 
Aside from ultra-wide lenses, I think the small size of the AF100's sensor is way overstated and shouldn't affect your shooting much. Unless you like absurdly shallow DOF shots. And the size of the sensor shouldn't affect the cost of lenses. Finding ultra-wide is a bit difficult, but I find it hard to find a use for anything wider than the 7-14mm.
 
Big and heavy?*

Also the AF100 chip is the size of standard 35mm 1.78:1. Wide lenses look appropriatly wide as they would on a standard gate.
 
OldCorpse said:
So you want a GH2. Smaller than the Canons yet, with shallow DOF, and vastly superior when it comes to moire and aliasing.




If you can swing the $, then FS100 is what you want, because not only is it the best of breed when it comes to low light (to get any better you'll pay multiples of what you'd pay for the FS100), but it is actually a pretty small camera - smaller than the AF100. But, there is one downside - it is more expensive than the AF100, not by street price (small difference), but because you need to spend more to equip the FS100, for example, ND filters are mandatory.

IMHO, your choice is between going low budget - GH2, or higher budget - FS100. Those are your choices.
Click to expand...
Not really a fan of the Gh2. Do not like the menu system, lcd screen and size. Also lack of 3rd party support such as battery grips and accessories. A Canon 60d with a battery grip feels excellent in my hands, Im really looking into the FS100 as my next option even though it's shaped pretty weird.
 
Tim - talk about reading half the post - its big and heavy for (affordable) steadicam use etc - its not big and heavy compared to a cine prime, eng cam Red etc

Its big for a shot our of the clove box or mounted on the dash

As for wides I just dont know anything that can get close to the look of a cheap nikkor 20mm or 24mm on a 5d

(both sensible looks IMO) .. or a FF14 (a joke look)

You would need not only width but F2 or 1.4 to recreate the look of those combos

As I said I feel very happy with an FS100 and a DSLR - that happens to be a 5d but could easily be something cheaper

S
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top