good in low light - right or wrong? + 1st impression

anatusa

anatusa

Veteran
Hello

i am new to pro camcorders, my previous camcorder was sony hdr-hc3, now i have panasonic ag - af101 with lumix 14-140 HD, and my 1st look at my new camcorder was a disappointment. I bought it for a reason everyone were saying that big sensor is great for low light, well when i tried to film something inside my apartment at night time but of course with normal room light on, i got a very bad result , - everything is so dark and noisy, much much darker then it is in real, when i tried to add some gain it brought some light but noisy became even worse, in fact my sony did much better in same situation with full auto, and its really strange especially when compare sensor size of 1/3 and micro 4/3

i dont know if its the setting needs to be chosen right, but i did not expect it will be that bad (soooo dark), i am very new to pro stuff and really have no idea what to do, i bought that barry green book, its should be here next week i hope, really hope it will helps to figure out something, but for now i am not getting anything even close to clips from youtube.

if say true i am ready to panic, now i understand that did a huge mistake and had to buy something what you call run and gun, but that misstate i ll not be able to correct due to my budget, so i have to use it

few things i liked about the panasonic

- inside mic is really good, if i knew its so good i think i would not buy my rode ntg 2. with all my consumer camcorders before i was getting terrible sound noise if was holding cam in my hands and also it picked up all crappy sounds from all around even with small external mics. but that builed in mic in my new pany is great....

- no moire at all, i am not a pro but to me ois and af are great as well, for sure huge improvement from my sony, also af is not making any noise.
- seems like that i get almost non quality loss (at least i dont see it with my eyes) when i convert original file to wmv(1280x720 3000kbps), its a nice surprise also did not take long on my I7

if some one of you could share some setting or anything like advice that would be great, if you remember one song from Beatles i believe its called - Help..... well its about me..

sorry for my English.....
 
Well, one problem is that you have a really slow (i.e. large f-number wide open) lens. On the plus side, at least with the AF100 having interchangeable lenses, you can solve that issue!

I'd suggest getting hold of a fast prime lens like a 20 mm f/1.7 Panasonic Lumix, or the Voigtlander 25 mm f/0.95 if you need the low light capability. They let in a LOT more light.

Each f-stop is a factor of two in light gathered, so the f/0.95 lens gathers about 25 times as much light as the 14-140 lens does.

I think the 14-140 mm is fine for daylight shooting, or shooting with very brightly lit controlled film lighting interiors, but for low light it is just not the right tool for the job! Also make sure you white and black balance correctly as that can make everything look nasty- colour casts and noisy. And turn the gain/ISO setting up as well- won't help the noise, but will help everything being dark!

Cheers, Hywel Phillips
 
It's all about the lens. The 14-140 is a great lens granted it gets enough light. Like outdoors. The f-stop is 4.0-5.6. By comparison I have a Voigtlander that has an f-stop of 1.4. If you were to have put that lens on and filmed the same scene inside your apartment you would get much more pleasing results. There are other settings to tweak in order to let in more light, such as the ISO/Gain switch. Try setting that switch to a higher number such as 1000 ISO. When Barry's book arrives it'll explain the pro's and cons of different lenses and ISO/Gain settings. Don't give up on the AF100 yet!
 
I don't know of any camera that can shoot with regular indoor lights with an f/4.0 lens and get great results. Adding light, changing lenses or upping your ISO are your only options. Luckily, you can do all three.

As for the mic, no matter how good the internal mic is, it is not a substitute for a decent microphone that is used for a specific purpose.
 
The AF100 is a great camera, don't worry. You did not make a mistake.

You simply need a faster lens, and then you need to find the settings in the scene files that gives you the image you want.

This camera is a big step up and you have to go through a bit of a learning curve to use it properly.

See if you can get a lens that is at least f1.4 for low light shooting. There are many choices. Old Canon or Nikon glass with adapters are very reasonable priced. The 25mm Voightlander mentioned above is fantastic.

And you will not regret the better mic as you become more advanced in audio. The next thing is to get a fish pole for it with a good "dead cat" wind muffler and start to use it off the camera either with a sound person as an assistant or on a stand. The sound quality will increase greatly that way. Depending on what you are shooting you may also want to consider a lavaliere mic.

Have fun this camera is great and a great teacher. The best way to learn is by doing.
 
Yes...the 14-140 is a dog, a useful dog..but still...get some lenses between f0.95-f2 and you will see an insane difference. Even the 20mm 1.7 can shoot some great footage lit by one candle at 400ISO.
 
Unfortunately, B&H won't let me prioritize their lenses by f-stop.

Does anyone make a Micro 4/3 Zoom lens with an f 2.4 or less?

Does anyone make a zoom lens with some other mount with f 2.4 or less?
 
If you can get hold of one you must get a Voigtlander Nokton f0.95 25mm lens this will blow your socks off or you can try the Zeiss ZM f2 35mm lens but you need a Voigtlander M to mFT adapter to make it work.
 
If your budget is an issue, and you can deal with manual lenses, you might look at Canon FD glass. You can get a few fast primes (1.4-2.0) an f/2.8 zoom, plus the adapter you'll need for what you paid for the Lumix. Check Canon FD Lens on e-bay. There's a bunch of them.
 
The AF100 is absolutely insanely good in low light. The higher ISOs are incredibly clean, when you get the settings right. You can easily shoot at 3200 ISO and get satisfactory footage.

You want low light? This shot was done with the lowest possible imaginable light source -- one single tealight candle.

The key to great low light performance is to have a fast lens, and to choose your settings carefully to avoid too much grain in the picture. But I've been amazed at just how good 3200 ISO f/0.95 footage looks from the AF100.
 
hey

thank you all for comments guys, seems like the main issue i have is the lens, i got that 14-140 lumix - for only reason - it the only lens that support AF and has IS. i dont think there is nay other at the moment, hope one day there will be affordable adapters with electronic connectors for nikon or canon lenses.... so that it could support IS and/or AF
 
Barry_Green said:
The AF100 is absolutely insanely good in low light. The higher ISOs are incredibly clean, when you get the settings right. You can easily shoot at 3200 ISO and get satisfactory footage.

You want low light? This shot was done with the lowest possible imaginable light source -- one single tealight candle.
Click to expand...

Insanely good? I don't doubt that it's better than most smaller sensor cameras, but that blue channel looks insanely noisy and splotchy, which certainly would be expected from such a low-light, low-color-temp image even after noise reduction in post. Was the original image pretty underexposed in camera? how much did you have to push that in post?
 
nyvz said:
Insanely good? I don't doubt that it's better than most smaller sensor cameras, but that blue channel looks insanely noisy and splotchy, which certainly would be expected from such a low-light, low-color-temp image even after noise reduction in post. Was the original image pretty underexposed in camera? how much did you have to push that in post?
Click to expand...

Show me a small sensor camera that can do anything even close to that.
 
Hello Anatusa, for my GH camera I bought these lenses:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/wl/360AA05979

The Olympus covers both wide and mediums. Compared to the 14-140 it's one stop faster at wide and one and 1/3 stop faster at tele.

The Sigma is the close-up lens, two stops faster than the 14-140 at the same FL.

The 20mm is the low light lens. 20mm on the 14-140 must give you f4.8 or something, that makes the 20mm three stops faster than the 14-140 at the same FL.

You won't have stabilization with any of these lenses, and AF only with the 20mm.

Notice that even a stop is great advantage, it's the difference between having to shoot at ISO 800 instead of ISO 400.
 
Pietro Impagliazzo said:
Hello Anatusa, for my GH camera I bought these lenses:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/wl/360AA05979

The Olympus covers both wide and mediums. Compared to the 14-140 it's one stop faster at wide and one and 1/3 stop faster at tele.

The Sigma is the close-up lens, two stops faster than the 14-140 at the same FL.

The 20mm is the low light lens. 20mm on the 14-140 must give you f4.8 or something, that makes the 20mm three stops faster than the 14-140 at the same FL.

You won't have stabilization with any of these lenses, and AF only with the 20mm.

Notice that even a stop is great advantage, it's the difference between having to shoot at ISO 800 instead of ISO 400.
Click to expand...

How do you set an exposure (f-stop) on those lenses?
 
Through the camera interface.

Just like the 14-140, or any other lens that doesn't feature an aperture ring.

The 43/M43 adapter even allows AFS with the 14-54.
 
LoganMackay said:
Show me a small sensor camera that can do anything even close to that.
Click to expand...

What? Perhaps you misread my post.

I said: "...I DON'T doubt that it's better than most smaller sensor cameras..."

There isnt much sense comparing the AF100 to much smaller sensor cameras, what IS of interest is comparing it to cameras that use similar sized sensor formats in the same market. The closest smaller standard format that exists in competing cameras is 2/3", with less than 1/4 the imaging area and sensitivity. But I imagine most people looking at the AF100 would be most interested in how it compares to APSC/S35 sized sensors.
 
As you are coming from a camcorder with limited manual features... can I ask what shutter speed you were using? 1/48 is what most people here shoot at (with 24p). Maybe you had a faster shutter speed (less light)

You are likely to know this already, but worth mentioning.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top