Quieting down... Something special

Though I don't think Panny is going to price it at 12K

I expect something a little cheaper, around 8 or 9K.

Out of the fact that they usually come out with cheaper cameras than Sony in the same range.
 
Well since the F3 is now down to around 13K, body only, I am considering it, and considering canceling the Af100 or using it for a short time and selling it while it's still pretty hot. Having watched Convergence shot on F3 was pretty compelling evidence for the image quality - extremely film-like. Though I know I haven't seen the best of the Af100, certainly not the extent of its film-look capability. No doubt the AF100 is one hell of a package for the money. But another factor I am weighing is that everyone and their brother is going to be getting one, and in a short time, having an AF100 might mean as much to a client as having only an HVX now. My local rental house is not buying the F3 specifically because they don't want it cutting into their higher priced RED package. That in itself really has me thinking....
 
Barry_Green said:
The NXCAM is the obvious competitor to the AF100.

All other things being equal, that would likely be an advantage for folks. But we have no idea what other things will or won't be equal. We have no idea what features it will have, or won't have. The one thing I can assure you is: there is no free lunch. If it does everything the AF100 does, and more -- then it will cost more. Likely it will do some things the AF100 doesn't, and it won't do some things the AF100 does. That's how Sony and Panasonic have always danced in the past, and there's no reason to expect them to change their style now. There will absolutely, unquestionably, and without a doubt be compromises. It's the buyer's job to determine which set of compromises best suits their needs.
Click to expand...

It's funny, Barry, I was just talking to a friend prior to reading this post and told him if I had to speculate (and it's all speculation at this point), I would guess that the S35 NXCAM from Sony would probably not have the AF-100's multiple frame rate options, so you'd potentially have better dynamic range that comes from the S35 sensor, but not have the variable frame rates you'll be able to get from the AF100. So we'll have to decide whether we want a slightly better image, or more framerates..lol, oh well...
 
A cameraman with a Sony F3 package will probably be able to charge a little more for his/her daily rate than one operating an AF100. It's something to consider. I personally use a full size Panasonic HD camera (HVX-2000), and it makes almost as much $$$$ as I do each day. It's kind of like having a Mercedes payment each month, but if you are working your camera steadily, it will make money for you.

As far as which to buy -- it doesn't really matter much. A skilled cameraman with a AF100 will shoot circles around a less-skilled F3 operator. Spend more time developing your lighting skills and less obsessing about the technology.
 
bgundu said:
I have no doubt Panasonic is working on a P2 version of the AF100. Is seems like a no-brainer to make a beefier version to compete with the F3.
Click to expand...

I'm sure that's the case, but I was less saying I want a P2 version of the AF100 and more saying that AVC-intra is a phenomenal codec and all people are talkign about are the Nano flash. I have four 32gb P2 cards and I like knowing I can rely on them not to corrupt my footage, to work in extreme heat or cold, etc.

I'm a little surprised that nobody, even Barry, has so much as mentioned the HPG20 for this camera. After all, AVC-intra is a fantastic 10 bit full raster codec is it not? And many of us out there have P2 cards that would do us better being put to work rather than selling for a fraction of what we bought them for.
 
I personally would love to get the HPG20. It's a bit out of my price range. It definitely sounds like a good investment for you if you have a lot of P2 Cards. But... if Panasonic does make a an upgrade model to the Af100 that uses P2 and AVC-Intra, it may be a wiser decision to not invest $4000 bucks on an external recorder with the Af100. But that's just me....


Nick Harris said:
I'm sure that's the case, but I was less saying I want a P2 version of the AF100 and more saying that AVC-intra is a phenomenal codec and all people are talkign about are the Nano flash. I have four 32gb P2 cards and I like knowing I can rely on them not to corrupt my footage, to work in extreme heat or cold, etc.

I'm a little surprised that nobody, even Barry, has so much as mentioned the HPG20 for this camera. After all, AVC-intra is a fantastic 10 bit full raster codec is it not? And many of us out there have P2 cards that would do us better being put to work rather than selling for a fraction of what we bought them for.
Click to expand...
 
bgundu said:
I personally would love to get the HPG20. It's a bit out of my price range. It definitely sounds like a good investment for you if you have a lot of P2 Cards. But... if Panasonic does make a an upgrade model to the Af100 that uses P2 and AVC-Intra, it may be a wiser decision to not invest $4000 bucks on an external recorder with the Af100. But that's just me....
Click to expand...

Oh yes, I'd agree with you there. I was actually referring to pairing the HPG20 with the Sony F3. I know we're in the AF100 forum but people have been discussing the F3 in this thread and many others. My apologies, I forgot where I was :)
 
Nick Harris said:
I'm sure that's the case, but I was less saying I want a P2 version of the AF100 and more saying that AVC-intra is a phenomenal codec and all people are talkign about are the Nano flash. I have four 32gb P2 cards and I like knowing I can rely on them not to corrupt my footage, to work in extreme heat or cold, etc.

I'm a little surprised that nobody, even Barry, has so much as mentioned the HPG20 for this camera. After all, AVC-intra is a fantastic 10 bit full raster codec is it not? And many of us out there have P2 cards that would do us better being put to work rather than selling for a fraction of what we bought them for.
Click to expand...

Barry and Jan have both mentioned the HPG20 option but not a lot. More at the beginning when the cam wasn't well defined and many were asking for AVC-intra on board.
 
G-Man said:
It's funny, Barry, I was just talking to a friend prior to reading this post and told him if I had to speculate (and it's all speculation at this point), I would guess that the S35 NXCAM from Sony would probably not have the AF-100's multiple frame rate options, so you'd potentially have better dynamic range that comes from the S35 sensor, but not have the variable frame rates you'll be able to get from the AF100. So we'll have to decide whether we want a slightly better image, or more framerates..lol, oh well...
Click to expand...

One thing Sony said in a paper about the AVCHD codec is that the NXCam will have AVCHD, and not the 35Mbps long GOP of the EX1/3 and F3.

I think the S35 having more DOF control, greater DR and better low light abilities due to the size of the sensor, but those will only be fractional increases. That will be more a matter of knowing your AF100 to equalize the cameras.

Its unlikely the NXCam will have the frame rates since the more expensive versions like the EX1 and F3 don't have it. Unless of course, Sony reads this and throws it into the final development.
 
Last edited:
I've used the HPG20 with the AF100. The biggest problem is that it's pretty huge, it's bulkier than the camera itself. It's not exactly a sleek portable situation. If you've got a long cable and are running it over to video village, then it's totally practical. But if you're wanting a small portable unit, the nano is tiny compared to the size and bulk of the HPG20.
 
ken37 said:
A cameraman with a Sony F3 package will probably be able to charge a little more for his/her daily rate than one operating an AF100.
Click to expand...

I think this is an important point. Whether I buy an AF100 or F3, I'll still want a matte box, follow focus, rails, new lenses, etc. The total price difference for me between the two cameras, factoring in everything needed, is roughly $10K. I feel I can charge $250/day more for the F3 than the AF100. Even if the camera only has a useful life of two years before I move on, that means I would need only 40 shoots in two years to make up the price difference. And then I would have a camera that will resale much higher than the AF100. Plus having the F3 will likely edge me into a progressively higher level clientele. I think it was Barry who once advised to buy the best camera you can afford that will make you money. I think it's an aggressive, positive business plan.
 
TwinCitiesShooter said:
I think this is an important point. Whether I buy an AF100 or F3, I'll still want a matte box, follow focus, rails, new lenses, etc. The total price difference for me between the two cameras, factoring in everything needed, is roughly $10K. I feel I can charge $250/day more for the F3 than the AF100. Even if the camera only has a useful life of two years before I move on, that means I would need only 40 shoots in two years to make up the price difference. And then I would have a camera that will resale much higher than the AF100. Plus having the F3 will likely edge me into a progressively higher level clientele. I think it was Barry who once advised to buy the best camera you can afford that will make you money. I think it's an aggressive, positive business plan.
Click to expand...

I see you live in the Twin Cities like myself. As you know we live in a Panasonic town. 75% of the jobs I shoot are on some sort of Panasonic, 13% or so on the RED, 10% on one of the Canon DSLR's, and 2% on a Sony of some kind. I think in this town you'll have trouble renting any sony enough to make it's money back, I mean Cinequipt sold a lot of their Sony's because of it. I already have 5 days booked with my AF100 in January and early February. The word is out on the AF100 in town and the producers in town have been contacting me because of it. Don't miss the boat man.
 
Last edited:
Hey Brian, it's Kevin. ;-) Yeah, you and I have talked a bit about the AF100, awesome to hear you have some AF100 shoots lined up already. I mentioned in another post that these cameras look like they'll have a lot of overlapping territory with shoots that could be done with either camera. I don't know about this being a Panasonic town though, I think most people are brand-agnostic and pick their camera/cameraman based on quality, price and ease of use in post. Sony hasn't been matching up, but that could easily change. For instance, half my shoots these days are 5D, a real game-changer. Clients have been thrilled, but come early next year, that camera will obviously no longer cut it with a lot of folks. I haven't made up my mind about which way to go. The AF100 looks awesome for a lot of jobs, but I'd love to have that HDCAM SR potential (as you have the Red potential), and some of the other F3 features. Let's definitely talk more about this when we shoot together soon!
 
TwinCitiesShooter said:
I think this is an important point. Whether I buy an AF100 or F3, I'll still want a matte box, follow focus, rails, new lenses, etc. The total price difference for me between the two cameras, factoring in everything needed, is roughly $10K. I feel I can charge $250/day more for the F3 than the AF100. Even if the camera only has a useful life of two years before I move on, that means I would need only 40 shoots in two years to make up the price difference. And then I would have a camera that will resale much higher than the AF100. Plus having the F3 will likely edge me into a progressively higher level clientele. I think it was Barry who once advised to buy the best camera you can afford that will make you money. I think it's an aggressive, positive business plan.
Click to expand...

A good way to determine your daily rate is the one-percent rule. A $40,000 camera package generally will rent for approx $400/day. Based on that, it's more realistic to expect an additional $100/day income for the F3 over the AF100.
Image counts for a lot; it will be interesting to see which of these two cameras generates a greater gotta-have-it factor.
 
I'm finding different rates here. My HVX200 gets $150-200/day. I think $400-$450 for an F3 package is doable (more if they want Super Speeds or the like). I agree that a big determinant is how sought-after the cameras are. As Brian pointed out, many clients already know about the AF100. I don't think Sony marketing has been nearly as successful here. Makes it harder for guys who want the higher-end camera but will then have to educate clients on its advantages. Feels like I just got done doing that with the 5D. ;-)
 
TwinCitiesShooter said:
Hey Brian, it's Kevin. ;-) Yeah, you and I have talked a bit about the AF100, awesome to hear you have some AF100 shoots lined up already. I mentioned in another post that these cameras look like they'll have a lot of overlapping territory with shoots that could be done with either camera. I don't know about this being a Panasonic town though, I think most people are brand-agnostic and pick their camera/cameraman based on quality, price and ease of use in post. Sony hasn't been matching up, but that could easily change. For instance, half my shoots these days are 5D, a real game-changer. Clients have been thrilled, but come early next year, that camera will obviously no longer cut it with a lot of folks. I haven't made up my mind about which way to go. The AF100 looks awesome for a lot of jobs, but I'd love to have that HDCAM SR potential (as you have the Red potential), and some of the other F3 features. Let's definitely talk more about this when we shoot together soon!
Click to expand...

Hey Kevin :)

I hear what you are saying about being hired for your skill, but sometimes they want a specific camera. If you can't deliver they might just hire you without a rental or worse yet hire someone else. The current buzz in town is for the AF100 so that's what I'm getting. If the buzz changes I'll sell it and get something else, simple as that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top