Quick AF-100 & Sony F3 comparision

Sounds pretty much like how I would expect such a test to go, but everyone please -- we don't want another "this vs. that" fight, so please remember the crucial points here -- he said they only had a couple of hours with the F3, whereas he's had plenty of time to get to know and fine-tune and optimize his AF100. Nobody expects the AF100 to deliver images that are every bit as sharp and noise-free and indistinguishable from an F3; the F3 has reasons why it costs 3x as much. And we're never going to see the true difference after it's been downrezzed and recompressed on Vimeo!

But I do appreciate the way you kept pricing in context and said that "for the money, the AF100 more than held its own"; that seems like a reasonable summation, and, unlike those of us who will see only the Vimeo version, you were making your assessment based on actually seeing the footage live and working with the camera-original footage.

Good to know that you're happy with what you've got and it's delivering results that you like!
 
Other than the sharpness, I could easily be convinced these were two different scene file settings from the AF, at least as viewed online.
 
They booth look good. More choices at affordable prices. That's important. Can't wait to see more stuff from the NEX-FS100. Exciting times.
 
I too liked the look of the AF100 better... but it's a total Coke vs Pepsi thing. And a lot of that probably had to do with the particular scene files and maybe the glass. I don't see anything in the Vimeo clip that made one somehow inherently better than the other... both looked really darn good.
 
Not a significant difference, though I have no illusions that in certain circumstances (worse lighting, more aggressive grading, etc.) that the F3 would hold up better.
 
you could notice on the wide shot the f3 renders the fine details on the hair really well while af100 blurs it out. still, af100 holds up pretty well

fs100 is gonna be pooping great images as well :)
 
Hey, the last live episode of my show was devoted to a comparison between the AF-100 and the F3. it aired live on thrusday, march 17th at www.jtown.tv.
we should be done by the end of this week with the edited clips, but if you use and iphone to surf to the site you can see the entire episode already up.

thanks,
jesse
 
I agree, we sure are a lucky bunch at the moment.
I thought that the F3 looked better in the wide dolly shot. In all the other shots, I thought the differences were minimal: although I would
give a slight edge to the AF100 actually.
With that said, they both look great, and I do think we are a lucky bunch at this time.
 
I'm not sure I understand the difference in the ratings of the camera. How/ why is one camera at 400 and the other at 1250 to get the same exposure.

I get that the sony is a much more sensitive chip, and I also get that video exposure is non-linear will not conform to a light meter exactly, but if the menu is labeled as iso or asa, shouldn't it be close?

Same lighting, same stop, radically different sensitivity setting? So would the panasonic's gain be maxed out before the sony's is even started.
 
I brought up that same question, initially- however I don't think that it's quite as radically different as it first seems. I say this because if you look at the 2 exposures- the AF100 exposure is 65-70 IRE on the model's face and the F3 exposure is 50-55 IRE. With that being said, the F3 is still more sensitive. Also, I wouldnt say that the AF100 is maxed out at ISO 1250. I've achieved usable shots at ISO 2500 and even 3200.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top