Updated AF100 Camera

J

jonathanrichards

Active member
If Jan is cruising these boards, does she know if Panasonic intend to extend their commitment to the Super 35mm large sensor format or is the AF100 a one hit wonder?
 
If they do, can I put in a requests for:

- 10 bit (more would be even better, of course). Top of my list, the only real issue I have with the AF100 which an external recorder wouldn't help with.
- 1080p at full 50p (or 60p) with sound. For times when I know I'll want to slow some of it down, but need the location sound in sync.
- Dual link 4:4:4 SDI out with S-log equivalent (but only if the bit depth is there to make it meaningful)
- A rethink on the chroma handling of highlights. Not that it isn't possible to get great neutral roll-off in the highlights, but the cam certainly needs some love setting up to get there, so toning this down out of the box might make for quieter internets :)
- Quicker autofocus with prime lenses. If autofocus is included, might as well make it more workable for run and gun or solo steadicam.
- Higher bitrate codec onboard.
- Four channel sound so you can put external mic into two channels and internal mic as backup to two- saved my bacon a few times on the HVX200.

Handling and form factor? Love it, don't change a thing!

Basically, if you can take the front end of an AF100 and the back end of an HPX250, and release it at not too much of a premium, I'll buy it :)
Although I am seriously thinking of a Scarlet...

Cheers, Hywel
 
I have a really hard time seeing Panasonic going S35 anytime soon. 4/3 / m4/3 is a lot closer to the size of traditional 35mm film than S35, it's a format Panasonic has already made a commitment to that will accept a much wider array of lenses than S35, and Panasonic is coming out with a variety of lenses for m4/3. And honestly, what would the bulk of folks buying cameras in this price range get with an S35 sensor over a m4/3?
 
Mike Harvey said:
Panasonic is coming out with a variety of lenses for m4/3.
Click to expand...

Really, no kidding? What lenses that are specifically targeted for cinema use? Because if you mean these things that can't make smooth aperture transitions and that can't adequately talk to the AF100 and zooms that aren't parfocal, then I would say that Panasonic has turned its back on this camera... I know, Panasonic Pro doesn't make lenses. Tell that to the HPX250.
 
Mac said:
Really, no kidding? What lenses that are specifically targeted for cinema use? Because if you mean these things that can't make smooth aperture transitions and that can't adequately talk to the AF100 and zooms that aren't parfocal, then I would say that Panasonic has turned its back on this camera... I know, Panasonic Pro doesn't make lenses. Tell that to the HPX250.
Click to expand...
If they did its going to cost a lot of money... Then why not just buy a cooke zeiss or a real cine lens?
 
Everybody is going to get sick of me saying this.
All we need is more affordable cine lenses right now. Preferably not Micro Four Thirds mount. Its risky to invest in a camera that only Panasonic makes. I want glass that I can take to the next camera I own or rent and maybe it will be another MFT camera but who knows. PL mounts are not going away any time soon and thats what I'm looking to buy. For now Zeiss is the only game in town for lower priced cine lenses, and they cost $3900 a piece for the CP.2 prime. Then it goes way up and from there, and cine zooms are crazy expensive.

Sorry this went off topic.
 
dcloud said:
If they did its going to cost a lot of money... Then why not just buy a cooke zeiss or a real cine lens?
Click to expand...

Also, do Cooke or Zeiss lenses talk to the camera? (Not a rhetorical question, as I don't know the answer to that... though I doubt they do).

Mac, my point is that Panasonic is firmly behind the m4/3 format. Are they true cinema lenses? No. But how many folks are actually using "true" cinema lenses on their AF100? Or FS100 or 5DmkII for that matter? The AF100 (and FS100, for that matter) were design with the idea that you could take any SLR lens and slap it on there, and they've been upfront about that since the beginning. Also, as posted in another thread, there is a firmware update coming out so that the AF100 *can* talk to their new lenses. And making a reasonably inexpensive zoom that is parafocal with a decent f/stop is nearly impossible. They can do it with the HPX250 because the HPX250 is a 1/3' sensor. The 2/3" lenses on our cameras where I work are $12k each, and that's only because we buy so many of them that I was told we get a discount. M4/3 is going to be a *lot* more expensive. And S35? Well... I don't feel like mortgaging my condo for a lens.

Frankly, I'd be happy with the 14-140mm that came with my camera if it was only faster. A constant f/2.8 and I'd be in heaven. Of course, if it did that, I doubt they'd be giving them away free with the camera.
 
My guess is that Panny is sticking with M4/3 but I expect their next cam to be 10-bit 4:2:2 internal recording with a more robust codec or P2 with a higher resolved image, better DR etc... like an AF-200. Plus Panny has some sweet looking fast M4/3 glass coming in 2012.

FYI: Erik, I hear ya regarding the PL glass but M4/3 glass is something that should come in handy for quite some time since even if your A-cam moves on to something using native PL (cough scarlet cough) you can always slap that M4/3 glass into a Panny DSLR... I'm thinking a 'GH3' in 2012 is going to make a nice B-cam down the road.
 
Last edited:
OK I'll chip in for the AF200 wish list :)

STEREO STUFF
1. Genlock please.
2. Ability to flip CMOS scanning direction (so that CMOS skews the same way on both eyes if you have a mirror rig that necessitates one cam being upside-down)
3. Stereo sync of electronic lenses and camera settings (like F3 December firmware update)
4. As small and light as possible. Everything removable (removable stuff in AF100 was a great start)
5. Keep 4/3 sensor size - it's the perfect size for 3D narrative stuff (please look at the depth of field of all of the stereo films being made now)

IMAGE STUFF
1. Color fidelity, latitude and low noise performance, of course
2. Sensor that resolves full actual 1080p resolution (pixel-for-pixel crispness)
3. 48fps at 1080p. Heck, 120!
4. If you want to go above 1080p... awesome! Stereo shoots always need a bit higher res. 48fps at >HD would RULE.
5. If you don't want to bother with onboard compression, just send the RAW sensor data out through the dual-link HD-SDI ports, pretending it is video... dual-link or 3G HD-SDI should handle 2880x1620 Bayer, 12bit, 48fps no problem (2.69 Gbps).
6. Log output option would be great.

GENERAL STUFF
1. Record lens metadata per frame (zoom, iris, focus, etc) to help with post (like RED, Alexa, F3)
2. Tell the Panasonic TV folks that they need to subsidize the price of this thing because getting good 3D content would help them sell TVs, projectors, etc! All of Panasonic's 3D products have a fixed interocular, which really sucks. Why not make this their mirror rig-optimized model?

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com
 
Unfortunately, I see the next wave of cameras having the option of shooting at 1080/48p. :cry:

As far as an AF-200 wish list, I would be happy with...

50MB/S AVCHD or higher
10-bit 4:2:2 w/ internal recording
Better overall image (you all know what that means)
SMALLER form factor.

And ideally I would like Panny to provide the option to remove things like built in LCD, EVF etc… but that’ll never happen. Apparently RED has the best kept secret in the industry that everyone knows about...
 
Mike Harvey said:
I have a really hard time seeing Panasonic going S35 anytime soon. 4/3 / m4/3 is a lot closer to the size of traditional 35mm film than S35, it's a format Panasonic has already made a commitment to that will accept a much wider array of lenses than S35, and Panasonic is coming out with a variety of lenses for m4/3. And honestly, what would the bulk of folks buying cameras in this price range get with an S35 sensor over a m4/3?
Click to expand...

What?

S35 IS the size of a traditional 35mm motion picture frame.
 
mcgeedigital said:
What?

S35 IS the size of a traditional 35mm motion picture frame.
Click to expand...
No, S35 is bigger than traditional film. The traditional cine film frame is 22 x 12mm. S35 does away with the optical soundtrack area and expands the frame size to 24.9mm wide. The AF100 is a little bit smaller than the cine film frame size, about as much smaller as S35 is bigger.

The new "S35" sensor cameras aren't quite the same size as film S35, they're 23.6mm wide.

Film formats have pretty much always had a "regular" and a "super" size; there was "Regular 8" and "Super 8", there was 16mm and "Super 16", and there's 35mm and "Super 35". Super35 didn't really gain much traction until the advent of the digital intermediate, because shooting in S35 meant that you couldn't do an optical print down to a release print. S35 was mainly used as a grainy cheap substitute for anamorphic shooting; when the digital intermediate process came about and it became commonplace to scan the film frame, then the relative size difference of S35 and 35mm became a nonissue as far as release prints go, so more production migrated to the larger frame size of S35.
 
Hi Barry,

I see that you are very much behind the AF100. Could I ask, why can I only find bad press with regards to the image that comes from the AF100?

A lot of people are particularly not happy with the way that it handles highlights. Could you tell me if this is true. Does it have an issue? Apart from the FS100 having a far greater capability in low light, I don't understand how it is producing a better image.

I'm more than confused right now on which camera to buy...

Oh, I'm shooting snowboard films BTW. So a camera that can shoot high contrast, bright sunny days are essential.

Many Thanks
 
Like I posted in your other thread... My choice would likely be a 2/3" CCD camera with servo zoom for quick moving outdoor sports like snowboard films. Not the AF100 or FS100. But that's just my thoughts.

By the way, there is plenty of good press with regards to the AF100.
 
Hi David,

Sorry, I did just see that. What 2/3" CCD camera would your recommend? They are usually pricey cameras! The Scarlet was looking promising, but let not go there... and it wasn't CCD

I'm not covering sporting events, so it's not important to have a run and gun with servo. We are more in the same game as the brain farm guys, with less budget :)

Plus we are getting a TS3Cine camera, so we want the footage to easily cut with that, and that is also large sensor.
 
The af100 handles bright exposure just fine. We shot a whole film (A Verse Before Dying) in the harsh exterior sunlight conditions of Texas and it looks utterly gorgeous.

People who complain about "highlights" don't usually know how to use the camera. If you overexpose, you'll clip color channels - just like you will on the F3, FS100, and tons of other cameras. So dont do that. Expose properly and it will look really really good! And if you want more overexposure range, use cine-d gamma and turn down the color saturation.

Look for footage from NZGreen, he has some gorgeous New Zealand skiing and snow-covered mountain footage from the AF100.
 
Prendi said:
A lot of people are particularly not happy with the way that it handles highlights. Could you tell me if this is true. Does it have an issue? Apart from the FS100 having a far greater capability in low light, I don't understand how it is producing a better image.
Click to expand...

Here is a little bit of video shot in the same sort of environs which you suggest, maybe a little steeper but maybe not.

http://vimeo.com/groups/72874/videos/27526382

Best,

jan
 
Kindredmachine said:
Unfortunately, I see the next wave of cameras having the option of shooting at 1080/48p. :cry:
Click to expand...

How is this a bad thing? I'm sure there will still be a 24p option... and if there isn't, shoot 1080/48p with a 360 degree shutter and just use every second frame. That equals 24p.

Except you also have the option to change over to slow motion in post at any time you want.

And you can use the info in the other unused frames to help noise reduction (use Neat Video in temporal mode to essentially get 360 degree shutter in the dark parts, 180 degree shutter in the bright parts... but only if you want).

Kindredmachine said:
As far as an AF-200 wish list, I would be happy with...

50MB/S AVCHD or higher
10-bit 4:2:2 w/ internal recording
Better overall image (you all know what that means)
SMALLER form factor.

And ideally I would like Panny to provide the option to remove things like built in LCD, EVF etc… but that’ll never happen. Apparently RED has the best kept secret in the industry that everyone knows about...
Click to expand...

Totally with you on all of these!

David W. Jones said:
I would use an espresso maker function much more than any stereo/3D stuff.
Click to expand...

I admit that the ability to reverse CMOS scanning direction is not useful to 2D guys too!

How about instead of having a stereo camera sync cable we just have:

A port where you can plug in an external follow focus / iris / zoom to control electronic lenses - extremely high precision protocol
Plus some smoothly-focusing and irising electronic primes and zooms (maybe the primes are already good?)

That'd be nice for 2D guys too, right? And nice for Panasonic, because they sell more electronic lenses.

The 3D guys can just plug their FIZ unit into both cameras (and hope there isn't too much variation between lenses...)

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top