Was giving up on a AF100 but decided to reconsider.

SJX

SJX

Veteran
I realize this post turned out quite long (53 views and zero replies). So if you don't want to read the whole thing, please just skip to the numbered questions bellow. It will help just the same. Thanks!



I'm searching for a new camera to shoot a feature with. The pre-requisites are:

  • large sensor
  • enough resolution for the big screen
  • adequate dynamic range for day externals with lots of direct sun light plus shadows mixed.
  • clean HDMI or SDI with at least 8bit 4:2:2 to record to something like a Hyperdeck Shuttle.
  • Under $3,000 for the body.(initially)
My first idea was a Nikon D800. I like the GH2 as well but it has no clean 4:2:2. But on another thread, Barry Green suggested the AF100, which is slightly above my budget. So I decided to check the AF100 again. I remember checking it out when it came out and not being impressed at all. I was never a fan of the HVX200 look and it seems to be just a HVX200 with a larger chip.

Nevertheless, I decided to read up on the AF100 and see if there were any progresses with it since. The main problems I have with it, which I guess is what most people also think, is that it looks soft (softer than the D800 it seems) and have huge problems handling highlights and is said to be noisy. After reading this PVC article I was specially concerned: http://provideocoalition.com/index.p..._and_the_ugly/

This quote is what really concerns me:"The mixture of sun and shade was too much for this camera to handle so we had to wait for all of the sun to go away."


The project I would get the camera to shoot with is mainly externals day. We can't afford to shoot only during magic hour and it's low budget, so we can't control all the lighting with silks and the like. I know the D800 has no built-in ND filters which will be a must. But I can at least use a mattebox. But shoot with a camera that can't handle the highlights properly seems like harder to "fix". Besides during externals you need some sort of sunshade anyway.

The article also was not very impressed with the 8bit 4:2:2 output of the AF100 at all when compared to the EX1 10bit 4:2:2. Since I'm interested in using an external recorder this is also a low point. I couldn't find any reports or examples of AF100 footage recorded from the HDMI 4:2:2, which makes me think it's just not good enough to bother? If so, this could be a huge deal breaker.

But here is the thing. Besides the sharpness, highlights and noise, I really like the camera features. I like it enough to have decided to spend more time and try to research it in more detail to see if I could use it, instead of just giving up on it. I'm willing to stretch my budget for it. It has several extremely useful features that are very handy in real world production. As a camera, meaning feature-wise it runs MILES around a FS100. I will not even speak about the D800. But unfortunately the proof is in the pudding and image quality speaks louder than easy of use.

So I thought I would come here to see if I can find some answers to my questions and some advice from seasoned AF100 users. So please bear with me and I thank you in advance for your time. Here are my questions:

  1. Is there a solid resolution test to indicate how many lines the AF100 resolves? Is it as soft or softer than the old Varicam HDC27? Because that camera was horribly soft, even with very expensive glass. The image looked good, but was it soft! I remember watching a movie shot with it, I think called Soldier or God and it looked murky and anything I saw from that camera looked not much better than an HVX honestly, at least IMO. But that was a 720p camera.
  2. Are there scene files to minimize noise without sacrificing the already thin dynamic range which all these digital cameras have? I heard of some but most say they sacrifice dynamic range or latitude.
  3. What is the trick to avoid the nasty highlights? I know to avoid it but sometimes it#s not 100% possible, specially when shooting day externals. Also, if everything is always bellow 100 IRE makes for a very boring image. if filming hi-key stuff like Noir for example highlights are needed and they need to be bright!
  4. Any tricks to avoid noise without needing fix it in post with Neat Video? I know, pump light in the scene. But again without dark shadows it becomes boring and again, not always possible.
  5. What is the function called Dynamic Range Stretch exactly? Does it bring up noise? When it's recommended to be used?
  6. What is the function called Area Function Prioritizing for focus or exposure exactly?
  7. What is the cheapest lens that works with the Face Tracking function? Is it any useful for steadicam and hand held shots?
  8. I have a 7D. Is the low light at least as good as a 7D? I know the 7D has a larger sensor but it also has more megapixels.
  9. Not really a question but more a concern. Wide lenses! I have S35 lenses and my widest is 18mm, which is enough for my style when shooting s35, unless in very special occasions. Now my 18mm will be a 24mm :(. I don't want to have to go with still lenses to get wider. But a wider S35 lens will cost an arm and a leg.
  10. Is there any example of AF100 footage recorded from the HDMI 4:2:2?
.

Another concern is if it's smart to buy a AF100 at this point. It's obviously an older camera which has been "outdone" by it's newer competition and I believe selling it later will be harder and with a big price depreciation. It already seems to be the case and with the Blackmagic camera even more. There are many trying to unload AF100s and many not finding people who want to pay enough for it. I think the camera has an unjustified bad rep. I spoke to a guy who has one who said he wont sell because he will only get "peanuts" so he will just keep it. Also, probably a "AF200" is just around the corner. But yes, I need now, although you always still think about this stuff and I would not want to be stuck with it.

The other option would be the D800, which I know is also only 8bit 4:2:2, has more aliasing and moire, but at least it's cheaper, seems sharper, seems to handle highlights better, has better or at least comparable dynamic range and has a larger chip with much better low light performance, which will come in handy for the very few night externals. I really don't care about the sensor size regarding DOF. It's shallow enough really!

I would really appreciate if you guys could give some advice here. Also maybe point to sharp looking AF100 footage. All I have found looks to be on the softer side but I never know if it's the online compression or not.

Also, if there are any new developments for the AF100 that I'm not aware of please feel free to fill me in.

I'm spending a lot of time reading on the AF100 and searching for footage online, but every time I always end on the same place. People saying to go with a FS100. So I'm hoping here's the right place to turn that around. I like the AF100 way more as a camera.


 
Last edited:
I own a number of cameras, including the AF100. If I were serious about shooting a feature for release on the big screen, I would rent the camera of my choosing rather than be tied down to the meager budget I had to purchase a camera with. But that's just me.
 
The problem is that we will have an erratic scheduled divided in 3 different phases and renting that way would end up more expensive than buying.

But if you have an AF100, would you care adding anything to the discussion concerning it? Thanks!
 
glad to see someone left on the internet is considering an af100 purchase. For me, a noob that had no clue and a 6k budget and wanted a good new camera to learn and shoot shorts with it will work fine. I paid 3200 new, so 2700 and an amex card got me in the door. I'm getting the samurai for fun and have a few good lenses. Got a cartoni focus with cf sticks off craigslist for 500 so I look the part of a videographer. I know the second you buy something, at least in my case, I better be prepared to keep it and love it and this case is no exception. I'm not holding my breath for 10 bit on this camera but you never know. If I spent all day reading on the internet about this camera I would be crying, so again, I'm glad to see you considering one! I can't answer any more of your questions - did I mention I'm a noob?

If you are in New Mexico I'll loan you mine...
 
Thanks. But honestly, I'm not impressed at all by that. Don't get me wrong. It looks very nice. But looks like a soap opera. Like video. This is precisely the HVX look that I mentioned before and that I hate. I have seen better looking AF100 footage on vimeo, much more filmic. Just not as sharp as I would like. But could be vimeo's compression. Also, it may be because the frames are downscaled, but some highlights look funky. But thanks again for the link.
 
jackelliott said:
glad to see someone left on the internet is considering an af100 purchase. For me, a noob that had no clue and a 6k budget and wanted a good new camera to learn and shoot shorts with it will work fine. I paid 3200 new, so 2700 and an amex card got me in the door. I'm getting the samurai for fun and have a few good lenses. Got a cartoni focus with cf sticks off craigslist for 500 so I look the part of a videographer. I know the second you buy something, at least in my case, I better be prepared to keep it and love it and this case is no exception. I'm not holding my breath for 10 bit on this camera but you never know. If I spent all day reading on the internet about this camera I would be crying, so again, I'm glad to see you considering one! I can't answer any more of your questions - did I mention I'm a noob?

If you are in New Mexico I'll loan you mine...
Click to expand...

Thanks for the offer, but I'm nowhere near new Mexico. :)

Yes, the camera has some very nice features. I'm trying to find some sample footage online recorded from the 4:2:2 HD-SDI to try to download it and grade to test how it holds up. But can't find any. Panasonic should give such footage away on their site.
 
By the way, does Barry offer tips to dealing with the ugly highlights and noise in his AF100 book? Apart from the obvious avoid highlights and dark shadows I mean. Things like scene files and tips on how to set the camera. If I end up getting the AF100 I will also buy his book. I think it's the best on the AF100 out there?
 
SJX said:
It looks very nice. But looks like a soap opera. Like video.
Click to expand...

...I see many less experienced shooters complaining that a camera doesn't look "filmic" not realizing that much of what they consider to be "filmic" is actually a combination of lighting, lenses, and post-production grading. You can't entirely get rid of the higher contrast from the AF-100 ( that's largely dictated by the dynamic range of the sensor ), but with proper grading you can take this footage in any direction you like.

With DSLR footage, you can't get rid of moire or aliasing if it's there in your footage. There is no simple fix for this, though Mosaic Engineering is developing anti-aliasing sensor filters to help minimize this problem.
 
You are shooting a feature so why not rent or borrow one... then do some tests of your own.

Sure...some of the answers and opinions you may glean here and elsewhere will be very helpful...but nothing beats putting a camera throught its paces with your own lenses ,kit and skill set.
 
"feature" and "3K budget"?

I would consider the following:

Canon 5D MKIII (not two)
BMD camera (with all its warts)

And if you can rent .. get a Scarlet.

IMHO, the AF100's ~780 LOR and latitude would make me
look elsewhere for an "A" cam.

jeff
 
Last edited:
SJX said:
By the way, does Barry offer tips to dealing with the ugly highlights and noise in his AF100 book? ..... If I end up getting the AF100 I will also buy his book. I think it's the best on the AF100 out there?
Click to expand...
SJX: Yes, in both his book and his DVD, he goes into detail about what the many camera settings do, to emphasize (or de-emphasize) various characteristics. If you buy the camera new in the U.S., the book should be included. I bought the DVD before buying the camera, to help me decide if the camera was right for me. I suggest you do the same; he gives a lot of good advice.

-- Ken

P.S. - If the book doesn't come with the camera, but you already bought the DVD, that will probably be enough. The DVD gives almost as much info. It's just not quite as easy to look up specific things.
 
Last edited:
Last year I shot a few projects on the AF100 (paid) including one very big one.

I also was DOP on the following two shorts both shot on the AF100 - had a busy year so these gave me a little sideways fun.


 
jmarkham said:
Canon 5D MKIII (not two)
Click to expand...

I think the AF100 is a better choice for an all-around camera than the 5D3. A lot of the technical differences are really nitpicky, and in practice don't make a huge difference in overall IQ. And both cost about the same.

BMD camera (with all its warts)
Click to expand...

Which isn't out yet. I don't get why people recommend cameras that are currently in no one's hands. You have no idea what the actual ship date is, nor anything about this camera outside of what information Blackmagic is allowing out.
 
TheDingo said:
...I see many less experienced shooters complaining that a camera doesn't look "filmic" not realizing that much of what they consider to be "filmic" is actually a combination of lighting, lenses, and post-production grading. You can't entirely get rid of the higher contrast from the AF-100 ( that's largely dictated by the dynamic range of the sensor ), but with proper grading you can take this footage in any direction you like.

With DSLR footage, you can't get rid of moire or aliasing if it's there in your footage. There is no simple fix for this, though Mosaic Engineering is developing anti-aliasing sensor filters to help minimize this problem.
Click to expand...

Dingo, quite frankly I didn't blame the camera for it looking that way. I mentioned that I have seen more filmic footage online from the same camera, so I couldn't possibly mean it was the camera's fault. I just disagree that this is some of the best Indie work done with the AF100. Also, I would just like to reiterate that when it comes to footage I asked footage captured from the 4:2:2 HDMI or footage that shows the AF100 sharpness. I don't need to be convinced that the camera is capable of filmic footage. I have already seen that online and I know it can. What I'm looking for is footage, filmic or not with wide shots that look sharp. It's easy to look sharp in mediums and close ups. Now that link had a establishing shot of a landscape, but it is just a downrezed screen grab.
 
Shooter said:
You are shooting a feature so why not rent or borrow one... then do some tests of your own.

Sure...some of the answers and opinions you may glean here and elsewhere will be very helpful...but nothing beats putting a camera throught its paces with your own lenses ,kit and skill set.
Click to expand...

Sure this would be the best, but I looked around and can't find a AF100 locally to rent. I found FS100, FS700 and we have also RED, EX1 etc. But no AF100 unfortunately.
 
jmarkham said:
"feature" and "3K budget"?

I would consider the following:

Canon 5D MKIII (not two)
BMD camera (with all its warts)

And if you can rent .. get a Scarlet.

IMHO, the AF100's ~780 LOR and latitude would make me
look elsewhere for an "A" cam.

jeff
Click to expand...

Jeff. I guess you did not read my original post otherwise you would know the 5D doesn't meet my criteria, which includes having a clean uncompressed 4:2:2 HDMI or HD-SDI output. Because we will record to an external recorder such as the Hyperdeck.
Also, quite honestly, the 5D is crap! Specially when compared to the AF100. I have a 7D already and before spending money on a 5D I would just shoot with that. If you think the 5D is resolving more than the mentioned ~780 you are definitely mistaking. In the Zacuto shootout all the DSLRs looked way softer and murky compared to the AF100 and that included the 1D, 5D and 7D. I have also used the 5D and the MKIII is only slightly better, but not really better in resolution. It's better in other things such as moire. But not good enough at that.

About the Blackmagic, again you missed the part I said I need it now. Also, nobody knows how good it will really be. So why suggest a camera that isn't out and has been delayed without much solid word of when it's coming out?

Also, please to anybody, do not suggest other cameras. I don't want to stir this off topic and turn it in a AF100 vs other cameras thread. I have done my homework and narrowed it down to the AF100. I'm interested to learn more about this camera. Not any others, thanks.
 
Ken Hull said:
SJX: Yes, in both his book and his DVD, he goes into detail about what the many camera settings do, to emphasize (or de-emphasize) various characteristics. If you buy the camera new in the U.S., the book should be included. I bought the DVD before buying the camera, to help me decide if the camera was right for me. I suggest you do the same; he gives a lot of good advice.

-- Ken

P.S. - If the book doesn't come with the camera, but you already bought the DVD, that will probably be enough. The DVD gives almost as much info. It's just not quite as easy to look up specific things.
Click to expand...


Thanks!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top