Yes i wonder if canon will bring out a similar cam/dslr or what ever you call them as the Panasonic AG-AF-100, wont they be trailing the pack otherwise
Will Canon Bring one out
Yes i wonder if canon will bring out a similar cam/dslr or what ever you call them as the Panasonic AG-AF-100, wont they be trailing the pack otherwise
While they will probably never actually put it into production, Canon has shown a working concept model of a 4K 2/3" camera. Historically speaking, 'trailing the pack' has been Canon's deliberate strategy in the camcorder market: they quietly R&D new technology (like optical image stabilization), but wait until a competitor includes a similar feature in a production camcorder (Sony's electronic image stabilization) before introducing their own version.
Well i feal a camcorder whatever like the Panasonic would be a must for me if i was starting out in the pro world of weddings and the like and its not a huge price, even if the PQ is no better than a 5D the all in one set up is far superior.
I don't know. They would have to price it in between the 5D and 1D. Doing so would possibly take away sales from the 1D, but those are most often used by professional photographers anyways.
Canon has likes to wait, just as Erik mentioned. I think they learned their lesson with the t1i (500D). They jumped the gun on that one. I mean 1080 HD at 20fps? WTF were they thinking? Then a few months later they released the t21 (550D) and t1i owners were screaming because they felt ripped off.
But with the new XF100 and XF105 coming out, I doubt we will see one of these. With the estimated street price for the XF100 at $2999 and the estimated
street price for the XF105 at $3999, it would eat away at sales for these. So I doubt we will see one anytime soon. Hell, I'm amazed that Canon has finally moved away from the HDV format. It took them this long to do that, they will probably wait just as long to introduce a cam like Panny. I'm guessing that the XF100 is aimed at competing with the HMC150...how long has that been out?
I have to thank you for this thread, as I was unaware of the XF100 and will be having sweet dreams tonight.
http://www.dvuser.co.uk/content.php?CID=246 this guy does not like DSLRs but seems to be drooling over this one
Is that guy sure it is a 4/3 INCH sensor? Then why have my Olympus 4/3 cameras only half the FOV of a "full frame" cam with the same lens?
I love the Olympus lenses. Great quality... albeit a tad expensive.
"It is dark the other side. Very dark!" - "Oh, shut up and eat your toast!"
'this guy' says this: Many of you will know that I am one of the few people in the world of video who has not had anything good to say about the so-called Digital SLR revolution for HD video. I’ve used and tried some of them, including Canon’s EOS 5D MK2 and for video, it is next door to useless. It would appear that the world jumped on the 5D MK2 for video for one reason and one reason only; shallow depth-of-field; that’s it.Originally Posted by jet
Although not strictly a digital video format, digital SLRs have made serious in-roads into the world of video since the launch of the EOS 5D MK2 in 2008. However, there are no DSLRs currently on the market that can produce the quality of video that could be considered for any serious applications.
Does he really know what he is saying? I suspect he may be on the Panny payrole. It'd explain how he could afford a $10,000 camera - talking as if he loves it so much and wants one.
'this guy' says - The world has gone shallow depth-of-field mad, everyone wants to throw that background right out of focus, in fact, people want to throw it so far out of focus that it positively knocks it back in time a few hundred years to a time before that background was even there. And then goes on to say and it is this massive sensor that will allow you to control your depth-of-field like never before.
Fck 'this guy'.
Last edited by Dr. Benway; 2010 November 1st at 10:02.
At first blush it does sound like he's being unreasonable. Seeing is believing and we've all seen the incredible images posted made with the Canon 5d mark II, and even the TV series like House using them for certain applications.
However, I think it comes down to what you consider "serious" applications.
This guy makes more sense when you read this paragraph:
"However, there are no DSLRs currently on the market that can produce the quality of video that could be considered for any serious applications. Due to the 'line-skipping' down-converting methods of cameras like Canon's EOS 5D MK2 where the method of downscaling to get a HD video picture size of 1920x1080 is achieved by simply deleting (skipping) lines on the large sensor. This, and other limitations such as a lack of decent low-pass video filtering, means that DSLRs like the 5D MK2 suffer from chronic aliasing, compression artifacts, bayer-type patterning, stepping and other retarded picture degrading phenomena. However, for soft rounded objects such as people's faces, with hard backgrounds thrown way out-of-focus by use of narrow depth-of-field, and little (or preferably no) movement in the picture, it is possible to achieve some interestingly artsy results. Hopefully, in the future, DSLR manufacturers will strive to fix the serious gremlins that the current first crop of DSLRs are riddled with. ."
And he's right about those things.
Apparently, the AG-AF101 solves a LOT of those problems.
So it really depends a LOT on how significant you think those problems are. If you're willing to ignore them completely, then who cares about the AF-101? However, if they are a MAJOR concern, then the AF101 is a godsend for the price.
PLUS the XLR inputs are awesome for sound so you don't have to sync sound in post.
The argument about form factor doesn't seem that relevant. How are you going to do handheld with the AF-101? You'll probably need the same rig as for a DSLR or something.
Last edited by Gillvane; 2010 November 1st at 10:37.
I guess the hand grips on the side and top make a person think that it'll be easier to hold. But if you get a large lens and matte box on the end of it, shoulder support would be a must.
He says it all there...
I wonder if Canon will up the DSLR video quality (no line skipping) to challenge it. Maybe in the 5D Mark III once Canon decides what they're going to do with it?
My skills are vast, rendering me capable of too many things.
I think this is what were going to see for the time being, updates to the 5D and 7D. Canon is selling 7D's and 5D's like hotcakes because of the video DSLR revolution. To put out a product like Sony's NEX-VG10 would eat into current 5d and 7d sales and it would greatly hamper the sales of the new XF100.I wonder if Canon will up the DSLR video quality (no line skipping) to challenge it. Maybe in the 5D Mark III once Canon decides what they're going to do with it?
I have no doubt Canon will follow suit, just not right now. My guess is that the successor to the XF100 and XF105 will have interchangeable lenses.
Barry Green on the Af101.
We're seeing a whole lot of snow jobs on the AF100 but not a lot of AF100s. I hear a lot about how DSLR video performs on a res chart, but I'm not seeing the problems in real life. I'd be more impressed with the AF100 it had a C size sensor and a better form, and the price was more in line with what it is - a synched T2i and a Zoom H4 in a single box. From what I've seen and read so far I'm going to pass on this one.
mm i would not pass if somone bought me one,it does seem to be very low cost for what i have seen.
I get where the guy is coming from, we're using the 7d and t2i for production on a test pilot for a reality series, while the look is impressive we've been told already by producers not even the 5d will cut it for broadcast, obviously if the show gets picked up we'll have to move to an XDcam HD or better camera system.
For most our other clients who just need HD web video or DVD, the DSLRs work perfectly, but like the man said for serious production work for HD broadcast you are better off going with professional cameras that are primarily designed for video. Not because it necessarily gives a better look, but because you will avoid all sorts of headaches and jumping through hoops just to try get your content approved for broadcast.
While a fan of the SLRs I also understand why they aren't passable for most broadcast situations, ever try to shoot against a brick wall that's in sharp focus? it aliases like crazy. I'm excited to see some sharp focus high detail footage from this new panny, that electronic lens adaptor for it that allows new canon lenses with proper controls sounds awesome too. I won't complain about the 4/3" chip over aps-c, Sure there's a little more crop, but in a real video camera 4/3's is pretty insane compared to everything else in the price range, I think the closest would be an EX1/EX3 with only 1/2" chips, everything else is basically 1/3".
Last edited by oneearth; 2010 November 1st at 19:56.
If the sony vg-10 moves in any kind of numbers, I could see canon producing something like that as a consumer camcorder that uses eos lenses. They could still advertise 18 megapix or whatever while optimizing for video quality. Yes canon is traditionally slow in responding in the prosumer line, but consumer stuff is ahead of the curve, especially with 24p. They have full 24mbit avchd and native 24p, just need to merge with the t2i chip and tweek a bit. But then I don't know if there is any overlap between the still camera line and camcorders, or if they are also completely separate divisions.
My films at www.vimeo.com/channels/beeflix
Sure, I guess I got touchy and protective about the 5D/HDSLR's because the comparison is chalk and cheese - an $1800 5D MKII or a $10,000 Panny AF100. And, he is a hypocrite regarding the DOF quotes.
The Af100 is less than $5,000 US dollars.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...A=endecaSearch
You can use any lenses, and you don't need a viewfinder, and you don't need a sound recorder, just a good mic.
Sorry, local rupees. Worth far less than the U.S. dollar. Oh... to be earning Australian dollars right now.
When spending this much on a camera, I don't consider $4,795 much different from $5,000.
It also doesn't come with a lens. So unless one just happens to have a spare lens laying around (that fits), the price is now up to about $5,000...or more.
I would take an Af100 for free, but wouldn't buy one. I mean c'mon. It records in 24Mbps AVCHD at 4:2:0 and has no LANC.
If it were at the same price point as the Sony VG10, I might jump. Otherwise, I'd rather spend less on the xf100. If I were to spend about $5,000 for a video camera setup, it would be -
T2i
Tokina 11-16/2.8
Tokina 16-28/2.8
Canon 24-70/2.8 L
Canon 70-200/2.8 IS L
That's a lot of really nice glass, and a bigger sensor, for only a few $ more than the AF100. Plus, I could use it to take awesome photo's.
[QUOTE=zagnut;361308
I would take an Af100 for free, but wouldn't buy one. I mean c'mon. It records in 24Mbps AVCHD at 4:2:0 and has no LANC.
If it were at the same price point as the Sony VG10, I might jump. Otherwise, I'd rather spend less on the xf100. If I were to spend about $5,000 for a video camera setup, it would be -
T2i
Tokina 11-16/2.8
Tokina 16-28/2.8
Canon 24-70/2.8 L
Canon 70-200/2.8 IS L
That's a lot of really nice glass, and a bigger sensor, for only a few $ more than the AF100. Plus, I could use it to take awesome photo's.[/QUOTE]
What are you doing? Weddings, short films?
The VG10 doesn't use standard lenses. It uses some sort of e mount lens. That's a big turn off for me. Who wants to invest in E-mount lenses? The VG10 looks good for weddings, that sort of thing, not really so hot for shorts and going for the cinema look.
With the T2i set up you've described, sure you have some nice glass. But you still have no usable sound. You still need to buy a separate sound recording system, like the Zoom, and sync in post.
Yes, you've got a bigger sensor, but you've also still got moire, aliasing, and more Jello effect.
And what do you need a LANC for? Just push the button on the camera.
Xf100 also strikes me as a good camera for weddings, that sort of thing, not so great for shorts and the cinema look. It doesn't have interchangeable lenses. I think this description is accurate:
"ideal for videographers on-the-go, recording at events, documentary filmmaking, etc"
Usable sound is easy to take care of. I have a Tascam DR-02. Great recorder that's only $100. Or one could use a $20 mp3 player and $10 in parts from Radio Shack to trick the AGC on the t2i.
Moire, aliasing and rolling shutter might be a concern to some. I'd still take the t2i over the AF100.
But this thread isn't about either of those. So bring on the XF100. If it's priced comparatively with the HMC150, I'll start saving.
I guess it depends on what you're doing. I wouldn't consider anything these days without interchangeable lenses, something you can put a 50mm 1.8 on and get a nice DoF.
T2i wins for price. If that's all the budget you got, then that's the camera for sure.
If you have 5 grand with some left over for a decent mic and lens, the Af-100 hands down.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
