Finally Bloom's review!

Steve Kahn said:
Sorry guys. I feel really stupid about my not understanding. But Bloom is right. For indoors one needs wide and would like fast as well. I'm a bit disheartened that such a beast doesn't walk the earth...
Click to expand...

if your not lighting a scene, perhaps. its a cine cam after all
 
dcloud said:
if your not lighting a scene, perhaps. its a cine cam after all
Click to expand...

I'm not a big fan of this line of reasoning that says it's a cinema camera so just learn to properly light a scene.

One of the great things about the HDSLRs is the ability to get great footage at available light. That's a huge boon for people who, whether for budgetary or practical reasons don't want to or can't lug around a big lighting set-up. I'm not really inclined toward an upgrade that forces me to give that ability back.

And I don't think the AF-100 is such a camera. To me, the missing links are not that elusive. Panasonic built a great 20mm f/1.7 and a great 7-14mm f/4 so I don't see any reason they or someone can't produce a great 10 or 12mm f/2 or whatever. Also no reason they can't produce something like a 12-60 f/2.5 with IS. And assuming this camera proves as popular as we all think it will I think there's a very high likelihood we'll see those lenses before too long. In the meantime we'll have a 14mm f/2.5 and several fast Olympus 4/3 zooms. Not really so bad.
 
I know this is not a DSLR and has more features but what to you guys think about the image quality compared to a GH13 or even a GF13?

I'm neutral at this point, I'm not jumping for joy by any means but I don't think it is underperforming (subjective word btw). Again, I'm neutral but if the cam were priced at $2499 I'd buy one over a $500 GH1 body with the hack just so I didn't have to sync audio.

Anyone think it will be hackable? If it is, then it's worth the $4200 street price IMO.
 
mountainradio said:
I'm not a big fan of this line of reasoning that says it's a cinema camera so just learn to properly light a scene.

One of the great things about the HDSLRs is the ability to get great footage at available light. That's a huge boon for people who, whether for budgetary or practical reasons don't want to or can't lug around a big lighting set-up. I'm not really inclined toward an upgrade that forces me to give that ability back.

And I don't think the AF-100 is such a camera. To me, the missing links are not that elusive. Panasonic built a great 20mm f/1.7 and a great 7-14mm f/4 so I don't see any reason they or someone can't produce a great 10 or 12mm f/2 or whatever. Also no reason they can't produce something like a 12-60 f/2.5 with IS. And assuming this camera proves as popular as we all think it will I think there's a very high likelihood we'll see those lenses before too long. In the meantime we'll have a 14mm f/2.5 and several fast Olympus 4/3 zooms. Not really so bad.
Click to expand...

af100 is not the end all be all. what you could do is bring a fast wide with the 5d and shoot with a fast tele with the af100 on the same scene.

if youre looking for fast wide lens right now, there is a few.. FOR NOW. wait for a couple of months and more will come... or you could wait for a full frame vaporware camera next year.

I know this is not a DSLR and has more features but what to you guys think about the image quality compared to a GH13 or even a GF13?

I'm neutral at this point, I'm not jumping for joy by any means but I don't think it is underperforming (subjective word btw). Again, I'm neutral but if the cam were priced at $2499 I'd buy one over a $500 GH1 body with the hack just so I didn't have to sync audio.

Anyone think it will be hackable? If it is, then it's worth the $4200 street price IMO.
Click to expand...
youre better off with a dslr. it fits your needs more than the af100.

also street price is 4700. id kill for it to be 4200 :P
 
Steve Kahn said:
Bloom mentions he likes the Sigma 30mm f1.4 (a 4/3 lens) but says that would look like a 60mm on the AF100. I don't believe this is the case.

Correct me if I'm wrong but don't 4/3 lenses have the same FOV as m4/3 lenses on the AF100?
Click to expand...

a 30mm is a 30mm irregardless or what camera it is made for, therefore you need make allowances for the field of view being different. It's not a Sigma 30mm 35mm equivalent F1.4 (which would be a 15mm F1.4) it's the same glass as we use on the Canons, just with a different mount. Great lens though
 
Duke M. said:
That review didn't tell us anything significant and new. I hope that's not how the final day goes.
Click to expand...

There is so much info out there already. This review is my opinion. Not a big reveal of "hey it's shoot 160fps, ok it's 5k". Another opinion and some more footage. Better than just a PR release surely?
 
maybe you can host it somewhere to download? Or perhaps do large resolution side by side stills where we see the codec break up a bit? That might be interesting to see at what degree the difference really is and if it's acceptable or not.

Love the skew test. I shat myself when i saw how little skew there was on such a long lens!!!
 
Phillip,
very interested to see your comparison of this against the GH2..
all the talk about the same sensor etc..
my budget is 1000$ max for now.. (saving my ZERO money for Scarlet)
nice review :)
 
Full size side by side stills would be great. Especially if there is a lot of motion like leaves or waves.

I finally found the clip with some informal tests. I was impressed with the lack of skew shown as skew is my only real complaint on the EX1.

We really need to see some trumpet charts. The shot of the cable bridge to show aliasing appears to show some moire, but a trumpet chart may reveal that it was only an illusion in a busy image or recompression artifacts.

Here's a crop section of the bridge I'm talking about.
AF100-Bridge.jpg
 
Last edited:
Thanks for your efforts Philip!

For me, the cost of the Canon adaptor will really influence my AF-100 purchase decision. I use a 5D & 7D for stills so overlapping purchases is a great plus. I am thinking the Canon 17-55 f2.8 would be a nice lens for the AF-100. It is a sharp lens, reletively wide, pretty fast and has IS as well. Or the Tamron 17-50 f2.8

My main concern with this 2x crop if distortion on wider lenses. Is the smaller image window a help given a 24mm (35mm eq) would need an 11mm (35mm eq) which is in the fisheye territory?
 
Last edited:
Depends on the lens. The 7mm wide on the 7-14 zoom is pretty much totally rectilinear, as is the 14mm on the 14-140. If you're using a fisheye, you'll get barrel distortion, but if you're using a fairly rectilinear lens in the first place, you should get excellent results on the 4/3 sensor. barrel distortion shows itself mostly on the edges of the frame, and the smaller sensor (as compared to stills 35mm "full frame") means the edges will be cut off.
 
What lens is used in Bloom's vids? Like on "South" and the one with the skew examples? There's some really nasty distortion going on there on the sides. It looks like that awful panoramic mode that many widescreen tvs have where they take a 4:3 image, keep the center portion relatively intact and then stretch the remaining side portions off to the sides of the screen.

Whoops, I guess Barry just kinda covered that. I personally can't handle that type for distortion. What's a decent wide angle I can get that won't distort the edges like that? I'm planning on getting a GH2 kit with the 14-140 along with the AF-100. Was also looking at the 7-14 and 100-300 to start with. Then I was gonna get a set of Dulcos Nikon ZFs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top