Personal View site logo
Make sure to join PV on Telegram or Facebook! Perfect to keep up with community on your smartphone.
Please, support PV!
It allows to keep PV going, with more focus towards AI, but keeping be one of the few truly independent places.
Convince me not to buy a AF100
  • Chaos123xChaos123x

    I love my Gh2 I really do. I think it has great image quality and I invested in some great lenses and things for it.

    But I only bought it because I could not afford the AF100 last year.

    Now I ran into some extra money and I can pick up the Af100 if I wanted too.

    Are the little things like XLR input and a headphone jack really worth the price? I'm going to keep my Gh2 no matter what, but I am toying with idea of getting the af100.

    Why would you or wouldn't you buy the AF100 if you had the cash in hand?

  • 54 Replies sorted by
  • LPowellLPowell

    I'd start saving up for a Scarlet.

  • stoneystoney

    AF200?

  • Chaos123xChaos123x

    lol yeah I guess there will always be a better camera. But Im not aiming to have any of my stuff on the big screen so a scarlet would be bit of over kill.

  • bwhitzbwhitz

    Dunno really... I just don't like the image. It's seems like it's an older generation of sensor than the GH2. DR seems lower, as well as poorer color rendition (despite all the options). Just because a camera has 100+ gamma and color matrix dials doesn't mean that the sensor is going to be any better at rendering color. The motion of the image doesn't look right to me either. This has been discussed before though, some people see the difference between Inter-frame recording and Intra, some don't. Could also just be the way the AF-100 processes the frames... who knows. All I know is that the GH2, with an all-I or low-GOP, patch produces similar motion to dedicated digital-cinema camera like Red or Alexa. AF-100 doesn't.

    That's all I can really think off. It's up to you though... it's your cash. ;)

  • L1N3ARXL1N3ARX

    Since the gh2 already trumps the af100 in image quality, maybe hold off until you can get a cam that really improves upon the gh2. Just not worth it atm, especially new... you'd be throwing your money away.

  • GrueGrue

    Personally, if I had that kinda money--and I don't--more and more I'd be looking at the FS100 over the AF100, but that's me...

    Beware of gear acquisition syndrome.

  • itimjimitimjim

    I agree @Grue on all your points.

    If you're making the next financial step up into that territory, then it would have to be the FS100. The other option is wait for the AF200, which has some serious expectations if it's to compete.

  • Brian202020Brian202020

    I've owned a GH1, GH2, HVX200, HPX170, AF100, and a RED ONE MX. The best image came from the RED, second best came from my AF100. The camera that made me the most money was the HVX200, second was my AF100. Although it wasn't the best in the two categories it was second in both. I love my AF100 it's contently making me money, and will probably keep it for a while yet.

    UPDATE: Although it was a good camera, I felt it's time is coming to an end soon, so I just sold it before NAB hoping to get the most I could for it.

  • Chaos123xChaos123x

    I'll probably invest more in lenses, lights, and microphones. I haven't even hacked my Gh2 yet, I think I will buy some 64gig extreme cards and give Vitality's his much deserved donation instead.

  • PixCanFlyPixCanFly

    If there's no urgent need, I would save the dollar for the next upgrade. An AF200 perhaps :)

    The AF100 is like 4 or 5 times the price of GH2 but I feel the image quality is definitely not even 2 times better. I don't think the image quality of the AF100 will wow you anymore if you have already shot with GH2, especially with the hacks.

    What you are really paying for are the professional features of the AF100 like the waveform, the built in ND filter, SDI output, onboard audio etc etc. So you need to know whether all this feature means anything to you because you are paying for it. Ask yourself whether you'll use the SDI for monitoring or for external recording, is the waveform important to you etc etc.

    My situation was actually opposite, I sold my Canon 5D2 and save up to buy an AF100. One week before the purchase, I changed my mind and bought 2 GH2 instead and I left with enough money to buy a nice SoundDevice MixpreD audio mixer and a SmallHD monitor to compliment my GH2 setup. Camera will come and go but you can always bring along the audio mixer and monitor with you for the next upgrade.

    But like what others said, if I really really have to spend the money, I'll pick the Sony FS100 instead.

  • RobertoRoberto

    @Chaos123x

    You did say, "Convince me not to." ...

    1) Do a TCO (total Cost of Ownership) calculation. Include insurance for dropping it into sea-water;

    2) Do a risk analysis. Templates are downloadable online. Include risks such as new models reducing resale value of your purchase to zero. Also wife giving you nasty looks for a year;

    or:

    If the rental you'll be paying for your next shoot is greater than the cost of the camera, buy it.

  • edwardmedwardm

    I've set up my old Panasonic AG-DVC30 SD camcorder, which has the XLR audio mixer accessory, as my audio record deck. I tried to sell this camera last year but had no takers, and then decided that was just fine, since it makes an excellent audio deck recording uncompressed linear PCM on the SD DV format. I can use my shot gun mics with +48v phantom power on the DVC30 mixer, can control audio during recording (which can't do on the GH-2), and I have a headphone jack on the DVC30 to monitor audio.

    Update: I intended to emphasize that there are alternate ways to get XLR and mixing with the GH-2 and other DSLRs without buying an AF100 or video camera. But I do also use an XHA1 because there are places where I prefer CCD imager (no rolling shutter) and the long, motorized zoom at slow speeds.

    Tomorrow I am using two GH-2s to record stereoscopic video of a sled dog race. Don't know if I will bother to record audio separately for this event (what with cold temperatures and snow and barking dogs being bad enough). I will have a R0DE mic on one of the GH-2s.

  • Chaos123xChaos123x

    I think it's funny that people act like having a waveform and vectorscope is something that all pro cameras have to have. I used to shoot 3/4 Umatic, Betacam SP, and DVCPRO, I don't remember any of those cameras having a waveform or vectorscop unless that were connected to a CCU that was hooked into a entire control room.

    But yeah, I think I will stick to the GH2. I actaully prefer recording my audio seperatly now.

  • alcomposeralcomposer

    Reason:

    1 You can buy 6 GH2's for the price of one AF100. 2 You would need to use an external HD recorder to get better quality than the GH2 (adding cost to initial investment and hassle for filming) 3 Hacking GH2's are fun 4 The smaller size of the GH2 allows similar GoPro shots. 5 If you smash up a GH2 you don't cry because of the price - but not having a GH2 for a day!

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    @Chaos123x

    Being far from AF100 lover I want to say that if you think that it'll be useful for you, if you have big amount of good m43 glass it is best to not ask and just go and buy it. As far as I know they have some discount now.

    But I really hate all this Barry Green hutzpa with lectures how no one must longer use HDSLRs and that their time is up.

  • lolodigitallolodigital

    I had 1 5DMK2, one HVX200, one HMC151. Sold all of them.

    All my productions are shot with 2 hacked GH2s, 1 GF2 and 1 alpha 65 as a backup cams, and also one HX9V as the backup of the backup cam :-)) Image quality is very appreciated and many non specialist customer thought that we use a RED cam ...

    I rent an AF100 and appreciate my HMC151 ergonomics... but for me, image quality is approximatively the same... and GH2 is small and is very easy to use too ...

  • bwhitzbwhitz

    Also, if you haven't seen yet... GH2 cuts pretty well with Scarlet with Epic footage at 2k. I've seen the AF-100 next to Red MX footage at the same res and I can't say the same...

    But like others have said, if you need the FEATURES... to save time, or make a production easier, ect... get the AF-100. If you just want maximum quality, get two GH2's and a proper external-recorder/mics.

    I just haven't seen anything shot on the AF-100 that has "wowed" me. Besides a music video that used Ziess CP's and an external recorder to an all-I frame codec. The motion is just to "mushy" otherwise. Then on top of that, it's only a 24mb/s codec. 24mbps for $4k? That's just a bad deal. That's what most sub-$1000 DSRLs record. If you want something better... you're going to need an external recorder... which will be more expensive and make the rig bigger/less mobile. At this point, I'd say vote with your wallet and get some GH2's and hold off on the "proper video cameras" untill they actually decide to start selling "proper video cameras" again... aka, something like 2k 100mbps Intra native recording with 60fps for $5000.

    Canon is also developing a RAW codec... so I might just wait a year. It's true that there's always going to be "the next best thing"... but I think a MAJOR leap forward in quality/price is coming soon.

  • LPowellLPowell

    @bwhitz What I'm looking forward to is using the Scarlet in 3K mode where it has a 2X crop factor like the GH1/2/AF100. That will allow me to share my Nikon AF-D lenses among the cameras at the same Field of View. In 3K mode, the Scarlet works up to 48fps and has a 3072x1620 frame, which downscales to 2048x1080 with an exact 1.5x ratio.

  • RRRRRRRR

    It comes down to what you need really. The image you can get from your gh2 is good enough for most things. The FS100 seems to add a tiny bit more in terms of flat picture profiles, inputs/outputs, low light performance and other stuff (way more than an af100), but then you might want to add an external recorder as well - so that increases the price tag slightly, and potentially changes your work-flow. Also, the FS100 does'nt seem overly handy for recording on the fly, so that might be a deterrent.. I'm guessing the form-factor is part of the reason why you are even considering the af100, so then it's down to - can you do the work you do with the gh2?

    Is it worth it? Who knows. What do you want to do with the camera and what kind of work-flow do you want? What makes good financial sense?

    Investments in lenses, lights e.t.c. will be of more use over time than a specific camera box, but you might also want to keep part of that money for production, or save up to be able to invest in something that really matters / spend when it matters.

  • bwhitzbwhitz

    @LPowell

    Yea for sure, Scarlet is a sweet camera... and an amazing deal. Basically a smaller RedMX for half the price!

  • robmneilsonrobmneilson

    I went the FS-100 route, and I'm very happy with that purchase. The form factor was not as big of an issue for me since I already had alot of camera support (rails, shoulder system, grips etc).

    But very happy with my purchase. Although I invested money in lenses, which I expect to outlast all the camera bodies I own. Maybe keep the GH2, and buy some nice glass?

    FS 100 PROS: Bigger sensor, better low light CONS: Form factor, No HD-SDI, More expensive

  • driftwooddriftwood

    The only problem on the Scarlett is the backlog. I ordered mine on day one and still am waiting to be contacted by my RED Bomb Squad Rep in the UK. Despite countless reminders. But I'm still going to be using GH2s when I do get it.

  • L1N3ARXL1N3ARX

    I was quite close to ordering a scarlet day one as well. The fact that there is an expected backlog, and the 4k competition is going to be heating up this year are all reasons, I think, it might be best just to wait it out for a while. I mean, by waiting a year, you could easily get a scarlet at a reduced price used and in mint condition. Who knows what other goodies lie around the corner from Panasonic, Canon and the like. With the gh2 as good as it is right now... this seems the like the best time to play the waiting game.

  • TobiTobi

    I shot one scene in a short with the af100, using a nanoflash recorder that was, the rest was all shot on gh2 driftwood 170mbit. The af100 footage (custom flat setting) was almost unusable compared to the gh2 footage. we had to add a lot of grain in color to hide the videolook and ugly blown highlights. It has definitely a broadcast/news kind of look, unlike the sonys even with an external recorder. I didn't notice a big improvement compared to the avchd either.

  • NickBenNickBen

    @lin3arx First generation 4K from JVC and others will likely suffer from same problems as current DSLR: non-broadcast codecs, 8 bit, etc ... I wish they'd surprise us with 12 bit, 4K RAW for 10K or less, but I suspect that territory will be reserved for $10-20K for another couple years. Funny enough, 2 years ago many would kill for the AF100 features, now it's "last year's model." The market is however heating up in 1080p FF land certainly...

Add a Comment