Interesting...new Panny cameras at NAB

D

dhart1949

Well-known member
http://www.digitaltrends.com/photog...onal-camcorder-handles-4k-raw-120-fps/#!zHelv

Hmm, super 35mm sensor...would guess the pricing would be near the Sony F55. Varicam 2/3" with 14 stops of dynamic range but not 4K. No "leaks" yet that I'm aware of on possible replacement for AF-100. In any event doubt it would be a sub $5K camera, but we shall see. Unfortunately not going to be able to make the show this year...too much work
icon7.png
 
None that we know about. I'm hoping something will be announced at NAB. I think there's room between the GH4 and the Varicam for a nice update on the AF100.
 
Its been 4 years since the AF100 has been announced and 2012 since the AF100a. If no surprise announcement at NAB of an AF100 successor, possibly unlikely there will be a replacement…Thoughts?
 
I'd be really surprised if they did not make some announcement about a successor. They could go the GH4 for video route but my hope is that they use that new S35 sensor and a lesser set of features than the Varicam, a simpler body, accessories and EVF than the Varicam. I'm hoping for something a bit more grand than the AF100 - something near the $8 - 10K range.

Now even if they did announce something it would be a year off at least. They can't cede all this ground to the C100 - 300, and the FS700. Get me a Panasonic with Sony F5 features and I'll buy it up.
 
I really have a hard time seeing them put an S35 sensor in a sub 10k camera. There is a user base for m4/3 lenses already (and the 12-35 X and 35-100 X are fantastic lenses for video). Coming up with a new mount (and lenses to fit) or licensing a mount from someone else doesn't make a lot of sense in a camera that cheap. And PL on a $8K camera (and realistically this would be in the $5k-$6k range) doesn't make a lot of sense either, since most folks buying such a camera wouldn't want to be spending the money to be sticking PL glass on it I would think. Plus it helps differentiate from the Varicam.
 
I got the sense that Panasonic was updating the GH to fill the m4/3 niche, like they were "listening" to the GH shooters by honoring their enthusiasm and preference for the look of the GH2/3 for video. I would not be surprised at all if the new AF was m4/3 too. It could be the pro video housing for all those upgrades but then why put all that new video tech into the GH and provide the connections in that mount?

I don't know what the numbers are but Panasonic is forfeiting the C100-300, FS700 - F5 space. The Varicam is up there with Alexa, F55/65 and C500. There's a chasm between the GH4 and the Varicam. Are they just going to drop out of the market of owner/operators that are not DSLR shooters?

I thought that the new media and codec tech, the s35 sensor tech, RAW in the Varicam might find it's way into a camera that would become a shooter's camera that could record for cable and commercial work for the pros who are not at the broadcast level that need variable mounts. Not all of it, but a subset.

Do they really need to license a Nikon or Canon mount? I thought the Panasonic strategy with m4/3 and Sony with FZ, with third party mounts that adapted those would not require them to license anything but I don't know.
 
Last edited:
hscully said:
I don't know what the numbers are but Panasonic is forfeiting the C100-300, FS700 - F5 space. The Varicam is up there with Alexa, F55/65 and C500. There's a chasm between the GH4 and the Varicam. Are they just going to drop out of the market of owner/operators that are not DSLR shooters?
Click to expand...

This I completely agree with. It doesn't need to have RAW or an S35 sensor... simply sticking an improved m4/3 sensor and mount onto a PX270 back end makes it a much more appealing camera than the anything else in the in the sub-$10k market. Give it some sort of 4k option (even if it's just the GH4 codec so as not to compete with the Varicam) and it smokes everyone else.
 
Mike Harvey said:
simply sticking an improved m4/3 sensor and mount onto a PX270 back end makes it a much more appealing camera than the anything else in the in the sub-$10k market. Give it some sort of 4k option (even if it's just the GH4 codec so as not to compete with the Varicam) and it smokes everyone else.
Click to expand...

Heck, I'd settle for GH4 guts in a AF100 body... even less R&D and tooling work for them to produce, even easier to turn a profit. Whatever they might do... I'm just not keen on trying to make the YAGH (and all its necessary cabling) work for me.
 
mcbob said:
Heck, I'd settle for GH4 guts in a AF100 body... even less R&D and tooling work for them to produce, even easier to turn a profit. Whatever they might do... I'm just not keen on trying to make the YAGH (and all its necessary cabling) work for me.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's very weird to see a company that once so completely dominate the indie market now seemingly ignore it, at least in a "pure" video camera sense.

Of course, NAB is still to come. I'm still hopeful for a an AF200 - similar (if not exactly the same) body with improved guts. True 1080p, 10/12 bit 4:2:2 50 Mb/s internal recording, and maybe some wifi connectivity.

That's it, don't need anything more. Just give me an option not named Canon.... :smile:
 
Mike Harvey said:
This I completely agree with. It doesn't need to have RAW or an S35 sensor... simply sticking an improved m4/3 sensor and mount onto a PX270 back end makes it a much more appealing camera than the anything else in the in the sub-$10k market. Give it some sort of 4k option (even if it's just the GH4 codec so as not to compete with the Varicam) and it smokes everyone else.
Click to expand...

Yep. That would be a great camera and the metabones adapter is working pretty well on my current AF100 so I don't need to give up S35 FOV. If they can deliver AVC Ultra with 4:2:2 10 bit, which I believe can be recorded at 25Mbps and introduce some sort of sLog then I'm in.

I'd still need to rent for a RAW option because I get a lot of narrative people who really want that. What would be a nice little pipe dream is if they would open it up to something like the Odessey 7Q as they did with the FS700. Take the expense off the camera and make it an option but I wouldn't hold my breath on that one.
 
Last edited:
I'm with the rest of you who say there is a massive space between the GH4 and Varicam, even between the AF100A and the Varicam. There's room to have the GH4 as the $1500 to $2000 B cam/hobbyist hybrid, $ 3,500-$4000 AF100a as the entry level cinema camera, and a $6000-$8,000 AF200.

Personally, I'm not buying another camera for video that isn't designed to do video. I'm sick of all the extra add on stuff and frankenrigs and horrid ergonomics. The IQ performance on a lot of these new cameras is nice...BMC, the GH series, Nikon D5200/7100 (which is the one I went with) but holy hell do they all have issues. No Nd filters, no proper audio, bad form factors, and in the case of Black Magic...simple things like deleting clips and formatting are issues too. The GH cams are the easiest of the bunch to do video on, but I still want an actual video camera with all the nice things that go with it. If there is no AF100 successor at NAB...I'm going AF100 and saving a ton of money.

I don't care that it isn't as pristine IQ wise as the newer cameras...but damn it, it has all the stuff one needs on a single body (what a novel idea) I spent last night watching some of the better stuff shot on AF100. Still looks very very good to my eyes.
 
pulpfiction007 said:
I'm with the rest of you who say there is a massive space between the GH4 and Varicam, even between the AF100A and the Varicam. There's room to have the GH4 as the $1500 to $2000 B cam/hobbyist hybrid, $ 3,500-$4000 AF100a as the entry level cinema camera, and a $6000-$8,000 AF200.
Click to expand...

This would be ideal. I think there's room for both these cameras. Man, I'd be happy to see them.

Personally, I'm not buying another camera for video that isn't designed to do video. I'm sick of all the extra add on stuff and frankenrigs and horrid ergonomics. The IQ performance on a lot of these new cameras is nice...BMC, the GH series, Nikon D5200/7100 (which is the one I went with) but holy hell do they all have issues. No Nd filters, no proper audio, bad form factors, and in the case of Black Magic...simple things like deleting clips and formatting are issues too. The GH cams are the easiest of the bunch to do video on, but I still want an actual video camera with all the nice things that go with it. If there is no AF100 successor at NAB...I'm going AF100 and saving a ton of money.
Click to expand...

You know I've gotten to work a couple of projects with some DSLR shooters and I have to admit that I'm impressed with their work and all they can get from those cameras. However, I'm spoiled now with the AF100. I need WFM, NDs, balanced line ins, Vectorscope, granular scene file control, BUTTONS for WB, ISO, and an EVF I can actually use. I sold my GH2 and picked up a Nikon 3300 for stills because all my lenses are Nikon mount and I wanted something I could use with some auto features like AF and VR with a big fat zoom for stills. I'm pretty happy with that right now, and the video is fine for what I'd use it for.

I don't care that it isn't as pristine IQ wise as the newer cameras...but damn it, it has all the stuff one needs on a single body (what a novel idea) I spent last night watching some of the better stuff shot on AF100. Still looks very very good to my eyes.
Click to expand...

Hell yeah. I need to upgrade but I'm not selling my AF100. I'm keeping it for a lower budget option and a B cam. It's still working great for me for all HD jobs. I'm shooting with it all the time and my clients are happy loving the way it looks, as do I.
 
Last edited:
Does anyone else think the AF100 is too big? Cut it down to about a third its size, something like the Sony VG30 or Canon XA25, and then we'll talk.
 
Last edited:
pulpfiction007 said:
I'm with the rest of you who say there is a massive space between the GH4 and Varicam, even between the AF100A and the Varicam. There's room to have the GH4 as the $1500 to $2000 B cam/hobbyist hybrid, $ 3,500-$4000 AF100a as the entry level cinema camera, and a $6000-$8,000 AF200.

Personally, I'm not buying another camera for video that isn't designed to do video. I'm sick of all the extra add on stuff and frankenrigs and horrid ergonomics. The IQ performance on a lot of these new cameras is nice...BMC, the GH series, Nikon D5200/7100 (which is the one I went with) but holy hell do they all have issues. No Nd filters, no proper audio, bad form factors, and in the case of Black Magic...simple things like deleting clips and formatting are issues too. The GH cams are the easiest of the bunch to do video on, but I still want an actual video camera with all the nice things that go with it. If there is no AF100 successor at NAB...I'm going AF100 and saving a ton of money.

I don't care that it isn't as pristine IQ wise as the newer cameras...but damn it, it has all the stuff one needs on a single body (what a novel idea) I spent last night watching some of the better stuff shot on AF100. Still looks very very good to my eyes.
Click to expand...


Ha ha - yes to everything here. I use and love my Blackmagic Cinema Camera... but it's kind of an odd duck. Everything you want in the way of acquisition CODECS and DR... but just baffling in other ways (no manual WB, no audio meters, 1/4 inch audio jacks (even mini xlr would have been better), internal battery (wait till that thing dies), etc). Still, I cling to the AF100 for everyday work because I need good, clean preamps and all of the things that you have to bolt onto the BMCC. Would love a 10bit 4:2:2 AF100 with updated sensor and AVC-Intra recording to P2, throw in some sort of log recording mode, and witness perfection. Lastly, I know raw isn't happening in a sub $10k camera from Panasonic... but that would be the best thing ever!

Shawn
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top