With the correct lens, would this camera make since as a "live stage event" filming camera? I read a zoom and focus controller would work with certain lenses. I wonder if the low-light sensitivity would be good enough. Any thoughts?

Geoffrey

I haven't seen the lens for this camera which would give me the same functionality as my 17x Fuji with 2x extender for my HPX 500. The 14 x 140 I have seen doesn't seem to have the controls needed for that kind of shooting.
We can hope someone comes up with something if they haven't already but most of the people I talk to don't think of this style shooting as a reason to have this camera.

Yes, very much the kind of work the standard sized video cameras are good at,

Although the old style studio cameras with large tubes (many 30mm) could handle this sort of work, but everything tended to be a bit larger on the optical front to match.

I have ordered the Voightlander 25mm f .95. That should certainly be good low light lens. No zoom of course.

I also have the Canon 70-200mm f 2.8 that I plan to use with the Birger mount. This would be a good low light medium to long Tele lens.

I also have Canon 100-400mm f 4-5-6, not that fast but with a sturdy tripod it would be pretty handy if there is enough light. You would probably be shooting at ASA 800 or more with this lens.

I would probably also use a couple ENG cams like EX3's, 350's or similar for a shoot like this. But I think the AF100 would fit in well, I need to get some nice SDOF shots.

I have a concert shoot this month on the 29th, maybe I will get to try the AF100 by then. If I do I will definitely use it, I am not holding my breath though. I plan on shooting this one with my EXcams and a 5DmkII and maybe a 7D.

My only concern is that using lens adapters with the AF100 will produce slowed down autofocus, which would negatively affect its use for recording live events. If you follow link Compatibilities of DMC-GH2 | Compatibility | Digital Camera | Product Support | Support | Panasonic Global (http://panasonic.jp/support/global/cs/dsc/connect/gh2.html) , Panasonic mentions under asterisk #6: "AF tracking is slower than the counterparts in HD movie support Micro Four Thirds lens(LUMIX VARIO HD lens). Also operational noise in AF may be recorded while motion picture recording." Obviously, this is discussing the GH2 compatibility with lenses other than the Lumix lenses, but I couldn't find a compatibility chart like this for the AF-100, and I'm wondering if this issue would also transfer to the AF100.

I was planning on purchasing an AF-100 to go with the GH2 I just pre-ordered, but I wonder if the AF-100 will also have slow autofocus with any lens other than the Lumix lenses. It appears from this compatibility chart that even the other Panasonic lenses produce slower autofocus than the newer Lumix lenses.

Don't take this wrong, everyone has a different way of working.

I have been shooting video and film since the 70's, and I have never used auto focus ever, for video. Now for stills I use it all the time, since it started working well in the late 80's.

I never had a video camera with auto focus until I got my EX3. All the Betacams, Umatics, DVcams and DVCpros did not have it. Pro ENG/EFG lenses still don't.

So for me auto focus is a non issue. This is just my way of shooting. I never use auto anything. I know it may be old school, but it works great and has for a long time, and I know I am not the only one that shoots this way.

For event coverage, having a remote focus that controls the focus on the stills lens rather like those used on the studio cameras would be better than autofocus. You can then use it as a creative tool as used by television camera operators.

The requirements for a stills autofocus is different to that on moving image camera, so there will a lag until more specialised lenses come onto the market for these new cameras.

Totally agree with Olof. Last night I was shooting a show, and for a different purpose was also running another camera as a kind of POV, but I accidentally left it on autofocus - which I'd never dream of using normally. Stage lighting - especially reds and blue really confuses it, and many of the sequence have visible light beams in, and the damn thing kept trying to focus on those!

In my humble view autofocus has no place at all in theatrical or music video work - the critical point of focus in the frame may often be nowhere near central, and it must be a manual, brain controlled process. Singer moves head, camera refocuses to the drum kit behind, or the actor moves off centre and the camera focuses on the scenery? Totally unacceptable.

Last night was 2 SD cams (JVC5000s if it helps) 17x zooms, remote focus and zoom and LCD viewfinders. The lenses working between 2.8 and around f11.

Auto focus might be useful when you are following a horse on the hunter course. You zoom to keep it large in the frame. Could be with a small chip depth of field might be enough to keep it sharp enough, if you focus hyperfocally, maybe about 1/3 closer than the farthest point the horse ends up from the camera.

I would defer to Paul and Olof's expertise... the reason I've used autofocus when capturing concert footage (Sony V1U's in the past) is that I only record 1-2 live shows/year, and there's a lot to address. I record several a cappella shows, and it's just me and two videographers. I'm working the lighting, sound, etc., and I've found it difficult to make sure I have the correct aperture, etc., while making sure that I'm capturing good angles of the singers moving in/out of the main shot, coordinating my assistants, etc. Autofocus has really helped in the past. I just got rid of the V1U's, and I was considering purchasing the AF100 for my primary/middle camera and then perhaps renting a couple EX1's for the side shots, in combination with a GH2 to keep a wide angle shot going. I'll practice a bit with manual focus and see how it'd work with a live show, but I was hoping that it would be comparable to the V1U with the autofocus while also giving me DoF.

You could put on a 2/3th inch lens, put on extender to fill the frame.. Dunno if that would help you out.. If you sort out power for the lens you could put a focus and zoom demand on it.

You'd need to do more than just the range expender, you'd have to ensure that optics recreate the prism found in 2/3" 3 chip video cameras. Less of a problem for Super 16 lenses and you may just get away with a one stop loss doing this optical trick (because of the smaller than cine 35mm sensor), although the resolution may be compromised when shooting wide open.

If the market is large enough, I expect the lens manufacturers will manufacture suitable zooms.

Of course if the market is large enough the manufacturers will come out with a solution. Probably just in time for the release of the AF100A. (Joke)
It just seems to me that at this stage of development for video and motion pictures that we wouldn't being taking two steps forward one step back as far as ergonomics and optics go.
Almost every time a new camera comes out it with a new sensor size it seems like I have to wait for the lenses to be made which allow me to do what I currently do with the older cameras and lenses. This is one reason I like 2/3 inch over 1/2 inch in shoulder mount cameras. Not enough 1/2 lenses where available when cameras first were released and the 2/3 to 1/2 inch adapters had too much of a crop factor for the wide end.
Hard to buy a camera when the lens I want to use on it isn't being demonstrated on the market.

You'd need to do more than just the range expender, you'd have to ensure that optics recreate the prism found in 2/3" 3 chip video cameras. Less of a problem for Super 16 lenses and you may just get away with a one stop loss doing this optical trick (because of the smaller than cine 35mm sensor), although the resolution may be compromised when shooting wide open.

If the market is large enough, I expect the lens manufacturers will manufacture suitable zooms.

Another problem is the quality of the lens glass. I tried using wide angle adapters designed for SD video on HD cameras and found that the glass was not suitable for HD detail. 2/3" HD lenses might work for video on this camera but could fail at stills.

Until a decent (and affordable) parfocal lens comes out for these cameras, I can't justify a purchase. My work goes from simple stage recordings to interviews to elaborate music videos. And my style has evolved with a fluid zoom lens as a integral part. If the job calls for DOF stationary lens settings, I'll rent.