Also how do people reckon 4/3" will be in lowlight compared to 3 1/2 inch chips?

That's a good question Jonathan as camcorders using half-inch chips have maximum apertures of f/1.9 at full tele - if you get my drift. 4/3rds cameras at the same (equivalent) focal length will struggle to hit f/5.6 and in most cases it'll be nearer f/6.8 unless the glass is huge. So that's a cool three stops they've got to claw back - which is asking a lot for a chip that's just 3x wider.

tom.

Tom, while you're right on your numbers... that's probably a worst case scenario comparison. Most people buying this camera probably won't be long lens shooters, but staged/dramatic production, where there are lots of fast lens options. Head to head in that case, bigger chips usually win.
But of course, no way to tell until we start to get our hands on them. Can't wait! :)

It depends on the noise level of the camera. Except at the very top end, the limiting factor is camera noise - not codec bit depth - so 8 bit is fine at the acquisition level for the vast majority of cameras. All 10 bit recording will do is more accurately define the noise! (Not worth wasting bit rate on. :-) )

So 10 bit may be valid in something like a 3700, but not in a 371, and I suspect this camera will be the same.

That said, even if acquiring in 8 bit, there may be something to be gained by processing and post in a 10 bit codec such as ProRes, but it's always possible to transcode this or any other 8 bit codec.

I'd be more concerned about the 4:2:0 nature of the codec and (even more so) the overall compression level than the 8 bit nature. That's not due just to absolute quality considerations, but also the complexity and difficulty of editing, which can mean a transcode is highly desirable. On the face of it, there seems to be quite a lot to like about this camera, but the native codec is not one of them. It would be a far better camera, and needn't cost any more, if they'd done the same as Canon and used 50Mbs MPEG2 to CF cards. If it will take SDXC, that should itself be capable of 50Mbs fairly easily - possible even 100Mbs. (So AVC-Intra could be used with SDXC.)

RE: 8 bit out on HD-SDI
 

The AF100 will for sure accept SDXC and with 2x 64 GB SDXC card it will capture 12 hours of PH Quality (1080/60p). Yes, because of the though put of the card they could have used AVC-Intra, but the party link from Panasonic on this matter has always been the price point of the camera and not being able to hit the price point using AVC-Intra.

Also - I believe that the HD-SDI output bypasses the AVC Codec - the footage that every one has been reveiwing from Crews.tv was taken on an AG-HPG20 at 100 Mbit AVC-Intra on to P2!
See their blog post about the shoot at:
AF100 Storm Gathers | crews.tv

"On this shoot Panasonic offered an AG-HPG20 P2 Memory Card Portable Recorder with AVC-Intra 100, a unit that doubled as a handy director’s monitor."

Also note - that we are accepting pre-orders on this camera at:
Panasonic AG-AF100 Micro Four Thirds CineCam(Cinema Camcorder)

I'd assumed the comments about the price point of the camera referred to a scenario along the lines that if AVC-Intra had been used, it would have meant P2 and hence much higher memory costs. I don't think there is any valid technical reason why an AVC-Intra coder should be any more expensive than an AVC-HD one - they both use the same underlying technology, and if anything AVC-HD should be MORE difficult to implement (hence more expensive) owing to the long-GOP nature.

But if this camera is capable of using SDXC, it shouldn't need P2 anyway - SDXC should be up to recording 100Mbs.

Look at Canons XF100. Canon have managed to put a fully broadcast approved codec into a far cheaper camera than the AF100. Why can't Panasonics technicians manage the same?
Yes indeed, and I think an external recorder is likely to be a must have for any purchaser of one of these. Personally, I'd go for a device that records to smaller and cheaper memory (such as a nanoFlash) than the AG-HPG20 - but why should it be necessary to spend a lot of money when a far better codec could be there natively? Canon can do it - why not Panasonic?

Hey, thanks a lot for that answer - helps out a lot.

Thanks Tom, I suppose proof will be in the fooatge that comes out. Interesting stuff though about focal lengths.

J

I think 1080p60 as an overcrank is pretty useful. There is no way to deliver 1080p60 so shooting would just force a downconvert or framerate change anyway. It is still great they included it.

BH is showing that the AF100 is Temporarily out of stock for 6-10 weeks. Was it ever in stock or is 6-10 weeks when they expect to see it for the first time. that will put us at December.

Dear Greg,

Initial shipments of the AF100 by Panasonic are scheduled for December 27, 2010.

that's what I thought but some guys are claiming to already have the camera. Very interesting

I think there are a few pre-production models floating around that Panasonic is loaning to people, and taking around to shows. Philip Bloom has one right now, but he only has it for three days as a loaner. A press release last week gave the official release date of December 27th.

Anyone with a loaner camera have WIDE shots to show? 14mm in 35mm full frame terms.

This product has not hit the market
 

Not sure why they are listing it that way - it's never shipped before - and if you look at the day that they first listed the product 6 - 10 weeks from that day would be around the time that Panasonic will be shipping (Dec 27).

Here's Jan Crittenden talking about the camera.

YouTube - Pana AG-AF100 at DV Expo