Ive been using the AF100 since early 2011 - as well as three other cameras - and here are my long-term impressions. Sorry it's long, but it has been nearly two years.
I'll start with the most negative - highlight and chroma clipping. This has been hashed and rehashed so often that I won't say much, except that I am more forgiving than most, because it isn't usually that distracting to the viewer - and I can live with blown out whites and an occasional odd color in out-of-focus distant foliage for instance.
But I had one major problem several months ago shooting an outdoor party for a local actor/director as a favor for a wealthy woman at her home in Pebble Beach. She was wearing a VERY expensive white silk blouse and, because of the reflective quality of the silk, the shadows in the folds went an ugly purple. The exposure was correct (my usual 1 - 1 1/2 stops under, Chroma at -4). Normally I might have let it go. But because I knew she paid a lot for the blouse (probably more than I made that month), I had to deal with it in post. It was fixable, but it took a lot of time and swearing.
This single event is why I've posted here several times hoping for a new sensor in the 100 sequel, which unfortunately isn't… well, you know.
The next week I placed a pre-order for an FS700 - one bad experience (not even a paid job) and I was ready to change. But after evaluating the fact that I wouldn't gain that much (i.e. color space, codec), I decided to stick with the AF because of what I do like about it, and because of the introduction of two new zoom lenses.
I like the MFT sensor size because it allows use of those lighter lenses - and the camera itself is so light that it's a pleasure to work with all day handheld, and allows me to pack a lightweight tripod (I've built a custom fitted EVF mount, matte box base and shoulder brace).
Now I only need to carry three small lenses - the 12-35, the 35-100 and the Nokton 17.5. [An aside but relevant - am I the only one that's securing my still lenses with gaffer's tape? I have Novoflex and Metabones adapters for my Leica and Canon FD lenses and they all have play in the adapters - I have to tape them, which means I need an adapter for every lens. For this reason alone the native mount MFT lenses are a real plus!]
Minor rants and raves:
The AF100 is dirt cheap, it was paid for a month after I bought it.
I like that the recording setup (i.e. 24p or 30p) is programmed within the individual scene files, but I wish the names were displayed in the menu so I could identify them.
I really miss the scene file wheel (my HPX250 has it, and when I use that camera I remember how much I like it).
I like that the Power Switch is a real switch and is placed with the Mode button under the LCD - this makes it convenient to set the camera in my lap and review/delete clips.
I originally distrusted the fiddly little SDHC cards (after using P2) but I've not had one fail - knock on wood - so I've grown to like them better. And even the best ones are very inexpensive.
For my work, mostly documentaries, the image quality of the AF is excellent - and I can easily make it perfectly match my 4.2.2 HPX250. I never was a fan of "photo-realism" in art, and I'm not enthralled by the video-game look produced by the new breed of large sensor cameras. It's my opinion, but I prefer the 16mm-like look of the AF100.
And I'm getting as sick of artificial looking bokeh as I am of over-used slow motion - really, haven't we had enough?
However… I may be a dinosaur, but I'm not blind - we all know the camera/sensor needs to be, and could be, greatly improved. Sadly it's now regularly referred to in blogs with adjectives such as "the ill-fated AF100" and "the beleaguered AF100".
I know that Panasonic has financial woes and aren't likely to produce an AF200 any time soon - but compare it to the American automotive industry. Five years ago they were going in the toilet, but (admittedly with the help of federal bail-out money) have since produced some of the best cars they've made for over 50 years, a major turn-around. It shows that aggressive, innovative, market-focused product saves a manufacturer, not conservative cut backs.
I'll start with the most negative - highlight and chroma clipping. This has been hashed and rehashed so often that I won't say much, except that I am more forgiving than most, because it isn't usually that distracting to the viewer - and I can live with blown out whites and an occasional odd color in out-of-focus distant foliage for instance.
But I had one major problem several months ago shooting an outdoor party for a local actor/director as a favor for a wealthy woman at her home in Pebble Beach. She was wearing a VERY expensive white silk blouse and, because of the reflective quality of the silk, the shadows in the folds went an ugly purple. The exposure was correct (my usual 1 - 1 1/2 stops under, Chroma at -4). Normally I might have let it go. But because I knew she paid a lot for the blouse (probably more than I made that month), I had to deal with it in post. It was fixable, but it took a lot of time and swearing.
This single event is why I've posted here several times hoping for a new sensor in the 100 sequel, which unfortunately isn't… well, you know.
The next week I placed a pre-order for an FS700 - one bad experience (not even a paid job) and I was ready to change. But after evaluating the fact that I wouldn't gain that much (i.e. color space, codec), I decided to stick with the AF because of what I do like about it, and because of the introduction of two new zoom lenses.
I like the MFT sensor size because it allows use of those lighter lenses - and the camera itself is so light that it's a pleasure to work with all day handheld, and allows me to pack a lightweight tripod (I've built a custom fitted EVF mount, matte box base and shoulder brace).
Now I only need to carry three small lenses - the 12-35, the 35-100 and the Nokton 17.5. [An aside but relevant - am I the only one that's securing my still lenses with gaffer's tape? I have Novoflex and Metabones adapters for my Leica and Canon FD lenses and they all have play in the adapters - I have to tape them, which means I need an adapter for every lens. For this reason alone the native mount MFT lenses are a real plus!]
Minor rants and raves:
The AF100 is dirt cheap, it was paid for a month after I bought it.
I like that the recording setup (i.e. 24p or 30p) is programmed within the individual scene files, but I wish the names were displayed in the menu so I could identify them.
I really miss the scene file wheel (my HPX250 has it, and when I use that camera I remember how much I like it).
I like that the Power Switch is a real switch and is placed with the Mode button under the LCD - this makes it convenient to set the camera in my lap and review/delete clips.
I originally distrusted the fiddly little SDHC cards (after using P2) but I've not had one fail - knock on wood - so I've grown to like them better. And even the best ones are very inexpensive.
For my work, mostly documentaries, the image quality of the AF is excellent - and I can easily make it perfectly match my 4.2.2 HPX250. I never was a fan of "photo-realism" in art, and I'm not enthralled by the video-game look produced by the new breed of large sensor cameras. It's my opinion, but I prefer the 16mm-like look of the AF100.
And I'm getting as sick of artificial looking bokeh as I am of over-used slow motion - really, haven't we had enough?
However… I may be a dinosaur, but I'm not blind - we all know the camera/sensor needs to be, and could be, greatly improved. Sadly it's now regularly referred to in blogs with adjectives such as "the ill-fated AF100" and "the beleaguered AF100".
I know that Panasonic has financial woes and aren't likely to produce an AF200 any time soon - but compare it to the American automotive industry. Five years ago they were going in the toilet, but (admittedly with the help of federal bail-out money) have since produced some of the best cars they've made for over 50 years, a major turn-around. It shows that aggressive, innovative, market-focused product saves a manufacturer, not conservative cut backs.
