Ikonoskop A-Cam DII vs. Panasonic AF100

I do think the AF100's images (so far) look soft(er) but that I believe weighs in to its advantage. Soft(er) does not mean less detail. I still think it has lots of detail in its image...but...like film...is soft. The EX-1, as detailed as it is, always looked sharp (as in, for lack of a better term, videoish harsh) to me. But that's me looking from the outside in...since I've never used an EX-x camera before. But Duke,...in the end I wouldn't be suprised if you found both cameras resolved the same amount of detail. If so...then that would give the Panasonic an edge in the more "film-like" dept. Of course however there are other variables to consider.
 
Last edited:
I hear your points Mike, believe me I have been really looking forward to the af100, but Ive never seen footage close to matching sharpness to the gh1/2 and I think thats in the same conversation Matthew was bringing up i.e. "Why does the af100 look kinda soft compared to other cameras?"

Why am I comparing the af100 to the GH1/2? Because it is a very similar sensor and I would expect the af100 to have similar (or better) image sharpness than them. Everything that has been posted on the net- from .tiff frames of avcintra recordings, to .mts files to compressed .mov files, ive downloaded them and have specifically noticed soft footage compared to the GH1/2 (not even trying to pixel peep).

Its important to talk about this stuff now while the camera isnt out yet and there are still time to make adjustments instead of being afraid to say anything, we are the buyers of this product... OK, Ill shut up until I can get more apples to apples, sorry to cause a fuss.
 
There's other factors than just the sensor that affects sharpness and softness. The lens is probably the most important, and being that the lenses are different you can't properly compare them. To do a proper comparison and evaluation you'd need to set up both cameras in the same room/environment, same lighting, same subject, same lens, same distance from the subject, same aperture, same ISO, etc., etc. Without doing that you can't accurately say one is sharper than the other. Also, as Ian-T mentioned, there's a difference between sharpness and detail, and I'll agree that detail is more important than sharpness. Take the 2 images in the OP... the image from the DII appears to have less detail than the AF100 image, even though the DII may appear sharper in that particular comparison. It's not always about resolution and sharpness. That's one of the reasons why the DVX100 is still used today and is still a great camera.
 
I seem to be reading a few comments regarding one being sharper than the other. Would I be incorrect in assuming that they were both taken either with lenses at different F-stops or even different focal lengths. You can see quite clearly in the older man's shot that his nose is in focus and his eyes are slightly soft, where as the other image, all parts of his body are in focus quite evenly...

We aren't getting a good idea of which is really sharper based on that.
 
Interesting camera ergonomic however as a left-handed I shoot with my left eye... which could be difficult with the viewfinder so close to the camera body
 
I am huge fan of the 2/3 Swedish Ikonoscope and it's S16 possibilities but against the AF100 it falls short for the low budget filmmaker.
They even have a custom to order Black and white Kodak sensor that is very intriguing. This is a take it or leave it camera for the discerning filmmaker with a particular Euro aesthetic.
If I had the cash I would buy it but the body is $8750. The extra's including two hardrives, two mounts ( a PL and Nikon adapter) would cost you an additional $4-5K.
This is a camera to rent or for niche commercial or FX production companies to buy much like the Aaton S16 Minima.
That said if I was budgeting for a film with the look that the Ikon can give I would buy it and include it in the film costs.

An interesting comparison could be made for the 16mm enthusiasts between the Ikonoscope and the GH2, now we know the possibilities of the sensor crop. It's a wait and see for how 16mm lenses will perform but just by what I have seen the $900 GH2 is looking to be the home for 16 glass.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top