Should we have a micro 4/3 thread?

David.rhsc

David.rhsc

Panasonic GH2 and AF-100

Discuss? :D

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/panasonicdmcgh2/

GH2 video samples for your viewing pleasure. There are some stills in a couple of them.

http://vimeo.com/14725884

http://vimeo.com/15340175

http://vimeo.com/15485479

Not sure what is causing the pulsating light in the last one. The first two are pretty sweet. I'm impressed at out the shutter captures the motion of the wake of the boat. Actually seriously considering one of these despite the slightly smaller sensor compared with APS-C found in the Canon cameras. Yes the Mpixel count is also lower, but the down-sampled compression has (in my opinion) superior image quality to the line skipped compression that Canon is using. The GH2 looks to have a superior color quality to the GH1, although maybe not quite as "already pretty" looking as the Canon lineup. Still, I'm pretty impressed with what I saw in the first two vids.

(edit)

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?Ntt=gh2&N=0&InitialSearch=yes

$900-1500, essentially t2i/550d price range, maybe a bit higher for the 14-140 lens.

(/edit)

This is the big brother, the AF-100.

http://pro-av.panasonic.net/en/af100/index.html

Which maybe I, or someone else, has posted here before? Anyway. Like I mentioned in a different thread, not ready nor can afford something of this level - but with the features listed at $5K it's really appealing.

I like the idea of this format, just about any lens type can be used - so all my FD stuff and maybe even some of my c mount lenses as well can come into play. There's something cool about the image quality of old glass, even with the crop factor (2x for the FD mount glass) or vignetting (the 16mm c mount stuff) I'm into the idea.

So, what do folks think? One review I read commented that m4/3 could become the "super 16" of the HD cinema world. I also kinda like that idea. Is the sensor just plain too small for the format to catch on with the folks who sign the checks?
 
Last edited:
Sort by date Sort by votes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ZGtFZoSyhA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ydgbyirlai4

getsmiley.php
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I really like the feature set and practical shape of the AF100, but it’s just too expensive for me.
If I had that kind of cash, or was making money off gear it would be a pretty exciting option.

Some beautiful images from the GH2.

-Thanks-
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Buddy Greenfield said:
I really like the feature set and practical shape of the AF100, but it’s just too expensive for me.
If I had that kind of cash, or was making money off gear it would be a pretty exciting option.

Some beautiful images from the GH2.

-Thanks-
Click to expand...

Sir, the nails head you have hitteth. ;)

I can't justify the AF-100, as much as I would love to have one. Add the Hot Rod mount, a solid pair of legs with a good head, rods, quality FF, and all the other toys and cost starts to really rise.

OTOH, I should be able to afford a GH2 shortly after it drops - unless of course they go out of stock instantly, :lol:. Strictly for side projects, personal practice, I want a dslr for stills to complement the AE-1 anyway, and so forth. Not really holding out any illusions of hiring out one of these on paid work.

Either way, I'm pretty jazzed on the idea that whatever aks I get for the GH2 would migrate nicely to the AF-100. :idea: Hypothetically, should I ever need to own something of that level and can charge rental on it for work.

Oh, and crop factor for m4/3 when using FF35 lenses is around 1.9ish apparently, not quite exactly 2. Still not sure how that math would go on PL mount (super 35 cine) glass. Frame sizes are much closer together than with full frame 35 stuff. There's a few folks around that have the PL adapters for their GH1s, but I haven't had a chance to check it out personally.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
Yikes, fully loaded… double not a chance in hell, to the tenth power. $$$$

The boat’s wake footage is something. I wonder how he got his hands on one to test.

I need to look into a mount for some junky old 35 primes I have to see if they are of any use.
You say you are holding onto some C mount glass still? I sadly parted ways with mine.

-Thanks-
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Never say never. As with all technology there is a premium period, where companies try to recoup the cost of their investment as much as possible as quickly as possible up front. Then prices start to drop as competition gets in on the game or the technology becomes...out dated or considered obsolete.

The beauty of this all is that Pandora's box has been opened. Canon will answer and this type of "affordable" technology will become more and more accessible to us and our kin. I recall a thread about 3D taking over in the next five years (I only bring that up here to make a point and not open that debate here), imagine where this market will be for people like us in the next 5 to 10 years.

This is huge revolutionary stuff. The prices will tilt our way. All we have to do is wait and keep on keepin' on. This type of stuff will be ours, AND WE WILL RULE THE GALAXY. MWAAAA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HAAAA. (Was that a bit over to top, directors?) :)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
The AG-AF100 looks like it's going to push out my next DSLR purchase even further.

*sigh*

And just when I was starting to recover my my Mac Pro purchase, too...
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I would love to see what Canon could do if they took the hint and revamped their compression scheme, then came out with something akin to the AF100 in an APS-C sensor. Would be pretty sweet. :) They dropped a couple of tapeless cameras recently that (xf-305 or some such). Nice image, but they were playing 4:2:2 50Mbit catch-up while Sony and Panasonic cameras in that range were pulling higher numbers.

C-mount. I think I have the right name. Maybe not. The screw-in mount like on a Bolex. I haven't tested it yet, but a while back I scored a bolex crank h16 with 3 lenses, a hand grip and a case from a hair/make-up artist that tried to use it in school, but said she thought it was broken because all her film came out "blank" ;) $27.50 including transit fare since I didn't feel like driving. Major score. Can't recall the focal lengths atm. They'll definitely vignette, depending on the look they have and the project, could be a nice effect.

Purpose built lenses here:

http://www.four-thirds.org/en/fourthirds/lense.html

This is a great source for adapters, most of which can be had on Amazon or something.

http://www.fotodiox.com/

Tons of options for various cameras from them. Not sure how well all of them work.

I was going to nerd out here and type out why m4/3 is so lens friendly. Cliff notes: short flange focal distance gives room to build adapters to get other lenses at their correct FFD.

Long version:

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

;)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Nice score on the Bolex (That's C mount indeed).

I wish like Canon would even take the DSLR technology, give it some useful audio recording ability and throw it into a movie camera shaped container with an XLR mic in for like 2k. If they put out the t2i for 9 hundred, I would hope they could add an xlr jack and a different container for $1800, but I don't know.

Even if Panny threw a fixed lense one out for like $2500 that could work.


Thanks for the Fotodiox link, I will see what they have to offer for sure.

-Thanks-
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
David.rhsc said:
Which maybe I, or someone else, has posted here before? Anyway. Like I mentioned in a different thread, not ready nor can afford something of this level - but with the features listed at $5K it's really appealing.

I like the idea of this format, just about any lens type can be used - so all my FD stuff and maybe even some of my c mount lenses as well can come into play. There's something cool about the image quality of old glass, even with the crop factor (2x for the FD mount glass) or vignetting (the 16mm c mount stuff) I'm into the idea.

So, what do folks think? One review I read commented that m4/3 could become the "super 16" of the HD cinema world. I also kinda like that idea. Is the sensor just plain too small for the format to catch on with the folks who sign the checks?
Click to expand...

I believe that was me.

AF-100 series, really, really intrigues me. It seems, i'm not sure how to solidify as to what the appeal is, the image seems "Pure"?

I would have to take it for a test-drive, before committing. But from reading reviews, test-footage, I'm impressed.

We've been discussing over the last month or so, whether it's possible. We're currently shooting on a 5D, so money wise, it's a steep step.

'Rik, happened to take it for a whirl, if i remember correctly. How did it go?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top