Switch from GH3 to AF100, a wise decision?

GrahamH said:
The comments above about GH2 vs. GH3 are fair enough, but the GH4K is going to be a whole other price bracket.
Click to expand...

If the rumors are true, yes, most likely it will replace the AF in price and features on their lineup. Which just further proves what I'm trying to say- we've all moved on from the GH2 and many of its limitations, it seems silly to be comparing it still. Especially when the OP was asking about the next generation, and the rumors are pointing to the generation after that actually being in the same class as the AF.
 
GH2 vs. AF a fair enough comparison if that's the only and closest thing you have intimate experience with to compare... I've used the GH3, but only for a day... not enough to motivate me to replace my GH2 and not enough to thoroughly evaluate it vs. my AF. At first blush, adding a headphone jack and 1080p60 isn't enough to make the GH3 all-round 'better' than the AF - of course, neither is the AF all-round 'better' than either GH2/3.

Yes, it's good to have both a large sensor video camera and a hybrid still/video camera

Yes, I'm eager to see what the next generation holds (but it's awfully hard to produce with a yet-to-be-sold camera)

Yes, you should borrow the AF to evaluate it before you plunk down $1200

Yes, you'll make a better decision for you than any of us can make for you
 
mcbob said:
Yes, you'll make a better decision for you than any of us can make for you
Click to expand...

False. It is our job as an internet forum to blindly rant our own personal biased opinions so that we make whatever decision that OP came in to make harder than before he asked it.

Don't give in, man! Don't "try it out", that's crazy talk! TRUST THESE PEOPLE YOU HAVE NEVER MET!
 
mcbob said:
GH2 vs. AF a fair enough comparison if that's the only and closest thing you have intimate experience with to compare... I've used the GH3, but only for a day... not enough to motivate me to replace my GH2 and not enough to thoroughly evaluate it vs. my AF. At first blush, adding a headphone jack and 1080p60 isn't enough to make the GH3 all-round 'better' than the AF - of course, neither is the AF all-round 'better' than either GH2/3.
Click to expand...

Ok, now that the sarcasm is out of my system...

I didn't say the GH3 is enough to motivate you away from a GH2 (I still have 2 GH2s myself). I also didn't say the GH3 is "better" than the AF. I'm saying that someone who chose an AF over a GH2 back then might not do the same with a GH3. Obviously the OP wants opinions, he posted this in the AF100 group after all- just offering some perspective on those opinions.
 
M. Gilden said:
I didn't say the GH3 is enough to motivate you away from a GH2 (I still have 2 GH2s myself). I also didn't say the GH3 is "better" than the AF. I'm saying that someone who chose an AF over a GH2 back then might not do the same with a GH3. Obviously the OP wants opinions, he posted this in the AF100 group after all- just offering some perspective on those opinions.
Click to expand...

Yep... sorry if it was construed as me putting any words in anyone else's mouth, just relating my own experience as another AF100+GH(2)+HMC150 owner, for whatever the OP gleans from them. Personally I wouldn't (or haven't) made an either/or decision on any of the 3, because they're 3 different tools for different uses that work well together (for me).
 
I too own all of the cams discussed in this thread. They are all different tools used for different purposes.

The AF image is far superior to the HMC's, practically noise free in low light compared to the inherent grain in the 150. For events and most corporate work, the combo of these two cameras has proved more than sufficient. The problem for me was that the resolved detail of the GH2 just spoiled me when trying to compare it to these other cams and we eventually had to make the upgrade to the C100.

It's all how you use these cams to make them play well together. For example, in an interview situation be sure to use your GH3 with non lumix glass as the wide and the AF100 with Lumix glass for the medium/close. Spend more time learning how to make the cams you have play well together than worrying about which new cam to buy. In the end, I never sold my AF and still find us using it for jobs that it can handle.
 
I know this is a totally different wrinkle, but given the it's same dollar amount, has a better image and DR than the Af100 and (i think having both) a better image than the GH3, and all the video features of a C100, and 60p, and an XLR option, and a built in Zeiss 24-200mm 2.8 lens and absolutely amazing continuous AF - you might consider the RX10 as a real step up.
Right now, for small rigs, I have the GH3, RX10 and BMPCC.
If I had to take one camera on location, after using it for just two days, it would be the RX10.
 
My "tools" are Canon XH-A1, AF100 and BMCC 2.5k and people keep asking when I'm going to sell my old cameras and I tell them, no camera replaces the other.
 
Last edited:
I have a GH3, and AF 100 and an HMC 150. The GH3 shooting at 50 mb has the best image quality, but the AF 100 is almost as good. The AF 100 is by far the most convenient to shoot, with the HMC 150 a close second. If used as a "grab n go" camera, the GH3 is the smallest and doesn't look like a video camera. In all cases manual focus and aperture works better than auto. Any of the cameras work well, but it is essential to know the strengths and weaknesses of whatever you use.
 
I use an AF100 for shoots that require synchronized audio and allow professional lighting - e.g. studio interviews. For live stage performances, however, a GH2 or GH3 (or even a Nikon D5x00) is a far more practical and flexible solution. For hair-splitting motion picture quality, nothing under $3K tops a hacked GH2, but to preserve those minute details, you do have to take care in how you post-process the 100Mbps footage.
 
Admir, you have probably already made the choice at this point, but in all honesty $1200 for an AF100 is a STEAL. That being said, I would HIGHLY encourage you to sell your HMC150 ASAP. Get out while you still can!!!

Do not sell your GH3. You will regret it, and you won't get much out of it. You can always use the same lenses across the GH3 and AF100, and they will cut together fairly well. The AF100 is a beast of a camera, but even with all of its features, I still prefer my GH3s. I sold all of my cameras (multiple HMC150s, etc...) and now run entirely on GH3s and M4/3 glass. I can't begin to tell you how happy I am with the results. The GH3 workflow is great, codecs are great, image quality is great. No ND filters, but those can be purchased.

Sell the HMC-150. It is a fuzzy 720p CCD camera with a low-bitrate codec and a short zoom lens. Get rid of it while you still can!
 
Last edited:
HotConductor said:
Admir, you have probably already made the choice at this point, but in all honesty $1200 for an AF100 is a STEAL. That being said, I would HIGHLY encourage you to sell your HMC150 ASAP. Get out while you still can!!!

Do not sell your GH3. You will regret it, and you won't get much out of it. You can always use the same lenses across the GH3 and AF100, and they will cut together fairly well. The AF100 is a beast of a camera, but even with all of its features, I still prefer my GH3s. I sold all of my cameras (multiple HMC150s, etc...) and now run entirely on GH3s and M4/3 glass. I can't begin to tell you how happy I am with the results. The GH3 workflow is great, codecs are great, image quality is great. No ND filters, but those can be purchased.

Sell the HMC-150. It is a fuzzy 720p CCD camera with a low-bitrate codec and a short zoom lens. Get rid of it while you still can!
Click to expand...

Well I haven't made a choice yet. I had the chance to test one AF100 out and found the image to be really soft on the wide end and that it had a quite high level of noise and that the image broke up pretty easily when filming a lot of movement. All those things is what makes my GH3 so nice, I just get a really nice image with no issues (at least on that part). I will wait a little longer until they fall in price even more (if that is possible, who knows...) and see what will happen.

I wouldn't sell my HMC150 since I cant imagine filming a wedding or interviews with a DSLR. The HMC makes a perfect run n gun camera with a nice zoom lens, NDs, XLR, and a proper camera body. I simply can take it out of my bag and start shooting for hours, something I could never do with my GH3 without carrying around lenses, ND filter, and a rig. Does it give me a nice image, nope! I can't stand it when compared to my GH3 but as long as my clients don't complain, it will work for me.
 
Last edited:
Admir said:
Well I haven't made a choice yet. I had the chance to test one AF100 out and found the image to be really soft on the wide end and that it had a quite high level of noise and that the image broke up pretty easily when filming a lot of movement.
Click to expand...


A really soft image on the wide end would be more a lens issue.

A high level of noise could very well be your camera settings.

It's odd that you notice the image breaking up during movement on the AF100 when it uses the same basic codec as your HMC150.

I'm not saying that the AF100 is the perfect camera, but it offers a better all around tool set over the GH3. I had a pair of GH3 and hacked GH2 but sold them and used the money to buy accessories for a Sony F35.
 
David W. Jones said:
A really soft image on the wide end would be more a lens issue.

A high level of noise could very well be your camera settings.

It's odd that you notice the image breaking up during movement on the AF100 when it uses the same basic codec as your HMC150.

I'm not saying that the AF100 is the perfect camera, but it offers a better all around tool set over the GH3. I had a pair of GH3 and hacked GH2 but sold them and used the money to buy accessories for a Sony F35.
Click to expand...

We did some tests with the Tokina 11 16 at about F5, both on the GH3 and the AF100. The GH3 image was simply sharper and more clean. It's nod odd at all- I have noticed this with my HMC150 many times when shooting wide images of the sea or landscapes a windy day where a lot is moving. That's why I use my HMC as little as possible, only when it's about documenting an event where I can't control the light or how things are going to play out, that's where a camera like the AF would shine, to have those built in ND's or the XLR is just a must have. That's why I hold on to my HMC!
 
Last edited:
Admir said:
I wouldn't sell my HMC150 since I cant imagine filming a wedding or interviews with a DSLR. The HMC makes a perfect run n gun camera with a nice zoom lens, NDs, XLR, and a proper camera body. I simply can take it out of my bag and start shooting for hours, something I could never do with my GH3 without carrying around lenses, ND filter, and a rig. Does it give me a nice image, nope! I can't stand it when compared to my GH3 but as long as my clients don't complain, it will work for me.
Click to expand...
First of all, I'll echo DWJ's comments regarding noise - it's largely noiseless until well above 1600iso with the right settings. It is a softer camera than the GH2/3 and can't shoot to the GH3's wonderful 50Mbps codec that alleviates the aforementioned high-motion image breakup.

For whatever it's worth: owning a HVX/AF/GH triad (and later HMC/AF/GH - I was given an HMC in barter), the HVX/HMC has been my least used camera over the past two years. The AF with a 14-140 zoom works in 95% of situations the small-sensor cams did - it can't do a smooth live zoom and has slightly shorter zoom range, doesn't work that well in auto, and is more difficult for a less experienced operator to use, but all the other functional elements are there... and the AF sports notable improvements to sharpness, noise, recording length (taking up to 2 64GB+ cards, HMC can't use SDXC), VFR, plus the ability to take on a few shoots for customers in PAL land, and shoots interviews a metric crapton better than the HVX/HMC (especially when using faster lenses). Handling is very similar to the HMC with the exception of the lens.

All that said, if the AF isn't right for you, it isn't right... but do consider trying to shoot an interview with your GH3 some time. It's about as close to a proper video camera as "DSLRs" (yes, I know it isn't one) have come. When I first got my GH2, I shot a good number of interviews using the GH as a master wide or primary camera and setting up my HVX for sync audio recording (plus a 2nd closeup angle). I still do much the same with my GH + AF. Software like PluralEyes (or even simple slating) makes syncing two angles deadly simple, and the AF comes a lot closer in sharpness to the GH image than the HMC could hope.

edit: reading your above comments, I think I understand you were calling the HMC softer and noisier, which it is... or maybe I'm still wrong
 
Last edited:
I don't have any advice to add here but have owned the GH2 the GH3 and the AF 100.
In deciding to go with the black magic design pocket camera and 2.5 K camera I let my GH2 and AF100 go.
The only regret I can report on the AF 100 IS that I sold it. And if I could acquire one for $1200 I would be all over it.
It took me a while before I was comfortable with my abilities with The AF100, but the time I invested in learning the camera was certainly worth it. I think if I weren't fully invested in the black magic cameras I would reacquire another AF100.
Nobody can tell you what to do but think about this, if you acquire the used AF 100 and invest the time and are still not happy how much can you possibly lose if you turn around and sell it? Best.
 
I'm reticent to jump in here but I'm going to. I have a GH2 and and AF100. I don't use the GH2 that often for video as I much prefer the look, tools, flexibility and images of the AF100. I find with the GH2 that the apparent sharpness is a function of edge detail imposed on the image by the camera and the lack of an OLPF may be the cause. However, I would not trade in the artifact free AF100 wide images for my GH2 shimmery, silvery edged detail wide images. Of course, not the GH3, but that's my 2 cents on it. Good luck
 
I'm a huge fan of the AF100 & GH3, but hope my next camera will be 10-bit (or better) as I'm over banding in gradients caused by 8-bit cameras. That's the only complaint about the footage I've ever received back from clients.

It's too bad the upcoming Blackmagic 4k's fastest frame rate is 30 fps or I might consider it as my primary camera, & still may pick one up for gigs not requiring slomo. I've been using their S16 Pocket Camera for some B-Roll & except for the moire the image is solid.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top