Finally Bloom's review!

Michael Olsen said:
Can't kill DSLRs because AF-100 is not 23 MP still photography camera.
Click to expand...

i know right. the people who buy DSLR's for videography are probably 1% of the market of DSLR's. probably not even that. maybe 0.01%.

thus af100 will probably not even dent that market in any appreciable or quantifiable way. it will dent EX1, 3, HVX200 etc perhaps though...
 
PaPa said:
Phil:

The opening shot of "South" and the shot of the water at 2:26, what lenses were used? Im curious to know why the opening shot has so much more lens distortion than the one at 2:26 when they look to be about the same focal length??
Click to expand...

bump, before my question gets lost.
 
I think you'll have a bit of difficulty to "take a few steps back" while hanging on a rope
Click to expand...
Use a jumar or prusik

or after being dropped off by a heli on a 55 degree snow slope.
Click to expand...
Worry more about the possible avalanche and other dangers in the terrain...

And if you cant get the shot you thought you could, just adopt and get it another way.

Also shooting tight interiors is the same ( a lot of indy films are done in less then ideal location), where the only way to frame the shot is to have a wide enough lens.
Click to expand...

There is never the 'only way'; to quote Sidney Lumet (from his book Making Movies):

"I once asked Akira Kurosawa why he had chosen to frame a shot in Ran in a particular way. His answer was that if he'd panned the camera one inch to the left, the Sony factory would be sitting there exposed, and if he'd panned an inch to the right, we would see the airport. Only the person who's made the movie knows what goes into the decisions that result in any piece of work. They can be anything from budget requirements to divine inspiration."
 
grimepoch said:
I don't want to work with H,M,L as I am coming from the DSLR mindframe.
Click to expand...
You'll have to change your mindframe then, because this is how it works. The gain switch lets you quickly switch among three ISOs that you have programmed into the switch position. It doesn't have some infinitely-adjusting wheel; they came up with a way to make it work for both video cameras (l/m/h gain) and for film camera operation (using the same l/m/h switch, assigning whatever ISO you want to each position).

Second question, you mention that you cannot mix footage type on a card. I will be shooting mostly 1080p24. If I want to overcrank, can I do that on the same card, say if I want to do some 1080p60?
Click to expand...
Yes you can do that, you can record any and every NTSC mode on the same card. Bloom's comment was that you can't use NTSC and PAL footage on the same card. I didn't try that so I can't verify that one way or the other.

The lack of moire and aliasing almost made me cry :) I CANNOT wait!!!
Click to expand...
Agreed, I have been shooting more and more wide shots just becaues they look great.

Lots of folks keep complaining that the m43 format doesn't have fast wide lenses, but ... on the SLRs, you can't shoot ANY wide shots that look good, because the wider you go, the more stuff is in focus, and the more that's in focus on an SLR, the more aliasing you get. Yes you can get a great wide field of view, but if the image sucks, what's the point? I would go so far as to say that the 7mm lens on an AF100, on f/4 at 200 ISO, will look not only better, but a hell of a lot better, than a 14mm lens on the 5D at f/2.8 and 100 ISO, because of the SLR's inherent low res and aliasing complications. I'd take a little bit of noise over that, any day.
 
Last edited:
Welcome to filmmaking, where the real creativity has ALWAYS been how to overcome the limitations of the tools, and resources, your budget allows you to use, to tell your story. Is the AF-100 going to be a perfect camera? Of course not. However, I think that it is going to still be one hell of a camera, at a great price point, until perfect gets here. ....And I ain't holding my breath waiting for perfect.
 
I think it's going to be an interesting mindswitch that we are all in. Might be time to once again bring out my cinematography manual and invest in a DOF calculator and possibly.... gasp..... have a setup for focus.


I think we need to all say thanks to Mr. Bloom and to Barry and all who share. We sometimes forget that they aren't paid to do it, but they do it out of the communal good and to share information. Not to be hounded and attacked or berated for a product that is in itself an evolution. There won't be a perfect camera 10 years from now, so till then let's just have a great time.


A bad craftsman blames his tools! Sure, we all want something cool, but it's still us on the other end that facilitates it and makes it happen. I personally was happen some 11 years ago when I bought my XL1 and all the way up till I bought my HMC150. We should all be happy that we can produce broadcast or cinematic visions on cameras that we can actually afford to own and not just rent. I shot my last feature on an Arri SR3, and I paid about 25K on film stock and transfer. I think for maybe 10K, I'll be able to buy all that I need... and viola... I'll own it when I'm done. NOt just a chemical process that I can never duplicate....


Let's relax and have a good time and say thanks for this site and for the people on it. After all... didn't the DVX change everything once before? Now this baby will do the same until something else comes out to knock it down.... Ce la vie!
 
Perfectly put.... We should try not to be fan boys and go with what is best for US... at a price that doesn't cripple us.. and that offers what we need in a camera. It's also kind of foolish to compare or contrast to the Red camera which isn't out, and who knows when and if it ever will be. Their history leaves one to conjecture but even with all of that, if it ever does deliver on the promises then I'll buy one. Till then... I'll wait.
 
Michael Olsen said:
Can't kill DSLRs because AF-100 is not 23 MP still photography camera.
Click to expand...

Absolutely right, but..... shouldn't we discuss a bit more, what it is then? And not what it is not? This becomes a semi-religious debate quickly about an entity not yet amongst us in metal and silicate. I think it won't kill and it won't not kill anything because it's not yet born. Christmas?! Okay, I hope a bit before..... ;-)

Honestly - and strictly metaphorically spoken - we should care a rodent's behind what and if it kills anything other than budget costs we have and other impediments in our creative work. It seems to be small, versatile, gives us lot's of options for a high but still nice price. It has issues? It better has because it is real (soon).

I know that there may be "canonical" ;-) equations that it won't meet. So what? It's a tool not a monstrance.
 
Barry_Green said:
You'll have to change your mindframe then, because this is how it works. The gain switch lets you quickly switch among three ISOs that you have programmed into the switch position. It doesn't have some infinitely-adjusting wheel; they came up with a way to make it work for both video cameras (l/m/h gain) and for film camera operation (using the same l/m/h switch, assigning whatever ISO you want to each position)
Click to expand...

Hmmmm, I don't understand why they couldn't have supported dialing in the exact setting you want. I in fact use all my ISO settings a lot on my 7D, up to 1600, as I do a fair amount of found light work as well. Since it's just basically a digital setting in the camera, wouldn't people like to be able to dial up their ISO at ease? I know that I would. I realize in the film world changing ISO is like changing the actual film, but in the digital world, where analog gain comes into play on the signal path, I do like to tune it to get the most out of the sensor.

One thing I dislike about my 7D is that the ISO has to be changed with a button hit, then a dial. I'd rather switch the shutter speed to be adjusted that way since I set it less than the ISO setting. Is the shutter and F-stop each to change on the fly if need be?

I mean, if it is what it is, I'll deal, I'm just curious why something that is pretty basic to support isn't there. It's another "freedom" removed in the design.
 
tipota said:
Absolutely right, but..... shouldn't we discuss a bit more, what it is then? And not what it is not? This becomes a semi-religious debate quickly about an entity not yet amongst us in metal and silicate.
Click to expand...

Surely sounds like that... for me, as someone working with cinema, seems that the dslrs played an important role in developing the technology that is now affordable in a video camera like this one. I use a GH1 for video too (and probably will continue, as a B camera), but for video it lacks too many things that the AF100 now assembles. No need to be a parricide!
 
eduk said:
Surely sounds like that... for me, as someone working with cinema, seems that the dslrs played an important role in developing the technology that is now affordable in a video camera like this one. I use a GH1 for video too (and probably will continue, as a B camera), but for video it lacks too many things that the AF100 now assembles. No need to be a parricide!
Click to expand...

Yes. My GH13 and the AG-AF will go along just fine I think. I just think it's somewhat besides the topic to discuss if something is or is not a killer - especially as no crime has been committed... yet.... ;-)
 
Homunculus said:
thus af100 will probably not even dent that market in any appreciable or quantifiable way. it will dent EX1, 3, HVX200 etc perhaps though...
Click to expand...

While it will compete with the EX1/3 and HVX200 for the Indie filmmaker market that is really a very small part of the market where people get paid for what they do.

Films may be what we love and aspire to, but I'd wager that most of the money earned is from weddings, sporting events, ENG and live events. There are features like the long range power zoom, auto focus, etc will keep the upper end prosumer cameras going for a long time.

The EX1/3 and HVX200 are getting long in the tooth and sales will diminish anyway. I'd bet that Canon is now going to release some thing that marries the XF300 to an APS-C sensor right around the time the Scarlet is finally released.

My guess is that the AF100 is the first introduction of the latest thing and is Panasonic's opening salvo.
 
Jesse Brauning said:
For example: the Panasonic 20mm 1.7 is a M4/3 lens. If you want to use FF as your standard, it like any other 20mm lens, would look like a 40mm on a m4/3 body.
Click to expand...

Hi,

The above post had me confused and I just wanted to clarify, the 20mm MF 4/3 lens is the same on a 4/3" mount with an adapter. So the 20mm is a 20mm 1.7 for either the 4/3s or the micro 4/3s. Don't have my calculator to figure out anything else. So we do have a fast wide angle lens available for it.

From Italy

Jan
 
Jan_Crittenden said:
Hi,

The above post had me confused and I just wanted to clarify, the 20mm MF 4/3 lens is the same on a 4/3" mount with an adapter. So the 20mm is a 20mm 1.7 for either the 4/3s or the micro 4/3s. Don't have my calculator to figure out anything else. So we do have a fast wide angle lens available for it.

From Italy

Jan
Click to expand...

Hi Jan

I have that lens and it's not what I would call a wide angle lens, 35mm FF FOV equivalent of 40mm makes it just wider than a standard lens. We need something like a 9-18mm f.2.8 to match up with the APS-C crop and the full frame equivalent...It's the single biggest issue for me. Otherwise it's a stonking camera!

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