Dear Panasonic : An Open Letter

yoclay said:
I
10 bit 422 in camera, S35 sensor. 444 with external recorder or LOG, or both. Built-in ND's, decent codec, xlr's, sdi.
Click to expand...

Oh, an Alexa. Except $10K is currently 1/5 of the asking price. And it doesn't have built-in NDs. And the Sony 32GB SXS card is $932 at B&H.

So who will be the one to undercut Arri by $40,000 and Sony and their SXS card for about $600 to $800? And then, what will the next Scorsese film be shot on?
 
Barry_Green said:
That's exactly what I'm asking 'em for. The AC160 is basically an AF100's back end and a 1/3" chip block & lens grafted on. So how about taking the AF100 body and shoveling in the HPX250's back end... that would be sweet. Most folks have said they'd pay $8k for that, but I think $6k should be within reason (considering an AC160 costs the same as an AF100, why couldn't an AF250 cost about the same as an HPX250?) Speculating, but heck... I'd love to see something like that.
Click to expand...
The HPX250's going for $5K on Amazon (Willoughby's, fulfilled by Amazon). With a street value of less than $6K, an AF200 (or 250, or whatever) would be very sweet. I would even think $3.5K-4K for a model with AVC-Ultra LongG 10-bit 4:2:2 at 50 Mbps should be possible, with higher-quality 10-bit HD-SDI recording capability. Or -- let's speak in hushed tones -- maybe even quadHD/4K. Ooh, I'm getting goosebumps.
 
James0b57 said:
I think that was an earlier poster's point. Manufactueres are able to use the argument of "well, it's better than what you had before" and then continue to intentionally hold back on products in a lower price bracket.
Click to expand...
My point was more like: Don´t get your had too much around why manufacturers don´t build the camera you´re dreaming of, but rather look at what they´ve already built and get your head around your story. And I don´t mean this in the beaten-to-death phrases "it´s not the camera, that makes the pictures" or "story is king", because times have changed radically since the days of miniDV. So story still is king of course and shooting skills are important as ever, but shooting itself has become incredible cheap (only considering cameras, audio recorders, recording media and digital HD(!) editing of course...) considering the (technical) quality you can end up with.
But hey, maybe I´m to easily satisfied coming from BetacamSP ;o)
 
I'd love to see Panny scare some people (Sony, Canon, Red). I'm cheering for these Titans to beat each other to a pulp! LOL. Sony's last attack was pretty impressive. (F3, FS100, NEX5N, HX9) Canon and Red are slugging it out right now.....so maybe Panny will "drop a bomb" on the industry in the next 9-12 months? The sooner the better! I've given Panny some of my money.....I'd love to give them some more. (They almost got 4500 for the AF100, but I held off.....great cam either way) Something with a big sensor and a 10 bit codec would be nice. I'd also like to see them get their sensor range up....it's not bad, but it lags behind by a half to one stop or so....I'd love to see it the other way around. (FS100 is 11.5, I'd love to see something from Panny with 12.5 at least) But the bottom line is....I'd love to see Panny respond with a VENGEANCE! Go Panny!!!!!
 
Barry_Green said:
So I don't know exactly what this stuff should cost. Nor does anyone outside of the Panasonic factory. My guess of $6k is based on the notion that the AC160 and AF100 retail for the same price, so perhaps an HPX250 and AF250 could retail for the same price. But that may not be possible. It might need to be a grand or two more. We don't know. Only the factory knows.
Click to expand...
I suspect that it's not just a matter of what it could cost, given available technology, but what Panasonic's marketing people decide it will cost. I have to thank Red for helping to drive down prices. Now if only one of the big companies would buck tradition and recklessly, preemptively lower its costs. I have an inkling that JVC, who has no high end to protect, could surprise us by announcing a range of 4K2K (quadHD) offerings this year.
 
Last edited:
Barry_Green said:
As stated a hundred times before -- those of us who are not in the business of manufacturing cameras, cannot possibly navigate the waters of manufacturing and understand why some things cost more and some less. The fact of the matter is that stills cameras will sell something on the order of a thousand for every video camera, and consumer video cameras will sell a thousand for every professional video camera, and professional video cameras will sell a thousand for every digital cinema camera. So even though you may add up the cost of various parts and think "well, by golly, this AC160 should cost more than that AF100", the fact is that the market for AC160's is probably at least 10x bigger than the market for AF100's, and that means that the costs can be amortized a lot quicker and across a much broader swath of customers.

So I don't know exactly what this stuff should cost. Nor does anyone outside of the Panasonic factory. My guess of $6k is based on the notion that the AC160 and AF100 retail for the same price, so perhaps an HPX250 and AF250 could retail for the same price. But that may not be possible. It might need to be a grand or two more. We don't know. Only the factory knows.
Click to expand...

That is true to a point. The AF100 and FS100 are perfect examples of this. They show that the technology is affordable. The FS100 is using the same sensor as a F3.

The AF100 struggles with, in my opinion, creating an aesthetically pleasing image, and the FS100 is pretty much there already. A better codec, curve options, and ND would've made it amazing. Sure, there would be better cameras, but it would've been amazing, even at $1k more, had it had those extras. As it is, they are both good contenders, and their specs are great. If they had been better, would they have had a bigger share of the market? Time will tell.

BTW, I am perfectly okay with pro features coming at a premium. For example the F3 should rightfully be a lot more expensive than the FS100. But the 4:2:0 and 24mb/s is an unnecessary distinction in the FS100, imho.
 
I am very aware that I am nit picking. But as long as I have an hdslr in my hand and access to Red rentals, I think I have a very very comfortable position to do so.
 
Last edited:
It would still be nice to have a s35 raw options for 6k$ but Scarlet is here.... by the time you saveupforone their still wont be a better option I think.. or they will already have an upgraded brain.
 
Barry_Green said:
That's exactly what I'm asking 'em for. The AC160 is basically an AF100's back end and a 1/3" chip block & lens grafted on. So how about taking the AF100 body and shoveling in the HPX250's back end... that would be sweet. Most folks have said they'd pay $8k for that, but I think $6k should be within reason (considering an AC160 costs the same as an AF100, why couldn't an AF250 cost about the same as an HPX250?) Speculating, but heck... I'd love to see something like that.
Click to expand...
I would buy this.
 
WayneMann said:
As long as it allows overcrank in 1080 to 60P, I would buy it. I would settle for straight 1080 60P.


Wayne Mann
Click to expand...

Veeeerrrrry interesting. I would consider that. I have been really interested in switching to 60p. Although, it is digital, so there is no reason why a camera can't have all the favorite frame rates. (except for hardware limitations such as the C300 which cannot do frame rates over 30p@1080p)
 
My mistake. When I said straight 60p I meant in leu of the ability to overcrank 1080 to 60p. I still want all the usual frame rates. We do aerial video with R/C helicopters and airplanes and some of the long and short tracking shots we do are really cool when you can get to the sweet spot in the clip and be able to slow down the footage for that golden moment. Slowing down 24p or 30p footage just sucks for trying to get smooth slow motion.


Wayne Mann
 
Haha. Going for 60p alone seemed rather hardcore, but really admirable, in a way.
 
Last edited:
Barry_Green said:
That's what Panasonic did. A big 35mm-sized sensor in a professional video camera body. And you don't have to pay $10k for it, you can get it for about $4k.

Granted, it's not "s35", it's more like "normal 35", but still -- isn't that basically what you're asking for?
Click to expand...

nearly. but to me, anyway, not quite. i know it's a lot more video camera-ish than a dslr, but it still seems like a modular design to me. is it too much to ask to have an eng-type lens for run-and-gun? and yes, it's only $4k, but isn't it also 8bit 4:2:0? i've only done a few shoots with the camera and found it really frustrating. following focus was clumsy, color in the display seemed way off (disturbingly so), and the menu interface might have been designed by Fisher Price.

i cut my teeth on pro-sumer cameras, and i always groaned when i heard old dogs bitching about learning new cameras. but the AF100 doesn't scream "workhorse" to me.
 
LuckyStudio 13 said:
After all the dust have settled from the recent early November event, clearly there is a big void that existed in the marketplace that is still left unattended. There is a very big sub $8k - $10k gap that we really hope that you can bridge for us, the low budget indie filmmakers. We really hope that Panasonic will have a new camera coming forth into the new large sensor camera generation and setting the industry standard like what the "DVX and HVX" have done in the past.

Thank You.
Click to expand...

What would you do with if this bridge were gapped? Is the lack of codec really what's holding people back from their filmmaking?
 
Isaac_Brody said:
What would you do with if this bridge were gapped? Is the lack of codec really what's holding people back from their filmmaking?
Click to expand...

I'm not saying you're wrong for saying that, Isaac. But, there are lots of us who aren't really looking for a better codec for filmmaking...a lot of us are looking for better features to make our clients happy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top