This could replace everything.

Paul Biya said:
Adaptors may survive.
Click to expand...

DSLRs, will not only survive, they will thrive. And they will do so for 2 reasons:

1. Camcorders with adapters still make lousy still cameras.

2. Buyers of $800-$1000 DSLRs are NOT the same buyers as $5000 - $8000 camcorders. At least not for the same purposes. That kid coming out of high school who wants to start shooting isn't going to be buying a camera that costs more than his car. But s/he can earn enough over the summer to pick up a 550D and a couple lenses. Same with those of us looking at crash-cams, hybrid shooting, b-roll, etc. Why in the heck would I want to drop another $7k on a second EX1 for b-roll when I can just take my 550D and a couple lenses?
 
most younger, guerrilla filmmakers don't have that kind of cash. I mean honestly, most of us are film students who are broke always. DSLRS are really helping our situation because its so cheap but gives great quality for the price. I think dslr's are it for quite some more time.
 
Yeah, but as soon as you can afford it you will move to a real camera, that comes not with all that problems and workarounds.
But Perrone is right, there will always be a niche market for video DSLRs - I wouldn't call that " thrive" though.

Frank
 
DSLR is not that cheap. You still have to worry about all the extras such as AUDIO, viewfinder, extra gear... and by the time you have it all you may as well have bought a real camera in the fist place.
 
DM_rider said:
Ya, most likely no one will ever use DSLR's EVER AGAIN!

Check out the AF100 forum
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/forumdisplay.php?213-AF100
Click to expand...


Yeah, good luck with that. Some people seem to overlook the fact that - an image sensor is not just an image sensor. The 5D and 7D craze is NOT only built upon the fact that the cameras are comparatively cheaper.

Yes, anyone can go out and shoot "filmic" footage with a camera that costs a fraction of what a decent prosumer camera costs, but when work is being shot on 5D's and 7D's for commercial clients who have annual billings in the millions, it means something. And I have yet to see anything shot with the AF100 that makes me even remotely interested in owning one (until I start getting calls from producers asking for it) :)
 
Last edited:
I agree. They are still a flavor of the week for agency s right now. Check this huge shoot we had in town, all 7D's and 5D's with PL lens. For a housing community, no less. Still hot right now. But, I bet the F-3 is going to get some of that business. AF-100 will stay within the indie crowd and semi-pro prob.

http://www.castlehillsmovie.com/
 
JDDalllas said:
Is it me or does it look a little "Fisher Price"
Click to expand...

AF100.jpg
 
Last edited:
I don't think the AF 100 is going to kill it, if it was not a micro 4/3 I would jump on it...but why drop cash on that when you won't be able to use all of your old lenses.
 
JDDalllas said:
Is it me or does it look a little "Fisher Price"
Click to expand...

Not at all. in real life when fully kitted the AF is quite the looker.

attachment.php


Paul Biya said:
DSLR is not that cheap. You still have to worry about all the extras such as AUDIO, viewfinder, extra gear... and by the time you have it all you may as well have bought a real camera in the fist place.
Click to expand...

Thats the point of the AF100. People see the "body" price of a 550D and think, hey its $1000!!!

thats like looking at a RED and saying its only a $17,500 camera. by the time you get it running, its a $40,000 camera. The point being, the AF100 gives you, the look, the convenience, the performance and the quality of a dedicated video system at a price thats a STEAL compared to what youre getting.
 
I don't consider the AF 100 being all that cheap, if you look what you get. You get a camera whitout a lens at all, the lens on a camera is many times the most expensive part on it / one of the most expensive parts. This camera comes with no lens on it, so the "low price" actually makes sense for me...
 
The HPX3700 comes with no lens at all, and it's $59,950. The Arri Alexa comes with no lens at all, and it's $80,000. The Sony F35 comes with no lens at all, and it's $350,000. The Sony F3 has no lens with it, and it's $13,300. So in that context, the AF100's $4700 street price is quite low.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top