Panasonic AG-AF100 series

Giuseppe Pugliese · May 7th, 2010, 02:19 AM

I hate to be literally the only one on here who seems to bring this up but... what about SKEW!

You are all talking about size of chip, but not one word about actual function. I have a horrible feeling this is just going to be a lovely tease just like the 300 was. It will be plagued with skew. They really need to be on their game and eliminate the skew issues down to something much closer to a global shutter feel, for this camera to be taken seriously.

Why am I the only one who actually cares about the MOTION in motion pictures? How can anyway stand watching any of this footage from these DSLR's without it screaming SKEW...?

I just don't understand. And for everyone complaining about 4:2:0 color space... it has HD-SDI out... the camera is only 6k I think you can buy one of the few capture boxes out there and get your 10bit 422. But please for the love of the camera gods, push Panasonic to eliminate SKEW!

I will only buy this camera IF there are no skew issues, otherwise its in the same category to me as a DSLR, and thats just sad.

Tim Polster · May 7th, 2010, 08:33 AM

My guess is that it is down to pure processing power to read each pixel at the same time for every frame.

I hate skew but I think it would be addressed by now if it was an easy fix.

I agree that it seems like as much attention is paid to limiting a camera to fit in a range rather than just whooping the competition. I know this is their busines model and they need to make money, but it is frustrating as a consumer.

What bugs me about skew is that this situation conforms shooting with these cameras to a cinema type approach, ie limited camera movement. Which actually is closer to the role of the AF-100. But for the smaller chipped cameras it just does not fit. These are video cameras and video like it or not, often involves moving the camera.

I sure it wil be fixed over time.

Ethan Cooper · May 7th, 2010, 08:55 AM

As I understand it, skew comes down to sensor read-reset times (the time it takes to scan a line of the sensor and move on to the next) and processing horsepower. I know Panasonic has mitigated skew somewhat in their higher end cams through processing, but possibly it's been too expensive to implement in their smaller cams to this point. As most things, if you see it in the more expensive line, generally it will trickle down to the less expensive lineups eventually.

My guess is that Panny will up the read-reset times with whatever newer chip they stick in this thing. Who knows if it'll be feasible to cram the processing in there by release time.

Rick Presas · May 7th, 2010, 10:17 AM

We live in AMAZING times in filmmaking today. Cameras released this year will be able to do, for less than $10k, things that we never would have dreamed of just a decade ago.

The camera will most assuredly appeal to the "Pro World." even DSLR cameras out right now do.

Panasonic doesn't need to "beat RED." RED is a very small company that doesn't pose even a minute threat to Panasonics business. The companies are in totally different classes. If you want something like a red, BUY A RED.

"One perfect camera"? Give me a break. the thing doesn't exist. Has never existed. and never will exist. And the idea that it would make panasonic MORE money is laughable. Thats like saying that the Ford Motor company would make more money if it made one perfect car that could run 10 million miles. Planned Obsolescence has ALWAYS been a part of consumerism, and always will. If it wasn't people would be out of jobs.

If you don't like the camera, don't buy it. There's an OCEAN of options out there for you. That's how amazing the times are right now.

Don Miller · May 7th, 2010, 12:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ethan Cooper

As I understand it, skew comes down to sensor read-reset times (the time it takes to scan a line of the sensor and move on to the next) and processing horsepower. I know Panasonic has mitigated skew somewhat in their higher end cams through processing, but possibly it's been too expensive to implement in their smaller cams to this point. As most things, if you see it in the more expensive line, generally it will trickle down to the less expensive lineups eventually.

My guess is that Panny will up the read-reset times with whatever newer chip they stick in this thing. Who knows if it'll be feasible to cram the processing in there by release time.

In addition there's the number of channels on the sensor. It appears there are chips with about the same number of photosensors as finished resolution. So about a 2K chip. But there are also the DSLR that do some sort of aggregation to produce a smaller final image. It's possible with CMOS that this aggregation could be done on-chip.
There's going to be different technical approaches to solve these problems. It appears most videocams will switch to CMOS. With that change happening I'm sure they have ideas about limiting skew.

Manus Sweeney · May 8th, 2010, 04:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Giuseppe Pugliese

How can anyway stand watching any of this footage from these DSLR's without it screaming SKEW...?

that may be a little bit of an exaggeration!

personally the only time ive noticed skew in footage from my 7d is in a shot when ive accidentally kicked the tripod or whipped the camera around to reframe

Buba Kastorski · May 8th, 2010, 07:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Giuseppe Pugliese

what about SKEW!

what about it, every CMOS camera has it,
it is in nature of rolling shutter, I don't think any manufacturers any time son will be able to make CMOS imager fast enough to eliminate skew and at the same time keep the camera cost affordable;
if skew problem would be so important to me as it is to you Giuseppe, for the next couple years for sure, I'd stay with CCDs,
but i don't like crazy camera moves, and I love my DSLRs :)

John Wiley · May 9th, 2010, 03:29 AM

I agree that skew is not a big issue. Chances are if your footage is unusable because of skew or jello, then there is most likely an underlying problem with the footage which would make it unusable anyway (eg panning too fast, vibrations from strong winds or a moving vehicle) Personally if I ever see skew in my GH1 viewfinder I take it as a warning sign that I'm doing something wrong and need to slow down my movements or stabilise the camera.

Tim Polster · May 9th, 2010, 08:05 AM

Exactly my point. What if you are not filming a "movie" but shooting video? Is there then a problem with your filming if you have to pan or catch a fast moving object?

I know CMOS is a way to get things to market, but it sort of forces a cinema approach to all shooting unless you can live with diagonal verticals in certain instances.

As a side note, I was shooting in a testing machine shop with some large air compressors with an EX-1. I had a fair amount of jello on locked-down shots from the slight floor vibrations. It is not always operator error! This stuff is real and I could not use those shots.

Chris Hurd · May 9th, 2010, 09:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Giuseppe Pugliese

what about SKEW

Fewer swish-pans.

How is that not a good thing?

Dan Brockett · May 9th, 2010, 10:03 AM

As a fan of classic cinema, I am beginning to look at CMOS/rolling shutter skew as possibly a good thing. It forces people who have no concept of how to move a camera cinematically to do so. Cameras are not meant to be waved around like a hose, it makes the audience sick.

MTV camera movement was a reaction to visual boredom and because operators often did not have access to dollies, jibs and Steadicams. Now that you can buy a slider for $99.00 and a jib or Steadicam device for under $1,000.00 IMHO, there are few places or times when lousy camera movement is warranted.

Even the worse skewing camera can make beautiful images if the operator knows how to utilize the movement to good effect instead of just randomly shaking and moving the camera around to give a shot or composition energy. Of course, skew when the camera is not moving is not desirable but if it makes you feel better, 98% of the audience never notices it and when they do, it is still no big deal. It bothers filmmakers and videographers MUCH more than it bothers audiences. These days, it is becoming accepted, to a point, as part of the look that people use.

Dan

Tim Polster · May 9th, 2010, 09:33 PM

Where did anybody say they were moving their camera like a hose? This was the mantra of the HPX-300 defenders...until they actually fixed the skew a bit.

Not everybody shoots movies with their video cameras. If you shoot any kind of sports, movement or live events this is part of your world. And you do not always have the luxury and cinematic camera movement. Problem is that in a few years, CCD will be gone. So I hope somebody who is making the cameras thinks skew is bad so they eliminate it in the future.

I just don't get the "nobody will notice it" attitude that so many have with today's cameras. If somebody made a light that flickered once every 3 minutes, would you use it? Or be happy when folks told you nobody would notice it or care? Just seems like a degredation of the professional toolset to me.

Although I do expect the AF-100 to have skew, this camera is more of a cinema camera, so it should be less of an issue for use.

Erik Phairas · May 9th, 2010, 09:48 PM

Well i've never once saw a video posted on vimeo or youtube and thought, "wow that skew ruins the look of this". Unless they were trying to show examples of skew of course.

I have seen many videos that had that horrible CCD bright line that goes up and down the screen when a light or the sun makes it into the frame. I noticed that even before I saw people online complaining.

Skew seems to be an invisible problem to the laymen like me.

Mitja Popovski · May 10th, 2010, 04:49 AM

If you dont like skew, you just have to wait for 48p, 50p, 60p. But i like 25p.

Manus Sweeney · May 10th, 2010, 05:27 AM

i think its fair to want some improvements in the rolling shutter.. of course nobody would complain about that! but i think the main point being made by users of dslrs based on experience so far (with the canons at least - the nikons skew is certainly more of a challenge) is that if your movements are exteme enough to give you noticeable skew then perhaps the viewers are going to be more put off by the extreme camera movements before they would by the wavy verticals..

for me at least i think it would be nice if it was fixed or improved but it wouldnt be a dealbreaker of any kind as its never been an issue for me, there are of course many styles of shooting though so just speaking for myself!

May 7th, 2010, 02:19 AM	#136
Giuseppe Pugliese Major Player Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: New York Posts: 392	Skew! I hate to be literally the only one on here who seems to bring this up but... what about SKEW! You are all talking about size of chip, but not one word about actual function. I have a horrible feeling this is just going to be a lovely tease just like the 300 was. It will be plagued with skew. They really need to be on their game and eliminate the skew issues down to something much closer to a global shutter feel, for this camera to be taken seriously. Why am I the only one who actually cares about the MOTION in motion pictures? How can anyway stand watching any of this footage from these DSLR's without it screaming SKEW...? I just don't understand. And for everyone complaining about 4:2:0 color space... it has HD-SDI out... the camera is only 6k I think you can buy one of the few capture boxes out there and get your 10bit 422. But please for the love of the camera gods, push Panasonic to eliminate SKEW! I will only buy this camera IF there are no skew issues, otherwise its in the same category to me as a DSLR, and thats just sad.

May 7th, 2010, 08:55 AM	#138
Ethan Cooper Trustee Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Houma, La. Posts: 1,400 Images: 5	As I understand it, skew comes down to sensor read-reset times (the time it takes to scan a line of the sensor and move on to the next) and processing horsepower. I know Panasonic has mitigated skew somewhat in their higher end cams through processing, but possibly it's been too expensive to implement in their smaller cams to this point. As most things, if you see it in the more expensive line, generally it will trickle down to the less expensive lineups eventually. My guess is that Panny will up the read-reset times with whatever newer chip they stick in this thing. Who knows if it'll be feasible to cram the processing in there by release time. __________________ ∅ -Ethan Cooper

May 9th, 2010, 10:03 AM	#146
Dan Brockett Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Los Angeles, California Posts: 2,109	As a fan of classic cinema, I am beginning to look at CMOS/rolling shutter skew as possibly a good thing. It forces people who have no concept of how to move a camera cinematically to do so. Cameras are not meant to be waved around like a hose, it makes the audience sick. MTV camera movement was a reaction to visual boredom and because operators often did not have access to dollies, jibs and Steadicams. Now that you can buy a slider for $99.00 and a jib or Steadicam device for under $1,000.00 IMHO, there are few places or times when lousy camera movement is warranted. Even the worse skewing camera can make beautiful images if the operator knows how to utilize the movement to good effect instead of just randomly shaking and moving the camera around to give a shot or composition energy. Of course, skew when the camera is not moving is not desirable but if it makes you feel better, 98% of the audience never notices it and when they do, it is still no big deal. It bothers filmmakers and videographers MUCH more than it bothers audiences. These days, it is becoming accepted, to a point, as part of the look that people use. Dan Last edited by Dan Brockett; May 9th, 2010 at 11:05 AM.

May 9th, 2010, 09:48 PM	#148
Erik Phairas Major Player Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Las Vegas, NV Posts: 628	Well i've never once saw a video posted on vimeo or youtube and thought, "wow that skew ruins the look of this". Unless they were trying to show examples of skew of course. I have seen many videos that had that horrible CCD bright line that goes up and down the screen when a light or the sun makes it into the frame. I noticed that even before I saw people online complaining. Skew seems to be an invisible problem to the laymen like me. __________________ EX3, Q6600 Quad core PC - Vista 64, Vegas 8.1 64bit, SR11 b-cam

May 7th, 2010, 08:33 AM	#137
Tim Polster Inner Circle Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Arlington, TX Posts: 2,231	My guess is that it is down to pure processing power to read each pixel at the same time for every frame. I hate skew but I think it would be addressed by now if it was an easy fix. I agree that it seems like as much attention is paid to limiting a camera to fit in a range rather than just whooping the competition. I know this is their busines model and they need to make money, but it is frustrating as a consumer. What bugs me about skew is that this situation conforms shooting with these cameras to a cinema type approach, ie limited camera movement. Which actually is closer to the role of the AF-100. But for the smaller chipped cameras it just does not fit. These are video cameras and video like it or not, often involves moving the camera. I sure it wil be fixed over time.

May 7th, 2010, 10:17 AM	#139
Rick Presas Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Brownsville Texas Posts: 74	We live in AMAZING times in filmmaking today. Cameras released this year will be able to do, for less than $10k, things that we never would have dreamed of just a decade ago. The camera will most assuredly appeal to the "Pro World." even DSLR cameras out right now do. Panasonic doesn't need to "beat RED." RED is a very small company that doesn't pose even a minute threat to Panasonics business. The companies are in totally different classes. If you want something like a red, BUY A RED. "One perfect camera"? Give me a break. the thing doesn't exist. Has never existed. and never will exist. And the idea that it would make panasonic MORE money is laughable. Thats like saying that the Ford Motor company would make more money if it made one perfect car that could run 10 million miles. Planned Obsolescence has ALWAYS been a part of consumerism, and always will. If it wasn't people would be out of jobs. If you don't like the camera, don't buy it. There's an OCEAN of options out there for you. That's how amazing the times are right now.

May 9th, 2010, 03:29 AM	#143
John Wiley Trustee Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Byron Bay, Australia Posts: 1,155	I agree that skew is not a big issue. Chances are if your footage is unusable because of skew or jello, then there is most likely an underlying problem with the footage which would make it unusable anyway (eg panning too fast, vibrations from strong winds or a moving vehicle) Personally if I ever see skew in my GH1 viewfinder I take it as a warning sign that I'm doing something wrong and need to slow down my movements or stabilise the camera.

May 9th, 2010, 08:05 AM	#144
Tim Polster Inner Circle Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Arlington, TX Posts: 2,231	Exactly my point. What if you are not filming a "movie" but shooting video? Is there then a problem with your filming if you have to pan or catch a fast moving object? I know CMOS is a way to get things to market, but it sort of forces a cinema approach to all shooting unless you can live with diagonal verticals in certain instances. As a side note, I was shooting in a testing machine shop with some large air compressors with an EX-1. I had a fair amount of jello on locked-down shots from the slight floor vibrations. It is not always operator error! This stuff is real and I could not use those shots.

May 9th, 2010, 09:33 PM	#147
Tim Polster Inner Circle Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Arlington, TX Posts: 2,231	Where did anybody say they were moving their camera like a hose? This was the mantra of the HPX-300 defenders...until they actually fixed the skew a bit. Not everybody shoots movies with their video cameras. If you shoot any kind of sports, movement or live events this is part of your world. And you do not always have the luxury and cinematic camera movement. Problem is that in a few years, CCD will be gone. So I hope somebody who is making the cameras thinks skew is bad so they eliminate it in the future. I just don't get the "nobody will notice it" attitude that so many have with today's cameras. If somebody made a light that flickered once every 3 minutes, would you use it? Or be happy when folks told you nobody would notice it or care? Just seems like a degredation of the professional toolset to me. Although I do expect the AF-100 to have skew, this camera is more of a cinema camera, so it should be less of an issue for use.

May 10th, 2010, 04:49 AM	#149
Mitja Popovski Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 38	If you dont like skew, you just have to wait for 48p, 50p, 60p. But i like 25p.

May 10th, 2010, 05:27 AM	#150
Manus Sweeney Major Player Join Date: May 2009 Location: Amsterdam, NL Posts: 217	i think its fair to want some improvements in the rolling shutter.. of course nobody would complain about that! but i think the main point being made by users of dslrs based on experience so far (with the canons at least - the nikons skew is certainly more of a challenge) is that if your movements are exteme enough to give you noticeable skew then perhaps the viewers are going to be more put off by the extreme camera movements before they would by the wavy verticals.. for me at least i think it would be nice if it was fixed or improved but it wouldnt be a dealbreaker of any kind as its never been an issue for me, there are of course many styles of shooting though so just speaking for myself!