Good news about AF100 firmware

Actually I think Olof from NH was doing banding testing and it was still doing it even with the nanoflash, though there was some confusion over whether it was posturization.
 
I said in a post long before canon released the 24p firmware update that they where playing chicken. I believe panny as well have the ability to keep this cam future proofed with endless firmware updates readily available to release, but why do that unless the competition puts them in a position to do so. Like anything else, why would a company give it all to us now when they can keep milking it while protecting their pro line at which would die off if we got the wish list at a consumer price. It's business.
 
I wonder if a hack could allow us to adjust the color for the LCD? I'm getting a green cast on my LCD. I think someone else posted the issue earlier, but I didn't see any resolution for the issue. I had a shoot tonight, and really had to lay some faith into my WB tool as I don't have an external monitor. I know, I should get it into my budget! :embarasse
 
Geno said:
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.
Click to expand...

can not work

@Vitaliy - you have a Problem of the low-pass filter: impossible

35MBit or 120 MBit the AVCHD-BQ to be not better - the AF 100 is AVC not MJpeg . . .
 
Last edited:
I am really interested in it. I would really like to see in a hack a way I could program all the buttons that I dont use by using nikon glass to be able to be mapped to other functions... maybe change ISO or scene files via the iris wheel... and hackable frame rates like the HVX/HPX. And a bit rate increase to be at least on par with the new Sony FS100s AVCHD would be awesome too.
 
reem12 said:
I said in a post long before canon released the 24p firmware update that they where playing chicken. I believe panny as well have the ability to keep this cam future proofed with endless firmware updates readily available to release, but why do that unless the competition puts them in a position to do so. Like anything else, why would a company give it all to us now when they can keep milking it while protecting their pro line at which would die off if we got the wish list at a consumer price. It's business.
Click to expand...
That theory doesn't make sense to me at all. Why would Panasonic hold back on ways of making the AF-100 more competitive with cameras like the F3 or Red, especially if they were just software related? Maybe if Panasonic had a higher-level version of the camera that they were trying to protect, but they don't.

Canon could afford to hold off on releasing firmware updates for the 5D, because there wasn't another full-frame DSLR with video.
 
I updated the firmware to 1.15 and the color on the display looks ok now. There is also a red x on the screen if you leave the VFR on.
Good job Pana and now a higher bitrate; 35mbs will be good enough.
 
When I see the footage with the Nano flash I ask myself if a higher bitrate realy makes such a huge diference. The Image of the Nano flash looks softer in collors then the camera codec footage.
But I do I believe a 4.2.2 collor sample does make a diference for collor grading, But bitrate? hhmmm dont know. Some of you guys talk of seeing posturisation and stuff in the footage.
Maybe am blind but I dont see any artifacts at all, besides the Vimeo and Youtube compression is not a good messure.
10 bit and higer frame rate up to 200 on the AF100 would be on my wishlist dough and of course any improvement is :-)
 
Katty Galloo said:
When I see the footage with the Nano flash I ask myself if a higher bitrate realy makes such a huge diference. The Image of the Nano flash looks softer in collors then the camera codec footage.
But I do I believe a 4.2.2 collor sample does make a diference for collor grading, But bitrate? hhmmm dont know. Some of you guys talk of seeing posturisation and stuff in the footage.
Maybe am blind but I dont see any artifacts at all, besides the Vimeo and Youtube compression is not a good messure.
10 bit and higer frame rate up to 200 on the AF100 would be on my wishlist dough and of course any improvement is :-)
Click to expand...

I think it is not the bitrate of the Nano that is so important, the fact that it records 4-2-2 from the SDI-output in 10 bits.
The bitrate of the AF100 should be higher to have a better picture IMO.
Barry said that it is allready from x to 35mb/s in the VBR mode with 24 as the average I suppose,
but from x-50 is what we need than. 35 average will be a good boost for the AF100 cam in technical respect and from a promotional point.
If it is technical possible to get a higher bitrate by changing the routines in the firmware - like what happened with the G1 - IMO it will sell a lot more AF100's. So Jan, what do you say, will it ever happen? Not to butter you up, but I hate the thought that Sony might get the better of this new development of affordable big sensor cams.
 
Again, and man I've said this a lot. It's not how it looks right off the card (which is still better with Nano) it's how it looks when you compress to DVD or Bluray. The Nano stuff, due to less compression of the original stream, looks much better when recompressed. In fact downright kickass. If you only do web delivery, or look at footage right off the card on a monitor, then no, external recording is not needed.
 
Has anybody heard anymore news about this yet?

I'm not holding my breath for an increase in bitrate, but i'm interested to see what's possible.
 
Katty Galloo said:
Some of you guys talk of seeing posturisation and stuff in the footage.
Maybe am blind but I dont see any artifacts at all, besides the Vimeo and Youtube compression is not a good messure.
Click to expand...

Indeed, I have seen the posterization problem myself in many of my own footage and other "raw" footage and was surprised nobody talked about it. It shows on both internal and external recordings and generally appears in darker areas, whenever some tonal gradients and/or shallow dof occur. This is a real problem since some underxposed footage with easily become unusable…
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top