AF-100 Hype and Scarlet Wait...

[tillHavis]

I may look awful but it's nice and light. And cheap. I like that compromise.

I would personally buy a lighter plastic-shelled Scarlet instead of the heavy metal "cool" one we have now.

I don't need the damn thing to last 100 years - everything we have will be totally out of date in 5.

I don't have an ego that needs to be stoked by buying gear that makes me look like a "cool filmmaker". The camera shouldn't look like it is compensating for something.

My favorite cam was always the HD-100U - nice functional blend of form and function. Of course DSLRs are even better - part of the joy of them is that their cheap look helps you negotiate for discounts on locations and look inconspicuous

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

Hi Bruce it's not about being cool; Poor design often reflects of a company's ethos.
For me Panasonic and the larger companies are about protecting their market share. This always leads to products that are designed around protecting this market. This almost always leads to cannibalization of existing designs and form factors in order to make a product fit. Rather than making it the best it can be.
In the case of the HD-100U this means the you get a larger sensor but the same resolution, no real codec improvements or innovation, and a rather clumsy design, Why ? because any extra features will eat into their other markets share.
Yes all companies are in business to make money, but you can make money and produce innovative and beautiful products.

The Epic and Scarlet are created by people who want to make things the best they can be. Yes they are serving a market but in a way that does not penalize you for having limited funds.
They also allows you build and move into their other markets pretty easily.

In reality the Fixed Scarlet is probably one of the best and most innovative feature laden camera (for its price) I have ever looked at.

For me equipment is there to serve a purpose but I see no reason why it can't be beautiful, functional and innovative.

To be honest this attention to detail is often what separates great film makers for ok ones, this determination to dig deeper, to go that extra mile to make the best film you can.

I understand your post about being inconspicuous but the Scarlet is pretty small and can be hidden pretty easy. I don't think great looking products should be should penalized for looking good;
but rather judged on how well they perform and the images they produce, the features they offer and the joy the give the users.

If I can get a smile when I look at it's design because it is a beautiful and functional thing, all the better.

Regards

 

[C. Jagan Mohan]

.................................... - everything we have will be totally out of date in 5.............................

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

5? Common! RED1 M is already outdated and discontinued in less than that.

 

[Bruce Allen]

You left price out of your argument entirely.

How about this: put price FIRST AND FOREMOST. Then everything becomes much clearer.

Here's what I think Panasonic aimed for:

"People want a large sensor video camera without DSLR aliasing & usability hassles for as cheap as possible."

The cheaper they price it, the more cameras they'll sell. The more cameras they sell the cheaper they can price it because they need less profit per camera.

If you were Panasonic, how would you do this?

1. re-use the hell out of your other cameras' bits and pieces
2. use cheaper components wherever possible (8 bit vs 10 bit etc)

Fact is if they can knock just $200 off the manufacturing cost, they can probably knock $600 off the price.

And that's how they managed to make a usable large-sensor video camera for a price of $4600 that is actually coming out in December - and which a bunch of people will buy.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

 

[Bruce Allen]

Hi Bruce it's not about being cool; Poor design often reflects of a company's ethos.
For me Panasonic and the larger companies are about protecting their market share. This always leads to products that are designed around protecting this market. This almost always leads to cannibalization of existing designs and form factors in order to make a product fit. Rather than making it the best it can be.
In the case of the HD-100U this means the you get a larger sensor but the same resolution, no real codec improvements or innovation, and a rather clumsy design, Why ? because any extra features will eat into their other markets share.

With respect, I think it's more because extra features drive up cost. Here's what I think Panasonic aimed for:

"Make a large sensor video camera without DSLR aliasing & usability hassles as cheaply as possible."

The cheaper they price it, the more cameras they'll sell. The more cameras they sell... the cheaper they can price it because they need less profit per camera.

If you were Panasonic, how would you do this?

1. re-use the hell out of your other cameras' bits and pieces
2. use cheaper components wherever possible (8 bit vs 10 bit etc)

If they knock $200 off the manufacturing cost, they can knock $600 off the MSRP because suddenly this thing is getting mass-market.

That's how they managed to make a usable large-sensor video camera for a price of $4600 that is actually coming out in December - and which a bunch of people will buy.

If I can get a smile when I look at it's design because it is a beautiful and functional thing, all the better.

I agree, but to me that looks like an over-engineered Victorian steam engine or a Humvee or something. A piece of macho styling. Form before function. With an EVF whose name is going to get me in trouble at airports.

I look at it and the first thing I wonder is: can I shave some of that metal off to make a dual 2/3 Scarlet stereo rig lighter?

I love good design - just I'd prefer a sports car to an SUV.

But then again... I have never broken a camera. The closest I came was when my little Sony PC5 DV camera fell 8 feet onto a rock while hiking - it BOUNCED - because it was so light - and continues to work fine to this day.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

 

[Rick Burnett]

A project in June 1011? Time machine?

Well I pre-ordered an AF100 for $4699 with free shipping. Obviously the goal is an S35 Scarlet. I have been following EVERY bit of information on both cameras very intently. I am SO glad that the AF100 is here because I think it is a nice stop-gap between my 7D and the S35, and it will give me an opportunity to make more money as I feel a lot more confident if in fact the statistics of the AF100 are as they've been tested so far. And hopefully Birger's mount for EOS to m4/3 is out in time (I have a lot of Canon glass already).

Initially I was going to get the Fixed Scarlet, but the more I've worked with APS-C, I want to stay in this format. I agree that the AF100 is a bit hideous looking at it is just slightly modular (you can remove both handles) and I am really annoyed I cannot remove the EVF on the top, but, when I read through ALL that it can do, I it's like Christmas is coming for me....well it is December.

Though I will say, I'd really like to hear an S35 roadmap as well.

 

[Jim Retar]

A project in June 1011? Time machine? .

haha, if only it would go forward too so I could pick up an S35!

 

[Rick Burnett]

Hahaha Jim, get on that! We want AT LEAST 1000 years of DR (so you can make it 10-bit).

 

[Bryce O]

I can guarantee that anyone who says something to the effect of... "That camera is too ugly..." will never make a decent film in their life. You're in this game for the wrong reason. If you want to "look cool" buy a $800 T2i and load up on 10k worth of matte boxes and Zacuto gear.

"Hey look at me, I'm a filmmaker! See how cool my camera is! I have a matte box and a fallow focus... because that's what pros have!"

 

[Terry VerHaar]

I can guarantee that anyone who says something to the effect of... "That camera is too ugly..." will never make a decent film in their life. You're in this game for the wrong reason. If you want to "look cool" buy a $800 T2i and load up on 10k worth of matte boxes and Zacuto gear.

"Hey look at me, I'm a filmmaker! See how cool my camera is! I have a matte box and a fallow focus... because that's what pros have!"

And what are you willing to put up as a "guarantee" that your totally ridiculous statement will turn out to be true? :willy_nilly:

This is a new low in comments for this forum.

 

[Bryce O]

And what are you willing to put up as a "guarantee" that your totally ridiculous statement will turn out to be true? :willy_nilly:

This is a new low in comments for this forum.

$100 dollars... that it will be 90% true. There's always one stupid exception.

I thought everyone on this forum was supposed to be against all that shallow-film making crap. So now a camera has to look cool? It can't just take good looking images? Good to know...

I'm sure this is how real Hollywood shoots go down... "Get me a bigger camera! That small one doesn't look cool enough! and... put some more matte boxes on it! I don't care if if there's no flaring... the camera doesn't look cool without one!"

 

[Terry VerHaar]

$100 dollars... that it will be 90% true. There's always one stupid exception.

I thought everyone on this forum was supposed to be against all that shallow-film making crap. So now a camera has to look cool? It can't just take good looking images? Good to know...

I'm sure this is how real Hollywood shoots go down... "Get me a bigger camera! That small one doesn't look cool enough! and... put some more matte boxes on it! I don't care if if there's no flaring... the camera doesn't look cool without one!"

I think you are the one looking foolish for even focusing on this. It was an off hand, subjective comment (i.e. OPINION). I doubt anyone, including the poster, is really saying anything about the abilities of the camera. Just that is it ugly.

 

[Jeremy_Sawatzky]

I too am looking very closely at the af-100 and have been reading alot about it on dvxuser. Unless jim comes out with some concrete evidence of scarlets release. or hell just an announcement about it i think i could hold off. i use my broken camera till the af-100 but that camera looks like an awesome option. I would FAR rather have a scarlet, but then again- an af100 is all il need for a long time. u can get one working well for 5500. That is a really good price for a very good camera. - the day scarlet is released i sell it and scarlet is mine!

 

[Rick Burnett]

I too am looking very closely at the af-100 and have been reading alot about it on dvxuser. Unless jim comes out with some concrete evidence of scarlets release. or hell just an announcement about it i think i could hold off. i use my broken camera till the af-100 but that camera looks like an awesome option. I would FAR rather have a scarlet, but then again- an af100 is all il need for a long time. u can get one working well for 5500. That is a really good price for a very good camera. - the day scarlet is released i sell it and scarlet is mine!

This is the path for me too. Given the brain right now is $7k for the S35, I think the AF100 will retain good value, unless of course Panasonic 1 ups it with something better in too short a time. So when that time comes, out with the AF100 and in with the S35!

 

[Thomas Church]

I just think it's sort of sad that RED is completely missing the boat regarding Scarlet 2/3 fixed.

By the time it comes out I wouldn't be surprised if there was a 1080 RAW camera on the market from Panny or Sony.

 

[Rick Burnett]

Even if something comes out 1080 RAW, using the Scarlet at 1080 will still be superior. A bayer pattern sensor does NOT resolve to it's native resolution. Look at RED ONE footage at 1:1, I see aliasing. Now bring it down to 1080. So pretty!

Of course looking at native resolution is a function of the display device as well. I don't have any ultra high def displays to see full RED ONE and not just a crop on my 30" cinema display.

 

[Jason Rudd]

What color depth will the Scarlet have? Does anyone know at this point at what color depth the RAW will be processed? I'm sure it will be better than 8-bit. Will it be the same as RED or Epic (14 bit?).

 

[Adrian Frearson]

By the time it comes out I wouldn't be surprised if there was a 1080 RAW camera on the market from Panny or Sony.

Well Ikonoskop are due to start shipping their camera in October, albeit on a very small scale. I think this camera is more directly comparable to what Scarlet will offer than the AF100, but sure there will be some overlap in the user groups.

 

[Billy Barber]

I was at Createasphere in NYC where Panasonic was showing a working AF-100. I have to say it seemed to me that if you take the top handle off (now removable) and the side handle off (now also removable) the camera looked a lot more like the non working Epic body that was also floating around the show than Red fans might care to admit.
Regardless, come Dec when it ships (and it looks like it will) the camera will seem even more beautiful.

 

[Andrew Thomas]

I will definitely be picking up an AF100 because it will exist and I can shoot on it. The same will be true when Scarlet ships. I feel bad for those who are so delusional to think that "if only I had <insert tool>, I would be able to make great art!!"

The truth is that if you have been sitting around waiting for Scarlet to hit and not out making art, your art is going to suck even at 3K resolution with HDRx and magic motion.

 

[Jay A. Kelley]

I think this is an interesting camera. With a NanoFlash we may get some good images. Of course I'll have an Epic and Scarlet, but that does not mean others can't play as well.


For me, it's RED, but if my clients want an AF-100.. I'll come up with it.

Jay