@peternap if i will buy the camera i would get a variable ND but another issue is that the lens hood is fixed so it is perhaps difficult (if not impossible) to access and turn the ND :(

I checked out tommy's 1080p50 AC90 AVCHD files in Stream Parser and Elecard Streameye. They're recorded at 28Mbps with a 24-frame IPB GOP. The AC90's AVCHD encoder uses both 4x4 and 8x8 quantizer matrices, much like the AF100 and GH3. From what I saw, the AC90 records much like an AF100 with a small 3MOS sensor. Looks like a very good choice for a compact shoulder-mount videocam with a fast motorized zoom and advanced image stabilization.

After a bit of editing with the footage. I would say id rather buy this camera than the GH3. :-D

@LPowell THANKS! This sounds great!!! Although (to be honest) it doesn't say me much ;-) But I like the sound of: "much like the AF100 and GH3"
If you can tell more about the files (or where I can read more about quantizer / GOP meaning) I am always interested.

@peternap See picture. Yes I am saying the whole large lens hood can not be removed. (at least that is what I heard). The lens protection cap also goes in the hood and I suppose the Variable ND needs to be close to lens (otherwise I could screw a hood on the lens, with the ND on that and a lens cap on there. )

@tommy Here's a short intro to AVCHD video stream structure:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_of_pictures

@Vitaliy_Kiselev @mimirsan I think I am missing the point. Are you saying the AC90 is a X900 camera in a different body? This is the case with most prosumer / semi professional camera's. But I know now (and understand) that I have to pay for XLR, more buttons, body etc. It does have a better OIS but indeed even a smaller (different) sensor.

@peternap 9.28 As you can read in this topic, I had many cameras in option. There sure is no perfect one. So I don't think, that 'thinking' will help me ;-)

• AC130/160 = 3-5 times more expensive for a bit bigger sensor, ND, and a worse OIS
• FS100 = I don't think is suitable for me (handling, off the road, documentary, etc)
• NEX EA50 - Like the NEX5 / VG20 moire/ aliasing.
• GH3 - It still has no XLR etc, and I already have the GH2 (and also want to have a camera for more corporate things)

What camera (s) do you have?

@Vitaliy_Kiselev Thanks . But I read you (really) liked the X900, right? So I pay some extra for XLR, buttons, etc. Would you not go for it (in my case)? I think I am running out of possibilities

@tommy The Nokton f/0.95 lenses have a VERY different look from the 20mm f/1.7. I enjoy using both of them and have used the 20mm pancake for everything from professional portrait stills to timelapse and music videos. It is a different look, like I said, but it is not a bad one at all and it is both fast and detailed for the money.

If you want a softer look with fast glass, look into using vintage Rokkor lenses. I am quite fond of the 58mm f/1.4. It is softer than the Nokton but has beautiful bokeh and can be picked up for well under $130.

Anyway, there are tons of good fast lenses you can pick up for the GH2 without spending as much as a Nokton. They just are not quite as fast and they (once again) have a different look.

Here is a still that was shot at a fairly high ISO with the 20mm f/1.7 - it has been scaled down and watermarked but you can get some idea of the character of the bokeh. Shot with Dynamic B&W RAW+JPG. This is the JPG version (I would use the RAW if I wanted to recover the highlight recovery, obviously).

http://perlichtman.com/pasdenapulse/wordpress/2012/03/09/emma-and-molly/_1730987/

And here's a long exposure averaged from a few shots, with the 20mm used with a lower ISO.

http://perlichtman.com/pasdenapulse/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/2011-10-04-GP-Brightest-Only-Set-04.jpg

And here is some of the NAMM show coverage I shot earlier this year (with the infamously poor audio since my shotgun mic mount broke right before the show and I had to use the internal). All of it shot with the 20mm f/1.7, including the intro.

@tommy Sounds like you're in good shape. :)

Tommy, this is an excellent analysis of the camera. I must admit, this totally didn't register on my radar and I was all set to wait for the VG30 from Sony.

Now you've got me in a pickle.........

Low-light is a major one for me, second is DOF. Reading your account and Barry Green's, i don't think the camera will have any issues in low-light. So how does the DOF compare with some other cameras? I have an AC160, GH2 and a Panasonic SD900. We want to replace the SD900 as we believe it to be the worst performer for what we need. Will this camera give any greater DOF than the SD900 do you think? I believe it will based on the 1.5 f lens.

I hate the auto-focus of the 160, i use manual pretty much 99% of the time and it does me proud with that but we use the 900 for shots that have to be captured quick and i really wish the 160 could do auto-focus like the 900 does. So next question, auto focus on par with the 900?

I realize these questions will be impossible to answer without having used a SD900 but worth a shot i thought!

Cheers

@Sph1nxster I don't have a SD900. The AC90 is the little brother of the AG-AC130. I would expect cheaper (undressed) models to be less good, but I think the AC90 uses newer technology and therefor in some ways is better. For example the BIS 3MOS sensor is better in low light, better 5 axes OIS, etc. I heard (rumors) that same technology will be used in the successors of the AC130. I emailed Panasonic with some technical questions, and wait for respond.

In my opinion the auto focus is fast and accurate (not like Gh2's rack focus, that zooms in and out...) Here is a test shot: http://wtrns.fr/rm_gyTBe8d7zyw A pan from (too) close by flowers in the shadow! to a couch with a colorful blanket in the sun. Although the couch is over exposed I think it is quite good, but you should test it yourself. Please let me know what you think

When I have the camera, I will try to change some settings, so auto exposure is a bit less.

DOF, is hard to say. I think it is quite well for a little sensor, because F 1.5. Because it has a good OIS, you can go more tele handheld to get some more DOF as well. The aperture goes only to 11 and than closes and you loose your DOF. I did most tests outdoor in bright sun, and didn't have a ND filter, so that is the main problem.

I hope to hear some good solutions for my question / post above (Oct 1st). How to keep your aperture between 1.5-4 (for DOF) in day light. Variable ND / filter holder / small matte box, but how do i know if it will fit (because the lens hood is not removable.

I will get the camera in the end of this month, but will immediately go abroad to film. Therefor I need to order some variable ND / filter holder now. Hope you (or others) have some idea

@Mimirsan @smetvid @Sph1nxster @zigizigi @mozes @brianluce @John_Farragut

Hereby some of your questions I couldn't answer before. I got the information mostly from Jan Crittenden Livingston (Panasonic)

• LCD: 8.8 cm ( 3.5 inches) wide LCD monitor (Approx. 1152 K dots)

• Viewfinder: 0.61 cm (0.24 inches) wide EVF (Approx. 263 K dots)

• In build seamless automatic ND (exact same as HMC40)

• Low light: 1/4 BSI 3MOS would be similar to AC160 1/3 3MOS

• AVCHD 2.0

• Similar camera as the Z10000 (only USD 1600 cheaper, and no 3D options)

• Dimensions (W X H X D): 160 mm x 195 mm x 350 mm excluding protruding parts (6-5/16 inches x 7-11/16 inches x 13-1/16 inches)

• (Clean) 4:2:2 HDMI out

According to them:

• the AC90 is VERY sharp and may actually out-resolve the chips in the AC130 by a bit. It uses three over- HD chips (I think 2.3k-ish) and then uses spatial offset to turn that into a 4K image, which then gets down converted to 1080P upon recording. It is super sharp, super crisp, and super clean.

• About the automatic ND: The system uses zero ND filtration when the iris is set between f/1.5 to f/2.8. If you "stop down" the lens past f/2.8, the iris doesn't actually change at all. The system adds a little bit of ND filter to make the same exposure as if you'd actually stopped down the iris. It brings in more and more ND until you hit f/6.4 when the iris display reads out f/6.4, it's actually f/2.8 plus all the ND filter the camera can deliver. If you stop the iris down any further, it actually starts closing the iris again.

This has two massive benefits: 1) It delivers seamless exposure changes 2) It keeps the iris in the "sweet spot" for as long as possible, avoiding the crippling issues of diffraction. If they'd gone with true iris changes, diffraction would start mushing up the image as early as f/4 (and, in the red channel, as early as f/2.8!) By the time you got to f/11, the image would be a total mush of soft, fuzzy, out-of-focus nothingness. But by doing it this way, they avoid diffraction entirely down to about f/10. F/8 is pretty much diffraction-free. It's really clever engineering to avoid the serious side effects that could occur, from using such a small chip.

To get rid of (some) over exposed highlighting (I had in my test) in auto settings:

• use cinelike-D gamma (or, if any other gamma, use KNEE set to LOW), and drop the color saturation down some (maybe -3 or so).

• To lower overall exposure to avoid highlight clipping, you could set the Auto Iris level setting to a negative value, each increment accounts for about 1/6-stop drop of exposure.

• For the flattest image for grading, use cinelike-D, norm1 matrix, drop the color saturation, and maybe raise the master pedestal about to +2 or so.