I've held off the DSLR technology unfortunately.

So just out of curiosity...
How many people are in my situation...In where there's a possibility to skip the whole learning curve of DSLR's, and head straight to this tool?

This Panny AF100 looks to be a blessing..

I'm going to be very careful about this, too. At this point, I want to see how the camera will be received and what bugs or issues come up and then make a decision to go AF-100 or D5. My hope is the AF-100 is everything I am looking for because I am so used to shooting traditional video - and all my supporting equipment is geared in that direction - it will actually be cheaper. If the results are there, I'll stick with what I know.

Yeah John....

I also shoot traditional video, and try to throw in some cinematic feel when i've got a controlled environment.
This tool might allow us to keep the traditional, and still allow for cinematic elements to a wedding video...

I'm also looking at this guy for hope to skip the DSLR "generation".

Though I'm also taking a interest I'd proffer a caution at being the first to dive into brand new technology. I'll be happy to sit back and wait for it to be refined (and price adjusted) before seriously considering it.
Just an observation after 20 years of jumping in and buying the then greatest thing. I find that it takes a few incarnations of any piece of technology before it's right, and by then the next latest thing is on the horizon.

I personally am going to wait. I feel I've got the DSLR thing down pretty well right now and will keep running with it for the time being.

Im with jeremy, I am used to the dslr way of doing things. I now feel that the traditional videocam size is too bulky, and the af100 would be way too big (in my imagination anyway) with a 70-200 2.8 lens or something heavy.

2011 is the year of new cameras. Panasonic has the AF100, Sony has the S35NXCAM, Canon ? Seat tight till NAB to watch your options. After that let the early adopters snitch out the issues then make a decision.

Sony announces the S35NX just in time to give potential AF100 buyers pause.
The Sony looks like it might be smaller than the AF100. That would be nice. There's no reason to believe the new Sony will substantially outperform the AF100. Neither Sony or Panasonic want these cameras used in place of their more expensive offerings.
There's not much new technology in these cameras. There's not much risk in being a fairly early adopter, considering the type of product and the stature of these companies. The best glass to be buying over time is the harder choice.
The Sony does not sound like a 4/3 setup. Which is interesting.....

Im with jeremy, I am used to the dslr way of doing things. I now feel that the traditional videocam size is too bulky, and the af100 would be way too big (in my imagination anyway) with a 70-200 2.8 lens or something heavy.

We're creatures of habit, aren't we. My mental workflow is geared toward tons of buttons, toggles, and wheels and onboard and wireless audio monitoring that is all in plain sight. It's not better, but comfortable and reliable for me. To me, an AF100 or XF300 is tiny compared to the giant shoulder rigs back in the day and I don't give it a second thought.

The AF-101 looks very interesting, but the big question for me is not the camera, but the lenses. I'm not yet happy with the lens / adapter options and until I am, I'm not going to make any decisions.

I'm also waiting to see what Canon do with the 5D mk3. For me, this will be the barometer of where HDSLR is going.

We're creatures of habit, aren't we. My mental workflow is geared toward tons of buttons, toggles, and wheels and onboard and wireless audio monitoring that is all in plain sight. It's not better, but comfortable and reliable for me.

John you are sooooo right on the button on this !!!! :-)

I am the other end of the spectrum, began using consumer Pannys, then found the DVXs "threatening" I think. When I first used the GH1 with its smaller size weight and lack of knobs, it was like "coming home again". :-)

Habit indeed. I even found the DVX to be a bit consumer having always worked with full size shoulder cams where every thing that I need to get to is accessible without taking my eye from the viewfinder. This is probably the main thing that would stop me going to DSLRs, not sure about the AF-101.

Hi George

I started off in the '80's with the first Panasonic shoulder-mounts (my first was a M4 I think, Standard VHS!!) All my cameras since then has been shoulder-mount. I like the feel and the size and most of all the stability!!
Sure tiny cameras are convenient but then you have to pour more money into rigs to make handheld shots practical!!

I'll stick with my HMC72's for now and then change to the HMC80 next year sometime!

Chris

Im with jeremy, I am used to the dslr way of doing things. I now feel that the traditional videocam size is too bulky, and the af100 would be way too big (in my imagination anyway) with a 70-200 2.8 lens or something heavy.

I'm with David and Jeremy. I'm used to the DSLR now. I like the small camera where the guests don't even know there is a videographer. I started doing weddings in the early 90s so I've used the big rigs. I can't imagine being on a crowded dance floor with the big brick on my shoulder anymore..i wonder how I used to do it. haha

I picked up the af100 for wedding use. Some of the features on this cam are simply a must for myself, as I skipped the DLR phase. The af100 has proper xlr audio inputs, waveform monitor which is awesome for exposure, 2 zebras, ND filter wheel, 12hr record time, focus assist in Red (awesome!!). These are among just a few basic things that make this cam a real dream to work with. You can really rig this thing up the way you want too. Top handle and side grip are both removable and have built in shoe mounts under both.

I like the small camera where the guests don't even know there is a videographer...

That would kill my business. I pickup lots of wedding and other work purely because I am clearly a videographer... Don't people stop and smile at you when you are shooting DSLR?

Hi John

Mine too! People expect the official videographer to have a professional looking camera and shoot a wedding with a little GH1 or 7D just doesn't cut it for me. An AF would be slightly better but still doesn't gain as much respect as a decent shoulder-mount camera...besides I have tried shooting with small cameras and you just don't get the stability unless you stick in on a huge rig that costs as much as the camera.

I'll stay with my shoulder mounts which I can grab instantly and shoot stable shots when something happens!!!

Locally the AF100 is around the $4.5K mark.. adding a few lenses would bring it up to what capital cost I wonder???? I really cannot see any point in running a business where your equipment takes such a huge chunk of your profit just for the sake of "having the best" which the bride can seldom see or appreciate!!

Even in the old days when I was shooting on MD10000's in 4:3 brides used to say..wow what a great video and those cams were a little over $1000. If I had shot the same wedding on camera systems costing $10,000 would the bride have appreciated it any more???

Chris

That would kill my business. I pickup lots of wedding and other work purely because I am clearly a videographer... Don't people stop and smile at you when you are shooting DSLR?

The DSLR has improved my business immensely. Some people do stop and smile when I shoot with a DSLR. Don't people shy away from that big bright light on your shoulder mounted camera? With a DSLR, no need for a big bright light.

That would kill my business. I pickup lots of wedding and other work purely because I am clearly a videographer... Don't people stop and smile at you when you are shooting DSLR?

Hi John

Mine too! People expect the official videographer to have a professional looking camera and shoot a wedding with a little GH1 or 7D just doesn't cut it for me. An AF would be slightly better but still doesn't gain as much respect as a decent shoulder-mount camera...besides I have tried shooting with small cameras and you just don't get the stability unless you stick in on a huge rig that costs as much as the camera.

I'll stay with my shoulder mounts which I can grab instantly and shoot stable shots when something happens!!!

Chris

Chris, I find the opposite is true when it comes to the "look" of my 7D. Guests come up to me all the time and are amazed that I'm shooting HD video with this camera. I show them a clip of something I shot in the dark and they are blown away how good it looks. I hire freelancers that work for me and they shoot with the old shoulder mounted cameras. I'm having a tough time booking them weddings now because brides are comparing their work to mine and the quality isn't even close.

I've had the AF100 since the end of December.

It's a great cam but unfortunately, I haven't fully maximized it. I use it with Canon lenses and a Kipon adapter. I'm still waiting for the Birger. Sadly, they delayed release.

Why did I get it?
I miss a proper handheld feel.
professional audio
form-factor

What I don't like:
missing record button on top of the handle.
Variable frame rate uses the SAME dial as shutter. VERY VERY dangerous. If VARIABLE framerate is on, you don't record audio. But you still hear sound from the headphones. Only when you playback do you realize there's no audio track. I found this out the hard way.

What I don't like:
missing record button on top of the handle.
Variable frame rate uses the SAME dial as shutter. VERY VERY dangerous. If VARIABLE framerate is on, you don't record audio. But you still hear sound from the headphones. Only when you playback do you realize there's no audio track. I found this out the hard way.

I would have thought that the placement of the record button would be better. Less chance of a double tap when hand held and easier to hit when on a tripod?

Wow. The headphones should be a cam ops measurement of what the camera is recording. The fact that it still outputs audio to HP's during varicam is kinda scary.

What do you primarily use the camera for?

I have about $9,000 invested in my AF100, but I didn't have any glass to put on the cam as I didn't have a DSLR prior to this. I had e-mailed Michael and a few others that use DSLR's, and from what I've heard from them, was the look you get out of shooting with a large chip camera really makes a big difference, and helped book even more weddings. It was time for me to upgrade, not because I wanted the best equipment, but because I wanted my work to progress. The DSLR form factor didn't appeal to me so much, so I opted to go for the AF100. I still have a lot to learn, but no doubt my work for next years weddings will be a higher standard for me than the year before. It's all about progression in your work, and this seemed like a good next step for me.

That would kill my business. I pickup lots of wedding and other work purely because I am clearly a videographer... Don't people stop and smile at you when you are shooting DSLR?

I book weddings based on examples of my work online. The couples that hire me based on my look, have no clue what I'll be using for a camera, and quite frankly I don't think they care. If they see you put out good quality work, that's all they really care about in the end.

I would have thought that the placement of the record button would be better. Less chance of a double tap when hand held and easier to hit when on a tripod?

Wow. The headphones should be a cam ops measurement of what the camera is recording. The fact that it still outputs audio to HP's during varicam is kinda scary.

What do you primarily use the camera for?

Main camera for the ceremony and reception.

Oh. The codec is much much lighter on the NLE.

What do you primarily use the camera for?

seriously dude - you need to Google the name 'Magbanua' - this guy's a legend

besides I have tried shooting with small cameras and you just don't get the stability unless you stick in on a huge rig that costs as much as the camera.

a good monopod is $280.

Main camera for the ceremony and reception.

Oh. The codec is much much lighter on the NLE.

Hello Jason
Is Jose Ortiz here!
I saw you mentioning about the Camera and my question is... How is working in comparison with the DSLR with the wedding photographers flash. Big improvement?

thanks Amigo

Hello Jose!

It's still a CMOS sensor so there is still some skew and some issue with flashed. Definitely not as bad as the DSLR.

Here's a clip. Main cam for bridal march (front) is the AF - Roxanne and Elton: SDE on Vimeo

I hope to use it more extensively when the proper adapters are available.

Josh! What lenses do you use with the AF?

Right now I have the 14-140, and the olympus 14-35 f/2.0. I'm still deciding on what to else to get before wedding season kicks in. I'm seriously thinking of getting the 35-100, but I hear it is quite a big lens. I guess It might not be too bad on the monopod though. I just balanced the AF100 + 14-35 on my merlin yesterday. It flies pretty well.

What about yourself? I hear 50mm and around the 85mm mark are pretty standard for weddings?

Also, how do you shoot the recessional, primes or zoom?

I hate you Josh. You just pointed me out to a gorgeous piece of glass worth 2k plus.

Right now I use it with canons. For processional, I use a 16-35L. I set it to 5.6 - 6.3 on a 5d then slap it back on the AF.

haha, glad I could help in you adding to your wish list!

The image on the 14-35 is fantastic. It communicates great with the AF100 as well, giving you the readout on the LCD, which from what I understand you can't do with the Canon glass as of now (waiting on the biger). Others have said I owe it to myself to get the 35-100 as well. It seems like a sweet focal range, not to mention FAST zooms. I'm looking at them as variable primes at f/2.0 through out the zoom range.

So what are you usually shooting the processionals at 35mm? I'm so used to zooming out slowly to keep the subjects framed when I used my XHA1. I'm trying to figure out how to best shoot it now with the af100. I will have to come at things in a different mind set now.

mostly at the wider end. to show off the entourage couture.

is the 14-35 EXACTLY like a 14-35 on a full frame?

is the 14-35 EXACTLY like a 14-35 on a full frame?No the 2X crop factor makes it like a 28-70mm on a full frame.