Really? I'd've guessed $2,500-$3,000. The GH1's under $1K. Are you saying a few ports, a couple XLRs, and an EVF are worth $9K?
Sony's answer to the new Panny...
- Thread starter ATL Media Group
- Start date
...
I don't think a dedicated video acquisition device is simply "a few ports, a couple XLRs, and an EVF". I'm not sure why people neglect internal processing components and everything else that comes with the territory when speculating.
It's silly to think that the price of a DSLR is directly affecting the price of Video Cameras. What you're seeing is a decline in the cost to mass-produce hardware in comparison to five years ago, not mega-coporation heads becoming afraid of what the DSLR market will do to their well-established and proper video line-up.
Please be aware of the keyword and focus of my statements: price. We're not talking about whether or not these say mega-corporation heads have-been, were or are swayed by the market of content creator's open-armed inception of DSLR video in their decision to bring to us large-sensor dedicated video acquisition devices.
Nektonic
Veteran
Actually, there will be HD-SDI outputs on this thing, so that is probably adding a bit to the price. A good example is Canon's pricing on their HDV cameras? The cost difference was around $3,000 between their non-HD-SDI and HD-SDI equipped HDV cameras.
Would the price be less on the AF-100 if there were no HD-SDI outputs? Sure, but still, the camera is gonna be less than 6K when the actual street price is determined (I'm gonna estimate about $5,300). And with the fact that P2 media is not needed, just SDHC cards, this is not really gonna be all that much in the long run. Not unless you decide to buy the more expensive lenses and buy a nanoFlash to hook it up to. But since this camera's m4/3 mount will allow just about any lens to be used, we aren't forced to buy expensive glass. A win win in my book.
Basically this thing is the DVX-100 of the tapeless HD era, oh, and with an interchangeable lens mount and a near 35mm equivalent size sensor thrown in.
With a camera like the AF-100 projected to cost 6K, the question we should be asking is how does Canon still get away with charging 9K for their XL-H1s?
ATL Media Group
Veteran
Unless they're willing to pull the plug on their HD-capable vDSLRs, they should be afraid. They must rethink their pricing, or eventually they will be squeezed out of all but the highest-priced market, which fewer and fewer buyers will bother with. These cameras are solid state and lensless -- no expensive glass or precision moving parts. The Panny has essentially the same internal processing as any $1,000-$1,200 24-Mbps AVCHD, much of which the GH1 already has.
For many the HD-SDI Output plus film d.o.f. is enough alone to justify the extra cost. I am one of those many. And with Sony and Pana both heading in this direction it is an exciting time for filmmakers.
Barry_Green
Moderator
Really? Canon's charging $7,000 for a fixed-lens, 1/3" camera, and you think Panasonic's interchangeable-lens, cinema-sized sensor camera should only cost about a third as much? That seems kind of unrealistic...
Barry_Green
Moderator
It does? I haven't seen the parts list. I was unaware that they'd released what components they're using...
Emanuel
Cross-Examiner
Aside interesting, that's why these "pro" cameras never will be the revolution we've seen with Canon & Co (GH1 etc). And why the DSLR movement is more than the technology offered. The price point add-on is 'the' revolution per se. The same applies to Epic vs. Scarlet (or even RED ONE).
Dino
Veteran
The threads on the AF100 have been amusing. Panasonic gets slammed for not using P2 cards. If they had used P2 cards, they would have been slammed.
The idea of what this camera could be capable of delivering for $6K or under is amazing, given the video camera competition. If uncompressed audio, proper HDSDI and HDMI monitoring, full image processing via menu control with circuit names recognizable to video professionals, two viewfinders, both of which are movable(unlike a 5D or 7D), improved aliasing and moire, outboard recording options, and supposedly one included lens isn't enough for a price that is under that of an HVX200A when P2 cards are factored in--then you probably aren't a paid professional. I believe the only reason VDSLR's will continue to be built is due to being cheap.
I can't understand a professional camera person not wanting to use a real video camera except in a stealth scenario. I found out about this camera back in January and I can't wait to add it to our rental inventory and, of course, shoot with it!
The idea of what this camera could be capable of delivering for $6K or under is amazing, given the video camera competition. If uncompressed audio, proper HDSDI and HDMI monitoring, full image processing via menu control with circuit names recognizable to video professionals, two viewfinders, both of which are movable(unlike a 5D or 7D), improved aliasing and moire, outboard recording options, and supposedly one included lens isn't enough for a price that is under that of an HVX200A when P2 cards are factored in--then you probably aren't a paid professional. I believe the only reason VDSLR's will continue to be built is due to being cheap.
I can't understand a professional camera person not wanting to use a real video camera except in a stealth scenario. I found out about this camera back in January and I can't wait to add it to our rental inventory and, of course, shoot with it!
Emanuel
Cross-Examiner
If I can't buy it, I'll be renting it.
I can't remember what the original dvx100 list price was and what year it came out. Does anyone remember?
I can't remember what the original dvx100 list price was and what year it came out. Does anyone remember?
They haven't. I meant that the format they've chosen -- 24-Mbps AVCHD -- is handled by $1K cameras, so internal processing can't be the reason for the price tag.
Barry_Green
Moderator
I think the DVX100 listed for $3795 when it was first released, and the DVX100A raised that to $3995.
Barry_Green
Moderator
But no, it isn't. This is PH mode, which only Panasonic AVCCAM pro-line cameras get. The cheapest PH-mode camera is the $2295 HMC40.
Secondly, the codec is the last thing involved. The digital signal processing, image scaling, all that stuff is likely to be far advanced over what a little $1,000 handycam has.
I didn't say Canon's offering wasn't overpriced. But it does come with a lens. The AF100 looks like the micro 4/3 version of the HMC150. However, the HMC150 has three imaging chips and therefore a more complex optical system, and it also has a lens. Its $4K MSRP is $2K less than the lensless AF100's. Other than the imaging system, the one thing the AF100 has that the HMC150 doesn't is HD-SDI.
If Panasonic has designed a constant aperture micro 4/3 zoom and will include it in the price, then OK.
Last edited:
That's Panasonic. Canon's AVCHD palmcorders record up to 24 Mbps.
this is coming from someone who has no idea on how these cameras are made:
-the body construct is bigger and better (magnesium alloy not plastic) than a gh1
-the chips and processors are bigger and better than the gh1
-hd-sdi output
-built in nd filters on the body
-more software features (im guessing waveform and vectorscope, zebra and audio metering, focus assists and etc etc etc)
-2 xlr input
-video optimized low optical filter
*someone posted that the af100 is using a new sensor than the gh1 (unconfirmed)
-not to mention r&d cost
-and others i might know about
all of these amounts to 6k and if you really think about it.. all these features makes it a great camera.. ergo you can earn the money back from renting it out or using it on projects EASILY! so 6000 is a bargain on looking at what you will gain after buying it. (unless they do the 370 on you
im kidding)
-the body construct is bigger and better (magnesium alloy not plastic) than a gh1
-the chips and processors are bigger and better than the gh1
-hd-sdi output
-built in nd filters on the body
-more software features (im guessing waveform and vectorscope, zebra and audio metering, focus assists and etc etc etc)
-2 xlr input
-video optimized low optical filter
*someone posted that the af100 is using a new sensor than the gh1 (unconfirmed)
-not to mention r&d cost
-and others i might know about
all of these amounts to 6k and if you really think about it.. all these features makes it a great camera.. ergo you can earn the money back from renting it out or using it on projects EASILY! so 6000 is a bargain on looking at what you will gain after buying it. (unless they do the 370 on you
im kidding)
Last edited:
lol.
did you forget to read this
"Secondly, the codec is the last thing involved. The digital signal processing, image scaling, all that stuff is likely to be far advanced over what a little $1,000 handycam has."