Matt Gottshalk
Resident Preditor
Don't know if the DRS was enabled in any of these cams, but that feature alone would quite possible help a great deal with the highlights in these hi contrast scenes.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
They should instead farm the cameras out to us for a good two weeks, let us experiment to death, dial in our own magic recipes and secret sauce, and then set up our preferred styles of shooting. Like I said, the wander-around-shooting-a-montage thing is not my cup of tea. I know Philip excels at it, I don't know how the others feel about it. I want a set, actors, and lights, and a production monitor. We had none of that, so obviously I couldn't deliver my best -- and I don't know that we're seeing any of these shooters at their best, and I know they didn't have opportunities to optimize the camera.
.
...We had one day! Most of the guys didn't really know how to run the camera. One of them, Emmanuel, had never even picked one up yet...They should instead farm the cameras out to us for a good two weeks, let us experiment to death, dial in our own magic recipes and secret sauce, and then set up our preferred styles of shooting. Like I said, the wander-around-shooting-a-montage thing is not my cup of tea. I know Philip excels at it, I don't know how the others feel about it. I want a set, actors, and lights, and a production monitor. We had none of that, so obviously I couldn't deliver my best -- and I don't know that we're seeing any of these shooters at their best, and I know they didn't have opportunities to optimize the camera...
.... have you ever seen better footage from a DSLR shooter that they've posted on the very first day they got their DSLR? Likely not. Give these shooters a couple of weeks with the camera, or better yet a year or two (like the 5D and 7D have had) and then we'll be on fairer footing to go comparing the DSLR's "best" against the AF100's "first."
Also, when saying "I've seen better from DSLRs", I'd ask -- have you ever seen better footage from a DSLR shooter that they've posted on the very first day they got their DSLR? Likely not.
"But it looks just like my DSLR footage!" YES! YES IT DOES! Except it looks like your footage without aliasing or moiré! That alone is worth the price difference, never mind the audio controls...
Interesting in reading through all of the posts last night, I kept running into "but you have to see what it looks like on a Broadcast monitor..." or large plasma, etc. Seems to me that Vimeo and the like pose a relevant test that shouldn't be discounted. If it looks decent there, then you know it will look that much better when viewed in full resolution on good monitors.
I've never gotten around to watching Philip's stuff on my large system monitors - it looks incredible on Vimeo and Exposure Room on my desktop, and never felt the need to go to the next step. Having said that, I think I will now out of curiosity.
Bravo to all involved with the Japan trip.
Understood. I said early on that I didn't expect the AF100 to be leaps and bounds better, or necessarily any better, than a DSLR when the DSLR is in its "butter zone". When it's doing what it does well (the shallow-DOF shot of a person) it's really beautiful, and if the AF100 only matched it, but added all the professional features and workability, I'd be happy.
What I don't like about DSLRs (besides the workability issues) is when the DSLR isn't in its "butter zone", it sucks. Wide-angle shots just don't look good at all. I believe Philip Bloom said "DSLR aliasing is the bane of my existence." So if we had all the good, and none of the bad, then to me that's a great combination. And that's what the AF100 offers.
I think this is very true, and also gets at the root of some of the (over) reactions to the AF100.
The DVX100 was a quantum leap from it's predecessors, offering 24p.
The HVX200 was a quantum leap, offering DVCPro HD and P2.
The 5DMkII was a quantum leap in delivering shallow DoF and a softer, filmic, non-video image- especially when in its "butter zone" (™ Barry Green).
The AF100 is a refinement, not the quantum leap many were apparently expecting-
- Losing the aggravating moire.
- Drastic reduction of skew.
- Onboard audio, true camcorder profile, etc (we all know the pluses, right?)
If people were expecting a quantum leap above the 5D, for under $5000, I'm not sure why.
And I also don't know why forum members label the Japan trip as a "failed marketing ploy."
It was simply Panasonic doing what we all know they do, listening to users.
Instead of reading the forum and taking suggestions from here, they brought shooters to their home offices, so they could get instant, accurate feedback of what was and was not working.
And I think it's reasonable (a word and approach woefully underused around here lately) to expect some minor refinements before the AF is commercially released.
Then it's up to us, as users, to experiment, learn and share what we find out- optimal settings, what to try under certain conditions, etc.
But come on people, nobody said this was a $5000 Red, nobody said it was going to be 10 times, or 5 times, or even twice as good as a 5D.
It is what it is- an affordable, self contained camcorder that, while not resolving twice the image of the 5D, DOES resolve the most limiting restraints of the Canons. As I finish writing this, I'm heading out to shoot a music video on gritty urban streets, and will spend way too much time avoiding power lines, fences and other objects in the area.
The AF is full of potential. I'm going to get mine, learn its inherent strengths and weaknesses, share, and learn from others here. As will many others.
If you choose not to, fine. Just don't complain so loudly you spoil my audio. :happy:
PS- Thanks Barry, Philip, Filippo, and the others for taking that insane, grueling trip, and sharing (SHARING, people), your efforts on a brand new, nearly finished piece of gear while under the serious influence of jet lag! MUCH APPRECIATED.
Although not posted online the very first day he got the cam, wasn't Vincent Laforet's "Reverie" shot only after a day or two of getting a prototype 5DII?
All that said, I still don't get what people aren't liking about the AF100. I love it. I showed some of the clips to my producing partner (cares much less about technical than me), and she said "Oh it doesn't look as good as the 5D stuff." Well, so there you go, not sure how to explain that. But she just liked the 5D clips she has seen better. Of course I then spent many minutes explaining and convincing why it wasn't better, but for some reason it's just really hard to break free from that "5D is amazing" mind set.
I think it's the esthetics, the DSLRS have a very beautiful image that people can immediately see and "feel". Moire and artifacts don't show them up at first sight, but once you start notice them you see them everywhere and they ruin your pleasure to look at those images. But what colors and sweet gradients!
DRS is enabled, and it does make a huge difference, but -- there's a price to pay, and that's noise. In general I don't like pulling DRS out of the bag unless I really need it. I did one shot with the sun behind a building and a wonderfully dramatic sky, and the building was nearly in silhouette as I tried to rein in the sky. I switched on the DRS and the building just "popped" -- it looked great. In the viewfinder. But on the monitor, it's a noisy mess (because the DRS gained up the building by about 18db!) So... DRS is good, maybe I should have used DRS 1 to hold the sky without adding noise to the building, but ... DRS 3, I wouldn't use it unless it was a case where I just had to get the shot.Don't know if the DRS was enabled in any of these cams, but that feature alone would quite possible help a great deal with the highlights in these hi contrast scenes.
I totally agree.I wanna see what the camera can do with 5 tons of G&E, a pro DP, and decent content. If I were Panasonic, the very FIRST footage I would allow to be released would be footage that is thoroughly pre-pro'd, well-lit, etc, showcasing how GOOD it can be.
This is a very keen observation too. Why are there so many wide shots? Because the wides are so much better on the AF100. We all felt liberated! We can shoot wide again! We loved shooting wide. Philip and I spent way too much time with our 7-14 lenses, shooting fully wide 7mm. It was awesome. But, you're right -- those shots don't have that same "filmic" vibe as the shallow-DOF shots.I think it's also the content of these first test shoots. These AF100 clips have lots of wide shots, bright daylight, waterfalls - things we didn't see in the first clips from the 5D and 7D, which were mostly closeups of human faces, many times at night. And I think most would agree those CU shots are where the DSLRs excel, so it makes sense. Perhaps reaction would have been different if Bloom did a "Osaka's People" style film with the AF100? But again, I still don't see the issues with these first clips.