So there's no AF100 Successor - Now what?

In a couple of days, Panasonic will be releasing G7 - 4K from the 16 MPX sensor, DFD Auto Focus, articulating screen. The video specs are almost the same as GH4 (unless they are not). So GH5, whenever it comes out, must have a lot more than this. For the MFT lens owners, not everything is lost.

And, as a side note, Pentax is alleged to be coming out with a full frame camera by the Christmas shopping season. As of now, their consumer line is APS-C and their high end/pro line is Medium Format. IMO, this is going to be a trend that other manufacturers will follow.
 
So, does anyone think there's a chance that there's a surprise video camera in the works to actually replace the AF100 other then the GH4 and adapter(s)? Is the word definitive that Panasonic will not pursue filling that space and leave it to the modular DSLM workflow and upcoming DVX200? Maybe it just made it just made no business sense for Panasonic to wrap the GH4 and YAGH in a singular body with modest improvements. Yeah, I'm fishing for some information others may have come across, but perhaps it's a lost cause.
 
I would speculate that there won't be any more pro level MFT camcorders in the $5,000 range. It seems like, in order to justify a $5,000 price tag these days, a manufacturer will have to offer at least an s35 size sensor. Will then there be a lower priced LS300 type of a unit? Chances are against it as well, as LS300 will likely be sole MFT contender for a while.
 
I think the 2015 dust needs to settle, JVC, Panasonic, Black Magic and Sony all have released some very cool cameras and most of the newest ones haven’t even been tested. When they have been and are compared side by side, the cream always rises to the top. Who knows our 2014 GH4’s may still look real hard to beat.
 
Vardalos said:
... Who knows our 2014 GH4’s may still look real hard to beat.
Click to expand...
Panasonic claims 12 stops for DVX200 out of the same sensor as in GH4. If true, it's a ~ 2-stop improvement. If they manage to add BSI onto the next (GH5) version, they should be able to get another stop or two on top of the 12.

They could also increase the pixel count for the stills shooters and perhaps offer ~ 4.5K type sensor readout for video as well.

There's still room for improvement in the MFT tech.
 
DLD said:
Panasonic claims 12 stops for DVX200 out of the same sensor as in GH4. If true, it's a ~ 2-stop improvement.
Click to expand...

It should be pointed out that that is only with Vlog-L... so when that firmware update drops for the GH4, it should see an improvement as well. And I don't think the DVX200 and GH4 are going to share the same sensor (though, I could be wrong)


There's still room for improvement in the MFT tech.
Click to expand...

While it's not as sexy as S35, there are all sorts of practical advantages to MFT. I was recording a friend's event Friday, and the photographer was using a Canon 70-200mm, and I realized I had forgotten just how huge (and more expensive) that thing is compared to the Panasonic 35-100mm. A shame that Panasonic didn't release a lens-less DVX200 variant, but I think the GH line is going to do well with videographers for quite some time for reasons like that.
 
Mike Harvey said:
... While it's not as sexy as S35, there are all sorts of practical advantages to MFT. I was recording a friend's event Friday, and the photographer was using a Canon 70-200mm, and I realized I had forgotten just how huge (and more expensive) that thing is compared to the Panasonic 35-100mm...
Click to expand...
One of the major features of the current generation of point-n-shoot's is the incredible magnification they get out of small sensors - ~ 80X on top models.

Obviously, there are trade-offs. One inch and MFT, it might be said, are occupying the happy medium for the day-to-day practical shooter.
 
Gary Senda said:
Here is a snapshot of LS300 straight from VLC, sensor remapped (VSM 86%, so no oversampling), no CC, factory settings (gamma video, color matrix normal, wide dinamic range off), manual focus and exposure. The lens is a Zuiko 14-35mm f2 (set at f 5.6).

https://www.dropbox.com/s/evahlifkdyh78f7/vlcsnap-2015-05-17-11h04m27s200.png?dl=0

Regards

Gary
Click to expand...

Yeah, well, one of the strawberries in that shot looked a little bruised and squishy. The fault of a lousy sensor obviously! ; )
 
I have seen this image before. A while ago.... Pardon me for asking, but why are you sharing this? What makes it special?

Question: While the JVC makes it somewhat easier to use different lenses, what else does it offer that would entice me to consider it?

Comment: It has no scopes, it doesn't appear to handle highlights particularly well, it has a limited version of 4K available and it doesn't do high frame rates. I don't quite understand what market they are going after with this camera. I also get the impression that JVC is not putting much marketing muscle behind it to get the word out about it. I am looking for an AF100 replacement and though the FS7 fits the bill, it is much more expensive and I have invested in MFT lenses and adapters. Wish the LS 300 did more.
 
jc01108 said:
I have seen this image before. A while ago.... Pardon me for asking, but why are you sharing this? What makes it special?

Question: While the JVC makes it somewhat easier to use different lenses, what else does it offer that would entice me to consider it?

Comment: It has no scopes, it doesn't appear to handle highlights particularly well, it has a limited version of 4K available and it doesn't do high frame rates. I don't quite understand what market they are going after with this camera. I also get the impression that JVC is not putting much marketing muscle behind it to get the word out about it. I am looking for an AF100 replacement and though the FS7 fits the bill, it is much more expensive and I have invested in MFT lenses and adapters. Wish the LS 300 did more.
Click to expand...

I agree! I got to spend a week messing around with the LS300. I was not impressed. IQ-wise, nor feature-wise. It felt very Prosumer.

This is the 'platypus' of cameras. Evolution took a wrong turn here.

On one hand you've got interchangeable lens ability, but then no real way of monitoring exposure. (yes, it has zebras but anybody who's taking the time to swap out lenses is gonna need more than that.)

On the other hand, it's got tons of adjustment in terms of knee, pedestal, etc, but then there's no variable frame rate. And the codecs seemed a little feeble.

I think it has an identity crisis.

Is it a 'cinema' camera? Interchangeable lenses would point that way, but it doesn't have the feature set to support that shooting style.

Is it an 'events' camera? Some of it's AUTO features are geared that way, but good luck finding a power zoom lens that can be used/controlled on this camera.

As someone who's coming from the AF100, I find the JVC LS300 a bit of a letdown. Not sure who JVC is marketing to.

I think if they would have made it a fixed-lens camera (ala the DVX200) it would have made more sense.
 
Last edited:
DLD said:
And now the new Sony models are out, promising a superior performance throughout.
Click to expand...

Yes, but one big thing people liked about the LS300 was how you could use almost all your lenses... which most of us have a huge investment in. The Sonys are the bees knees, but then the lens options are not the same. Too bad. I guess you never get the best of everything, there's always some compromise somewhere, so you have to pick your poison.
 
OldCorpse said:
Yes, but one big thing people liked about the LS300 was how you could use almost all your lenses... which most of us have a huge investment in. The Sonys are the bees knees, but then the lens options are not the same. Too bad. I guess you never get the best of everything, there's always some compromise somewhere, so you have to pick your poison.
Click to expand...
I was reading Canon Rumors where someone linked to an Imaging Resource - so, this is beyond hearsay - but IR quoted a Sony rep that A7R MK II can focus Canon EF lenses better than Canon itself.

It apparently does well with both A- and E-mounts too.

And, for those with the Panasonic and other MFT lenses, I'd say what I've long said - the future GH5 will rock.

Of course, the date at which such rocking occurs is anyone's guess.
 
DLD said:
I was reading Canon Rumors where someone linked to an Imaging Resource - so, this is beyond hearsay - but IR quoted a Sony rep that A7R MK II can focus Canon EF lenses better than Canon itself.

It apparently does well with both A- and E-mounts too.

And, for those with the Panasonic and other MFT lenses, I'd say what I've long said - the future GH5 will rock.

Of course, the date at which such rocking occurs is anyone's guess.
Click to expand...

This is fascinating and highlights the conundrum we're all now facing: the plethora of camera and lens options staring us in the face. The LS-300 may be a letdown from an IQ standpoint vis-a-vis the competition (especially FF), but I think it's accurate to state it's still a step up from the AF100/AF100a and it can produce some nice images. That's what JVC is banking on. Enough of the market has invested in 4/3's glass and adapters and is reticent to migrate to FF, EF, PL or Sony E. As such, JVC's increasingly challenging job is to convince those MFT camera/lens owners that the LS-300 is worthy and logical for the majority of their new projects. Since most delivery is still HD, and will be for some time, it's a rather hard sell given the LS-300's apparent sensor DR limitations and compromised highlight handling. Viewed another way, what if the JVC had a GH4 or Blackmagic sensor under the hood? Answer: A whole new ball game!

Adding to JVC's woes are the many poor (arguably unfair) LS300 samples permeating YouTube. AF owners pixel-peep at those over-exposed, highly compressed, nasty examples and say to themselves, "Why upgrade?"

In the final analysis, I really believe the JVC is best suited for the AF owner who is looking for a short-term incremental upgrade path until they are ready to migrate to another system. I could be wrong (and often am so), but it appears to me that market forces are creating compelling vortices pulling us in directions other than MFT. Lens options are nice, but nowadays the market is demanding increased DR and IQ. We want film quality for under $5K. We're never satisfied.

I own an AF100a along with an FS700 (soon to be factory upgraded) and it's beginning to make sense to stick with the Sony side of things at least for the near-term and I may add the A7R II to the equipment list if it performs as advertised. I'll invest in the Odyssey 7Q/FS700 combo for the next year or two. I really wanted to like the new JVC as a small-footprint MFT powerhouse, but reluctantly I must admit that it's a non-starter for me. For my projects warranting the use of MFT, the AF will suffice for the time being. The value-proposition of the JVC simply isn't compelling enough to warrant the investment. I suspect the post-purchase dissonance I would experience after buying the JVC would have me shopping for the next solution almost immediately.
 
Last edited:
All good points and, while A7R MK II has a different form factor from both AF100 and LS300, its specs are a major leap forward.

PS. Apparently, DP Review mentioned the same thing with regard to lenses - their A7r MK II auto-focused fine with Canon EF 24-70 and the Metabones adapter.
 
Having had an AF100 and AF100A and now a JVC GY-LS300, I'm reading some weird stuff...

Codecs seemed feeble? And that coming from someone who thinks it isn't a step up from an AF100/AF101? It is hard to argue with some people that like a low bitrate better, I guess?

I also read "it doesn't have the feature set to shoot cinema"... What feature set would that be?

Or the suggestion of sticking a GH4 sensor in it... That would effectively mean losing dynamic range.

In my experience the LS300 is the step up every previous AF100/101 owner was waiting for :
* still compact and sturdily built
* better dynamic range, better roll-off
* the image has more definition even in 1080p
* obviously there is the 4K
* The sensor is larger, maximising the use of different lenses
* due to the higher definition VSM is possible, so 16mm lenses are possible too or just extending your range of a zoom.
* a lot more image control
* it is way, way, way cleaner than the AF100 - finally get rid of the noise generator the AF is in comparison
* better low light capabilities
* finally no longer a consumer/prosumer codec, but a real broadcast spec 4:2:2 50Mbps compression. 150Mbps in 4K (incidently, the Sony PMW-F5 just makes do with 100Mbps in 4K)
* 3G HD-SDI - so you can also really output progressive.


There's also the streaming and wireless capabilities, but I guess a lot of AF100 users weren't waiting for that. On a side note : I also like that the mic holder is now in a regular place, no longer obscuring the top handle with a shotgun microphone.


I realise judging an image is subjective and judging specific functions as well, but there simply is no way in denying that the LS300 isn't just a stap but rather a leap forward on camera's like the AF100. It is better in every objective way.

Are there things that we would want to have? Sure! higher framerates would be nice for one, waveform could be useful if you aren't using any external screen - and more. But you have to be realistic. At the pricepoint it doesn't have higher frame rates - I can live with that. For all the other advantages you get and the price, I'm okay with it. Or rather don't have the option than a halve-way option, I would personally never use : like higher framerates in a windowed mode. To some it could be useful, to others it won't...

If you have an AF100 and an FS700 (used many times), I understand, you would leave the AF aside (although it still takes pictures). Being scared of the LS300 I wouldn't understand : You will see that the LS300 will be nothing like the AF and will outperform the FS700 in most area's (better definition, lower noise, better codec, ...) although it doesn't have the slomo-tricks of course...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top