Panasonic AF-100 being called the "DSLR killer". Any thoughts?

D

dtjohns1

Well-known member
I come from strickly a guerilla music video background and I was about to pull the trigger on a 5d to compliment my T2i until I heard the news of the $4995 price tag for the AF-100. Now I am driving myself crazy as to what my next move should be. In my field the artist I work with and the people that see their videos could care less about moiree and aliasing. All they want to see is that the image looks incredible and it is edited well. With my background will the AF-100 be worth me spending the extra money or is the boost in quality minuscle to the cost. I know about the advantages of the audio and everything else but I do music videos so I rarely ever use audio and if I do I have a zoom h4n and also the form factor of a dslr allows me to be a little bit quicker and discrete since im not getting permits for my locations. Also do you guys think the AF-100 will really do away with the dslr craze?
 
I would wait to see the results of the GH2, D7000 and (hopefully) Canon 5DIII.

The AF100 will no doubt have a better all round image... cleaner, sharper... possibly more DR and, as you mention, minimal moire/alias/skew. But by the time it has launched... there should be 2nd generation DSLRs starting to show up.
 
You basically answered your question, DSLR gives you a lot more discretion and you don't often need XLR mic'd audio, so why buy something that might give you a better picture, but ultimately is too big for you to use and has features you will never use.
 
^^^Well people are acting like the image is going to be SOOO... incredible and the clarity, quality, etc. is my main focus because thats how i retain and get more customers. In the music video world you dont want to be behind the curve gear wise. Ive seen people who had all the work in the world with their hvxs and xha1s with 35 adapters left with nothing after the dslr phase hit and i dont want that to happen to me. I currently have a good amount of money to spend and I want to make the right choice as to what to do now so i can begin saving or know not to spend as much money on other things such as lighting, lenses, etc. Ill deal with the discretion issue if the image is noticably better than canon dslrs. But if it looks anything like gh1(3) footage ill prob. pass. People say its so great but Im not seeing anything special
 
Last edited:
Did the Wii kill XBox or PlayStation?

I think this is what time will tell. I think there are two different segments. Two different people. I KNOW....right now....there will be many "high-end" DSLR users who are gone for good. (Barry Green being the prime example) But more than HALF (prob much more) of this forum's user base will NEVER be on Barry's level...AND THEY KNOW IT.

The Wii's marketing objective was NOT to winover GAMERS. Their objective was to bring people into gaming that HAD NEVER PLAYED A VIDEO GAME IN THEIR LIFE!! The Wii COMPLETELY LACKS IN RAW POWER....but it's user groups (senior citizen centers, house wives, workout buffs) could care less....it does what it need to....AND FILLS THEIR NEEDS.

I don't think the DSLR market was EVER AIMED AT US. We're lucky that with a few tweaks, we've gotten away with it....but the truth is....the DSLR revolution was aimed at people who WEREN'T shooting video BEFORE. Photographers that hadn't shot much video....are NOW SHOOTING VIDEO. Soccer moms that were already shooting pics of their children....are now shooting jello-goodness on the soccer field. DSLRs are here to stay....but whether are not they stay with our "high-end" user...that's another question. Whether or not DSLRs stay in OUR HANDS is another question.

I PROMISE YOU THIS: Soccer moms aren't going to put down their D5000...and pick up a AF100. Newer micro-budget/hobby film-makers aren't ALL going to put down their T2is/GH13s and pick up a AF100...because they can't afford it....and for the work they are shooting...FRANKLY THEY SHOULDN'T. (I know I'm not shooting anything that DEMANDS the AF100) That doesn't mean that Kholi, Barry, and other "high-end" users won't happily walk into the promised AF100 land and NEVER LOOK BACK.

I'm THRILLED with the upcoming launch of the AF100....it means GREAT THINGS NOW and in the FUTURE for indi film makers.

Judy Smith is shooting vids of her baby in the bath tub with her husband's T2i right now and she is JUST AS HAPPY! :)
 
HHL said:
....the DSLR revolution was aimed at people who WEREN'T shooting video BEFORE.
Click to expand...

Well... it only became a revolution after cinematographers and filmmakers discovered what they could do with the DSLR. The DSLR Revolution was unintentional I'd say, and has yet to be really be capitalized on by Canon in my opinion. Producers and directors aren't asking for Red anymore, they're asking for 5D and 7D, and when Canon ads a few grand worth of business to their DSLR units (or even more), I'm thinking their dominance will continue.

HHL said:
That doesn't mean that Kholi, Barry, and other "high-end" users won't happily walk into the promised AF100 land and NEVER LOOK BACK.
Click to expand...

The 5D/7D tools have significant cache built up with "high-end" users. You might be surprised by what's being shot on these cameras. The AF100 would have to be pretty special to displace the Canons as the go-to cameras for commercials, and web video. As I've said before - All it has to be is "good enough" to produce the intended results.

Having much more color depth and resolution is useless and not worth the expense if the general public can't tell the difference between something shot on a 5D, film, and Red.

.
 
Exactly. Rather or not these DSLR's were intended for us is irrelevant since "Pro's" from all walks of life are using them and loving it. Lets be clear, there are some people who just do not like DSLR's for production use and even if there weren't any alaising or moire, they would still be bitching about the other so called limitations.

Will this camera be the end of DSLR's for production work? I doubt it and but only time will tell. The question everyone should be asking themselves is does this camera offer a feature that justifies the added price.

If your shooting only music videos, I would choose the 5D since you probably already have the support gear.
 
Not sure you can call a repackaged HDSLR with audio inputs & better output options a killer when it's 4x - 5x the price of the camera it's improving upon.

I'm going to bring up the 'camera which shall not be spoken of till it's released' & say that for around the same price difference you're getting greater distinction in resolution, DR (most probably) & more importantly recording format. For the extra $$ there needs to be something more to set it apart & I think the 'camera which shall not be spoken of till it's released' offers that distinction... in theory... once it gets here... whenever that is...
 
Last edited:
If you own a few bitties like a nikkor 14 2.8 and love the stupid view it gives on a DSLR, If you want to travel light and do stills to the panny wont cut it, If you like being able to fly your camera on a $500 stabiliser etc the the panny wont cut it

if you want to shoot without lights the panny probably wont cut it

If you are pissed with synch sound, rainbow men in striped shirts, pissed with mpeg streamclip and hours of lost computer time

pissed with sweating when filming anything with a wall in the bakground

the the panny could be a godsend

Id love one, what I would trade for it is my EX1 not my 5 or 7

S
 
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=2109045&postcount=5

It's worth every cent. Especially when you consider that you'll be spending a couple grand on accessories to make your dslr function like a camcorder. I think the DSLR's will still be pretty useful for B camera and interesting angles / crash cams, I can't wait to shoot with a more traditional workflow and not worry about a jerry rigged solution blowing up on set.
 
Well, OTHER than those features it's a repackaged HDSLR.

I guess what I'm saying is that people have been able to work around the HDSLR's shortcomings & many of these features & still produce good work. The basic image you get out of either should be fairly close & I could see the lower tier guys sticking it out with 5D's & 7D's due to price alone.
 
Even when I get the af100, I still won't put my 5d away. It will be a great bcam/ "extreme wide" camera for music videos. The 14mm ruby zoom, I'm buying is a TOTALLY different lens on full frame, its extraordinarily wide..... but is a nice decent wide on the af100. More than wide enough for any narritive work.

You really only use extreme wides on music videos or surreal films.
 
To the O.P. - if your current DSLR is doing what you need and delivering you the paychecks -- why would you need to change?

If customers start demanding the AF100, then buy an AF100. If the customers don't know or care, and you're happy using what you've got, and it's delivering the results you need, then why spend any additional money on anything? Just keep working.

I think that among professional users, the 5D/7D are headed for extinction, because they're such hacks and workarounds to get them to a functional level. For those who can afford the difference, there is simply no reason to choose the DSLR, and there are dozens of reasons to choose the AF100. Workflow, reliability, and ease of use are massive factors in professional circumstances where time is money, and screwing around with a hacked-together frankenstein product and trying to wedge it into doing something it was never designed for, is expensive.

DSLRs will have their niche, and obviously among no-budget folks who couldn't possibly afford an AF100, they will still use the DSLR. But for those of us who don't want to faff around with 12-minute time limits and overheating and fiddly mini-HDMI connectors and post-sync'ing sound and the inability to get a decent wide-angle shot without crawling aliasing and rainbow moire everywhere and guessing about exposure and ... well, for those folks, I do confidently predict that the DSLR craze is going to experience a pretty big reality check. Doesn't mean there'll be an overnight shift, but I would be very surprised to see any working pro who, after experiencing both of them, would say "well, I prefer to jump through the DSLR hoops." I just don't think that's gonna happen.

But I do think the 5D will still have a unique position because of its hyper-shallow DOF look, a look that you just can't get on film or through pretty much any other way (unless you want to shoot 65mm, and nobody really shoots 65mm anymore).
 
@Barry I can't help it man lol. I always like to have the latest and greatest thing when it comes to technology. But lately i've been hating the "buy something today and 3 weeks later something cheaper and better comes out" scheme thats been evident. Its like technology is moving at a more rapid rate than ever before.
 
Which is exactly why I say -- don't go chasing it. Get what you need, and then quit shopping. As long as what you have is doing the job you need, what does it matter that there's something else newer/better/later/greater out?

When your current product is limiting you, or is no longer in demand, etc., that's the time to go shopping. :thumbsup:
 
Barry_Green said:
To the O.P. - if your current DSLR is doing what you need and delivering you the paychecks -- why would you need to change?

If customers start demanding the AF100, then buy an AF100. If the customers don't know or care, and you're happy using what you've got, and it's delivering the results you need, then why spend any additional money on anything? Just keep working.

I think that among professional users, the 5D/7D are headed for extinction, because they're such hacks and workarounds to get them to a functional level. For those who can afford the difference, there is simply no reason to choose the DSLR, and there are dozens of reasons to choose the AF100. Workflow, reliability, and ease of use are massive factors in professional circumstances where time is money, and screwing around with a hacked-together frankenstein product and trying to wedge it into doing something it was never designed for, is expensive.

DSLRs will have their niche, and obviously among no-budget folks who couldn't possibly afford an AF100, they will still use the DSLR. But for those of us who don't want to faff around with 12-minute time limits and overheating and fiddly mini-HDMI connectors and post-sync'ing sound and the inability to get a decent wide-angle shot without crawling aliasing and rainbow moire everywhere and guessing about exposure and ... well, for those folks, I do confidently predict that the DSLR craze is going to experience a pretty big reality check. Doesn't mean there'll be an overnight shift, but I would be very surprised to see any working pro who, after experiencing both of them, would say "well, I prefer to jump through the DSLR hoops." I just don't think that's gonna happen.

But I do think the 5D will still have a unique position because of its hyper-shallow DOF look, a look that you just can't get on film or through pretty much any other way (unless you want to shoot 65mm, and nobody really shoots 65mm anymore).
Click to expand...

I disagree with one thing Barry & that's you assuming that HDSLR craze will stop. Aslo remember the gh2 is on the way, a new 5d on the way as well as a new 7d. Hdslr cameras will only get better and cheaper and still provide an amazing image quality.



The present and future it INTERNET and most footage shot on more expensive cameras is lost in the online transition. Hdslr for internet and delivering projects will always be here. It is much easier for a company to buy 2 Canon t2i cameras and load them up with gear and still be a lot less than the price of an Af100.


IMO a lot of magic is done in post, Hdslrs are here to stay and will only get better
 
The HDSLR craze will continue for those for whome an HDSLR makes sense. But that isn't everyone. For those who don't have $5,000 and don't mind or aren't concerned by the limitations of the DSLR, then obviously things will continue as they have been.

What I'm saying is that for pros who have a budget, I think the DSLR "craze" will indeed come to a halt. I think the AF100 will do to the DSLR, what the DSLR did to the 35mm lens adapter, and for the same reasons.

Among no-budget guys, I expect we won't see much of a change. Among guys with budgets, I think there'll be a pretty drastic change. It won't happen immediately because there are those who've already bought gear, but among those who rent their cameras it'll be immediate. And there are tons of folks who have grown weary of the workarounds and compromises, and for them it'll be an immediate switch.
 
Barry_Green said:
The HDSLR craze will continue for those for whome an HDSLR makes sense. But that isn't everyone. For those who don't have $5,000 and don't mind or aren't concerned by the limitations of the DSLR, then obviously things will continue as they have been.

What I'm saying is that for pros who have a budget, I think the DSLR "craze" will indeed come to a halt. I think the AF100 will do to the DSLR, what the DSLR did to the 35mm lens adapter, and for the same reasons.

Among no-budget guys, I expect we won't see much of a change. Among guys with budgets, I think there'll be a pretty drastic change. It won't happen immediately because there are those who've already bought gear, but among those who rent their cameras it'll be immediate. And there are tons of folks who have grown weary of the workarounds and compromises, and for them it'll be an immediate switch.
Click to expand...


With much respect Barry , lets see what happens. 35 mm adapters provided the look but at a cost of light and sharpness , to me that is not a good analogy because even with all that it was still more expensive.


Hdslr is a "photography" camera at heart and there will ALWAYS be a place on any set for one. Now with that excellent photography camera ( 7d ) the movie function / mode will only improve over time.

Canon 60d was just introduced at a price of $1099 , I highly doubt anyone or anybody can doubt or deny the value that such a camera has. From pictures to movies. I am not arguing on the quality of the Af100 as by everyone who has used one can clearly state that it is simply another beast.


But remember there are a lot of excellent cameras right now at these DSLRS still continue to dominate. Ever seen a 7d flying in a little self controlled helicopter = looks amazing.

Let me not keep pointing my views, but I am here to tell you the 100% honest truth that Dslr have only begun and for their value/performance will ne here for a very long time & YES I will love to own & probably will an Af100, but there will always be a place on the set for a HDslr photo/video camera.
:thumbsup:
 
Barry_Green said:
I think that among professional users, the 5D/7D are headed for extinction, because they're such hacks and workarounds to get them to a functional level. For those who can afford the difference, there is simply no reason to choose the DSLR, and there are dozens of reasons to choose the AF100. Workflow, reliability, and ease of use are massive factors in professional circumstances where time is money, and screwing around with a hacked-together frankenstein product and trying to wedge it into doing something it was never designed for, is expensive.

DSLRs will have their niche, and obviously among no-budget folks who couldn't possibly afford an AF100, they will still use the DSLR.
Click to expand...

Barry makes a good point.

I bought my 7D about 5 months ago for still photography and video. I'm a junior film student, so the camera is used primarily for shooting video - short docs, narratives, and experiments - but I've put it to use here doing small jobs; and I'm using it as a still camera primarily as a way to make money - I'd minor in photography if I could.

The point is, this will be my signature weapon through grad school, but my target career is screenwriting - I'm just using the camera now to learn, make films, and enter them in festivals to help boost my resume. Once school's over, I'm off to the writing world.

By that time, this camera will be obsolete, replaced by a 9DII or something with an equally ridiculous name, a built-in Zoom H4N, zebras, histograms, a 15" fold-out LCD, and an inflatable shouldermount for the same price as a 7D. But that's my POV: I expect DSLR's to be replaced by DSLR's. Some may graduate to bigger and badder more holistic camcorders, but I think there will be a market for them for a long time, especially as the key problems are addressed (moire/aliasing, 4gb file limits, codec, compression, audio, stability, etc.), and like Barry said, those who cannot afford $8,000+ cameras will do backflips when they see they can get an amazing shot with a tiny DSLR.

If I were to continue in the video business, I would find the tools that work for me and use them to their max, then replace when it is economically feasible, in regards to both cost of the new equipment and payoff from their new groundbreaking features. The AF-100 is a great camera; it all just depends on what is a smarter choice financially, IMO, because there's no point in breaking the bank over the newest toy when the antique works well enough.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top