Does the AF-100 Line skip?

[Chris Barcellos]

Yeah, this reminds me of the big arguments regarding the Canon 5D and other DSLRs. People saying you can't shoot this or that with that camera. Two years later its all being done by professionals--- professionals that are able to take what the gear has to offer and use it as a tool, and gets some beautiful images out of it and into commercially accepted projects.

There is no doubt that this camera is intended for the indi film maker and small studio. Panasonic has always catered to this crowd. While I am not sure if this is my future camera, I think Panasonic deserves major kudos for pushing this 4/3's format and for pushing the market forward into the large chip and interchangeable lens era. Sony (already moving that way) and Canon will have to follow in their video lines.

[James Campbell]

"I am enjoying this discussion very much." Agreed. Even though there's a spirited back and forth, I think the resolution (no pun intended) of the questions in this post are very important. I personally only purchase a camera at this price range only every 3-4 years, so it's important to determine if the resolution is as high quality as possible to open up as many distribution options as possible.

In the long run, there would be no upside to Panasonic indicating all over the internet and their own documentation that the resolution is 800 lines if it wasn't so, as it would certainly be discovered at some point. But I guess the proof will be in the pudding, as they say, and it'll be interesting to see the charts as described.

[Kris Koster]

I've had the benefit of reading this entire thread from start to finish in one go.

Simon said posts and posts ago that the image he produced was a 100% 1:1 crop of the full 1920x1080 image, not downscaled.

I ask, can we see the entire 1920x1080 image, not a crop or downsampled for the web? That wouldn't be a heck of a lot of trouble, would it? Considering there is so much debate here on that very image, I see that it's only fair we see the entire frame and details about what lens was used to reproduce it. The info we have on it thus far is minimal.

[Noah Yuan-Vogel]

Originally Posted by David Heath

Of course, the obvious question then is "if not line skipping, what is it doing?"! That's the current validity to the thread.

The most likely theories I've had presented to me revolve around some form of pixel binning (which the GH2 - same sensor - certainly DOES do in some modes) - but Jan denies that. So if not that, just what is it doing?

It's hard to know what to make of the the AF100 sensor. It's pretty amazing that no one at Panasonic knows or is able to tell us how the AF100 sensor works. It's visibly similar in size to the GH2 sensor with same size pixels and and released around the same time, and Panasonic says it is not the same sensor but cannot tell us even one way in which it is different besides possibly OLPF, which isnt really the sensor itself. Why put a 12+MP sensor in a 2MP camera unless you already had a 12+MP sensor sitting around?

Panasonic says the AF100 does not line skip and does not pixel bin? Is there some other option besides reading all 12MP at 60fps? it seems hard to imagine, though maybe not impossible i suppose, that the camera is processing data from the sensor at >1GB/s without extensive cooling or power consumption. Panasonic answering the line skipping question so decisively but with no explanation given the circumstances seems to just bring up more questions. Additionally, I am not sure I understand why answers about line skipping always are followed by information about an OLPF. Jan makes it sound like there is a special OLPF that helps avoid aliasing, but if there is no skipping or binning, it should not need a super special OLPF. Just an light OLPF designed for the full 12MP sensor should suffice, since it is line skipping that would cause a need for an extra strong OLPF to avoid aliasing in the first place.

Maybe they just mean "No, you wont see artifacts of line skipping as strongly as you are used to with other line skipping cameras like the 5D/7D" or "No, we do not skip lines, but we do bin them which causes similar artifacts but helps with noise, but the aliasing aftifacts are handled by a strong OLPF".

I hope they mean "No, the sensor reads all 12MP at 14bits and 60fps at 720MP/s and processes the data at full resolution at 1.2GB/s and does a high quality downscale to 1080p for encoding and recording, and all that stuff we said about the OLPF actually isnt that important because the images are so oversampled that there is incredible sharpness with no aliasing anyway." It seems unlikely, though, especially after seeing it moire a bit on charts.

In the end, I guess what matters is that we know the practical realities of the camera: It does show some aliasing but not too much unless you shoot charts and crank up detail. It's not magic, its performance in terms of latitude and noise are, like most of its competitors, proportional to its sensor size and retail price.

It doesn't matter that we dont really know how it performs as it does, but it is a little bothersome that the company that designed the camera wont tell us some of its basic design features.

[Jan Crittenden Livingston]

Hi,

The Zacuto Shoot out is in process, and frankly by the time I get to this little task that may well be published. I know it will be shown at NAB.

Please know that I have a very busy job that requires a lot of extra time and having these chart thrown into it is just not on the schedule as there are other things that I am having to do that are more time sensitive. I simply just don't seem to find the time to set all of this stuff up and do this. Sorry.

Knowing that all will be proven with the Zacuto Camera shoot out, is probably the best thing. So with this, I bid this list adieu. See you all around the web.

Thanks,

Jan

[Noah Yuan-Vogel]

Originally Posted by Jan Crittenden Livingston

there is no line skipping being used. It uses an optical low-pass filter to resolve the aliasing and moire that is typical from high count imagers.

Isn't aliasing and moire less common in high (pixel) count imagers? More numerous, smaller pixels, means more samples and less space between samples, which would seem to mean less aliasing. Unless you are talking about aliasing that is typical from line-skipping on high pixel count imagers?

[Jan Crittenden Livingston]

Last post, My engineer was there with the cameras all the way and the folks, ASC Members, DPs and DITs that are well-known in this industry, that are running the test are big names in the industry. there were close to 85 people involved in the first round and I do trust them.

There are not vast budgets and huge headcounts at any video manufacturer these days. Sorry, I wish that were true, but it is not. I do the work of 5 people, if I go back to comparing what I do to who did it in 1996. I am busy and I am not an engineer and I would need to involve my engineer to get this done and since I took up 3 of his days for the Zacuto shoot and there is yet another segment of that I need him for.

Anybody that would like to decide on a camera can visit the vimeo site where I have collected a good number of clips created by people that own the camera, see here: AF100 Footage and Interviews/Presentations videos on Vimeo or they can visit their local reseller for a demo.

And while it seems that you can read whatever into my departure, I just am busy and need to spend the time on things more constructive as we prep for NAB I don't have the time to chase this down and I regret even posting on this thread. I could post any res chart I wanted and you wouldn't or couldn't argue it was or was not the AF100. I think the Zacuto shootout will be the answer as there you have a chart that it is certainly verified by more than one person that it is the AF100. So I am saying that I will live with what the folks from the shoot out say. People vastly smarter that I were there.

And in a way, I am saying that you don't get paid for lines of resolution, you do get paid for creating nice pictures. Buying a camera on resolution alone is a mistake, but there are those on this list that will argue that is how you make the decision. I think potential clients would rather see video that has been created in a controlled and even way to be inspiring and beautiful rather than chart after chart of resolution. It isn't about resolution, it is about the pictures.

Best,

Jan

[Ron Wilber]

dang... this isn't a 40 thousand dollar camera. Pixel peeping and hounding to this extent, on a camera that will be out of date in 6-12 months, seems rather pointless. If you haven't already made up your mind about the af100 with all the footage and discussions floating around... then this is clearly not the camera for you.

[Noah Yuan-Vogel]

Originally Posted by Ron Wilber

dang... this isn't a 40 thousand dollar camera. Pixel peeping and hounding to this extent, on a camera that will be out of date in 6-12 months, seems rather pointless. If you haven't already made up your mind about the af100 with all the footage and discussions floating around.. then this is clearly not the camera for you.

I would highly recommend against making all your decisions about a camera based entirely on compressed online video and forum discussions. The AF100 still is still backordered at most stores, so it is not yet available to all of those that would like to own/try it, so in many ways a lot of what has been said about the camera is still speculation and early-adopter opinions.

If you are not interested in the discussion due to having already made up your mind, you do not need to be involved, but in my mind some of these questions we have posed may determine whether this camera will be "out of date" in 3months or 3years given the various competing products about to come to market.

[Mestizo Devon]

I think thats the point, get the best camera you can at the time because next week the af100A will have less noise and better IQ and so on. I'm tired of the incremental updates, I need a camera to stand TALL for a couple years!

[David W. Jones]

Well this will be my last post in this thread, and quite frankly I'm surprised it has lasted this long with all the ill will being poured out. I Wish Jan the best, as she has been nothing but helpful, even under fire from the likes of people who's only intention is to stir the pot.

I have used many cameras over the years. From a Quaker Oatmeal box pinhole camera to an Arri 535B, and everything in between. And the only thing that has been consistent, is change. Cameras will come and go as technology moves forward. No camera will be the end all camera. Truth is, I have purchased 4 new cameras since the announcement of the Red Scarlet. Our newest camera purchase, the AF100 was so cost effective it paid for itself in under a week. Which is the fastest I have ever had a camera pay for itself.
Bottom line... If you feel the AF100 is not the camera for you, don't buy it!

All the Best!

Dave

[Chris Hurd]

What difference is made by all the measurbating? Zero.

We are officially done, done and done with this thread.

Many thanks to Ron Wilber, David Jones and Jan C. L.