New AF100 Setup

L

lawrenceingram

Active member
ORDERED MINE TODAY!

So I've been agonizing over this decision, worried that I wouldn't get it right, or that I'll somehow be disappointed with one of the components. I was mostly happy with the HVX200, but I'm really excited about this. So here is what I have chosen:

Canon L-Series 16-35mm f/2.8
Cool-Lux MD3000 Light & Sound Bracket
Bescor LED-70W Dimmable Light
Rode NTG-1 Condenser Shotcun Mic

I already have the Canon L-Series 24-105mm lens, but thought I needed something wider. The Tokino appealed to me except that I realized that 11-16mm would not allow me to use it as my regular lens because of the really short zoom range. The 16mm is not as wide with the crop factor, but I'm hoping it will do. I also have a Canon 70-300mm lens. I'm hoping for the Birger Mount to follow, but until then, I'm going to use a cheap mount from eBay.

I really wish I could know if the Ki Pro Mini is worth the investment. I would like to see comparison shots with a ProRes 220mbps bit rate vs the native in-camera compression. And maybe I'll consider the Atomos Ninja, but I'm not sure about using a hard drive (I do like solid state), and I don't know about HDMI for an input. Would that be different from using the HD-SDI?

If anyone has any comments or advice, I'd love to hear!

Thanks,

Lawrence
 
All that stuff sounds fine, I think you'll be happy with it. As long as your lenses have iris rings you should be fine; if they don't, the cheap adapter you need is from Kipon.

I wouldn't worry about the Ki Pro Mini, for two reasons: 1) you may be happy with the onboard codec, and 2) it's not out yet anyway, so there's nothing to worry about. We shot all of "A Verse Before Dying" on the camera's own codec, and the editor has said it's the best-looking footage he's ever had in his suite. Obviously a better codec could extract more from what the camera's feeding it, but I'm pretty sure that most people are going to be plenty satisfied with the onboard codec.

As for HDMI vs. HD-SDI, HD-SDI is better in every category. Better cables, better connection, HD-SDI supports 1080/24PsF, it supports timecode... HDMI is the cheapo consumer connector. It can deliver the same video quality, but other than that everything about HD-SDI is better.
 
Barry_Green said:
All that stuff sounds fine, I think you'll be happy with it. As long as your lenses have iris rings you should be fine; if they don't, the cheap adapter you need is from Kipon.

I wouldn't worry about the Ki Pro Mini, for two reasons: 1) you may be happy with the onboard codec, and 2) it's not out yet anyway, so there's nothing to worry about. We shot all of "A Verse Before Dying" on the camera's own codec, and the editor has said it's the best-looking footage he's ever had in his suite. Obviously a better codec could extract more from what the camera's feeding it, but I'm pretty sure that most people are going to be plenty satisfied with the onboard codec.

As for HDMI vs. HD-SDI, HD-SDI is better in every category. Better cables, better connection, HD-SDI supports 1080/24PsF, it supports timecode... HDMI is the cheapo consumer connector. It can deliver the same video quality, but other than that everything about HD-SDI is better.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the great info! It is just fantastic to be able to come here and get comments, suggestions or information from people as knowledgeable as yourselves. I'll plan on sticking with the onboard codec then and see what it gets me.


Jan_Crittenden said:
What is the sensitivity on the microphone?
Click to expand...

Not Sure about the sensitivity. I went with it because it got good reviews and was affordable. I mostly shoot run & gun, but I have a lav mic for shooting interviews. B&H lists these specs for the mic:

Mic_Stats.png
 
lawrenceingram said:
Not Sure about the sensitivity. I went with it because it got good reviews and was affordable. I mostly shoot run & gun, but I have a lav mic for shooting interviews. B&H lists these specs for the mic:

Mic_Stats.png
Click to expand...
Just checked the website at Rode. They say:Sensitivity -36 dB re 1 Volt/Pascal (15 mV @ 94 dB SPL) +/- 2 dB @ 1kH

This mic is too hot. You will find it quickly gets too loud if you are set to optimally utilize the frequency response of the microphone. You will have undesired distortion when it gets too loud. You will either need a 10-15 dB pad or find a different mic that has something closer to -50db in sensitivity.

Best,

Jan
 
Jan_Crittenden said:
Just checked the website at Rode. They say:Sensitivity -36 dB re 1 Volt/Pascal (15 mV @ 94 dB SPL) +/- 2 dB @ 1kH

This mic is too hot. You will find it quickly gets too loud if you are set to optimally utilize the frequency response of the microphone. You will have undesired distortion when it gets too loud. You will either need a 10-15 dB pad or find a different mic that has something closer to -50db in sensitivity.

Best,

Jan
Click to expand...

Thanks so much for taking the time to share that Jan! I'll keep looking!

Lawrence
 
Jan -

We've been using a Rode NTG-1 with our DVX100b and HPX170s without any issues. Is the AF100 different in some regard? Or is this mic not optimal for the Panny cams (and we've been doing it "wrong" without issue for a long time)?
 
All the Panasonic AG handhelds are designed to use -50 or -60 mics. If the NTG1 is similarly hot, then it will be so on the HVX, HPX, DVX, or AF100.

Do you ever turn the audio pots all the way up, or only halfway? If you're comfortable with the range you're getting, then you should be comfortable with the AF100 too. But if you can only use a limited range before the mic output overloads the system, then you'd want a 10dB pad in there (or 15dB).

Frankly, if you can live with the limited range of a hotter mic, there's a chance (I'd have to test) that you'll end up with slightly cleaner sound from the hotter mic. Because you'd be using less internal boost for lower volume levels, you might get a cleaner signal after the pre-amps get through with it. But if you're in a loud situation you may not be able to turn it down low enough.

I will admit I didn't look up the specs on the NTG2 before saying it'd be okay, and that was negligent on my part. I was just going off all the praise that I see heaped on it, and I don't think I recally anyone who has reported it being troublesome, so ...
 
After Jan mentioned this, I investigated further and found some good information from Jan on this post. I'm going to go with the Sennheiser ME66/K6. It's more expensive than the one I had planned on getting, but Barry just convinced me to save some money on the external recorder! :grin:
 
I'm also using the K6/ME66/ME64 combo, these days via a Sennheiser ENG radio transmitter. Leaving aside the merits of the mic for the moment, since I already own it, I'd really like to understand how much to pad the mic output for my (hopefully soon to arrive) AF101.

Following the outline in Tomlinson Holman' book, back in the days of my DVX100 I figured out that I needed a -30dB pad between the mic and the camera. The critical number needed to figure that out was the maximum microphone input voltage to the camera that caused distortion, which he quoted in his book as 48 mV for the DVX100. Without a tone generator to provide calibration, I don't know how to obtain that figure except by trial an error (trying to record the loudest noise I think might be needed and listening on playback of the recording to see if it distorted).

I'm ashamed to admit that I've therefore stuck with the blind Mojo of a -30 dB pad even though I've changed cameras (HVX, Canons, now AF101). When I send the sound via the radio system I blindly dialled in -30dB output on the receiver and left it at that. I'd really like to figure out if I am just throwing away signal in a slightly more rigorous way than the "actress horror film scream" test.

Jan or Barry- do you happen to know the figure for the maximum input voltage before distortion for the AF101? It would be really handy to know. I wonder if some of the bad rep of the ME66 comes from people plugging it in blindly without the pad- certainly made a hell of a difference back in the DVX100 days.

Cheers, Hywel.
 
I love the AT m/s mikes. Not the cheapest but you have the option to record mono, stereo and then stereo imagery through the M/S. Really an amazing mike and I picked one up used for 500... I'ts been a solid performer for music, interviews, and run and gun. We tested it against the 416 and the quality of the recording is very similar but it doesn't have the reach of the 416, but then again you can't record stereo or M/S with the 416...

I've turned a lot of people onto this mike cause its' so versatile and can handle a lot for sure... I simply love the darn thing and I've used it all over for the past 4 years....
 
I have the rode ntg1 and have been using it with fantastic results with an hpx170. My volume nobs are rarely past a quater. I've used it in live events with dj speakers shaking the dancefloor and there was never a problem. I am aiming at getting af100 and if so is the audio setup for af100 same as the hpx170. I like the ntg1 and would like to keep it if I can.
 
Audio should be the same, if not identical. The controls are all identical, and the menu settings are identical. I don't know if the underlying hardware is identical or not.
 
So the AF100 doesn't have the option of choosing from -50dB to -60dB like the DVX had? -not that it matters so much, but still...
 
We use two rode ntg1 with our HVX200 so we'll be continuing to use them as well. If it's too hot for how we use it, I'll look at getting something to pad it. Good to know that, thanks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top