Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

AF100 v Scarlet No way

Status
Not open for further replies.
Aaron Newsome said:
My Cinedeck Extreme will allow me to record in Cineform, ProRes, Avid DNxHD and even uncompressed if I need it. Add XDR 280 Mb/s I-Frame MPEG and that's quite a few nice options. Add to those five, the camera's built in codec and that's 6 choices to meet any needs I'll have.
Click to expand...
And, effectively, all of them in 8-bit, since Panasonic didn't have the foresight to include 10-bit HD-SDI/HDMI.
 
Stephen Strangways said:
Not to argue, but out of genuine curiosity: what do you like about the footage from the 5D that you don't like about, or think is missing from, the AF-100 footage?
Click to expand...

I just prefer the look of the 5D. I mean, I don't get too caught up in all the specs, data rate and other labels that are attached to cameras. I just take into account what looks better. And I personally think the 5D has richer colours and captures more depth in the image. Of course, this is based on very little evidence so far, so it's not really fair.

BTW, I'm not a fan of vdslr's (not do I have one), what with adding all the rigs and so on. I'm purely basing my opinion on the image. But right now, I don't think I will be investing in the AF100. They know they could have pushed the boundaries a whole lot further (like the no over-cranking at 1080p), it was just another "drip feed" on Panasonic's part.
 
Thomas Church said:
Maybe RED will sell just one model of Scarlet 2/3 with a detachable zoom lens.
Click to expand...

That would be nice, but then you are getting an amazing zoom lens for next to nothing. Hell, it would be worth buying the camera and throwing the brain away...
 
Jim Retar said:
You can select between 12-60p in 1080 mode.

As for the footage being posted, you realise most of it is ungraded?
Click to expand...

I thought it was 60i?? I saw a thread on this somewhere and was real surprised, but then I checked it out on Philip Blooms site and he was saying that it is capturing in 60p and then converting it to interlaced (internally). Not sure about this, and would truly like to be wrong. I guess I'll end up having to use one at some point...
 
Andrew Salter said:
My point about the Af100 is why release a camera with such a low codec, l know its about a price point, but it seems if you want to get a good i frame from it you have to bolt on a nano flash etc and time you've rigged it up with all the bits, no change out of $7-8000. Its lost its simplicity and has become a bolt on package without any ergonomics or major break throughs apart from a largish sensor.
Click to expand...

Seems these editors with experience couldn't tell the difference between the native footage and the AVC-100 intraframe encoded footage:

http://crews.tv/blog/2010/10/22/af100-curveball/
 
Lawrence Bansbach said:
And, effectively, all of them in 8-bit, since Panasonic didn't have the foresight to include 10-bit HD-SDI/HDMI.
Click to expand...

The advantages of 10bit vs 8bit for acquisition are way overblown. I've captured some really great looking footage with my XDR. The XDR and nanoFlash are 8bit only devices. Since these will likely be the most popular option with the AF100, a 10bit interface would not benefit most users one bit. It would raise the price, decrease battery life, possibly make the unit larger or run hotter though.
 
Also there is another "mom sucker" cam from Sony: NEX-VG10E HD Flash Camcorder the worlds first interchangeable lens consumer HD camcorder.

Quote from Jeff Kilgroe:

"IMO, the Sony NEX-VG10 is a better buy than the AF100. It has better sensitivity, nearly 2 stops greater DR, APS-C/S35 sensor size,
equally adaptable lens mount and it's less than half the price, including an 18-200 zoom. It does lack SDI and XLR ports, but honestly, who cares?
Anyone who cares about those features will be recording to an external recorder anyway and the camera delivers "uncompressed" via HDMI.
The onboard mic is equal, possibly superior, to the AF100 mic. Or I guess you could buy an external recorder with audio input or
just run a nice audio recorder too. You can buy a NEX-VG10 plus a Sound Devices 702 and still come out cheaper than the AF100."


5079011946_dac1afd97f_b.jpg

Sony NEX-VG10E HD Flash Camcorder with Leica-C 21mm T1.4 prime lens (the picture copyright by fdtimes>>>).

Get a sample footage:

Beautiful Bali captured with the Sony NEX-VG10 Handycam camcorder>>Vimeo>>>
 
Stuart English said:
Out of interest, what's your definition of HD-EVF and HD-LCD and pro I/Os ?
Click to expand...

I can only go on 2nd hand info regarding the AF100... but I respect Barry Green and he said the LCD and EVF are both HD.

I/Os... full XLRs, HD-SDI (8bit, yea, yea), HDMI, timecode, headphone out.

I'm sure you will come back to me saying how much better the RED offerings are, but until I have a camera to actually plug them into... then I will continue to keep an eye on other cameras.
 
The point of the thread is to open a friendly debate about how the new AF100 camera was aiming at a certain point of entry $ to the proposed specs re the scarlet and how the AF100 is not as cost effective as thought and if you want a true quality image then its not 8 bit or AVCHD compared to RAW. Its the first of its kind and so will be the scarlet so is worth a discussion!
 
Thomas Church said:
...

However I can certainly see RED somehow scrapping the concept of a fixed lens camera. This camera was announced when we were all using HVXs and EXs. I don't see a lot of people going back to fixed lens.

Maybe RED will sell just one model of Scarlet 2/3 with a detachable zoom lens.
Click to expand...

Doubtful. RED has said that the electronics on the lens of the fixed are somewhat integrated into the body with one result that it cannot effectively be offered as a standalone lens. They also seem, from the comments along the way, very proud of the quality of the lens. So I doubt they will abandon the lens project and/or the Fixed model, but will continue working toward offering both 2/3" models.

(of course... "subject to change" as always.)
 
I still stand by that statement above that Sanjin quoted, except Sony decided to pull the 24p mode (which was still embedded within the 60i stream) from the production model. I had not been following the VG10's development over the past couple months. I suppose that will lead to a "pro" model of the camera, as Sony likes to often do, that will have XLR ports and 24fps... If the VG10 sells well in its current form. ...Or I'm sure someone will have a 24fps firmware hack.

At this point, the only advantage I see to the AF100 over the VG10 is the frame rate options. Have to ask yourself if the frame rates and some of the other little differences are worth the price difference (going either direction). Personally, I won't be buying either the VG10 or the AF100. I do own the NEX-5 compact still camera. I kinda like it for that, but that's where it ends. And while I do have the 20mm pancake and 18-50 e-mount lenses, I have both a Nikon mount (with G aperture control ring) and a PL mount for the camera. The NEX-5 with the Nikon adapter and the 35mm f1.8 Nikkor or other similar compact, fast prime, is quite a powerful little camera. Even the kit zoom isn't half bad, other than the iris ramping.

AF on the camera sucks though. Without the mirror, it must all be done in software and it fails quite often, so I tend to stick with MF / or MF assisted.
 
AF100

AF100

The advantages of 10bit vs 8bit for acquisition are way overblown.
Click to expand...

Ah no.. there is a very big difference between 8-bit and 10-bit; provided the camera's sensor and electronics can support that extra bit depth.


Now I'm not saying the AF-100 can't support 10-bit - I just don't know. But from the linked article ..

"The idea we took to the shoot – to avoid the limitations of the internal AVCHD recording codec on the AF100 by taking an HD-SDI feed out the back – turns out to be not the fix-everything solution we’d expected.

"The fact that the HD-SDI is only an 8-bit output does hold back the potential of the beautiful images the camera is capable of,” says Coldrick.

“This also means limitation in the color reproduction and shades of greys, but this is true of all 8-bit images – including competing cameras.

“I certainly noticed a lack of detail in the shades of green on the painting behind the photographer and on the wall behind the girl. Also noisy blacks in his jacket.”
 
AVCHD

AVCHD

Seems these editors with experience couldn't tell the difference between the native footage and the AVC-100 intraframe encoded footage:

http://crews.tv/blog/2010/10/22/af100-curveball/
Click to expand...

However the context of that link is not that the AVCHD is really good, it's recording to an external AVC-100 intraframe recorder didn't improve things.
 
Matt Gottshalk said:
Sorry Jeff, but HD-SDI OUTS and professional XLR inputs are no small things.
Click to expand...

On a truly "professional" camera, I would agree. But when the SDI is limited to 8bit output, may as well just record from the HDMI, which is the equivalent 8bit signal in this case. And then again for the audio... Are you really going to run any form of pro-level sound and then feed it into XLRs on the camera only so the audio can be compressed or re-sampled? If you're going to record to an external box from the camera, wouldn't you just want to feed your audio directly into that or record to a second system anyway?

I'm not trying to be an ass here. I seriously don't see an advantage to 8bit SDI output over HDMI on the AF100, other than if you have an existing recorder you need compatibility with. And I don't see any advantage to sending audio into the AF100, since it mucks about with it -- even if you're passing through to the HD-SDI.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top