March 7, 2012 - 18:41
I always find Adam Wilts reviews very good and thorough, and what he has now written on the FS100 is no exception. Very well worth a read if you are considering a large format video camera. (Which I'm not!) http://provideocoalition.com/index.php/awilt/story/review_sony_nex-fs100_super35_lss_avchd_camcorder/
In brief, not as good as an F3 or C300 (but a lot cheaper) and much better than the AF101 or a DSLR (whilst about the same price as an AF101)
Quote:
The bottom line? Even with its idiosyncrasies, you won’t find a better interchangeable-lens, large-single-sensor camcorder for under US$13,960 (the street price of the PMW-F3, sans lens. ....). The FS100 is a compact and lightweight camcorder offering cinematic depth of field with your choice of lens; variable frame rates up to 60fps at 1080p resolution; and incredible low-light capability with minimal noise. At $5000 lensless or $5600 with the 18-200mm kit lens, it leaves room in the budget for a variable ND filter, an offboard LCD/EVF, and whatever rods, rails, and support kit the serious FS100 shooter will want to add.
He's also done an equally interesting job on the C300 - http://provideocoalition.com/index.php/awilt/story/quick_look_canon_eos_c300_lss_1080p_camcorder/ - which seems to be the one that's really interesting those who can afford it.
March 7, 2012 - 20:27
#1
Re: Adam Wilt on the FS100
Other reviewers have found the lack of ND filters, poor buttons and build quality, and lack of HDSDI output a real turn off and have preferred the AF101.
March 7, 2012 - 20:56
#2
Re: Adam Wilt on the FS100
The lack of HD-SDI and ND filters are acknowledged, but everything I've read ties in with Adams review OVERALL. The general consensus seems to be the much better resolution, far less luminance aliasing, and far better low light performance of the FS100 are far more significant.
Yes, HD-SDI would be appreciated, but for an external recorder nothing will be lost by outputting HDMI.
As far as ND filters go, then the few people I know with a large format camera don't find it a big problem. Having to use external filters means they can tailor the amount of ND more exactly.
Which reviewers have come out in favour of the AF100?
March 8, 2012 - 10:20
#3
Re: Adam Wilt on the FS100
infocus2 wrote:
Which reviewers have come out in favour of the AF100?
Barry Green on dvxuser forum? 
March 8, 2012 - 10:41
#4
Re: Adam Wilt on the FS100
Well is does help him to sell his books and DVD's!
I think panasonic missed the boat with the AF101, if they had given it P2 and AVC intra it wouldn't be residing in the bargain bin behind the F3 and the C300.
But will we see a revised model at this years NAB?
March 8, 2012 - 10:55
#5
Re: Adam Wilt on the FS100
infocus2 wrote:
Which reviewers have come out in favour of the AF100?
Barry Green on dvxuser forum?
No David
And Philip Bloom called it a tie.
March 9, 2012 - 11:45
#6
Re: Adam Wilt on the FS100
Good to see a proper, full, well researched and factually underpinned review of the FS-100 at last. It seems to have been the forgotten camera in the present line-up but I'm finding it meets or exceeds my expectations every time I use it. I spent an afternoon in a badly-lit factory recently and accidentally allowed the gain to go much higher than i would normally be happy with (I hadn't fully understood the implications of a menu setting that I had used) but when I looked back on the pictures, they were great, nothing like as a grainy as I would have expected and they've cut into the final programme with no problem at all.
I have spent most of the time I've had this camera thinking about the Atomos Ninja rather than the camera but that's mainly because (as a long time Sony user) the camera just works in the way that i would expect it.
March 8, 2012 - 19:55
#7
Re: Adam Wilt on the FS100
I asked the BBC, when it came out, if they wanted it tested. I was told No.
March 9, 2012 - 00:48
#8
Re: Adam Wilt on the FS100
Having now looked through Nigel Coopers review that Richard links to, I am astonished by the number of significant omissions and factual errors in it.
Most importantly, anybody I know who has compared the FS100 and the AF101 has commented that in quality respects, the main differences are in terms of sensitivity, highlight handling, resolution and luminance aliasing - and in all these respects the FS100 is the clear winner. (Adam Wilt says: “…..but the Panasonic has harsher highlight handling, noticeably lower resolution, and more luma aliasing, and it can’t hold a candle (pun intended) to the FS100’s low-noise, low-light prowess: it maxes out at ISO 3200, and a heavily-processed ISO 3200 it is, too. “)
Yet Nigel Cooper doesn’t even mention sensitivity or highlight handling!?! That’s an amazing omission – sensitivity is the biggest single difference between the two. (see what Medidox says about the FS100 in low light above.) And as far as resolution and aliasing go, Nigel says: “(the AF101) ……lags slightly behind in raw resolution and there is a tad more aliasing, ……….” Just look at Adams comparative charts, and it’s pretty plain that the differences in resolution and aliasing are a lot more than “slightly” and “a tad”.
Nigel has also got his facts wrong about the sensor sizes. Even with the figures he gives, the figures work out to give the s35 sensor 40% bigger area than the 4/3 of the AF101 – not the 30% he says. But that is misleading anyway. Compare active areas and the figure becomes 86% due to the cropping of the four-thirds sensor for 16:9 video.
He says that “This 30% only gives you marginally more control over depth-of-field, but nothing really noticeable. “ That could be true if the difference was only 30% - use accurate figures and it’s a different story. (It’s worth saying that differing sources give differing exact figures for sensor areas. Creative Video have a chart - http://www.creativevideo.co.uk/index.php?t=helpCentre/page/39/image+sensor+size+comparison – which gives the active area for the AF101 as 178 sq mm and 464.44 sq mm for super 35, which makes the FS100 sensor about 160% larger!! I’m a bit dubious about that, but “about twice the area” seems a reasonable statement – rather than Nigel’s “a bit larger”.)
I took the opportunity today to look at a friend’s FS100 and feel Nigel is too harsh about build quality and ergonomics. That’s not to say I think the FS100 is good – but it doesn’t seem any worse than my memory of the AF101. Frankly, I don’t think EITHER of them are very good, but I certainly didn’t see things like “The side grip doesn't feel 100% securely attached to the actual body, even after tightening up the screw as tight as I dare, it kind of wobbles a little and feels like it is coming (sic) lose” – it seemed as solid as I’d expect for a camera at this price point.
There is no doubt there ARE undeniable downsides to the FS100, and the HDMI (instead of HD-SDI) output, and lack of built-in NDs are probably the two most glaring. But practically my friend uses an external recorder with HDMI, so the lack of SDI is irrelevant to him, and that seems true for other FS100 users. Worse is the lack of internal ND, but I’m told that is considered of much less importance than the other differences.
The other point he made (and also totally missing from the dvuser review) is lens availability for the two cameras. The other three large format video cameras are all s35, and that’s the cinema standard. If you’re thinking of getting lenses, ones suitable for s35 may have a far higher degree of future proofing.
I could go on – the price difference Nigel quotes I don’t believe has ever been anything like the case in practice – but that’ll do for now.
It doesn’t surprise me at all that Alan hasn’t been asked to look into the FS100 for the BBC – if they wanted a large format camera (and budgets didn’t stretch to the Alexa 
) I’d expect the F3 to make far more sense, and nowadays probably the C300.
) I’d expect the F3 to make far more sense, and nowadays probably the C300.
March 9, 2012 - 10:36
#9
Re: Adam Wilt on the FS100
I would say that ergonomically the FS100 is a puzzle. And one that took me a couple of months to get used to because it doesn't look or feel like any other camera I've used before. The focus tube is very strange but with the set-up I now use, the FS-100 on a rail system with the Ninja at the back, the focus tube is just long enough to get past the Ninja and so works well for me.
Most of the work I do is interviews with the camera on a tripod and this camera gives me so much more than the cameras I've had before. People think that because it is large sensor you always get shallow depth of field and this is just a silly point of view, I close the aperture and I dial up some gain when I want deep focus and it looks great.
HDMI out I thought would be problematic but the HDMI sockets grip quite hard, I also use a 90 degree adapator on the output of the FS100 to get the cable out of the way. I have seen that you can buy locking HDMI cable. The main problem I've had is getting cable the right length and flexibility, again this has taken time and experiment to get right.
The lack of ND filters was for me the most problematic area and I spent several months looking at both the FS100 and the AF101 with the Panny being favourite because of the ND filters. But the appearance of variable ND filters has completely changed that equation and even cheapy variables like those from 7-day shop work really well.
I like the look of the Canon, but it is out of my budget at the moment.
March 10, 2012 - 12:36
#10
Re: Adam Wilt on the FS100
It has always been a puzzle to me why manufacturers seem to equate a cinema style camera to awkward ergonomics. Surely if they had any sense they would take a leaf out of some of the classic small film camera designs and make something that actually feels nice to hold and use.
All the focus (pun not intended) is on the internal workings of the camera. It would be good if manufacturers would view the camera body as something more than simply a 3D shape to accommodate some buttons. Modern camera designs such as the C300, the FS100 etc appear to have absolutely no thought at all put into the ergonomics. Although the DV User review had mistakes, I notice that he did pick up on that, including the silly placement of the top handle of the FS100 in relationship to the LCD.
For years manufacturers settled on a common standard for the shape of 2/3" shoulder mount cameras. Why can't they do the same for smaller cameras that are intended for professional use? If someone hires me for a job, I shouldn't have to hunt the camera in all sorts of obscure places for the settings and controls I need to use. I shouldn't have to be hired for a job because I have or have not used a particular camera. If there was some sort of commonality like there is for 2/3" cameras it would be possible to easily use whatever camera is needed without having to totally relearn everything.
March 10, 2012 - 17:42
#11
Re: Adam Wilt on the FS100
My problem with the ergonomics of the camera stems from having to put the Atomos Ninja and the FS100 together. You can't (yet) buy something off the shelf to do it. I've tried various combinations and places and because the FS100 offers so many ways of attaching things I finally plumped for putting it on a rail behind the camera. Every placing I tried needed a different combination of HDMi cable length and twist that when in use may or may not interfere with other sockets, switches and cables.
If you just want to use the internal AVCHD recording then the problems are considerably less. And if you have any experience of using the Sony HDV range of cameras the menu structure will be very familiar and frankly for the work i've done so far it's been like using an old friend.
But I do feel that the camera is styled to make you think twice about going handheld. Focus is a significant issue with all large sensor cameras and if you do go handheld you are more likely to end up with wobbly out of focus shots unless you have planned exactly what you want to do. Autofocus doesn't help, but keeping it on a tripod and manually checking again and again does.
I don't feel that this is a limitation, handheld has to be really good these days on big display screens. So anything that makes me question whether this is the best thing to do, is very worthwhile. The FS100 can get great shots, it will also really punish poor film-making.
March 10, 2012 - 19:01
#12
Re: Adam Wilt on the FS100
FreeFlow wrote:
It has always been a puzzle to me why manufacturers seem to equate a cinema style camera to awkward ergonomics. Surely if they had any sense they would take a leaf out of some of the classic small film camera designs and make something that actually feels nice to hold and use.All the focus (pun not intended) is on the internal workings of the camera. It would be good if manufacturers would view the camera body as something more than simply a 3D shape to accommodate some buttons. Modern camera designs such as the C300, the FS100 etc appear to have absolutely no thought at all put into the ergonomics. Although the DV User review had mistakes, I notice that he did pick up on that, including the silly placement of the top handle of the FS100 in relationship to the LCD.
There's a good reason for the new 'cinema' cameras not being particularly nice to hold. They are not meant to be be used as 'run and gun' devices, so designers don't compromise on their flexibility or performance catering for that. That's true for all large lens cameras from the AF101/NEX-FS100 entry level up through the C300/EX-F3 to the Red/F65/Alexa i.e. 'real' cinema cameras. The Alexa for instance has been praised for having a human interface that an experienced Arri film camera operator needs virtually no training on. I doubt that anybody would seriously consider that camera a candidate for hand held shooting, other than occasionally for the most avant garde director.
The FS100 has been designed in consultation with a number of experienced focus groups, hence the very flexible mounting arrangements which allow external recorders, monitors, follow focus kit, etc. to be accommodated on a tripod configuration. Remember that these cameras have been introduced in response to the current fad of SLR video shooting, and they have infinitely better ergonomics than those SLR 'christmas tree' abominations. If a production really needs hand held as well as 'cinema' footage, then the answer is to use the right tool for those shots, i.e. an NX-5/EX1 style camera for mobile shots and something like a Go-Pro for the extreme stuff. There are a number of posts on this and other similar forums where workflows are being developed to blend such mixes of raw footage.
As for all cameras in a class having a common human interface, its one thing for an industry standard tool like ENG cameras that have been developed over the last 20 years, but its a vain hope in a competitive market like the low-end prosumer one.
Steve
March 10, 2012 - 22:34
#13
Re: Adam Wilt on the FS100
Quote:
They are not meant to be be used as 'run and gun' devices, so designers don't compromise on their flexibility or performance catering for that.
I can see where you are coming from, but I don't agree with it as a reason why the camera should be designed that way. After all, why should a camera be designed to preclude a certain way of shooting? I'd like the flexibility and ease to shoot as I see fit for the programme/video I am making thank you muchly.
After all, how would films like Saving Private Ryan, the Bourne films, 24 etc be made? It doesn't really matter what peoples individual preferences are with regard to those productions and their style, but it is up to the manufacturers to make a camera that is limited by the imagination of the filmmaker, not by the artificial restrictions imposed by an engineers idea of what people might want.
With the Alexa I would say that in fact it is a very good camera to use off a tripod. It can be configured to be used very nicely on the shoulder. I also disagree strongly that it would require a compromise to make the camera ergonomic to use off a tripod. All it needs is a standardised form factor such as the JVC model. What would stop anyone from putting a large sensor into a camera similar to the 700?
Quote:
The FS100 has been designed in consultation with a number of experienced focus groups
The Government uses focus groups too to justify its policies...
March 12, 2012 - 01:28
#14
Re: Adam Wilt on the FS100
FreeFlow wrote:
Modern camera designs such as the C300, the FS100 etc appear to have absolutely no thought at all put into the ergonomics. Although the DV User review had mistakes, I notice that he did pick up on that, including the silly placement of the top handle of the FS100 in relationship to the LCD.
You certainly won't find me praising the FS100 for ergonomics, certainly not for hand-held use anyway! But as you say, that's true of all four of these large format video cameras, even the C300, which I'd say is currently best of the bunch. Adam Wilt is also far from without any criticism of the FS100. The difference is that unlike the DVuser review neither he nor I think the AF100 is any better overall. They're neither very good ergonomically.
But it's more when Nigel starts talking about build quality that I really disagree. The FS100 may not be to military spec for ruggedness, but his negative comments about build quality just don't reflect what I saw with my friends camera, and are certainly not what he felt when he bought it. I'm interested to hear what Medidox thought as regards build quality etc when he compared it and the AF101?
The build may not be up to full pro standards, but comments like "The hand-grip on the side wobbles, even when tightened up, so to does the top handle/mic holder, which feels like it is hanging on by its fingernails....." are just not what I experienced.
Maybe whoever had the demo model before Nigel was especially heavy handed!
March 12, 2012 - 10:48
#15
Re: Adam Wilt on the FS100
What is build quality? Is it an objective thing that you can measure or is it subjective, is it how you feel about the camera?
Certainly the AF101 is a substantial piece of kit and it all feels right. Things are in the right place and the build is exactly what you would expect from Panasonic, strong and workman-like, if you will.
And the FS100 has the same feel as an HDV camcorder, in that the plastic body is as well made. You can't fault the body for build quality.
The side handle is unusual and I've seen it used with the on-off button pointing vertically instead of horizontally on a standard camera and that seems to work. It is not easy to move it around because the nut controlling it is in a difficult place, but once you've found your position it should stay there. The other handle, top handle also doubles as a microphone holder but just doesn't look like a handle and I only use it if I'm going handheld. But It is strong and you can pick the camera up with it. Personally i don't use either of these handles as my rail system has a handle underneath.
The other point that many people can't get over is the LCD panel and viewfinder tube, because these are unusual. The viewfinder tube has vertical and lateral movement. The vertical movement can be controlled and indeed locked using a dial beside the viewfinder but the lateral movement cannot be controlled and so is always there. It doesn't flap around, there is a degree of drag on it but it has that potential. And I can see that many people using it for a short period of time, or looking over the camera at a show would feel that this is flimsy and could therefore call into question the build quality of the camera.
In practice I have found this combination to be easy to use. When I go hand held my rig places the camera to my right and the fact that there is some lateral movement in the viewfinder means that I can have the viewfinder turned slightly to meet my eye without a problem. It is something that I wouldn't have expected but in use it is really good.
The major surprise for me is how much my attitude to filming has changed. I used to point and shoot but now (and probably this is felt by everyone with a large sensor camera) I feel that I am crafting shots again. And apologies if that sounds pretentious.
March 12, 2012 - 15:02
#16
Re: Adam Wilt on the FS100
Quote:
I used to point and shoot but now (and probably this is felt by everyone with a large sensor camera) I feel that I am crafting shots again. And apologies if that sounds pretentious.
No, that doesn't sound pretentious. If videomakers think more about the shots that they are taking then that is a good thing.
Quote:
The build may not be up to full pro standards, but comments like "The hand-grip on the side wobbles, even when tightened up, so to does the top handle/mic holder, which feels like it is hanging on by its fingernails....." are just not what I experienced.
Mine neither. I agree with you that the build quality is about on par with other cameras of a similar price range. I just don't agree with some of the others who say that Sony designed the camera to be used as a cinema camera, and therefore this means that handheld wasn't and shouldn't be a consideration. A theory that does not really bare scrutiny given the historical use of handheld shots in cinema, from The French Connection, Blue Thunder (a truly underrated action thriller IMO, and some exceptional editing) through to the Bourne films, Saving Private Ryan, Munich and so on and so forth.
This seemingly new idea that film style shooting means that it must be shot from a tripod or Steadicam or similar appears to have stemmed from the popularity and limitations of DSLRs with their rolling shutters and poor ergonomics more than it has the reality of true film based cinematography.