Would the GH2 band be acceptable on the AF100?

D

DvxHerb

Well-known member
I know I am being somewhat incendiary but I feel it is a legitimate question. I purchased the GH2 as a possible B cam for the AF100 that I had looked forward to getting in a few months.

After recording this yesterday I don't feel altogether confident buying a Panasonic product without actually testing the very unit I'd be buying:


Just to clarify... I am only complaining about the band. I sought the flares out, if that is not obvious.

After spending 40 minutes on hold with the consumer tech support, I am feeling less inclined to buy the AF100.

I have read the argument that Panasonic's pro division is basically a different company. That may be. But surely Jan and others know from the feedback on this site that a decent amount of GH2 sales are going to be made by AF100 buyers. Why not get out in front of this issue? I'm sure Panasonic would rather sell a customer an AF100 and a GH2 (or two) rather than sell a customer a GH2 with issues and then lose that customer's trust.
 
Last edited:
GH2 comes from a different part of the company from the AF100. Different sensor, processed in a different way.
 
DvxHerb said:
I know I am being somewhat incendiary but I feel it is a legitimate question. I purchased the GH2 as a possible B cam for the AF100 that I had looked forward to getting in a few months.

After recording this yesterday I don't feel altogether confident buying a Panasonic product without actually testing the very unit I'd be buying:


After spending 40 minutes on hold with the consumer tech support, I am feeling less inclined to buy the AF100.
Click to expand...

beautiful footage. i love the Solaris-esque anamorphic flares. can you please tell me how to do such beautiful horizontal streaking flares? thank you
 
Ha!

Noel,

I was writing my rebuttal to your point (the point I have seen brought up here time and again) before I even saw it.

This is not being rude to you... but to the idea that "We're the pro division. Our stuff is great. It's just the rest of the company that turns out substandard products" should not be the order of things. I'm sure that is not the image that Panasonic wants to put out there.

I'm sure Jan's counterparts in the consumer division care just as much about their products as she clearly does about the products she represents. However you would never know it from the glaring issues some of these products have had and the lack of communication, representation and accountability those counterparts have demonstrated.
 
Last edited:
If your AF100 exhibited the same issue, would you be mollified those who told you: "The AF100 is prosumer/quasi-professional. If you wanted a real camera, you should have bought _______"?
 
Last edited:
Well you were really pushing things weren't you? You had the sun shining straight into your lens, maybe the sensor was getting overheated or even burnt?

Also the banding isn't on a fixed position in the frame, it moves when you move the cam so it's a direct result of the light reflections within the cam and not the result of after-sensor processing or coding.

If you would have taken a few steps more to the right the sun would have been covered by the tree giving you a beautiful natural backlight and the wonderful squirrel would have been clearly visible. Basically you're video is a "don't try this at home!" video.
 
RieniO,

I specifically wanted the flares, the squirrel just happened to get in the way ;) What happens to your assertion if I could have have shot the same thing with the AF100 and not gotten the band?
 
RieniO said:
Well you were really pushing things weren't you? You had the sun shining straight into your lens, maybe the sensor was getting overheated or even burnt?

Also the banding isn't on a fixed position in the frame, it moves when you move the cam so it's a direct result of the light reflections within the cam and not the result of after-sensor processing or coding.

If you would have taken a few steps more to the right the sun would have been covered by the tree giving you a beautiful natural backlight and the wonderful squirrel would have been clearly visible. Basically you're video is a "don't try this at home!" video.
Click to expand...


you're right i think i saw that on page 8 of the instruction manual. "PLease do not point the camera at the sun or horrendous banding will occur."

;-)
 
How long could you safely let the sun shine into the lens like that? I imagine at some point the sensor would start to burn or melt or something, wouldn't it?
 
DvxHerb said:
RieniO,

I specifically wanted the flares, the squirrel just happened to get in the way ;) What happens to your assertion if I could have have shot the same thing with the AF100 and not gotten the band?
Click to expand...

I would never point a camera directly to the sun in the first place and I'm sure it's somewhere written in the manual that you're not supposed to do that.

The flares are a lens inssue IMO and if I would get the banding under less extreme lighting situations I would not accept that but that's hypothetical and it's only to answer your question.
 
Mike@AF,

I have no clue, nor is it something I intend to make a habit of doing. Respectfully, that's not really the point though. This band is apparent, to varying degrees, in other videos under normal lighting situations. My shot, while unusual, clearly demonstrates the issues and just happens to be THE MOTHER OF ALL BANDING™

It's funny the arguments being made about whether the other banded footage was "over or under exposed"... Do you think the "consumers" this camera is marketed to properly light their scenes?
 
You know that the GH2 is first and foremost a consumer grade stills camera that just happens to shoot video - and that the AF100 is a dedicated pro grade video camera right? Two different animals, different sensors, different olpf's (one tuned for stills the other for video), produced by two different companies, aimed at two different groups of users (though there is some overlap).

What lens were you using? DP's choose lenses carefully when they want to shoot sun flares; they all have different properties and will give wildly different results - perhaps the lens you were using doesn't have the flare characteristics you desire?

I get it - the banding is a talked about issue with the GH2 if you point it at the sun… But so far the AF100 hasn't shown this same problem (maybe because it's a completely different camera? Or maybe no-one is interested in pointing it at the sun?). You're frustrated; so return the camera and find another solution would be my recommend. Or you could wait and see what happens when the AF is released and everyone rushes to shoot their 'point it at the sun feature film epic'.

When I bought my diesel VW Jetta I made a big fuss and swore that I wouldn't buy the Bugatti Veyron. I mean the pick-up and top speed of the Jetta was so slow, how could another division of the same corporation charge that much more for a car that so obviously couldn't be any better. I feel your pain.

You've based a buying decision for a $5,000 camera on your experience from a $900 camera…

Sorry to the mods, but this is kind of frustrating.
 
Mike@AF said:
How long could you safely let the sun shine into the lens like that? I imagine at some point the sensor would start to burn or melt or something, wouldn't it?
Click to expand...

Yup, or you get a nucleair meltdown inside the lens which will result in overheating sensor and other parts as well. It's just something you're not supposed to do unless you're holding your mother-in-law's camera :-)
 
If the AF100 has the same issue, I would probably just avoid pointing it directly at the sun. But I wouldn't even call it an issue or problem...it's just a characteristic that doesn't look as cool as the rest of the sun flares in the frame.

It seems both cameras and lenses all have different reactions to direct sunlight. All that video tells me is how the GH2 and lens combo handle direct sun at that angle
 
Is this supposed to be a joke? An internet forum prank?

To me it's like complaining to a restaurant that you burned yourself after deliberately pouring scalding hot coffee on your lap.

Best regards,

Leo
 
I hope you didn't VOID YOUR WARRANTY with those nice prolonged shots of the sun.

And then post it here for the whole world to see.
 
Ticheli said:
Is this supposed to be a joke? An internet forum prank?

To me it's like complaining to a restaurant that you burned yourself after deliberately pouring scalding hot coffee on your lap.

Best regards,

Leo
Click to expand...

Yeah you can do the same thing with film...
 
Try this...don't shoot into the sun...

Not trying to be an a-hole, but pretty much every camera on the planet has issues when filming the billion degree ball of fire at the center of our solar system. If it wasn't banding it would be streaking, extreme blowouts or something else. It's about knowing the limitations and working around them, or in some cases with them. Flares on the other hand don't bother me and I embrace them when possible. But yeah, without proper filtering, shooting the sun will destroy your camera so don't do it.
 
RieniO,

Again, I wanted the flares. The flares were never the issue. I sought them out. I also did not point the camera straight into the sun. It was close, I'll give you that, but it was obscured a lot by the leaves, roof and the trunk of the tree. It's not like I centered the sun in the frame.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top