Good news about AF100 firmware

There are alot of banding going on in that video. Be it compression or the turned down detail who knows. Bitrate does not take away the fact that it's still an 8-bit camcorder.
 
Yeah so is the EX1 (there was a comparison in another thread), and it doesn't look this bad. Posterisation is the Achilles heel of this camera. You need to turn down the detail to get rid of the sharpening halos, then sharpen in post with a small radius or it's too soft, then put (more) noise and possibly chroma blur over the top to hide posterisation (which doesn't hide it all that well).
 
Last edited:
ASG said:
Higher bitrate won't do much:

http://vimeo.com/18734699

Is it my computer or does everyone else see banding in the skies throughout and posterisation in the fg at 1:09?
Click to expand...


I'm downloading the quicktime, I have a hard time passing judgement on a Vimeo screen, considering they slap their own compression upon whatever is posted to their site, I'll let you know though.
 
ASG said:
Higher bitrate won't do much:

http://vimeo.com/18734699

Is it my computer or does everyone else see banding in the skies throughout and posterisation in the fg at 1:09?
Click to expand...

I see posterization everywhere. Kind of like when you became aware of moire in the DSLR's. And since sometimes there is very little to nothing you can do, I figure there is little to no point in stressing over it. It's out of your control. Just shoot.
 
PaPa said:
I see posterization everywhere. Kind of like when you became aware of moire in the DSLR's. And since sometimes there is very little to nothing you can do, I figure there is little to no point in stressing over it. It's out of your control. Just shoot.
Click to expand...

Posterization/Banding is pretty brutal to have to deal with/hide. It's a shame they didnt work that out in the development phase. Will that stop me from shooting beautiful images with this camera? not in the slightest. Will I buy Sony's next offering if they offer similar features, and fix the noise and banding issues the AF is having, probably. But for now this camera has all the features/IQ I want, and more than enough to make great images.
 
Looking forward to a hack!

Panasonic, for some reason seems, to be the most hack-friendly company. God love them for keeping the gates low!
 
Igelkott Film said:
Whats the real problem with accusal making a lcd 3,5" with full HD res?
Click to expand...
Well, probably first of all would be that it would probably be physically impossible for you to discern it. 1920 pixels on a 3" wide screen would be on 640 pixels per inch! Think about that, that's laser printer resolution. That's over twice the pixel density of Apple's vaunted "retina display". I would expect that it would probably be beyond the limits of human vision to even resolve it, from any sort of normal viewing distance.

Now, when you're talking about the EVF, yes they can pack more on there. Remember the EVF is higher resolution than the AF100's LCD screen, it's 864x480 instead of 640x480. And it's much tinier -- it's what, a half inch or something, rather than 3" of the LCD. Of course, it's useless without a big magnifier on it, but with a big enough magnifier it becomes useable.
 
I think we should not expect too much too early.
We should put our wishlist only after Vitaly confirms the Hack and starts new sub-forum for Hack.
IMO, bitrate hike to 35Mbps would be more than enough for AF100.
 
Is 720/120fps a possibility? Zoom in on pixels for focus assist? That would complete it for me. Oh, and 35Mbps would be the cherry.
 
RaviSun3D said:
I think we should not expect too much too early.
We should put our wishlist only after Vitaly confirms the Hack and starts new sub-forum for Hack.
IMO, bitrate hike to 35Mbps would be more than enough for AF100.
Click to expand...

I think we should discuss the changes we'd like to see now. Panasonic might pay attention to the wishlists and incorporate some of those things in an official firmware update.
 
The banding has been introduced by the web compression apparently, according to Filippo Chiesa who posted that. He says in the comments that

"thanks for watching!
There is no relevant differences between AVCHD and nanoFlash files if you see them without grading or keys.
If you use filters or transitions, nanoFlash is surely better.
There's no banding in the original material, it's for the web compression."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top