Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Panasonic AF100 upgrade?  (Read 6431 times)
fredjeang2
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 792



« on: July 17, 2013, 06:30:26 AM »
ReplyReply



Do we know if there is a succesor on the road?

I think that Chris S and Bern C have or had this camera. How does it compare with the GH3 ?

Got built-in ND no?
Logged
Chris Sanderson
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1905



« Reply #1 on: July 17, 2013, 07:12:30 AM »
ReplyReply

No idea on an upgrade. I suspect it's the end of the line...

It is a very capable video camera; has ND, XLR, good presets. We still have two - for sale ))
« Last Edit: July 17, 2013, 07:17:52 AM by Chris Sanderson » Logged

Christopher Sanderson
The Luminous-Landscape
fredjeang2
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 792



« Reply #2 on: July 17, 2013, 07:25:41 AM »
ReplyReply

No idea on an upgrade. I suspect it's the end of the line...

It is a very capable video camera; has ND, XLR, good presets. We still have two - for sale ))

Thanks Chris,

And, may I ask: why are you selling them?
Logged
Chris Sanderson
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1905



« Reply #3 on: July 17, 2013, 08:58:24 AM »
ReplyReply

They are not being used enough - replaced by GH3s
Logged

Christopher Sanderson
The Luminous-Landscape
bcooter
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1118


Bang The Drum All Day


WWW
« Reply #4 on: July 17, 2013, 12:16:25 PM »
ReplyReply

They are not being used enough - replaced by GH3s

The last two weeks the GH3's saved me.   I can't say enough good about the file as long as your careful and set everything right.

Focus, when it's on, it's blood amazing.  The face feature for lifestyle and advertising, fast moving is freaky good and once you get use to the track wheel you can choose your primary subject fast.

These cameras aren't perfect, really, really, really need built in ND's, but damn they shoot the prettiest skin tones and hold a lot of detail.

They're not RED level but sometimes better, always easier.

If anybody knows anybody at Panasonic I have a wish list and I'd love to get it across.

These cameras are amazing.

IMO

BC
Logged

bcooter
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1118


Bang The Drum All Day


WWW
« Reply #5 on: July 21, 2013, 08:20:21 AM »
ReplyReply

No idea on an upgrade. I suspect it's the end of the line...

It is a very capable video camera; has ND, XLR, good presets. We still have two - for sale ))

I think this is the point of camera makers.

This is just a ramble of thoughts after coming off large production for weeks........

In a way it's kind of a shame that Panasonic and RED can't get together, or at least either one adopted part of the other's mindset.

The AF100 is a great camera, almost bought one, but at the time went the RED route.   Now with the RED's for large A cam with large supports and the gh3's for lifestyle, quick cutaways, fast low light work, I pretty much have all the bases covered, though I'd give anything for a AF100 and the RED 4k X sensor camera and a raw solution.

A lightweight, autofocus camera that used xlr inputs and had a dedicated viewfinder, multiple lens mounts, touch screen focus would virtually replace our multiple solutions.

The Gh3's are good, if your careful with the file and produce beautiful skin tones, a good clean file up to about 1000 iso, but they are still a dslr type camera and that form factor has it's limitations.

Also I know that in 18 months time the gh3's will be setting on the shelf replaced by a gh4, or a sony or a something while I'll bet we're still lugging those old RED 1's to each project.

When RED called the 1's future proof I don't think they meant the file size to go back and repurpose footage, I think they should have meant that the cameras will be good for a long time.

It's a different world for our business as we work so fast today and the shot list so long.  

Honestly I'm blocking shots before I've had time to think of the shot, which may sound counterproductive but somehow we do it, we get it and I'm so use to the short timeframe I think we get the shot pretty well.

I can say this, the days of saying you can't direct while shooting may be coming to an end, at least for short form, because I can see every bit of the frame, what's in focus what isn't, what looked good, what didn't without a replay, without a group discussion.  I know instantly whether someone walked into and out of frame naturally, if the line delivered was believable or staged because I'm directing, scanning the frame every moment and feeling the shot from within, not from a distance.

Then again I come from a still photographer's background where directing from a viewfinder is not uncommon.

But getting back to cameras, if a company really wants to make inroads, first they should consider usability.  The R1's are great, were expensive (much less today), robust (I think it took RED a period to get there), great file (with the X sensor) good software (needs another generation or two), good sound inputs with 4 channels, good viewfinder (with the new bombs) and in my experience incredibly robust.

Also I've upped the usability of my RED's by adding Zeiss nikon mount ZF still lenses as they are short throws on focus and with one quick run through you can focus and shoot yourself a lot easier than you'd think.

For stationary shots or shots with a dedicated focus puller we use the RED PL mount lenses and in all honesty not because they're better, they just look more impressive to have big glass on a big camera body, because I'll admit the RED's with the ZF's look kind of silly.

Still think about the AF100 with a 4k sensor, 14 bit 4:4:4 file, zone focus, xlr's, dedicated software conversion suite for raw and at least a smaller conversion box that would transcode the file to prorezz.

Actually, (even though I go hot and cold on RED) when you look at the price of a RED 1 (about 13k) what a set of ZF lenses cost, a bomb viewfinder, 5 v lock batteries your still around the price of anything that Sony and Canon will offer in 4k footage and have a more established rig and one that will probably last a lot longer.

Consequently there is the Scarlet.  I ordered an epic, thought better of it and went a different route condsidering both were new.

Granted it was early on and every part wasn,t available but those 3.5 mm sound inputs, only two channels, bog slow autofocus and that glossy screen that turns into a mirror in bright sunlight just did me in.  Now there is modules for Xlr inputs and you can add a bomb, but that jet engine fan is too much also given the fact that the r1's shoot 4 files, 3 quick times and one raw where the Scarlet just shoots a raw and Im now thinking of making a change.

I believe this is where most Japanese electronic cameras fall down   When you buy a Pana, Sony, Canon, still or motion, It feels to me that it's just a short time until they will be replaced as some features really needed aren't there yet.

Things like industry standard V-lock batteries.   If I have to buy and carry another dedicated battery charger . . . Whew.  

 Right now we have 4 different battery chargers for 4 types of batteries (in multiples)  but with V lock, what fits on an led light, works just as well with the REDs.   That is something someone should give some serious thought to.

Sound inputs should be standard.  XLR is fine, mini xlr is kind of goofy, 3.5 mm is dangerous.  For output, hdmi should be standard.  Does it really make sense to have hdmi, mini hdmi, micro hdmi? Really what is the difference between 1/4" to 5/8" inch?

(sorry to go off topic, but if one more sound guy tells me he doesn't like sending a sound signal to a camera, I think I'm going to buy 24 seihauser lav's and be done with it.)  Every sound guy gives me ok sound to the A camera, tinny sound to the b cam, on and off sound to the C camera and then hands me their sound file to match up.  Really?   I've never done an edit where regardless of where the sound comes from that hasn't had to go to sound sweetening for something and it's not that expensive.  Actually, when done properly the sound that goes into the RED one especially since it allows for 4 channels, is identical to any sound file the tech gives us.)

Wireless.  I'm there when it's a standard but today it's all a hit and miss.  There are dedicated hd wireless boxes that work robustly and though not that large are not that easy.   All of these cameras produce a knocked down signal for the lcd's and elv's.   Why not a tap into that signal to send to monitor.  It's really not necessary that a client see full 4k, or 2k video on an hdmi monitor but it is necessary that a monitor is up and running so they can see the shot without scrubbing through.  

Actually the Gh3's allow for a wireless transmission to a Ipad and as you are looking through the camera, it taps into the evf signal, "until" you start taping and then it cuts off.    I'm sure there is a reason for this but I don't know why.

We all know it's coming where everyone will have a wireless transmission, the problem is they all will be different protocols and hardware, all require different menus, all require different systems and of course require more cash outlay.

Focus.  Now this one really throws me.  I'm not an tech or engineer, but I know that autofocus on all cameras, stilll and motion hasn't changed in decades or more.  The GH3's have the best autofocus I've seen under the right conditions, but man when something isn't to their liking they go nuts.   I use focus pullers (you now the guys that stand there next to the camera with a box and turn a knob) and have one that is very good, but just can't cope with fast lens changes so he wants everything shot with an angeniux zoom.  

Isn't there a way to make a detachable touch screen, like the gh3's monitor where you just tap on a subject and it tracks them, tap on another area and it ramps to that, because today the only way to have exact focus is to manually do it and that is still open to human error.  Or how about a separate device that triangulates with the lens the subject and the device.   You point what looks like a sekonic spot meter at the subject, it follows them and the lens adjusts.  I don't know . . . is this possible?

Anyway, I guess I went off topic, but the electronic era may have brought us  some amazing devices, but with it comes a perpetual upgrade process where there is an announcement every week, about an announcement, followed by an introduction, followed by 4 firmware upgrades, followed by a new camera announcement.

When I pick up the RED 1 it reminds me of the film camera the past (the good and the bad) and that this is a camera that you can keep using in production for a long time.  When I go into those florescent lit stores that have rows and rows of black plastic video cameras all with 12 character names like AVX-1000s-Mr63 I know I'll be back.

IMO

BC





« Last Edit: July 22, 2013, 07:07:16 PM by bcooter » Logged

Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2217


WWW
« Reply #6 on: July 22, 2013, 01:04:00 PM »
ReplyReply

Coots

I think you are describing the F5

Its way lighter than Scarlet - its 1.5 X FS100 size and mass

Vlock striaght on the back, onboard compressed codec or raw recorder with proper 4k raw, XLR straight in
Can record 50mbs and raw at the same time with a lut applied to the 50MBS

And I feel it has way better ISO than the current Red chips, and 6stop ND onboard

Till I have a day with it I wont really know..

S




Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
fredjeang2
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 792



« Reply #7 on: July 23, 2013, 03:06:09 AM »
ReplyReply

The Sony is strictly a motion cam
And the gh3 are too dslrs.

Many are pointing that it's not really
Possible to have the best of both worlds
In one camera package. I tend to disagree
With this. I think that it' more a matter of
Will from the manufacturers and a lack
Of design inovation.

Ironicaly, the still and motion tasks have
Been metging into one big craft: let's call it
Image maker. But we still have to deal with
Specialized tools.

What's really good for still isn't that much for
Motion and vice versa.
It's a pity in 2013.

And I'm sure it is like that on purpose.

A full frame NEX is on its way very soon (2 or 3 months)
According to a contact I got on Sony. But even if it is true,
Will see the same thing more or less.
« Last Edit: July 23, 2013, 03:10:35 AM by fredjeang2 » Logged
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2217


WWW
« Reply #8 on: July 23, 2013, 04:56:51 AM »
ReplyReply

Yep. To me the downscaling thing does not work so 20mp stills and 2mp motion is a fail.

What we need is a nikon D4 with an add on 'jetpack' (memory+XLRinputs+monitor outputs) that brings the framerate from 8fps to 30fps

People forget that 8-11mp stills (from a proper camera - early canon 1 or nikon D2x) are very good - even a nikon D2x+jetpack would be an alexa smasher

Add a pelicle mirror (who needs 64000 ISO) and then you get stills quality AF and the whole industry is beated.

Im sure this is what Jannard dreamed of in 2005

S
Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
bcooter
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1118


Bang The Drum All Day


WWW
« Reply #9 on: July 23, 2013, 06:36:39 AM »
ReplyReply



I think you are describing the F5

Its way lighter than Scarlet - its 1.5 X FS100 size and mass

Vlock striaght on the back, onboard compressed codec or raw recorder with proper 4k raw, XLR straight in
Can record 50mbs and raw at the same time with a lut applied to the 50MBS

And I feel it has way better ISO than the current Red chips, and 6stop ND onboard

Till I have a day with it I wont really know..

S




Morgan, on paper the f5 looks good.

On paper.

Once again to me it's still  a black plastic covered camera with some caveats. 

Does it have real raw ready to roll? . . . and if so do they have a way to process it?

BTW:  Why do all Japanese camera makers have such a difficult time producing a software suite. (still and video).

Granted Cine-x is not Di-Vinci, but at least Red thought far enough ahead with the processing to offer a dedicated render card that processes out in their software and Di-Vinici.

Maybe Sony will do the same . . . I don't know.

Also understand I'm not selling RED, or any camera, but when I look at the F5, total costs, other than weight I don't see an advantage of the RED 1.   The R1 is proven, (and mine have gone around the world twice, been used in heat from Bangkok to Dallas, Cold weather in Munich and other than goofy file, never misses a beat (God I hate saying that as I'm sure I jinxed myself).

Also RED is professional.  Put an R-1 on set next to anything and it's the only camera a client really notices.  Everything else looks like a toy, or a video cam. 

But bottom line is the file.  An R-1 file needs to be worked to be seen.  To me, it blows away the Epic, Scarlet, Sony, Pana, Canon and I've used and tested them all.

It just looks like sharp, detailed movie film and with a base iso of 1000 it's fine and the true 14 stops of DR is not a flat, washed out file, but rich and deep with so much highlight detail it's kind of amazing. 

Actually I haven't found any camera, motion or still that goes above 1000 iso and holds detail and DR, they all do it, the Japanese cameras can go to a billion iso, but they get real smooth and kind of video looking.

The ONLY downside of the R-1 is high speed filming and ergonomics.   It's not the weight, as I can get an R-1 down to under 9  pounds (4 Kilos)  with ZF lenses, it's just that it's kind of a metal monster when you try to hand hold.  The only solution other than a steadicam is a shoulder mount.

But, if the Sony works and they don't hobble the image like the fs100 then I'll take a look, but software, file quality, lens options, will all make a big difference in my decision.

Oh yea, also costs, as I own three 4k cameras, don't know if I want to throw them away for something that might be as good

BTW;  We all know Fred is right and as I mentioned it's not good for us if cameras stay on the 18 month announcement schedule, with the next version offering something you really needed at the start.

Also as Fred says the GH3's, or any camera for that matter could be stills and video.  The GH3 will do it, do it very well, but not as you shoot video.  As you mentioned a still shooting 24fps could be made, heck my Canon 1x will shoot 15fps but you run into flicker from the mirror and from the light cycle of going dark to light.

Saturday shooting a motion and still lifestyle session, I ran a gh3 shooting stills and motion.  Obviously I had to shoot them in separate takes, but the gh3 (and the OMD) shoot very good still imagery up to 800/1000 iso.   Really beautiful and I hate to say it but film like.

(Funny thing is even though I used the gh3 for both stills and motion, for the sessions I like the best, I used the OMD with those beautiful OLY primes and the still files were a little cleaner, sharper and nicer).

The GH3 really is a better camera all around than the OMD, except for image stabilization, (which on the OMD really rivals a steadicam) but the gh3 is close to a perfect combo cam, except for a few silly issues on the menu and setups.

We shoot a lot more in Asia and Europe and the gh3's come in pal or ntsc mode only.  It really should be called the Americas, rest of the world cameras, because my ntsc will flicker with certain mains in Europe and we all know that could be changed with a flick of a switch in the menu, (if they so chose).

To me I know I could shoot a long form movie with my R-1's and never break a sweat of worry.  They are accepted, almost a standard and nobody loses their mind if you use one.    I still think there are the best deal out there and are so equal (in ways I think better) than the Alexa and at their price they are a steal in the movie world. 

When Jim Jannard said anyone that gives up their R-1 will regret it and it's not because they held their value, it because they continue to be very viable.

I could also shoot long form with  the GH3, but I'd have to make a lot of changes and be very, very careful on the exposure,  monitors and run a separate sound file with multiple channels.

When we set up I start with one or two R-1's to establish and master the shot.  I know if everything else dies, I have the shot in a can and can always crop in in Cine-X to move the file around (because for me it's still a 2k world)  Then we pick up the Gh3's and shoot tighter, wilder, more motion, more movement and they work fine, we can cut the footage together from both cameras and get pretty close.  (not exact) but close.

So I know you like Sony, can appreciate how well your fs100 served you but it will take a long time before someone pry's my R1's from my hands.

Also Red is down the road from me and after a brutal shoot, we van drop them off, have them checked out and feel secure for the next project (obviously this isn't free, but what is).


IMO

BC

PS

Also I've said this before, but if you need a small video head Chri's suggestion of that little gitzo.  http://www.gitzo.co.uk/video-heads

They don't work that well if you use the handle, but if you set the friction correctly you can move quickly and smoothly by holding the camera rather than the handle of the head and hit your mark intuitively.


Logged

Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2217


WWW
« Reply #10 on: July 23, 2013, 07:12:26 AM »
ReplyReply

I see Red as hasselblad/phase one (H/P1) - yep they got a pro file years before the Japs.

But I now see H/P1 as 90% redundant because Nikon D4/Canon 1Dwhatever are so bloody good (at stills)

And a H/P1 file is not redundant - not even a 2005 H/P1 file - so if you own it there is no need to sell.

So the question is have the Japs got to the Red level in motion like they have in stills?

Ive spent a day with the F5 at a 'workshop' (sales pitch) but not done my own tests which would be horrible - blown highlights, smooth tones, flouro lights - set it on tungsten shoot outdoors and try to correct - I know how to 'break' a camera.

I left the 'workshop' with a 'Feel' that the raw file was very good and base around 1200ISO- you can work it in some Sony Viewer (which looked like RedCineX) or Davinci where you can do secondaries.

To me it offers over your R1;

More ISO, Onboard XLR, Onboard ND, Much much much lighter Also onboard codec at 220-440mbs - which seems the perfect balance between raw and thin like a DSLR/FS100 and also instant proxies at 50mbs

The lens mount is solid PL, Nikon (opitek $600) and I guess others

To me the R1 is a no go. I just cannot carry it for a full day on the shoulder and IMO the ISO is too slow and I cannot handle the data load on some jobs with a fast turnaround.

(those things are probably not true for your crew of course)

Packing up for a flight today and ill need to carry on the camera - ill get my FS, NEX5 and gopro in a small Billingham with four nikkors Smiley

S



















Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
bcooter
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1118


Bang The Drum All Day


WWW
« Reply #11 on: July 23, 2013, 07:39:49 AM »
ReplyReply

Morgan with a one man band I know where your coming from.

I would have loved for my fs100 to have a good heck let's say great file, but I really don't like the file.   (to put it mildly).

Had Sony not limited it, or found a way to make a gh3 look, I'd have bought the next 4k fs in a heartbeat, probably then bought the f5.

Then again, I'm really surprised you haven't tried a gh3.  The look of the file just toasts the fs100 and you can have 4 of them for the same price.

In one shoulder bag I have a lav, two on board mikes, two gh3 bodies, one omd body, 4 pana zooms, 5 oly primes, chargers, cables, cards and even wi-fi for the ipad.

with one small tripod I can pretty much shoot everything I do and this is a messanger bag I had custom converted and not some huge black roll on.

The assistants don't like it, but I call my kit the "crew" replacement.  Honestly and with a bag of led's and few airstands I'm pretty much set.

The only issue is single channel sound, which can be fixed with an on board box (not elegant, but doable) and dual channels is a must.

Actually, I really should have bought the AF100 over the fs100 because panasonic has the file look down.

The gh3 has some limitations with it's form factor, but ask Chris how he like the look.

Skintones are just beautiful.

IMO

BC

In regards to iso, only once have I really needed anything over 1,000 and that's the RED 1's preferred setting.

Anyway to each his own.
« Last Edit: July 23, 2013, 07:44:31 AM by bcooter » Logged

Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2217


WWW
« Reply #12 on: July 23, 2013, 08:15:36 AM »
ReplyReply

I can completely see the GH as an amazing B camera for clamping to a table/car/talents head - thats why I have an NEX5 - probably the wrong choice.

But for my A camera..

Ill say one word about the GH3 - mini HDMI

and another.. 1/4 jack

..and another earphones (does it have them?)

Also zoom lenses - I know there are some plastic fantastics, but I love my 28-85 manual nikkor which is too telephoto on the MFT sensor

Im through with building A cameras from bits - even to the point where ive been (sort of) checking out old 2/3 ENG cameras and those 7-200 zoom lenses that used to cost $30k.

And that is the tragedy of the the AF100 - because if it had the GH3 image it would be quite a camera - 90% perfect for my needs.

Here is my last job with the FS100 - still struggling with skin but its ok.. ish http://www.sammorganmoore.com/latest/bcu-new-building

Smiley




« Last Edit: July 23, 2013, 08:23:37 AM by Morgan_Moore » Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
Hywel
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 158


WWW
« Reply #13 on: July 23, 2013, 09:39:48 AM »
ReplyReply

I have an AF100.

Ergonomically it is great, apart from single huge failing- no zoom in to focus. Remedied in the updated model I believe, but really shouldn't have been allowed to go out without in the first version.

Unfortunately the image sucks for my purposes. I often have relatively plain white or black backgrounds, and the banding is horrible. A backlight through hazer in a dark room turns from a lovely volumteric living thing into a stack of dinner plates of decreasing size when captured by the AF100.

You need to NAIL it with the light or you get clipped highlights, which go funny colours unless the chroma is dialled right down, at which point everything goes a bit grey and needs the saturation really pumped in post, which tends to make the skin tones look a bit crunchy.
And if you rely on shooting flat, the AVCHD recording screws you over because it has thrown away all the information you need to bring back in post, so grading is always fighting the compression.

I shot with it for over a year, including some 40 minute mini features. It was better than 7D/5Dii combo because it was at least reliable, but I was never happy with the images I got.

I still use it a a crash cam or a self-contained cam, especially if I know the backgrounds are going to be outdoors rather than the gradation of tones on an interior wall.

But honestly- I preferred the image from the Canons, and even from the HVX200.

My Scarlet blows the AF100 so far out of the water it is left stranded in the middle of the Sahara. I *love* the images from the RED, and the stills-RAW-like post production flow.

May well pick up a GH3 as a B-cam though. Or maybe a BMCC Pocket Cine Cam. I do fancy a small cam on a 3-axis Gimbal rig!

  Cheers, Hywel.

« Last Edit: July 23, 2013, 09:42:12 AM by Hywel » Logged
fredjeang2
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 792



« Reply #14 on: July 23, 2013, 01:29:29 PM »
ReplyReply

True,
The banding has been a serious problem
In those generations, af100 gh2 and they
Seemed to have fix that on the gh3, at least
In what 8 bits allows.
The af100 is also non hackable like the gh2.

And yeah, shooting flat with AVCHD is a suicide
Solution. This naughty codec requires to get closer
To the final look in capture. Wich requires lots
Of habilities. In fact, shooting with those cams
Is more chalenging than with Red or Alexas,
And it's a funny paradox.
i'd like to see small cams shooting prores444
Or even better, dnx444 and end of the hassles.
It's something Arri seemed to understand
And nobody else...

Coot, the pal-ntsc may well be
Solved when (and if) the hackers put their
Hands on it and for sure the bitrate will
Jump up to the 200 wich will boost the
Gh3 image quality.
The switch from pal to ntsc on the gh2 was
Also locked for taxes reasons and the hackers
Solved it.

Keep an eye on the gh3 hacks to come.
« Last Edit: July 23, 2013, 01:41:42 PM by fredjeang2 » Logged
bcooter
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1118


Bang The Drum All Day


WWW
« Reply #15 on: July 24, 2013, 08:33:55 PM »
ReplyReply

True,
The banding has been a serious problem
In those generations,........snip


Why? 

Really, why does a camera that cost thousands get some slack or not, for banding.  Jeez, you can buy a $50 Beaulieu and some 16mm film and never see banding if you three light telecine.

We all know it's just bit depth, data rate and a decent codec that doesn't dumb the data down.

There is no reason that in  still or motion a camera should band on white or black.

I know they do, (I've seen it in stills and motion) but digital cameras are expensive, way too expensive to have basic issues.

I know nothing about camera design, but you know somebody is sitting there chuckling saying, "well we could put in the larger processor or make it 12 bit, maybe pay those guys a royalty for a decent codec,  cause it would only add $234 to the cost, but hey, they wouldn't buy our $45,000 camera."

Kind of like when Detroit would screw on plastic wood and charge an extra $4,000 per car and then talk you into the dealer prep thing.

And just like the debate of medium format backs vs. cheap dslrs, there is a difference between and excellent file at the start compared to a marginal file you try to "fix".

Once again I hope the F5 is good, but in my heart I know I have will have a larger closet full of still and motion cameras that just needed that next upgrade to be there.

As Morgan mentioned the RED 1's are like medium format backs, but that's a plus not a negative. 

When I think about buying a new blad or Leica, I pick up my contax and realize there is nothing on the new cameras I really need right now.  It's the same with my R1's.    To me there intuitive, strong, reliable and professional.

Unfortunately they're also heavy, a little slow, take a while to set up and require more post production.

Honestly, I didn't buy a gh3 for the file quality (though it's pretty good), or because of the price (though since I know it will be replaced I'd rather losed a grand than 4 or 5 grand), I bought it because the way we shoot now which means advertising has become the speed of photojournalism with the requests of a media magnet that decides that broadcast, cable, the web and print are all the same thing.

BTW2:  Who the hell ever thought that moving f/t stops off a lens and onto some spinning clicking wheel was a good idea needs to rethink that thought.

Sorry to go off topic.


IMO

BC
Logged

fredjeang2
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 792



« Reply #16 on: July 25, 2013, 03:06:58 AM »
ReplyReply

I think that this is the point James.

The Gh3 is really interesting because
It gets closer to a kind of operabilty
The craft evolution requires.

It reminds me how the navy at the
Begining of the 20th century discarted
The heavy battleships for faster, lighter
And more manouverable cruise ships
Because the rules of strategy evolved.

I saw that the dudes involved into submarine
Video, never used the Avchd with the gh2
Because it bands too much under water.
They shooted motion jpeg in 720. At that
Time i runned some test with avchd 1080
And the motion jpeg pushed at 1080 by the
Hackers and no comparaison: the motion
Jpeg was, not only banding-free but more
Film look. But then, unfortunatly, it was
Limited to 2gigas per take, wich was about
30 sec of footage. (it was a constant bitrate)
But more annoying, there were no 24p or 25p
Options so in post mixing frame rate with
Other material was a bit of an hasdle.
Too bad because it would have been the
Cure of the gh2 biggest downside.

That's why i'm so happy in post when i got
Red files because if there is a process, i know
That the files are rock solid, while with the
Canons or Panas if it's not nailed, then it's
Difficult, sometimes impossible, to recover.

Then, what I also noticed, is the downgrading
Process.
A master at high bitrate from the dslrs can
Look quite good, but then doin a versioning
For the web degrades a lot lot more than
If the master comes from Alexas or Reds.

2 files, one from Red and one from the 5d
Can look prety close, but when doing a
Low res version, the differences are
Really there.

Not talking about color. I don't know about
The gh3, but the gh2 in color correction
Is simply a pain in the ass. I hate it.

I hope Panasonic understands the evolution
And brings rock solid files into their gh line.



Logged
bcooter
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1118


Bang The Drum All Day


WWW
« Reply #17 on: July 25, 2013, 05:18:08 AM »
ReplyReply

I think that this is the point James.

The Gh3 is really interesting because
It gets closer to a kind of operabilty
The craft evolution requires.

snip


There is nothing "perfect with the gh3's).  You have to be careful with the file, though not avchd careful and the autofocus is either brilliant (most of the time) or awful (some of the time).

The form factor is small and ok, though not rock solid film camera style,, though you can put your eye on a viewfinder and see the image. 

Should/could they be better, heck yes, but for the price, nothing I've ever tried comes close and the skintones are just beautiful.

What little grading I've done has been a snap.

IMO

BC
Logged

fredjeang2
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 792



« Reply #18 on: July 25, 2013, 12:10:33 PM »
ReplyReply

Yeah,
But you know what you are doin, the great
Imagery you produce demonstrate it.

But when you work for others, you receive
Everything, the good, the bad and the hugly.
No need to say, at my humble level, that what
I normaly have to deal with is not prety.
I'm not cutting yet for Almodovar.

On the latest, you don't want to have to deal
With gh2 or 5ds. When i see R3d, i know that
Whatever happens, it's going to be alright.

A gh2 in the right hands with the right team is
A breeze. The prob is that the right hands and the
Right teams are using Reds or Alexas. (it's changing,
I've heard that they start to embrasse gh3).

Curiously, the magic lantern + the canon does not
Seem to exite very much the advertising gurus.
But more the indy croud.

CC avchd material that has not been shooted by
People who know what they do is a russian roulette.


« Last Edit: July 25, 2013, 12:14:19 PM by fredjeang2 » Logged
tjbates
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 25


« Reply #19 on: July 30, 2013, 05:20:43 PM »
ReplyReply

There is nothing "perfect with the gh3's).  You have to be careful with the file, though not avchd careful and the autofocus is either brilliant (most of the time) or awful (some of the time).

The form factor is small and ok, though not rock solid film camera style,, though you can put your eye on a viewfinder and see the image. 

Should/could they be better, heck yes, but for the price, nothing I've ever tried comes close and the skintones are just beautiful.

What little grading I've done has been a snap.

IMO

BC

I've been reading with interest comments about these Panasonic cameras.
I shot a GH2 as a B-cam on a couple of documentaries for broadcast and found I could fairly accurately track focus manually using the built in viewfinder. Thought about getting an AF100 but heard the viewfinder was useless and therefore never tried it myself. Thought of getting a GH3 but tried it out at my local camera store and discovered the viewfinder was not at all as easy to focus moving subjects manually as the GH2. Looking forward to checking out the recently leaked GX7. It'll have EVF peaking and IBIS. Handheld with fast, light primes ....yes please.
Why is it that the EVF's on $1K cameras are sometimes so much better than something like the C300? And by the way...I'm over 3rd party EVF's. More leads to break - more batteries to charge.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad