Documentary Project: Camera Advice Needed Af100, FS100 or GH3/4

Y

yzw200

Member
Hi All,

A bit on my background: As an undergrad I worked on several short advocacy projects for nonprofits using a DVX100. I stepped away from film work for about 5 years and am now beginning work on a feature length documentary that will include both sitdown interviews and run and gun work.


I've been trying to determine the appropriate camera based on a limited budget ($3-4k including cost of lenses/accessories) and overall film goals (festival/theatrical release). I've been impressed with footage from dslr/m43 compared to most "videocameras" but have been concerned about the multiple parts/add-ons and ability to use in run and gun situations.

I've been considering a few options:

AF100: Love the all-in-one aspect,Nd filter/xlr etc/zebras.. but am concerned over what I've heard can be a challenge to get good imaging from it. Also concerned over the lack of updates and whether it will still be a viable option when the project is finished in 1-2 years.. Rather not buy a camera at the end of it's lifecycle again (dvx100).

FS100: No ND. Otherwise any thoughts compared to AF100?


Gh3: Not all-in-one but low price-point and improved image quality than af100.
GH4: Sorta all-in-one w/adapter (minus the ND) and shoots 4k. However images I've seen seem "videoish"




Truly appreciate feedback, advice and recommendations. Posted here as I'm strongly considering AF100--but need to know it will work for my needs. I'm basically ready to start shooting but been holding off due to need to make a camera choice.

Thanks,

Yisrael
 
Last edited:
I've used all of the cameras you've mentioned (as well as the C100), it sounds as though cost is a big issue and in that case I think it would be hard to beat a used AF100. The sensor on the AF100 is dated and there is not much question the system is at the end of its lifecycle but the bang-for-the-buck is undeniable at the moment. I probably don't have to mention (but I will anyway) that your delivery spec should play a significant part in your choice, if national broadcast is a consideration you will need to look at some other options.
 
Thanks for the input LyleGorch. Until I can raise funding, cost is a significant issue. In your opinion (and anyone else on the thread) what would be the benefits/drawbacks of creating a GH4 system? I figure a camera package including the body, XLR adapter, lens and ND filter would be in the $3500-4k range. My interest in the GH4 is more the video features (zebras/peaking etc) less then the 4k (though unlike the af100, its at the beginning of its lifecycle) so I prefer it to the GH3.

Perhaps it comes down to a question I've been trying to figure out since considering cameras...is a DSLR type system viable for run and gun type documentaries? Appreciate any and all thoughts and feedback.

Thanks
 
Like LyleGorch I have used all the cameras you mentioned as well. They are all capable of shooting nice pictures.

Although i've been able to create lovely pictures with the af100 over time (https://vimeo.com/98493295) I would seriously consider the Panasonic GH4 or the new Sony A7s.

The big advantage to the GH4 is the internal 4K recording. You don't have to use the 4k but it's nice that it's there for the future if you want it.

The big advantage with the Sony A7s (not on your list) is that it is a low light monster, and depending on the subject mater of the doc this might come in super handy?
Some A7s footage shot by Philip Bloom https://vimeo.com/99893160
This camera is basically capable of shooting in absolute darkness : )

If I had to choose a camera to shoot with from your short list I would choose the GH4 First, then the AF100 followed by the FS100 then lastly the GH3.

For me it's really a toss up as to weather I like the AF100 or FS100 more, I guess I kinda like them both about the same.
Although I would take the C100 or FS700 over both of them.

Here is some beautiful FS700 footage by James Vernon
https://vimeo.com/74056628


I currently own/shoot with a Sony FS700 and love it unfortunately it sounds like it is a little more than you want to spend.
 
I just shot a doc completely from the shoulder (except talking heads) with a GH4 rig. The rig was fairly balanced, with two 1.5kg weighs at the back. We used an Alphatron EVF, a separate sound system and a RODE camera mic on the GH4 for IT. Recorder internally to 4k. Shot 90% of the film on Sigma 17 - 50 with Nikon speedbooster and a Heliopan VariND. Here are my thoughts:

1. Never going back to HD :)
No seriously, 4K is great. The ability to crop in post is terrific, especially when doing a doc. Secondly the ability to shoot great pictures in camera without the need to use an external recorder is also terrific. Post stabilisation without loosing resolution is also great.
2. General IQ is great.
Dynamic range is great, sharpness is great, downscaled image to HD is great. I don't like the skin tones very much though, it needs some post work to get it right.
3. Camera body and design is nice.
Don't have much arguments over the body and it's functions. Lots of extra buttons, very nice EVF and on camera LCD. I hate that the LCD info disapeares after some time and the record button is to recessed in the body. Also, I have found the peaking inadequate. We use only the Alphatron EVFs peaking.
4. VariND is nice but be careful.
It should be used up to 5 to maybe 6 stops and nothing more than that. And even this is if you don't mind slight IQ loss. Otherwise VariND is a great tool. I was sceptical at first but I've grown to like them because of the pure practicality...
5. ISO
You can switch between ISO 200, 400 and 800 without more or less any visible added noise. This is great for exposure as you basically have a 2 stop ND built in. Not something you could have done with the DVX100:) but is something you can do with most modern cams, especially large sensor cameras. FS100 or C100 can go even higher without adding to much noise or loosing DR (with C100).

This was my first time doing lots of work with a DSLR rig. I lost lots of time putting together a rig. Also, lots of money:) Disregard the tempting cost of the body as you'll pay 4 times the price of it in the end. I have found that optical image stabilisation is a big plus when shooting with a DSLR from the shoulder, Especially if you want to shoot on the long end. 50mm was more or less the max tele that we would use. Maybe 10 to 15 mm more, but only for a couple of seconds, everything after that gets to shaky. If you ask me the Panny 35 - 100mm with IS is a must for shooting tele if you plan on doing run and gun or verite work, etc.
 
Last edited:
Do you have any other gear, or is your $3K-$4K budget going to buy you everything needed for this theatrical release quality project?

Say… tripod/fluid head, shoulder rig, monitor/viewfinder, batteries, SD cards, lenses, Microphones, Mic cables, headphones, filters, carry case, whatever.
 
yzw200 said:
Thanks for the input LyleGorch. Until I can raise funding, cost is a significant issue. In your opinion (and anyone else on the thread) what would be the benefits/drawbacks of creating a GH4 system? I figure a camera package including the body, XLR adapter, lens and ND filter would be in the $3500-4k range. My interest in the GH4 is more the video features (zebras/peaking etc) less then the 4k (though unlike the af100, its at the beginning of its lifecycle) so I prefer it to the GH3.

Perhaps it comes down to a question I've been trying to figure out since considering cameras...is a DSLR type system viable for run and gun type documentaries? Appreciate any and all thoughts and feedback.

Thanks
Click to expand...

I'm doing doc production on two different projects right now with GH4's, the benefits (aside from cost) are IQ, portability and to a degree working features/ergonomics. I used the GH2 and GH3 a lot as 'B' cameras and so migration to the GH4 was very simple, I already had every peripheral and adapter I need. IQ is going to be an endless subject of debate until the next-big-camera-introduction, but after personally testing the GH4 I was satisfied that I could get results that would satisfy the requirements of my projects. In terms of portability the sum difference might equal one or two additional pelican cases compared to using something like a C300/100, FS700 or F3, not a huge difference except that for my work I am flying in small aircraft to very remote locations and serious weight restrictions apply. One of the primary attractions of the GH4 for my specific projects is the potential to work RnG without an external recorder/monitor and some degee of weather-proofness, I've had excellent performance from both the GH2 and GH3 in pretty extreme weather, I would be surprised if the GH4 let me down in this department, time will tell.

I think that the drawbacks specifically to the GH4 are low-light performance and in general with DSLR/mirrorless cameras audio acquisition. Camera-in audio on something like a C300/100 or Sony FS or even an AF100 is better and cleaner to rig than on the DSLR/mirrorless cameras. Go to double system? Yes, but not easy for RnG without an additional (skilled) crew, if you hang something like a Tascam DR60 on the camera you instantly double the weight/footprint of the camera then add cables and wireless etc.. One other consideration (as someone has mentioned) specific to the m43 format is that the native lenses actually resolve better and look better almost wide open which means you need lots of ND for working exterior daylight, preferably the highest quality ND you can find.
 
Thanks for the informative reply benniles. I've will look at the A7 in more depth. You mention being able to create nice footage (I really enjoyed the vimeo link--bit of a classic car geek myself) "over time". I've heard the af100 is a challenging camera to learn to get good footage. Could you speak to that a bit?

Thanks again
 
Hi Kinoks,

Thanks for the first hand and detailed account of working with the GH4 and how dslr compares to working with a traditional camera for run and gun. As this was your first time "doing lots of work" using a dslr rig what would you say the learning curve is or things to keep in mind compared to a traditional camera? In a run and gun situation (or intimate situation) do you think it would be doable to shoot solo or need a second person for sound monitoring?
 
Hi David,
Thanks for the valid question-. So I have some items (high quality mics and cables) access to other items (fluid head tripod) and other items I will need to build out once I can raise funding. My goal is to begin filming so I can put together a trailer for both grantfunding and crowdfunding.

One of the things that holds me off from a dslr setup is the cost of rig and addons. That's where my intrigue at the af100 comes into play
 
Thanks for the followup info LyleGorch. Your point on in camera auido "Camera-in audio on something like a C300/100 or Sony FS or even an AF100 is better and cleaner to rig than on the DSLR/mirrorless cameras. Go to double system? Yes, but not easy for RnG without an additional (skilled) crew, if you hang something like a Tascam DR60 on the camera you instantly double the weight/footprint of the camera then add cables and wireless etc.." is a large part of my reasoning for an all-in-one solution.

Question on the m43 lenses: my understanding of getting the best image through wide open aperture was due to the sensor format. Is it actually lens specific? If going the m43 route I was thinking about getting a metabones speedbooster. Appreciate clarification and your thoughts on pros/cons of using m43 lenses vs adapter standard primes.

Thanks again
 
To be honest, any of the cameras you have mentioned will require rig add-ons if you intend on doing shoulder style work.

The AF100 will be the closest out of the box to be a ready to shoot deal. It has a feature set way above the other cams for the low price point. The GH4 has way more resolution than the other cams mentioned.
 
Going off on a bit of a tangent, but whatever you get, may be best not simply to think of purchase cost, but resale value and how well any accessories will hold their value/usefulness?

As example, if you're going to have to make an investment into lenses, think down the line. You don't want to spend a lot of money on 4/3 lenses if you see your way forward an s35 camera, for instance......
 
harddrive said:
Going off on a bit of a tangent, but whatever you get, may be best not simply to think of purchase cost, but resale value and how well any accessories will hold their value/usefulness?

As example, if you're going to have to make an investment into lenses, think down the line. You don't want to spend a lot of money on 4/3 lenses if you see your way forward an s35 camera, for instance......
Click to expand...

S35 lenses work just fine on a M4/3 camera.
 
yzw200 said:
As this was your first time "doing lots of work" using a dslr rig what would you say the learning curve is or things to keep in mind compared to a traditional camera? In a run and gun situation (or intimate situation) do you think it would be doable to shoot solo or need a second person for sound monitoring?
Click to expand...

This has been discussed endlessly on this forum. Do some research. It's really not so simple to answer as there are lots of factors involved, to which you need to get your head around.

Regarding crew size:
I really don't see how you can shoot without a sound op? You need a boom op, you can't just put your mic on the camera and expect to have good sound! What are you thinking here?:)
And shooting with dslr rigs, it's not necessary but it's super handy to have an assistant. Changing lenses, filters, setting camera settings, helping with the rig (there are lots of stuff that can unscrew, etc.). I mean it really depends on size of the project, but you alone wont be able to get much production value. You need a crew. I think most here will agree with me.

And putting together a dslr rig, you also need some experience doing that to. It depends on how nit picky you are, but for me, I want things to work, to feel comfortable to me and first off all to be usable so I can get great results with it. And I can tell you from my experience from this project; shooting from the shoulder and getting good, non jittery results, requires a good rig. This is obvious, but it's not obvious what this actually means when putting it together. Finding the right parts and putting them together so you will be comfortable and able to shoot for extended periods of time (documentary shooting is hard) and getting good results, is not an easy task. Especially if you are not an experienced ENG stile shooter, you wont even know what to look for.
To be honest all of this doesn't change with the AF100. Non of it actually. You still need to put together a rig, you still need a sound op that has his own sound system (recorder, maybe a mixer, mics, etc.), you still need a decent rig, an EVF, a thought out set of lenses, and so on and so forth.
I would NEVER buy the AF100. IMHO it doesn't produce nice pictures, it has a limited DR, it clips whites really badly, it's soft, it's skin tones are awful, it's outdated, doesn't have any resale value, etc. GH4 isn't really a DSLR any more, it's more of a hybrid. And I can say this: once you putt a rig around it, you forget there is a dslr in the middle of it. Well, kinda...:) A7s images look great, but you still need an external recorder, so this is something I would consider really hard if budget and crew size is a problem.
 
Thanks for the feedback on resale value/lenses harddrive and david w jones. Much appreciated. I'd been thinking going with a metabobnes speed adapter and standard primes to avoid that issue.
 
Thanks for all the feedback Kinoks. Part of my reason for looking for an all-in-one solution is that this project deals with a a cultural issue where having significant crew could undermine access.

I'd never just use an on camera mic...but was planning on using a lav setup in those situations.
 
David W. Jones said:
S35 lenses work just fine on a M4/3 camera.
Click to expand...
They may work - but unless you use an optical adaptor there will be a magnification effect, as I'm sure you're aware. Put another way, a focal length lens that is wide angle for s35 coverage will be standard when used on 4/3. Decent fast wide angle lenses tend to be expensive, whatever the format - it's a waste to then use them on a smaller format, much more satisfactory to get a lens of that focal length designed for the format in the first place. Optical adaptors are a partial answer - but they bring some issues of their own.

But I was really thinking more the other way round - originally getting a set of 4/3 lenses, then as yzw200 progresses, wishes to move to a s35 body.

In which case it's either completely renew the lens set or a case of an optical adaptor being essential. Possible yes, but not as nice as lenses designed for the format.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top