Panasonic When it Counts Roadshow
- Thread starter smelni
- Start date
Red 1 M original sensor body only is still $17.5k and a bargain at the price.
Add $5750 to that for the MX sensor upgrade. ( Still a serious bargain.)
But you are talking in either case a $30-40k package for a practical functional camera system. Depending on upgrade status, used R1 packages still bring around 75% plus of their original price. These are very high value for the dollar cameras for serious working pros.
Still seems to me that the entry level for pro grade full featured true 1920x1080p video cameras is around $7k and up regardless of how much people might wish it otherwise.
Last edited:
Red is far better in this respect than the DSLR's. Film cameras have rolling shutter issues too. To some extent it is an accepted part of the aesthetic of film and cinematographers adjust their shooting styles to minimize the negative impacts.
Am I missing something here?
Where was there an indication that the AF100 would be at the $10k more or under?
All I've read is that that cam without lens would be $6k or under?
Where was there an indication that the AF100 would be at the $10k more or under?
All I've read is that that cam without lens would be $6k or under?
Smelni went to the Panasonic When it Counts Roadshow and reported that that was what a marketing rep had told him. See post 6.
Of course, it would be nice if Jan Crittenden set the record straight.
Last edited:
Thanks.
Look for it, and couldn't find it.
and yes, it would be good customer relations for Jan to clarify this.
Look for it, and couldn't find it.
and yes, it would be good customer relations for Jan to clarify this.
maranfilms
Veteran
It's only worth what they can sell it for. and if many here like myself won't budge past the 6k mark, then it ain't worth a damn. Now it may be worth 10k if your willing to spend that, Im certainly not. Like so many others, I will continue to shoot dslr. And now with the hack out there. If the AF100, has any mud, and resolves less than the gh13 many people are going to be seriously disapointed. And that will definetly drive the market price down in a hurry.:beer:
maranfilms
Veteran
at
Thats great for you. But most of us here don't come close to making 30,000 in three days. or 10k per shoot. (I guess thats what your saying. "three shoots, each shoot could buy a cam, with or without a lens.") Infact most of us are struggling right now. So yeah anything over 6k will be a deal breaker for many.
By the way, do you have any work I can see. Im curious to see what a 10k per day shoot looks like in the corporate video world? Please, post a link to your reel or some footage. thanks
heavyG
Underwater Giraffe Member
We do branded online content and advertising www.heavygfilms.com or www.legourmet.tv
Not razzle dazzle stuff... It's more about who we know and how we deal with the client. Before starting out with this style of work I was a line producer doing big budget TV spots for national and international clients / ad agencies.
Our current budget for a day is a fair bit more than 10K.
G.
Not razzle dazzle stuff... It's more about who we know and how we deal with the client. Before starting out with this style of work I was a line producer doing big budget TV spots for national and international clients / ad agencies.
Our current budget for a day is a fair bit more than 10K.
G.
Jesse Brauning
Well-known member
6 Grand was never more than a rumor people, come on. Don't be dumb.
If you can't afford it, you can't afford it. A professional camera is for professionals.
If you need to save up rent money to pay for it, then it's not for you.
If you can't afford it, you can't afford it. A professional camera is for professionals.
If you need to save up rent money to pay for it, then it's not for you.
Nope. That was the official estimate back in April.
He said under $10k to quote Seth. $6 is under $10k isnt it? I dont think its quite the time to jump to conclusions. Going back over the years Ive heard "under 10k" used more as a barrier mark. Such as the only camera with 4:2:2 under 10K. That was the HVX and it was well under 10K. And then even if its $9999.00, Ill wait to see whats in it first to determine weather its worth that price to me. What if they had built in OIS or overcome rolling shutter issues - could be worth the money. Anyway my point is - wait and see.
Seems to me, no matter how you cut it, a decent entry level professional HD camera with all the ergonomics, functionality and features that make such a camera practical and efficient is going to cost at least $7k and up. Doesn't matter whether you are talking 1/3", 1/2", 2/3" or larger format.
Fine, but why say $6K when you don't have a clue? If it's now close to $10K -- and we don't know if it is -- Panasonic's going to have some 'splainin' to do, Lucy. For that money, it could have P2 and AVC Intra. The 3K fixed Scarlet will have a lens and all the trimmings for less than $10K, and the only thing the AF100 has that Scarlet doesn't is a micro-4/3 sensor.
John Caballero
Veteran
Because that was what was announced at NAB.
That's what I was referring to. Why would Panasonic have announced a $6K price point if they weren't fairly sure how much it would cost? Surely they wouldn't have changed it so much that it now costs $4K more. As I said, they should've been able to add P2 and AVC Intra for $4K (you can buy the HPG20 for a little more than $4K). If indeed the price has jumped so much, what else could explain it? Global shutter? Maybe 4K output? Some other bombshell?
Pietro Impagliazzo
Well-known member
They put up because it was never as bad as in the DSLRs.
I've only seen RED One rolling shuter issues in a music video shot with the M sensor, and the shots were high energy handheld done with long lenses.
That's pretty weird... Specially with the Sony VG-10 so cheap already available soon.
Perhaps lossless compression is being added. That would be a definite killer.
If Panasonic already said $6K, wouldn't the roadshow have been safe by saying $6K? I mean, merely repeating a previously announced official price point wouldn't have amounted to going out on a limb, unless of course it was known that the price had indeed increased (for whatever reason).
Last edited: