Finally Bloom's review!

British colloquial: Impressive, wonderful. ;-)

And, yes it's looks pretty darn nifty. I don't think I'm ditching my HMC-150 just yet, but in due time...
 
'Stonking' - as in 'Stonkingly good' - it's like saying 'brilliant' or 'great'...

It's something we use a lot. I'm sure Mr Bloom (soon to be knighted as Sir Bloom) will agree.

Just googled it - here's something to confirm (however - read the full link for some 'Surprising' other meanings!!!).

http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-sto3.htm

That, you will probably feel, comprehensively deals with one sense of the word, but as yet it doesn’t help with the way that it turns up in The Economist piece. That meaning is well known in Britain, as I said earlier, where a stonker is something which is large or impressive of its kind. Hence stonking, a word of vague positive emphasis: “That’s a stonking good idea”, what Tony Thorne called in his Dictionary of Contemporary Slang as “an all-purpose intensifying adjective”. It seems to have been especially in vogue in the late 1980s.
Click to expand...
 
LOL - looks like lots of Stonking definitions :cheesy:

And, as mentioned by Mr B himself (when asked what Stonking was)...

yes it’s corking
Click to expand...

I'd say the AF101 is definatley not a Numpty :happy:
 
I suppose it means great, fantastic, amazing - although I am not a Brit. Bit late on that - hadn't refreshed the page
 
grimepoch said:
Hmmmm, I don't understand why they couldn't have supported dialing in the exact setting you want.
Click to expand...
Well, you can, just not with a dial. You take any ISO in 1/3-stop increments from 200 to 3200, and assign three of them to the switch. So if you like to use 320, 800, and 2500, you can have them, and flip the switch between them. If you like 200, 400, and 3200, you can set the switch positions to hold those ISOs.

It's not difficult, it's just not quite the same as rolling a dial.

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?
Click to expand...
It's a small user interface question. THere's a wheel on the back that can be used to dial in frame rate and shutter speed. If they added ISO control to that wheel, then you'd have exactly what you're asking. I think I requested it, but I doubt it'll make it into the first version. Maybe some later version, who knows?

Is the shutter and F-stop each to change on the fly if need be?
Click to expand...
I don't know what you mean by this. The f-stop is on its own wheel and can be adjusted freely at any time. The shutter is done through a multi-purpose wheel, which also handles frame rate and something else - syncro scan I think? I don't remember.
 
just curious who uses such wide lenses? Hollywood to my knowledge rarely uses anything wider than 20's and you guys are asking for insane things like 9mm etc....what could you possible need that for? That's fish eye territory
 
Homunculus said:
just curious who uses such wide lenses? Hollywood to my knowledge rarely uses anything wider than 20's and you guys are asking for insane things like 9mm etc....what could you possible need that for? That's fish eye territory
Click to expand...

It's simply to get the lens/look/shot that people have become used to on FF cameras, IMO.

I don't think anyone uses a 9mm (unless for some really weird/special shots). The idea is everyone is used to FF 14mm (5D) or APS-C 16mm (say a Tokina on a 7D)... so it's about finding a lens that, once the sensor on the AF101 grabs a section of the lens image, will give an equivalent image (to a 14mm or 16mm).

The AF sensor won't see all of the image of provided by the lens, so a 9mm won't look like a 9mm - more like an 18mm.

There's a big relationship between the glass's ability to 'see' an image and the sensor's abilty to capture it. I think there have been some still image examples showing the different sensor 'crops' on the image from one lens (ie a 14mm on a 5D FF vs a 7D 'crop').

It comes down to wanting the same type of shot that you'd get with a particular body/sensor/lens. For example, a 14mm on a 7D will have a 'sensor crop' meaning that, despite the image being the same, the 7D just shows less of it. On a AF100/1, it'll be an even smaller 'crop' - meaning, if you want to get ultra wide angles (as in the FF 5D that acts like a 65MM style cine cam in terms of sensor) you need to start with the widest possible lens (as the sensor will crop out most of the fish-eye and only see a portion of the image projected onto it).

So, it all depends on what 'breed' of lenses you're planning to use... Canon L series (designed for FF) or APS-C or 4/3 etc. When buying m4/3's most places list the 35mm (still) equivalent.

Really, it lens choice vs crop for me. Otherwise the whole bigger debate swings into play about effective FOV etc and we don't want to go there!
 
Last edited:
Quick update.

http://philipbloom.net/2010/08/20/which-lenses-to-buy/

Nice image that shows the crop of Canon sensors... now, imagine a smaller frame within it and then you've got the portion of the lens image that's resolved by the sensor. Look how all the wider (distorted) edges are completely missed by the 7D crop sensor... same goes for the AF100.

Maybe someone (not Phil B or Barry G - they do enough to spread the word!) should do a simple image set - showing how the crop is seen on differing lenses, as there still seems to be debate about this. If you want to get an 'equivalent' you just need to think about how much you're loosing in the crop and then consider a different lens.
 
by the way..I saw he was looking for some HCM 150 batteries to use...are these the same batteries as the ones used by the DVX100 and HVX200? I sure hope so
 
MadMonkFish said:
It's simply to get the lens/look/shot that people have become used to on FF cameras, IMO.

I don't think anyone uses a 9mm (unless for some really weird/special shots). The idea is everyone is used to FF 14mm (5D) or APS-C 16mm (say a Tokina on a 7D)... so it's about finding a lens that, once the sensor on the AF101 grabs a section of the lens image, will give an equivalent image (to a 14mm or 16mm).

The AF sensor won't see all of the image of provided by the lens, so a 9mm won't look like a 9mm - more like an 18mm.

There's a big relationship between the glass's ability to 'see' an image and the sensor's abilty to capture it. I think there have been some still image examples showing the different sensor 'crops' on the image from one lens (ie a 14mm on a 5D FF vs a 7D 'crop').

It comes down to wanting the same type of shot that you'd get with a particular body/sensor/lens. For example, a 14mm on a 7D will have a 'sensor crop' meaning that, despite the image being the same, the 7D just shows less of it. On a AF100/1, it'll be an even smaller 'crop' - meaning, if you want to get ultra wide angles (as in the FF 5D that acts like a 65MM style cine cam in terms of sensor) you need to start with the widest possible lens (as the sensor will crop out most of the fish-eye and only see a portion of the image projected onto it).

So, it all depends on what 'breed' of lenses you're planning to use... Canon L series (designed for FF) or APS-C or 4/3 etc. When buying m4/3's most places list the 35mm (still) equivalent.

Really, it lens choice vs crop for me. Otherwise the whole bigger debate swings into play about effective FOV etc and we don't want to go there!
Click to expand...
'
yes but who uses full frame cameras in filmmaking? I just don't get it...I thought that's a photography thing?
 
Super8 said:
by the way..I saw he was looking for some HCM 150 batteries to use...are these the same batteries as the ones used by the DVX100 and HVX200? I sure hope so
Click to expand...

DVX/HVX/HPX170 all use the same battery, which is different from the
HMC40/HMC80/HMC150/AF100, which all use the same battery.
 
mcgeedigital said:
It is and it is nonsensical to use FF analogy when talking about cine-style camcorders.
Click to expand...
exactly photography has literally nothing to do with filmmaking. ZERO. it's like saying a rapper who makes beats in Reason or Fruity Loops can pick up Cubase and write a symphonic score, the two are not even related.

I have worked with several professional PHOTOGRAPHERS now who think just because they own a 5dmkii for their stills photos that makes them directors and they literally know ZERO about filmmaking and are absolutely awful.

This full frame nonsense has to stop it has zero to do with film and zero to do with the tenants of this forum which is about filmmaking
 
"full frame" has traditionally had practically nothing to do with cinematography. The "full frame" was used on the few vistavision movies that were made, and as a practical matter it just isn't used. No cinema lenses cover the "full frame" (except the Zeiss Compact Primes, and that's because they're derived from SLR lenses).

Cinema shooting is based off of the 35mm movie film frame, which is not the same size as the stills "full frame" -- in fact, it's half the size of the "full frame". And the AF100's frame is very close in size to the 35mm movie frame. Like it should be.
 
if you're buying an AF100 for FILM MAKING or video graphy which I hope you're doing otherwise you're going to have an expensive doorstop, then cut all that full frame b.s. out of your vocabulary because it has zero bearing on anything. The AF100 sensor is just abuot same size as the 35mm cinema film negative and the Red One sensor, that means your lenses and your field of view and cropping factor and all that nonsense is fine so let's move on
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top