Christian Calson

Panasonic AG-AF100 First Impressions

I’m working on a few projects in 2011 & the gear lust has started. I’m a proud parent of a HVX200 with the Cinevate 35mm lens option but obviously, we’ve come a long way since those few years ago when I made that investment. I’ve seen great looking features & shorts shot on DSLR cameras & the dream of film married to digital workflows still calls to me like everyone else in my class.I’m an indie filmmaker which means I’ve sold off & begged & borrowed & started making films long ago on DV cameras. I’ve never stopped. It’s something that once you get the bug for you’ll find there is no cure.

I was lucky enough to attend a seminar on the new Panasonic AG-AF100 video camera at Samy’s DV in Culver City. I wanted to share some first impressions on the new camera but I warn that this is not a full review. I haven’t had private time with the camera to see how it handles & shoots nor have I had a chance to shoot & look at footage that I’ve shot myself. That said, the majority of information on the camera is sales or marketing material literally ripped from the press releases on the camera. 

Here are my notes on the camera from what I observed & saw:

a. Size matters. It’s small. Very small. The camera itself can be easily put away in a standard backpack. So if you’re looking for a camera that is uber portable & has a small form factor, then the AF100 is a good option. The AF100 seemed fairly light but once you start adding larger more expensive lenses, you ‘have to’ put it on some kind of rails so as not to stress the ring the lens uses to attach to the body.

b. Incomplete. The sub $5k price point doesn’t include a lens. Panasonic is hoping to attract DSLR filmmakers/videographers by not including a standard lens with the unit. Whether this is to offer premium up sells or to justify a lower price point, it does bring up the first fault of the camera. It doesn’t feel complete. The list of available lens which Panasonic hoped would seem vast & wide ends up painting a difficult decision. I doubt it makes sense to buy a $5k camera & spend $30k on lenses. Maybe I’m wrong but this is my immediate impression. I like that the camera can take other lenses but why not package one with the unit?

c. Price. Cost may be relative but value is fixed. I am using this untrue statement to introduce a point that a prosumer (i.e. indie filmmaker) camera MUST be affordable & ultimately upgradable (meaning you can upgrade to the new tech from film to film without being stuck with something that may not make sense on your next project). I’m looking at you RED. Why spend $20k on a camera that will be worth a fraction in a year when your project is over? The distribution models will be different then as well. All this tells me Panasonic gets it & has price the AF100 correctly.

d. Retro. The camera body & lenses look very 70s 16mm camera. It may be a personal preference but I think it looks very nice & modern. 

e. Media. More pluses. The camera records in a new codec due to its 4:3 CCD onto SD cards. The same cards that you have in your point & shoot Canon camera can work with this camera. I wouldn’t use a standard SD card & probably use the recommended higher end professional cards but in a pinch, I like the option. Once again I feel that Panasonic is directly going after the DSLR filmmaker. Keeping everything familiar & not mixing more upgrades or premiums other than lenses. The codec is Panasonic’s alone so you have to download a plugin & ‘unpack’ the footage. You then have to find some kind of intermediate because the files themselves (4:2:0 8 bit) are too large & non-native to Final Cut Pro. It all works but it works through a few extra steps. This may prove to be the stuff of message board complaints. Because if you’re remote, the more steps you have to jump through, the more problems you will have. 

f. Picture. The images are wonderful. I mainly saw footage shot with their standard ($800 to add on) lens & considering it’s a zoom lens & has lots of depth of field, I was blown away. I think the standard lens makes a great utility lens. Once again, why not package it? It didn’t do great in low light but it wasn’t bad either. I think all around the advantage of a larger CCD is more depth of field & great images. The AF100 succeeds here very well. Just on image alone, I know I want to work with this camera. I hope it’s on my next project but I need to see more on how well these pictures make it through post to finished product. There’s also tons of assignable buttons so you can trigger different speeds & presets without going into the menu. 

g. Overall First Impression. At a sub $5k price point even without including the standard zoom lens, the AF100 seems like a good solid buy. It’s images are not as pristine nor does it handled low light as well as the F3, but for the extra $10k you save, it makes more than enough sense that if I’m deciding between the two cameras, that I’ll most likely choose the Panasonic this year. Everyone’s needs are different & everyone will react to the marketing on both camera’s uniquely, but I think there’s a sweet spot that’s hit with offering this much camera for the price with this kind of depth of field & picture. That said, I could get the camera & put it through its paces in a true review & have a very different conclusion but maybe I’ve offered some opinion that helps you decide what’s right for you if you’re looking at purchasing a new camera.