Where is Panasonic in this game?

P

Phil1076

Well-known member
So, the Canon C300 is available for pre-order at BH and other authorized dealers for.........$16k body only.

Now...Perhaps I'm smoking crack here, but isn't Panasonic in a position to dominate this market? We already have an AF100....granted, the decision to go m4/3 is questionable but if Panasonic were to combine elements of the AF100 and FS100 with the HPX250, wouldn't we have a competition-killer on our hands?

This has been brought up before, I'm sure...but the specs of the F3 and the C300 leave quite a bit to be desired, especially at their price points. Let's say Panasonic was to:

-cut the lens off the HPX250
-replace the 1/3" sensors with a S35
-keep everything else the same

Couldn't they do this relatively easily, while maintaining a camera price below $8k? The removal of the lens would help to balance out the S35 sensor. Perhaps it's easier said than done, but an HPX250 with interchangeable lenses and an S35 sensor would, in essence, be the perfect camera.
 
Would you really want another camera in the 10-20,000 price range? Seems pretty well saturated to me. Panasonic is rocking the sub 10K and even sub 1K world with great cameras. That said, I wouldn't be surprised to see something in between the AF100 and the F3/C300 someday from Panasonic.
 
NoahK said:
Would you really want another camera in the 10-20,000 price range? Seems pretty well saturated to me.
Click to expand...

Agree 100% - and most seem to think that those cameras are over-priced for their featured set. They're certainly not very future proof given their 8 bit pedigrees.

I've predicted the announcement of an AF200 before the year is out, a camera that blends the best of the AF/FS100 into one "super indie" model, which I'm assuming will be right around $5,500.
 
I think Panasonic does have to do something or risk sitting over in the corner with JVC.

the next camera needs:
10 bit architecture and recording in camera - doesn't have to be p2, higher bit rate avchd would be fine with me.
Improved sensor- doesn't really have to be s35 in my mind but I could be wrong...
A higher quality industrial design/ build of the camera body.
more robust menu - more like their pro 2/3s cameras.
Price: 13k list

Needed by: NAB
 
Last edited:
Mark Smith said:
I think Panasonic does have to do something or risk sitting ove in the corner with JVC.
Click to expand...

How big is the market for ~$15k digital cinema cameras, really? You've got RED/Scarlet, the F3, and now the C300. How much does Panasonic have to gain by entering a relatively niche market that is already pretty saturated? I mean, they probably sell more of any given HPX P2 camera then the entire market for digital cinema cameras in this market combined. Is it really worth their time?

Don't get me wrong, an AVC-Intra P2 AF100 type camera would be fantastic, but that would probably be in the sub $10k market. I don't think there is enough in the ~$15k market to make it worth their time. Just because everyone else is doing, doesn't necessarily mean they have to.
 
ShawnMi said:
What's wrong with M4/3? I still don't understand why this seems like such a big handicap to people.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I fail to see what is necessarily gained by S35 besides even shallower DoF. Look at a comparison of m4/3, S35, and a frame of 35mm cinema film... m4/3 is a bit closer in size than S35 to 35mm film.
 
NoahK said:
Would you really want another camera in the 10-20,000 price range? Seems pretty well saturated to me. Panasonic is rocking the sub 10K and even sub 1K world with great cameras. That said, I wouldn't be surprised to see something in between the AF100 and the F3/C300 someday from Panasonic.
Click to expand...

No, I don't..perhaps you misread my post. With Panasonic already having the technology and codec, it would end up being a $7-8k camera. And fine...keep the 4/3 sensor...An AF200 recording AVC-Intra 4:2:2 would be amazing for $7k or so. Bonus point for recording to SDXC.
 
I would personally just like to see some better glass come out on panasonic's part. I really like the M4/3 sensor, just not the lack of native lenses.
 
Bonus points for recording to SSDs! .. After the Samurai, i'm a fan of the SSDs! Reliable and *way* faster
than P2s.

An S35 sensor would be nice too.
 
The market is much bigger than 'digital cinema'. Every one can have the 35mm look, so everyone wants it, you see it on cooking shows for crying out loud. I seriously doubt 4k will be needed by the average shooter any time soon, but 10 bit and an on board broadcast compliant codec for under 10k would be really nice. Second the sdxc argument, keep the cost of ownership reasonable.

I was totally floored by the c300 price point, given the existing tech is in a $3000 camera, the only thing new is the sensor.

I actually think that the m4/3 sensor size is ideal for a lot of applications, yes the wide lenses need to be propriety to the format, but that makes for manageable deep focus when you need it, and sexy shallow focus is easily achievable as well. A one man band can't pull focus on every shot. Now if only they could figure out a way to allow for a 2/3" sensor crop, like maybe a slide away olpf, so you could use super16 or B4 zooms, it could truly be the one camera to rule them all.
 
Mike Harvey said:
Yeah, I fail to see what is necessarily gained by S35 besides even shallower DoF. Look at a comparison of m4/3, S35, and a frame of 35mm cinema film... m4/3 is a bit closer in size than S35 to 35mm film.
Click to expand...
For the record let me say the AF100 is a fine camera and I am not trying to start a 'flame war'. But there are advantages to a Super 35 sensor. It is bigger and so you can have more pixels (better resolution) and bigger pixels(better low light). Obviously this is a very simplistic description but you get the idea. Plus all of the 'cinema'' lenses work on the Super 35 sensor with the same FOV as on the cameras they are made for. But that isn't a big deal unless you are using PL mount glass
 
Phil1076 said:
... And fine...keep the 4/3 sensor...An AF200 recording AVC-Intra 4:2:2 would be amazing for $7k or so...
Click to expand...
I've seen more than one post by GH2 owners saying video from their GH2 (which uses a MFT chip) looks higher quality than that from an AF100. If those posts are true, then Panasonic already has the technology to improve in-camera processing of the MFT chip. Now just record 10-bit data with 4:2:2 color internally; no external recorder needed. Hey! They've already got that technology: it's called AVC-Intra. Put all that together for under $10K, and there you have the XF200. I'd buy it.
- Ken
 
I have used the AF100 a few times. LOVE it,..... having come from the JVC700 !

Question is....do any of you think Panasonic will do some type of update to the AF100 and announce it at NAB in a few months?
 
alaskacameradude said:
But there are advantages to a Super 35 sensor. It is bigger and so you can have more pixels (better resolution)
Click to expand...

The AF100 has a 16mp sensor from what I have read. How much resolution du you think you want?
Its still going down to two mega pixel through the Optical low-pass filter.

When i think about it I also read it was an 16bit sensor to.
 
Last edited:
I would like to see Panasonic develop a sensor that works like the sensor in the C300 but in m4/3 size. A chip that needs no scaling and have bigger pixel size thus giving it better light gathering. Combine this with in camera 120fps to SDXC cards in 1080p 4:2:2 10-bit and add 1:1 pixel function. If they also would (or any other manufacture) put together a fast enough lens series with something like 12-120/2.8-3.5 with a working ENG style motor zoom for a decent price that I'll be a great lens for events. I also see a lens around 25-100/2 that would be perfect for interviews. Having tried the Olympus 12-35/35-100 lenses they have the range and speed but they are just not made for video and to expensive.

There are so many things I love about the AF100 and it sits comfortable with a great price compared to all the other competing cameras. It's not the best but hard to beat price/value. We are at the first generation from both Panasonic, Sony and Canon and what I would like to see this year is the next generation and having cameras spread from the $5k to $10k.
 
GH2 has more resolution than AF100 and an overall better picture if you ask me. I never really liked the pictures coming from the AF100 (it's why I never bought it for my self), they are to bluish, not enough resolution and the handling of the highlights isn't much better than in my HPX171.

AF100 uses the batteries, codec and media followed from the HMC151 - and that's why I understand the AF100 to be an S35 version of HMC151. So coming from this perspective it's quite obvious that there should come an S35 camera that uses the batteries, codec and the media of the HPX250. AF100 was rushed to the market in the same way that C300 was. Both could have been better.

Anyway, if you ask me it's not a question of "if" Panasonic will deliver an S35 P2 camera but a question of "when".
 
For me the important thing that drew me to the AF101 was the price. It is in the same price range as the PD150, XL1, DVX100, Z1, EX1. This is ideal for the hobbyist or small production company. If you want more camera then you are probably looking to hire.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top