Is the AF-100 still doing well

FilmEquipmentHire said:
The 5D kits are still renting better than the AF101, partly, as already mentioned, people know the camera, but partly because of the lack of options on a zoom. We eventually got the Lumix lenses after waiting for the Birger adapter, but customers are not so familar with these so a bit aprehensive to try them. I think if the Birger EOS mount was available it would make a considerable difference. The AF101 looked good on the latest "Great camera shoot-out", very nice on detail and colour compared to other cameras in the test, particulary the DSLR's,
Colin
Click to expand...

IMHO . the rental community doesn't like the Lumix lenses because they're still lenses and are very slow. Focus-by-wire means pulling focus for
video sucks. The Olympus lenses with the slip-ring are gaining popularity.

IMHO, until the Birger shows up . the 5D / 7D is gonna trump the AF100 in the rental
market.

jeff
 
Well, here in Germany the FS100 rents at 300 a day, while you can rent the AF100 for 120 bucks a day at the same rental house.

I guess, that says something.

frank
 
I think the OP raises a valid point. If indeed there is a slowdown in AF100 purchases/rentals, what might the reason be? One wonders if maybe some folks out there might know something I don't. Are they privy to information I haven't come across? Anecdotal accounts of the cameras weaknesses, comparison to other cameras et al. Factors to consider when evaluating equipment for purchase. It can be relevant to take a look at what others are doing.
 
Well, I would presume that part of the reason is that there are some 12,000+ AF100s out there, so many of the potential renters have already bought theirs over the last 7 months. Whereas the FS100 has only been out for a much shorter time and therefore there are fewer of them out there. Which makes rental the only option for people until they can get their own.
 
Dino said:
My view, as a small rental house, is that our AF100's were on fire in January, then got back to normal rental levels thereafter--pretty constant through June.

While I'm pleased with how many corporate projects have been shot with our AF100's, I have seen less indie filmmakers than I expected(less than rented our Letus Ultimate DOF adapters when they were hot). I believe this is due to the ownership of DSLR's amongst indies because of low price and being on the market for awhile. The Canon DSLR's are really a cultural phenomenon at this point, even if not necessarily the best choice or value for many projects.
Click to expand...

This is exactly what it is. Please go look numbers on vimeo. Anything that has been produced on AF100 or FS100 only have 50K view and couple hundred "likes". Look at the pieces that has been produced with DSLRs IE: http://vimeo.com/18952185
yes i know they have been out on the market for one year+some months...
the point is;
DSLR has become so available to mass market and $5000 cameras won't fulfill rental business anymore. we have a new shooters in the business who are photographers and have been working with gorgeous models for a long time. They won't rent a $5000 a camera since they are so familiar with their DSLRs. Everytime you try to explain the facts to a newbie, a photographer or rookie producer they won't listen to you and will get a DSLR.
Numbers don't lie

I think we have a new standard for rental cameras which are above $10K. There is fact out there that u can't compete with DSLR market with $5K cameras. Anybody who is going to commence a rental business for sub $10K cameras, please consider these lines in this post.

So
these are my opinions please just go out and shoot as other contributors wrote here.

berk
 
Last edited:
Barry_Green said:
Well, I would presume that part of the reason is that there are some 12,000+ AF100s out there, so many of the potential renters have already bought theirs over the last 7 months. Whereas the FS100 has only been out for a much shorter time and therefore there are fewer of them out there. Which makes rental the only option for people until they can get their own.
Click to expand...

I personally think some are waiting for the Birger mount as well. Why not? If you don't want to invest in m4/3 or other glass and you already have a bunch of EOS glass that you love, might as well see if the camera price goes down any by the time the mounts (from anyone) become available.
 
I have been surprised at the amount of second-hand Af100's that are for sale; seems odd for such a new camera. Other cameras that were released around the same time (like the canon XF300 for instance) dont seem to be trading as much in the used market.

Could be that there were a heck of a lot more Af100's sold (which wouldn't surprise me), or perhaps people have bought the Af100 with a specific project in mind and then dont need it upon completion.

I'm still debating whether to buy an Af100 or the FS100 as my next big purchase (the Af100 still seems to come out on top for me because of the nd filters and the sdi output for my nanoflash). It seems Panasonic really did listen to everyone's wishlist with this camera (it ticks all the boxes) - so I'd be interested to hear if there is a perceived problem or not?
 
I think the pluses and minuses of both the AF100 and FS100 have been covered in GREAT depth here over and over. I tend to agree with the vast majority of opinions on both from those who've experience on both, as they are both great. As for the AF100, I've not seen that many on eBay myself. I had mine listed but of course, got stuck with a no-response zero feedback buyer, which is wonderful, disputing with eBay. :) That said, I looked through the completed auction selling history and it was pretty sparse when I checked (as I was pricing it) to other cameras.
 
Rick Burnett said:
I think the pluses and minuses of both the AF100 and FS100 have been covered in GREAT depth here over and over. I tend to agree with the vast majority of opinions on both from those who've experience on both, as they are both great. As for the AF100, I've not seen that many on eBay myself. I had mine listed but of course, got stuck with a no-response zero feedback buyer, which is wonderful, disputing with eBay. :) That said, I looked through the completed auction selling history and it was pretty sparse when I checked (as I was pricing it) to other cameras.
Click to expand...

But just to confirm you own both the Af and the FS; but you have decided to sell the Af and keep the FS? Would you mind briefly mentioning your reasoning for that decision?
 
simonpwood said:
But just to confirm you own both the Af and the FS; but you have decided to sell the Af and keep the FS? Would you mind briefly mentioning your reasoning for that decision?
Click to expand...

Sure. It was a very tough decision for me between the two. Neither is a clear winner, and the FS100 has enough to annoy me in certain ways just as other issues with the AF100. I've spent a lot of time with both, so I know them well. The FS100 has a smaller vertical body and is lighter. In addition, the battery life to weight ratio was longer. Given I use a Blackbird stabilizer, the FS100 worked better on it. Further, our productions tend to have a lot of dark found light scenes in them and the extra low-light performance on the FS100 appealed to me. Also, 1:1 focus assist.

But, saying that, giving up the ND filters, waveform monitor, snappier feeling in changing shutter or framerate AND the larger selection of slightly slower framerates below 24 were hard to give up.

Other than that, all the other features/issues/whatever didn't mean as much to me between them.
 
Interesting post, Rick. Just from that short list, looks like I'm happier with my AF100 than would have been with FS100. Everything you liked on the FS didn't matter much to me (other than sensitivity), while your likes on the AF are very important to me. (And 1:1 is taken care of via TVLogic.)

Warm fuzzy continues.
 
Rick Burnett said:
Sure. It was a very tough decision for me between the two. Neither is a clear winner, and the FS100 has enough to annoy me in certain ways just as other issues with the AF100. I've spent a lot of time with both, so I know them well. The FS100 has a smaller vertical body and is lighter. In addition, the battery life to weight ratio was longer. Given I use a Blackbird stabilizer, the FS100 worked better on it. Further, our productions tend to have a lot of dark found light scenes in them and the extra low-light performance on the FS100 appealed to me. Also, 1:1 focus assist.

But, saying that, giving up the ND filters, waveform monitor, snappier feeling in changing shutter or framerate AND the larger selection of slightly slower framerates below 24 were hard to give up.

Other than that, all the other features/issues/whatever didn't mean as much to me between them.
Click to expand...

Thanks.

Given that most of my shoots take place outdoors at daytime, I guess the Af100 is still the one for me.
 
That's why when people ask me to tell them which is better, I cannot. I'll be the last person to try to assign *my* important features to what others need, and why I tell people, you REALLY need to find a way to try both these cameras out in every way that is important to you so you can see what matters and what doesn't. All the footage I shot on the AF100 is wonderful, and the clients MORE than happy. I think that speaks for itself.

One must realize as well, while I've had access to other cameras like the HVX200, most of my shooting experience has been with the 7D, and like Barry has said to many, the FS100 seems to appeal a great deal to post-DSLR users (but not exclusively). I understand this. I loved shooting with my 7D, the form factor was perfect. The IQ, not so much for me. For people who love shooting on the HVX or other video cameras, they will love the AF100 (and again, not exclusively because I know many DSLR users that LOVE the AF100, and never had another camera other than their DSLR).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top