Finally Bloom's review!

Fotojorno said:
quote_icon.png
Originally Posted by Mark Smith
HAve you ever been to a Leibowitz shoot? ."


My best friend worked for her full time for 3 years before the digital age. The single most important item on her sets is lighting equipment. She used Mamiya RZ's, Hasselblad's, Leica's, etc., what ever worked for the setting. Film was the constant and lighting made the shot. So many of her images look naturally lit but that's what made her great.
Click to expand...

cool. what cameras does she use now? What cams do top photogs like her use canon5dmkii or is that considered low end? Do they all use hasselblads at that high end level?
 
Not to be morbid, but I read a while back that she was careless with her money and is now in serious financial trouble.
 
Julienmassie said:
I dont know, i dont think the iso setting for the low-medium-high will be so deep that it will be a mess to change it on the fly.
Click to expand...
Well, let's compare...

On the GH1, to change the ISO it's a minimum of three button presses: two button presses (ISO menu, and OK) plus however many button presses it takes to get to the ISO you want.

On the AF100, if you've pre-loaded your switch with 800 and 320, then it's one switch move, so much faster. If you haven't pre-loaded the switch with what you want, then it's a maximum of four presses (three to get to the menu, plus "ok"), plus however many to get to the ISO you want.

And, if you've most recently adjusted your ISO in the menus, then you can shave one button press off for the next time you go into the menu.

So as compared to the GH1, it's at worst two more presses, normally only one more press, and in many circumstances actually fewer presses because you do have the three-position switch that lets you change instantly.

While it may not work exactly like a Canon DSLR, it ain't no big thang either.
 
Homunculus said:
i know i already said as much several times in my previous posts. i was just joking when i said if sxsw likes DSLR's. the festival programmers don't even KNOW what camera a film is shot on let alone care.
Click to expand...
Another thing to consider is that the 7D wasn't even released until the end of September 2009 and the 5D didn't receive 24p until March 2010.

Considering that Sundance submissions are due in September, it would have been impossible for anybody to have shot and submitted a short or feature film to Sundance 2010 with the 7D. And any 5D shooters would have been shooting at 30p, which would exclude practically all filmmakers (who require 24p or 25p).

Maybe we'll see if Sundance 2011 has any films shot on DSLR.
 
Barry_Green said:
Well, let's compare...

On the GH1, to change the ISO it's a minimum of three button presses: two button presses (ISO menu, and OK) plus however many button presses it takes to get to the ISO you want.

On the AF100, if you've pre-loaded your switch with 800 and 320, then it's one switch move, so much faster. If you haven't pre-loaded the switch with what you want, then it's a maximum of four presses (three to get to the menu, plus "ok"), plus however many to get to the ISO you want.

And, if you've most recently adjusted your ISO in the menus, then you can shave one button press off for the next time you go into the menu.

So as compared to the GH1, it's at worst two more presses, normally only one more press, and in many circumstances actually fewer presses because you do have the three-position switch that lets you change instantly.

While it may not work exactly like a Canon DSLR, it ain't no big thang either.
Click to expand...

On the Canon it is one press, then rotate the dial. Pretty simple. That said, I'll just have to wait and see and adapt to whatever they give me, obviously :)
 
Barry_Green said:
While it may not work exactly like a Canon DSLR, it ain't no big thang either.
Click to expand...
For some reason I get the inkling that you may be slightly jazzed about this camera, Barry.

You've been working with it so tell us: is this the most excited you've been upon the release of a new one? Looking back are you more excited than you were with the DVX? (how funny that 24p made us so giddy) To be honest, I think I am and I haven't even used it yet. I am just amazed after waiting so long it is finally coming.
 
I think in order, I was optimistic about the DVX, but not hyped. Because back then I was still drinking the "Sony: The One And Only" kool-aid. Panasonic would have to move heaven and earth to convert people from the ubiquitous VX2000/PD150. So while I was optimistic, I was still firmly living in the Missouri mindset - "Show Me." It came out in October 2002, but I didn't actually get one until March 2003. And yeah, the rest is history on that. They did indeed move heaven and earth, and turned the whole perception of Sony vs. Panasonic and stood it on its head. The DVX was that good. And, funnily enough, it's had its 8th anniversary of being on the market. What other video camera remains a current model after eight years?!

I think I was more amped about the HVX200. That was the exciting one. That was the revolution. Tapeless, 1080/24p, and variable frame rates, and 4:2:2... it just hit on all cylinders. And recently I found out that the HVX has sold twice as many as the DVX ever did, even though it's been on the market just five years instead of eight.

Then I was hyped out of my mind on the Red One. That was gonna be the mother of 'em all, that was going to be the greatest ever. But after getting it I quickly got disillusioned. It was disappointing on many levels that after all the hype, what I got was a marginally functional prototype that wasn't more than about 1/10th as functional as the AF100 prototype I've been using now, it was a real 160 ISO, it was noisy, the audio didn't even work yet and when it did work it was terrible quality and resulted in a recall of all existing Red Ones to replace the audio boards... And the attitude towards Windows users, and towards customers in general, had me moving that thing on ebay after only two months. Over the last two years it has matured nicely, but you only get one chance to make a first impression.

So now to the AF100 - do I think it's going to be bigger than the HVX? Yep. It hits on all cylinders and it answers the last remaining question, the cinematic DOF control. It really is the camera that fulfills on the promise that the original DVX made - "make a living, flip a switch, make a movie." In fact, I've already committed to JDS a (for me, fairly) HUGE amount of dough to back a real feature film, and it'll be shot on the AF100 in the first part of next year. I am totally prepared to put my money where my mouth is. It's go time, baby.
 
agcohn said:
Another thing to consider is that the 7D wasn't even released until the end of September 2009 and the 5D didn't receive 24p until March 2010.

Considering that Sundance submissions are due in September, it would have been impossible for anybody to have shot and submitted a short or feature film to Sundance 2010 with the 7D. And any 5D shooters would have been shooting at 30p, which would exclude practically all filmmakers (who require 24p or 25p).

Maybe we'll see if Sundance 2011 has any films shot on DSLR.
Click to expand...

i must admit this is a very good point. i guess we will have to see the future to know. but i am interested to know myself. and can only HOPE what you say becomes true
 
Barry not to be a debbie downer, I agree af100 will be huge but honestly it may be taking 2 steps forward but at least one step back as well. You said HVX200 was evolutionary and important and had everything DVX had but even more. Well AF100 has everything HVX200 does but ...oh wait no it doesn't, it doesn't even have 4:2:2. So AF100 sort of improves upon some things on a 5 year old cam, but also goes backwards for some strange reason in my opinion! This somewhat diminishes the momentous nature of its arrival but obviously no where near even comes close to making it irrelevant or anything like that. It will still be a milestone and Panasonic still must be lauded for being the FIRST ona consistent basis to bring to market what the customers want, but I'm just saying ...it's not exactly completely ahead of the HVX200 in every way as HVX was over DVX
 
Well, there's always things to argue about. If you want to argue that everything was a step forward, it wasn't. The HVX was 320 ISO, the DVX was 640. So among all the improvements, you had to deal with that. Plus the HVX was substantially bulkier and heavier. And the HVX's 480/60i had a lot of downconversion aliasing artifacts in it that the DVX didn't have. The 480/24p and 480/30p were magnificent, but the 60i conversion was kind of pooched. Even so, collectively, the HVX was a massive step forward.

So if the only thing we're missing is the change in the codec, I'm not stressed by that. Because in terms of sharpness and color resolution, the AF100 is doing just fine thankyewverymuch, and if you need that much more, it does provide the SDI output. HVX200s, when first released, were $5995 for at least the first three months. An AF100 with that Ninja thing will cost less, and I think the concerns about the codec are vastly overblown anyway. We've got folks comparing AVCI to AVCHD and saying that on the monitor, in motion, they can't even tell which is which. It's pretty good. It isn't AVCI, but it's good enough that most folks are never going to bother getting an external recorder.

Is 4:2:2 better? Of course it is. And I wish it had it. But it's 4:2:0 progressive, and that overcomes about 90% of the problems with 4:2:0 interlaced. And if you need more, it's easily accessible.
 
Codec, ale the other discussions aside I think 2 things Pansonic could have done better. Just looking at the ergonomics- looks like a very light camera, but the position of VF is awkward. That is also my biggest beef with EX1. I know there are workarounds, but why not make it shoulder mount from the start?
Second thing is the lens issue, which imo there should be a stock lens designed for this camera. And existing F4 kind of kills it as far as shallow DOF usability. F4 is most likely not really a "sweet spot", like shooting F1.8 with EX1 is not ideal for that camera.
 
Barry_Green said:
Is 4:2:2 better? Of course it is. And I wish it had it. But it's 4:2:0 progressive, and that overcomes about 90% of the problems with 4:2:0 interlaced. And if you need more, it's easily accessible.
Click to expand...
I don't understand why people are complaining about the lack of 4:2:2 on the camera. I'm GLAD they made it AVCHD. It made the camera cheaper. And if I want 4:2:2, then I just hook up the Atomos Ninja for $1000 and I'm set.

"But the HDMI and HD-SDI output is only 8bit blah blah..."

The HVX200 records 4:2:2 in 8bit DVCPro. Nobody's complaining about the 4:2:2 on the HVX, are they? The AF100 + Ninja costs the same as the HVX did at time of launch ($5999) and it has 35mm depth of field! WHY ARE PEOPLE COMPLAINING?!?!?!
 
but why not make it shoulder mount from the start?
Click to expand...
Shoulder mount would be a different camera. Maybe there'll be an AF370 some day, like the HPX370. If so, I would expect the VF front-mounted on something like that. But that's not this camera, this is a handheld model.

As for lens, there's not a whole lot that can be said more about that. You can buy the Olympus lenses if you want f/2.0, but they're $1800 apiece or whatever. There is no stock lens so the user can make their own choice on that. It is what it is.
 
robertrogoz said:
Codec, ale the other discussions aside I think 2 things Pansonic could have done better. Just looking at the ergonomics- looks like a very light camera, but the position of VF is awkward. That is also my biggest beef with EX1. I know there are workarounds, but why not make it shoulder mount from the start?
Click to expand...
Because people would then complain: "why such a big camera!"
robertrogoz said:
Second thing is the lens issue, which imo there should be a stock lens designed for this camera. And existing F4 kind of kills it as far as shallow DOF usability. F4 is most likely not really a "sweet spot", like shooting F1.8 with EX1 is not ideal for that camera.
Click to expand...
Disagree here too. When I was thinking of buying the GH1 I looked around everywhere to get one WITHOUT the 14-140. Impossible to find. There was no way I wanted that lens.

I agree on the EVF issue but hey, you can't have everything. I agree with the codec issue. I kind of with Panasonic would get out of the codec business. I wish they let us have an api where we could specify our own codec. If that were the case I'd capter at 240Mb/s 4:2:2 instead of 24. But that's just me.

But, for the most part, especially after seeing images for the price, how does one complain???
 
No shoulder mount for me thank you :) I like the camera small. I could do without the EVF honestly. The one from Red Rock looks awesome and would have rather added something like that where I can put it anywhere. But, that's not changing so I'll just deal with it :)
 
Homunculus said:
cool. what cameras does she use now? What cams do top photogs like her use canon5dmkii or is that considered low end? Do they all use hasselblads at that high end level?
Click to expand...

Not low end at all. Greg Gorman turns down $20K weekend assignments just becuase he wants his Saturdays off. Big time? I think so. He shoots with a 5DII and 70-200 2.8L II for his portraits. Actually the last video I saw of him shooting was with the 5D and original 70-200 2.8L. I'm sure he's upgraded by now ;-) .

When I was shooting in LA, there were some pros even using Rebels. Really, at this stage of the game, I consider pretty much all sensors equal. I shoot with a 5DII & 70-200 2.8L II & 85 1.8 for most portrait work.
 
That's the whole idea. Being able to block and light something properly makes all the difference. If you have the skill and access to proper lighting, the camera itself isn't as important. That is most definitely a skill to cultivate.
 
Sure

Sure

Yeah sure, you can take great pictures/film with cheap equipment. All you need is expensive lighting equipment, professional models and of course access to a retouching studio....hey you can do this too!

I'm obviously joking but that video was hilarious. I was buying it until they said they sent out the picts to be retouched...lmao these days you can take a blank wall and built a whole scene with photoshop.

That wasn't a great example of using skill and technique over expensive equipment and resources.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top