First Look, Panasonic AG-AC90 at DVExpo West
- Thread starter BobDiaz
- Start date
Barry_Green
Moderator
No, no dialing-in. You would be best served doing a manual white balance to those lights.
pmasters8941
Member
Thanks for the answer, Barry. So is there any real benefit to selling my HMC40 and upgrading to the AC90 (outside of the dual card slot, XLR, and three ring controls)? In other words, I am mainly focused on image quality.
Terry_Martin
Active member
I haven't got mine yet, but I read the following from page 41 of the advanced ops manual:
To finely adjust the White Balance
White Balance for the Ach/Bch can be finely adjusted. Perform this after adjusting the White
Balance.
≥ Switch to Manual Mode. (l33)
1 Select the menu.
2 Touch / to adjust settings of color.
3 Touch [EXIT] to complete the setting.
: [CAMERA SETUP] # [COLOR TEMP A ch] or [COLOR TEMP B ch]
MENU
To finely adjust the White Balance
White Balance for the Ach/Bch can be finely adjusted. Perform this after adjusting the White
Balance.
≥ Switch to Manual Mode. (l33)
1 Select the menu.
2 Touch / to adjust settings of color.
3 Touch [EXIT] to complete the setting.
: [CAMERA SETUP] # [COLOR TEMP A ch] or [COLOR TEMP B ch]
MENU
Im Planning to sell my HMC 150 and buy AC90. Would this be a good decision? Im using my 150 for weddings as a second cam for ex1. Im concern with the low light capability of the AC90, would the ac90 be better in low lite considering the better implementation of gain in the ac90 than the hmc 150? tnx in advance for the input.
Wesley Byram
Well-known member
It's probably wise to wait a bit for some more reviews and footage samples. The AC90 may have cleaner gain, but the HMC150 is much more light sensitive to begin with. For weddings, also note that the '150 won't have flash banding issues while the AC90 (most likely) will.
On an related note, if someone with an HMC40 has gets an AC90, could you shoot some low light direct comparisons between the two?
I'd love to see comparisons between AC90 and both HMC40 and HMC150.
captain_nesmo
New member
Hey guys!
I've been watching this thread with some interest as I really like the look of the VG90. I'm a photographer with a desire to get into video. I shot a gig recently using Sony NEX5, a 500D, 550D and a 60D. This is the main kind of environment I'll be using the Panny in, as well as shooting music videos for bands. I want to get a proper video camera so I don't have the clip length issue when shooting a 2 hour gig.
I have a couple of questions:
1) Low light performance? Obviously, there are a few low light samples on Youtube and Vimeo, but has anyone used this camera in a gig type situation? I'd be particularly interested in knowing if the camera is capable of capturing the the typical lighting ranges at gigs, i.e. Particularly dark sections, then a moving head goes across the performers. I also gather that Gain is ISO, but higher gain doesn't exhibit the same kind of visual noise that higher ISO settings do on a DSLR.
2) Coming from the photography world, I love being able to get that lovely shallow depth of field, and I'll often use a 50mm F1.4 as a drum lock off because it's awesome in low light and looks pretty tasty too. I see the AG90 has got a minimum F-stop of 1.5. But, is that the same as F1.4 (ish) on a DSLR? If I want to pull focus (stack focus? I don't know the terminology) from a performer to the microphone in front of them (usually between 10-100mm) will I be able to do that and get the performer REALLY blurred?
Cheers all!
I've been watching this thread with some interest as I really like the look of the VG90. I'm a photographer with a desire to get into video. I shot a gig recently using Sony NEX5, a 500D, 550D and a 60D. This is the main kind of environment I'll be using the Panny in, as well as shooting music videos for bands. I want to get a proper video camera so I don't have the clip length issue when shooting a 2 hour gig.
I have a couple of questions:
1) Low light performance? Obviously, there are a few low light samples on Youtube and Vimeo, but has anyone used this camera in a gig type situation? I'd be particularly interested in knowing if the camera is capable of capturing the the typical lighting ranges at gigs, i.e. Particularly dark sections, then a moving head goes across the performers. I also gather that Gain is ISO, but higher gain doesn't exhibit the same kind of visual noise that higher ISO settings do on a DSLR.
2) Coming from the photography world, I love being able to get that lovely shallow depth of field, and I'll often use a 50mm F1.4 as a drum lock off because it's awesome in low light and looks pretty tasty too. I see the AG90 has got a minimum F-stop of 1.5. But, is that the same as F1.4 (ish) on a DSLR? If I want to pull focus (stack focus? I don't know the terminology) from a performer to the microphone in front of them (usually between 10-100mm) will I be able to do that and get the performer REALLY blurred?
Cheers all!
Just MHO, and I don't have the camera, but based on what we are reading, I wouldn't be making AC90 a first choice for music video, or low-light live music.
1) With professional stage shows there is often quite a bit of light thrown on the performers and it wouldn't be an issue, but if you are shooting bands in night clubs or small venues, you may have to get the band to let you light the stage. I could be wrong about this, regarding AC90, but I'd be wary.
2) Contemporary music video is very cinematic in style, and shallow DOF is a big part of the culture. You're not going to get anything approaching shallow DOF with AC90. I might lean to the Sony VG20 or VG30 for music.
Last edited:
pulpfiction007
Veteran
First thing is- the 1.5 on a DSLR will provide way more shallow dof than you could ever get on the AC90, because the DSLR sensor is many many times larger than the chips in the Panasonic. Also gain does add noise just like increasing ISO does- the AC90 has been reported to have a clean gain, but noise reduction is being applied to the signal as you gain up, so you would lose sharpness at high gain levels. DSLRs will also, due to the much larger sensor, be far more sensitive and are usually better in lower light environments than smaller chip video cameras are.
The AC90 looks like a great camera but if you don't have a lot of light....that may not be playing to it's strong suit.
And welcome, captain_nesmo
captain_nesmo
New member
Cheers both! Annoyingly, I can get everything I want from a decent DSLR, but it's the clip limit issue that is a real problem for me.
I'd actually looked at the VG20, and there are a load of good things about it. But, there are also loads of forums moaning that Sony have left features out that can be found on the VG10, and it's totally intentional. Okay, on what I've mentioned up there, and let's (to a degree) disregard cost, what would be a suitable camera? I really want to be able to do 1080p, and I'd like to be able to do it at 50fps as well as 25/24fps.
I'd actually looked at the VG20, and there are a load of good things about it. But, there are also loads of forums moaning that Sony have left features out that can be found on the VG10, and it's totally intentional. Okay, on what I've mentioned up there, and let's (to a degree) disregard cost, what would be a suitable camera? I really want to be able to do 1080p, and I'd like to be able to do it at 50fps as well as 25/24fps.
Interesting and valid point. Waiting to get an evaluation as it relates to a "gig" is probably the best way to see others evaluate the camera. I no longer do weddings or dance recitals after 22 years of same. Personally, I would use the AG AC-130 for dance recitals and weddings by virtue of the outside manual controls. However, this camera has a remarkable noiseless gain which is scary. I never owned a camera that showed a lack of electronic gain albeit a softer picture-a pleasant soft picture.
pulpfiction007
Veteran
Well for large sensor cameras that function more like camcorders, we basically have:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/761578-REG/Sony_NEX_FS100U_NEX_FS100E_Super_35mm_Sensor.html
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/731509-REG/Panasonic_AG_AF100_AG_AF100_Micro_Four_Thirds.html
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/887069-REG/Sony_nex_ea50h_Sony_NEX_EA50_Camcorder_with.html
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/889545-REG/Canon_EOS_C100_EF_Cinema.html
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/853273-REG/Sony_NEX_FS700_4K_Ready_High_Speed.html
I didn't post any cameras over 10 grand here. The lowest cost models are of course the VG series you mentioned (which I didn't include), then the EA50 which has the VG sensor but with a lot of things included, like a power zoom lens, way more controls, etc. The FS100 and AF100 are next up price wise. Both would do well with a fast lens in low light, but the fs100 is known for it's excellent low light capability. The C100 is also capable of seeing in the dark but it's pretty spendy as is the FS700. The Sony EA50 seems to be quite a value...you could shoot right out of the box with it, but you'd probably want to get a faster lens. Also it's sensor is not as tuned for video as the Sony FS series, meaning it's like the NEX5n, VG sensor which was made initially for photos so that's why it's probably quite a bargain. The trade offs are some of the aliasing that you get with the DSLRs, as well as it not being as good in low light as the FS series. On the other hand it has all the controls of a tradtional video camera...looks pretty interesting to me.
Also here is a video done by a reviewer of the EA50, shot with an on cam cine profile and not color corrected in any way. The reviewer also made mention that the aliasing is quite reduced compared to DSLR sensors, this camera looks more promising by the minute. I know others who have more to spend are dismissive of this one, but for 3600 bucks it offers A LOT! No rigs, no add on audio modules to buy....the lack of ND filters is a miss again by sony, but oh well..lol
http://vimeo.com/51524757
Last edited:
1) I am by far no expert, but I believe there is way too much emphasis on low light performance on the latest generation of video cameras. Especially when it comes to shooting bands. I regularly shoot bands at my church on an at least 4 year old Panasonic AG-HPX300p with a current price of over $7000 (It was $10k new). On the other hand I currently own just a 5 month old $300 Cannon Powershot SX260HS (primarily a stills camera) and and its shoots at pretty much the same quality video (only comparing ungraded footage) in low light as the HPX300p ....and most folk would never know the difference. Four years is a long time with this technology and all of the cameras have improved dramatically. I just recently shot 1080p 24fps for a band in a bar with the SX260HS and the shots are VERY usable just by setting its exposure compensation to its highest setting (a 15 seconds of ungraded footage are view-able at ) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_QMDWeZKUtw&feature=youtu.be WARNING turn sound off. Its mostly all about what shot you use. I don't really think any video camera in the $2k-$5k range would perform so poorly that the shots would be unusable, because you need some level of light no matter what what camera you use. The lighting on a band varies so much it is more luck and skill getting the right setting/shot than what camera you have in your hands. In fact the point of shooting bands is to get a shot with the available light and make THAT interesting. You are not filming a Hollywood production that is a completely different story, you are shooting something moving and exciting. Yes you may be able to get a slightly cleaner shot on the Panasonic AG-HPX300p at 9 db but we generally have to go to 18dp when we have very little light and at that setting it is very noisy. If you can see the images moving and shaking, the instruments and can recognize the faces and facial features you have a usable shot. I would of course had the HPX300p for this shoot, but I am impressed what the SX260HS can do. From what I've seen the AG-AC90 in the right hands will perform wonderfully shooting concert events. If you don't have the light you might have to break one out anyways (on camera LED or something).
2) Depth of field only works so well when shooting events. You will be working your focus so much doing video of an event it would drive me crazy. You need to get lots of the best footage you can get. If its a bit out of focus you are screwed and the value of that depth of field looks worthless. Look at my clip, it might have been nice to rack focus from the keyboard to the lead female but then that takes much more precision, where to me getting THAT ANGLE of shot is much more interesting than a focus rack. Especially if its just on the screen for 3-5 seconds as it will be cut to be. I've shot an event with a 5d Mark II and had to shoot 2 people standing shoulder to shoulder and I was across from them (sideways) like 5 feet away, I needed to be focus rack between the two and I could not do it fast enough in the dark without a lot more practice on the camera which I did not have. They may have both been in focus with the AG-AC-90 or a quick bump of the zoom would have sufficed. On the other hand look of the depth of field on the macro focus on Lou Bruno's http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tw7Ea...w9GtZH1StP-IUw.
Last edited:
Yeah the Sony EA50 is looking to be a very nice camera at the $3600 price point. I've been told if you want to buy a camera its smart to be able to pay for it in less than a year with the money you make off it. The clients I currently work with are just looking for 720p (few folk have Blue Ray). At about 20 events a year (I am part time) for me right now I don't book enough events yet to justify it. Maybe next year! My point is few folk will ever notice, unless you have the money and your work/clients demands/deserves much higher quality I am all for putting back in my wallet.
Terry_Martin
Active member
There are two ways to shoot music video, live events and in the studio. DSLR's are great in studio settings, with controlled lighting, scripted shots, and lots of artistic use of DOF. Live events are much different. You can't control the lighting, camera positions, and if someone wants to put a mike stand between you and the lead singer.
I primarily shoot multi cam live music with an HPX250, HMC150, HMC40, XHA1, and a gopro. I just received the AC90 and I'm sure it will be a great replacement for the HMC40.
If your first question is about low light, it is the wrong question. The Ac90 will be fantastic in normal club style music events. The real question is how are you going to record the audio. Suggest that you consider audio quality first, otherwise you will be just like the other 20 youtube videos from cell phones, but with better image quality.
DOF in live events works the other way, you want as much as possible since it is almost impossible to work with manual focus, and AF can be a problem in some conditions.
My suggestion for live music events is to 1) learn to make great off camera audio recordings, and then 2) get friends and shoot with more than one camera.
Bottom line, I'm sure the AC90 would out perform any DSLR and many other cameras for live (uncontrolled) music events.
BobDiaz
The Professor
There is much good advice in that post.
Here's a club date shot on HMC150 (not mine): https://vimeo.com/4693921
Considering that the HMC40 has 3 times less sensitivity, I am intrigued by the report that you get good footage from the HMC40 in low-light night-club settings.
The AC90 probably would beat the HMC40, but by how much? I am considering the AC90 for sports, and being able to use it for low-light music would be a nice bonus!
Going to captain_nesmo's question, why not suggest the HMC150?
Terry_Martin
Active member
@ bluesgeek ... thanks
The key to club music events is that the background and audience are almost impossible low light, but if there is any stage lighting at all, often the key subjects are within the range of an HMC40 or AC90.
Here is an example of a HMC40 in a tough situation:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ahxm7CDriug&feature=plcp
This club has a poor set of stage lights, dim and spotty. The opening shot is an HMC40 on tripod left of stage. The other cameras are an HMC150, master cam, shooting down from a balcony, and a HPX250 and Sony Z5 as run and gun. I ran the HPX250 in manual mode, but the others were in auto exposure mode. There was some color correction in Avid, but the most difficult to correct was the Sony.
I set the HMC 40 no not exceed 12 db gain, and overall I was happy with how it cut with the other cameras, given the poor light in the first place.
The key to club music events is that the background and audience are almost impossible low light, but if there is any stage lighting at all, often the key subjects are within the range of an HMC40 or AC90.
Here is an example of a HMC40 in a tough situation:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ahxm7CDriug&feature=plcp
This club has a poor set of stage lights, dim and spotty. The opening shot is an HMC40 on tripod left of stage. The other cameras are an HMC150, master cam, shooting down from a balcony, and a HPX250 and Sony Z5 as run and gun. I ran the HPX250 in manual mode, but the others were in auto exposure mode. There was some color correction in Avid, but the most difficult to correct was the Sony.
I set the HMC 40 no not exceed 12 db gain, and overall I was happy with how it cut with the other cameras, given the poor light in the first place.
Last edited: