+1
Wouldn't buy it if I was loaded. $16K what???? I thought Canon was going to come out with a 5DMK2 price point or slightly higher to undercut panasonic. I mean the 5DMK2 indirectly spawned the AF100 et al...
Where is Panasonic in this game?
- Thread starter Phil1076
- Start date
Wouldn't buy it if I was loaded. $16K what???? I thought Canon was going to come out with a 5DMK2 price point or slightly higher to undercut panasonic. I mean the 5DMK2 indirectly spawned the AF100 et al...
Agreed, but if they're not letting go of film then they don't belong in this conversation. This is new school technology. Adapt or dinosaur.
Donald Gregory
Well-known member
Look at the cinema glass they're going to be selling. Why do they need to sell a camera for $5k, if they're going to sell a cinema zoom at $40k or prime set at $30k? They're obviously not going after the low budget indie crowd with the c300, they'll let them use their 5d.
Mike Harvey
Veteran
On the other side of the studio from me right now are four studio camera setups each worth $100k+, and another in the $60k range. Comparatively speaking in the pro market, $7k is peanuts.
As for your other comments about worth, it's worth whatever Panasonic can sell them for and make a profit, not what the cost of parts are. If they can sell an HPX250 body with a m4/3 chip for $8k and enough people are willing to pay for it for them to make a profit, then that is what it's worth.
[EDIT] Also, there is no way they're going to be able to stick the 250's lens on there and keep it under $5,500. Most decent 2/3" lenses are well over $10k, and an equivalent m4/3 is going to be even more expensive.
Your comments are valid, just don't fan the flames of a $10K AF200, that puts earthlings like me out of the universe.
Most of my comments are light-hearted anyway, mainly opinion mixed with desire. .So yeah, you're right and so am I.
By the way, across from me right now is a camera phone and a GH2 and my super expensive AF100. LOL. What the blazes
are you doing in here if you've got access to half a million in gear? Go away!
NoahK
Hottie Mod
Based on the amounts of tutorials I sell, I'd guess Panasonic is really cleaning up with the 160/AF100 and GH2 cameras. If they plan a move into the Scarlet/C300 territory I'd imagine it will be very carefully considered before they do anything. Already so many folks are saying how disappointed they are that the C300 and Scarlet were much more expensive than they could afford- not necessarily a good market to go into...
-Noah
-Noah
Great point. I had no idea they have $40K glass, really? So I guess the next 5D still won't be an improvement at that price point? That's the point I was trying make.
Mike Harvey
Veteran
Because I'm on break at my other/"real" job at a TV station... these particular toys ain't mine :happy:
That doesn't make me like you any better, mate! Your real job is at a flaming TV station??? Oh, man. I just hate some people. :happy:
Are they hiring?
And the use of EF glass (not sure if EF-S lenses wil work with the new sensor) is limited as doesn't appear to have auto focus or IS.
Mark Smith
Veteran
IS is one thing but Auto focus For live action HD is a recipe to make no one happy at this point.
Actually what I meant was remote focus, using the lens motor, not actual autofocus, which can even be problematic on a still camera.
LOL ... OK, I'll say under $7.5K.
But dtz, you've got to give Panasonic some wiggle room! Remember the marginally acceptable resolution results of the AF101 test Alan Roberts did for the BBC? And remember the highlight problems the AF100 had in the Zacuto shootout? Maybe the problems are in the sensor, or maybe they're in the in-camera processing, but it will take some engineering to get the image quality up there with the big dogs. Also, I suspect it costs more to put AVC-Intra capability into a camera, as opposed to AVCCAM.
Oh yeah, one more thing :laugh:: No, no, no. Don't say HPX250 when talking about a large sensor camera. A built-in lens with anywhere near that range and aperature would be massive (and expensive). Stick with the AF100 philosophy of a camera with lots of manual controls, and a lens mount that can take Nikon and Canon adapters.
(But even the AF100 as it currently exists is a great camera, and better than my current camera, so take my criticisms with a grain of salt.
)- Ken
KINOKS
Well-known member
And it's not just that. Would you really won't to have a servo focus ring on a S35 chip camcorder?!!
The C300 is (currently) the only Canon that will allow you to do that anyway without connecting to a laptop over USB (if the EOS Utility even lets you do that in movie mode).
David W. Jones
Veteran
Wow, it's hard to read some of these posts with all the pot smoke in the air!
Seems that some of you want a magical camera with a unicorn horn and covered with fary dust.
I guess I don't understand... Is your AF100 no longer meeting your clients needs in under a years use?
Seems that some of you want a magical camera with a unicorn horn and covered with fary dust.
I guess I don't understand... Is your AF100 no longer meeting your clients needs in under a years use?
I was speaking only to resale value of lenses as it applies to the potential longevity of the m4/3s format - meaning of course that the ability (or lack there of) to autofocus on non-m4/3 bodies does come into play.
One other note about autofocus for DSLRs, it can be used in this way (I know, 'cause I've done it): If you've run out of the house with your trusty DSLR, but don't have a loupe, it can be high near impossible to get focus in the bright sun. By switching to still mode, your camera can get autofocus, then you switch over to movie mode and BAM! It's in focus (usually).
Not ideal, but for getting a nice video of the family, it IS a solution. I'm not the only one using thousands of dollars of equipment to shoot family movies, am I?
One other note about autofocus for DSLRs, it can be used in this way (I know, 'cause I've done it): If you've run out of the house with your trusty DSLR, but don't have a loupe, it can be high near impossible to get focus in the bright sun. By switching to still mode, your camera can get autofocus, then you switch over to movie mode and BAM! It's in focus (usually).
Not ideal, but for getting a nice video of the family, it IS a solution. I'm not the only one using thousands of dollars of equipment to shoot family movies, am I?
Of which is strictly your opinion based on nothing. We're too early into the game to know what the potential resale value is. And if the photography world moves towards mirrorless cameras (of which I provided evidence of one photog's opinion) then that outlook is good.
I would never trust that method. But then, I usually don't just "run out of the house", because professional results demand a professional workflow.
Is that all you're doing? Because, if so, I fail to see what your ultimate point is.