timtorpedo
Well-known member
I just shot a wedding with my AF100, I though I'd share the experience.
I had it with a Zuiko II 14-54 2.8/3.5 , a 135 Zeiss 2.8 c/y ("just in case" :undecided for the reach), I had my own redrock shoulder support, and a Glidecam 4000 (no arm, no vest, pure forearm sweat!). And I had a 2nd operator with a 2nd AF100, with a Redrock shoulder support, Zuiko 12-60 2.8/4 .
Locations were:
- church
kali
retty dark, concrete, not too much outdoor light coming in, some indoor lights, but the church being so high in ceiling did not provide too much throw).
- outdoor bright daylight
- indoor: Hotel, hotel room, big room (with no windows
rogar-Mark-08(DBG)) for reception.
Having the HPX170 before, I was a little worried about doing those kind of jobs before buying my AF100, reading feedbacks around here, some likes it, some don't really.
I like it.
I planned to shoot the church at 800 ASA, but very often found myself around 1000, sometimes 2000 at 2.8/3.5 - 24p/1080. (because the couple would be lit, but not the audience... etc). And checking the footage on my 50" plasma, the image held really well. The noise is totally acceptable.
It was PRICELESS to have to have the 135mm :cheesy: . The :kali: wedding coordinator would not allow us to be close to the wedding couple during the ceremony, the 54 was a too wide to get a nice close shot of them. If only the 14-140 would be faster....Please Panasonic....
NO OIS :shocked: : I hesitated a long time before getting my lens because of the absence of stabilizer. I must say I spent the whole day on the Glidecam, and a little on the tripod (for the church), and did not touch the redrcock. In the near future, if Pana comes with a lens made to FILM with and OIS on it, I will purchase it, not that I had issue keeping the camera steady without the Glidecam, but it would be one thing less to be focused on. For now I pretty happy with the set up.rogar-BigGrin(DBG)
"Blackbird fly..." (hummm... I meant Glidecam) : Regarding the Glidecam situation. It was my first time flying the AF100 on it, but it is POSSIBLE. It is for sure a little hard, and you need the stamina and strength to pilot the camera during the whole day. Because I had a second operator to rely on, I new I could miss certain moment to rest ( 20 seconds), and that I'd still be able to cut. It definitely add a nice feel to the whole film. Although, I found myself limited to use the wide end of the lens to minimize certain unwanted shakes (if I d be on the longer end of the lens). I will definitely use it on the next one, but if I can, will get the arm and the vest, to not have to rest every so often. Also, the longest shot I could do flying the camera would be about 3-4 minutes, after that my wrist would loose it strength. BUT while not flying , I would find ways to handhold (not fly) the rig quite steadily and that is the set up I used to do interview "on the fly" if I may say. FINALLY, I was able to get shot from high above by using the rig kind of like a monopod. I found that kind of set up quite versatile...rogar-SunGlass(DBG
INSIDE the HOTEL ROOM: I though from the outside it was a fancy hotel, but the inside of the hotel rooms was the situation I am the least happy about. The walls were yellow, there were gloomy daylight coming in, the practicals bulbs used in the rooms were fluorescent based (I assumed from tweaking the white balance / the economy savy ones probably), and the still photographer turning on and off his light, and taking picture with flash without caring about me shooting there (J**k!), made this part of the day (morning) not fun at allrogar-KnockedOut(D . Definitely some color correction to expect, but hey, life is not perfect.
FLASH: another thing I was worried was using a CMOS sensor knowing the effect it has with strobe lights (flash). There were 2 photographers all day long, and yes sometimes I saw the flash affecting my picture. BUT only in certain situations, I don't think it will be an issue once I edit the footage, and I did not notice it enough times that It makes the whole footage useless. So is flash a big issue? To me, not really. (at least not on this project). But it is something to keep in mind. If I knew / saw the flash affecting an important shot, I would hold it a little longer just to make sure I "got it" clean.
BATTERIES: I had with me 6 pana batteries. I shot from 7am to 6pm. I had a shotgun mic using phantom power, and the Zuiko lens that would take some of the juice. I used almost 3 batteries. But surprised on how long they lasted.
SD cards: I had 3x 16 gig , 1x 32gig. I shot 62 gig total (would have probably shot a little more if I did not have to set up other things in the church)
So I am over all very satisfied of this experience. The camera performed better than I expected for this kind of project (event type of stuff).
I hope this helps....rogar-BigGrin(DBG)
I had it with a Zuiko II 14-54 2.8/3.5 , a 135 Zeiss 2.8 c/y ("just in case" :undecided for the reach), I had my own redrock shoulder support, and a Glidecam 4000 (no arm, no vest, pure forearm sweat!). And I had a 2nd operator with a 2nd AF100, with a Redrock shoulder support, Zuiko 12-60 2.8/4 .
Locations were:
- church
kaliretty dark, concrete, not too much outdoor light coming in, some indoor lights, but the church being so high in ceiling did not provide too much throw).- outdoor bright daylight
- indoor: Hotel, hotel room, big room (with no windows
rogar-Mark-08(DBG)) for reception.Having the HPX170 before, I was a little worried about doing those kind of jobs before buying my AF100, reading feedbacks around here, some likes it, some don't really.
I like it.
I planned to shoot the church at 800 ASA, but very often found myself around 1000, sometimes 2000 at 2.8/3.5 - 24p/1080. (because the couple would be lit, but not the audience... etc). And checking the footage on my 50" plasma, the image held really well. The noise is totally acceptable.
It was PRICELESS to have to have the 135mm :cheesy: . The :kali: wedding coordinator would not allow us to be close to the wedding couple during the ceremony, the 54 was a too wide to get a nice close shot of them. If only the 14-140 would be faster....Please Panasonic....
NO OIS :shocked: : I hesitated a long time before getting my lens because of the absence of stabilizer. I must say I spent the whole day on the Glidecam, and a little on the tripod (for the church), and did not touch the redrcock. In the near future, if Pana comes with a lens made to FILM with and OIS on it, I will purchase it, not that I had issue keeping the camera steady without the Glidecam, but it would be one thing less to be focused on. For now I pretty happy with the set up.
rogar-BigGrin(DBG)"Blackbird fly..." (hummm... I meant Glidecam) : Regarding the Glidecam situation. It was my first time flying the AF100 on it, but it is POSSIBLE. It is for sure a little hard, and you need the stamina and strength to pilot the camera during the whole day. Because I had a second operator to rely on, I new I could miss certain moment to rest ( 20 seconds), and that I'd still be able to cut. It definitely add a nice feel to the whole film. Although, I found myself limited to use the wide end of the lens to minimize certain unwanted shakes (if I d be on the longer end of the lens). I will definitely use it on the next one, but if I can, will get the arm and the vest, to not have to rest every so often. Also, the longest shot I could do flying the camera would be about 3-4 minutes, after that my wrist would loose it strength. BUT while not flying , I would find ways to handhold (not fly) the rig quite steadily and that is the set up I used to do interview "on the fly" if I may say. FINALLY, I was able to get shot from high above by using the rig kind of like a monopod. I found that kind of set up quite versatile...
rogar-SunGlass(DBGINSIDE the HOTEL ROOM: I though from the outside it was a fancy hotel, but the inside of the hotel rooms was the situation I am the least happy about. The walls were yellow, there were gloomy daylight coming in, the practicals bulbs used in the rooms were fluorescent based (I assumed from tweaking the white balance / the economy savy ones probably), and the still photographer turning on and off his light, and taking picture with flash without caring about me shooting there (J**k!), made this part of the day (morning) not fun at all
rogar-KnockedOut(D . Definitely some color correction to expect, but hey, life is not perfect. FLASH: another thing I was worried was using a CMOS sensor knowing the effect it has with strobe lights (flash). There were 2 photographers all day long, and yes sometimes I saw the flash affecting my picture. BUT only in certain situations, I don't think it will be an issue once I edit the footage, and I did not notice it enough times that It makes the whole footage useless. So is flash a big issue? To me, not really. (at least not on this project). But it is something to keep in mind. If I knew / saw the flash affecting an important shot, I would hold it a little longer just to make sure I "got it" clean.
BATTERIES: I had with me 6 pana batteries. I shot from 7am to 6pm. I had a shotgun mic using phantom power, and the Zuiko lens that would take some of the juice. I used almost 3 batteries. But surprised on how long they lasted.
SD cards: I had 3x 16 gig , 1x 32gig. I shot 62 gig total (would have probably shot a little more if I did not have to set up other things in the church)
So I am over all very satisfied of this experience. The camera performed better than I expected for this kind of project (event type of stuff).
I hope this helps....
rogar-BigGrin(DBG)