Author Topic: DSLRs for video  (Read 23215 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

RegularKarate

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 6047
  • Respect: +204
    • http://www.livejournal.com/users/regularkarate/
DSLRs for video
« on: April 13, 2010, 01:16:17 PM »
+1
Not Dick-Sucking-Lip Reduction Surgery.

More like this new step in the digital revolution that has (probably too many) indie filmmakers using DSLRs to shoot film work.

It's been brought up in a bunch of different threads, but let's just have a discussion about it here.

Those that have experience, talk about it here... pros and cons.

Obviously, the main pro is that you get the shallow DoF all in a an HD format.
The list of Cons seems really big though... having to record sound separately (if you want decent sound), having to mount it on something if you don't want the movement to be awkward, the rolling shutter causing the jelly look, mostly inferior encoding formats, etc...

Still, I'm considering selling my DVX100a and picking one of these guys up... especially since I want to get back into still photography and don't really shoot as much video as I used to.

squints

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 2238
  • Respect: +75
Re: DSLRs for video
« Reply #1 on: April 13, 2010, 01:47:19 PM »
0

Still, I'm considering selling my DVX100a and picking one of these guys up... especially since I want to get back into still photography and don't really shoot as much video as I used to.

this is exactly the way i feel cept i've got a gl-2 instead of the dvx.
“The myth by no means finds its adequate objectification in the spoken word. The structure of the scenes and the visible imagery reveal a deeper wisdom than the poet himself is able to put into words and concepts” – Friedrich Nietzsche

picolas

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 1752
  • Respect: +103
Re: DSLRs for video
« Reply #2 on: April 13, 2010, 03:00:33 PM »
0
having to record sound separately (if you want decent sound)
for lazy doc purposes i find the internal mic on the 7d is fine. but you can also plug in a mic to avoid resyncing, like magician did. either way, recording sound separately is kind of a necessary evil if you're making something bigger.

having to mount it on something if you don't want the movement to be awkward
image stabilization (in most canon lenses) helps a lot. the motor makes a bit of a sound but it only becomes really apparent with silence.

the rolling shutter causing the jelly look
the smaller sensor on the 7d significantly decreases the chance of jelly.

mostly inferior encoding formats
just convert with mpeg streamclip overnight and you're good.

RegularKarate

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 6047
  • Respect: +204
    • http://www.livejournal.com/users/regularkarate/
Re: DSLRs for video
« Reply #3 on: April 13, 2010, 03:49:45 PM »
0
I guess I'm really just playing Devil's advocate here, but I'd like to hear more about it so this is how I'm doing it:

for lazy doc purposes i find the internal mic on the 7d is fine. but you can also plug in a mic to avoid resyncing, like magician did. either way, recording sound separately is kind of a necessary evil if you're making something bigger.
lazy doc's fine and all, but I don't do those.  Plugging a mic in I'm sure is fine for docs or really indie stuff, but there's no XLR so it's not very reliable.

Recording sound separately really isn't a necessary evil for anything but film or high production.  You can mix straight into the camera on "real" video cameras.  You just need a mixer... and I've had pretty good luck with sound just going from a boom directly into the camera and mixing it there.. you've got two channels to work with, which works for the basic stuff I do.

image stabilization (in most canon lenses) helps a lot. the motor makes a bit of a sound but it only becomes really apparent with silence.

I'm sure the image stabilization helps (does it pick up on mic?), but camera movement is still different.  You can usually see camera weight with smaller cameras when they're not mounted.

the smaller sensor on the 7d significantly decreases the chance of jelly.

Still looks pretty bad to me.  Maybe your experience has been different.

just convert with mpeg streamclip overnight and you're good.

more room for loss and artifacts. 

--------------------
Obviously, this is mostly nitpicking, but I'm sure some of this stuff matters and I just want different opinions.  Truth be told, I may end up getting one for video sketches, but might stick to using the HMC150 my friend has for the short I want to shoot this year.

RegularKarate

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 6047
  • Respect: +204
    • http://www.livejournal.com/users/regularkarate/
Re: DSLRs for video
« Reply #4 on: April 13, 2010, 04:56:42 PM »
0
Also, this almost has me sold and I've only watched part one so far.

The Great Camera Shootout

It's comparing DSLRs to each other and to film.  Unfortunately, that's not what I would really like to see (I'd like to see other HD cameras used), but wow, the results are pretty incredible.

New Feeling

  • The Vision Quest
  • **
  • Posts: 242
  • Respect: +4
Re: DSLRs for video
« Reply #5 on: April 13, 2010, 06:02:20 PM »
0
pretty sure I'll be getting a T2i this week.  thanks for the sweet link RK

Ghostboy

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 4892
  • Respect: +377
    • http://www.road-dog-productions.com/
Re: DSLRs for video
« Reply #6 on: April 13, 2010, 06:25:44 PM »
0
I love them. I've shot a lot on the 5D and just did a commercial on the 7D two days ago. I have yet to actually own one, but I need to get with the program. Also, it was just announced that the season finale of House would he shot entirely on the 5D. Yeah, they shoot with H264 compression, but honestly, who can tell on TV or the internet?


Reinhold

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 2452
  • Respect: +3
Re: DSLRs for video
« Reply #7 on: April 13, 2010, 09:40:22 PM »
0
we'll see if i can either make some money off of one or decide to make a short film before the release of the 5D Mkiii or 7Dmkii, but for me there are still too many cons to buy one without a specific project in mind. in one or two years, this market is going to be really transformed by RAW video, more frame rates, and simultaneous HD output, not to mention cine-for-HDSLR lenses.  i don't expect much progress on the sound front, but really the options that exist currently are suitable.

if canon can do an HDSLR full-frame or larger sensor that can shoot 2k@ 24fps RAW for $3,000 (body), then they are positioned to knock the entry level scarlet out of the market simply because the lenses are so much cheaper... in fact, RED could end up selling its cameras cheaper to attract prosumers out of the HDSLR market. (indie filmmakers win)

canon's cameras are both stunning cameras for the money right now, but again this is going to change really fast. if you can shoot from a tripod and the panning jelly won't be too much of a problem i see no issues with having to sync sound in post (since a separate digital recorder can actually offer more versatility than strictly on-camera  or wireless-to-camera sound options). i've seen people mention anti-jelly plugins but i haven't seen them in action.

the 5D's jelly problem is a dealbreaker for me compared to the 7D, but it's clearly a better camera overall.  the way i feel is that if your project can be shot on an HDSLR without compromising anything-- go for it. the cheaper lenses alone are worth it.

it's worth mentioning that the rebel T2i also shoots approximately 7D quality video and has many of the same features with a cheaper/smaller body-- for $800 with the stock lens.
Obviously what you are doing right now is called (in my upcoming book of psychology at least) validation. I think it's a normal thing to do. People will reply, say anything, and then you're gonna do what you were subconsciently thinking of doing all along.

Ravi

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 4865
  • Respect: +88
Re: DSLRs for video
« Reply #8 on: April 25, 2010, 06:20:53 PM »
0
These DSLRs usually obtain 1920x1080 from the larger sensor by throwing out lines of resolution rather than intelligently rescaling, so you can get aliasing.  But on the web you can't really tell, and there are filters for this in post.  You also have to convert the H.264 files to ProRes or another file format so you don't have to keep rendering while editing (H.264 is a better delivery format than acquisition format) and so that you can use timecode.  You don't have as much latitude in color correction, but the video can look surprisingly good if it was shot right in the first place.

Editing a multicamera concert shot on Canon 5Ds

Gamblour.

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 3465
  • Respect: +12
Re: DSLRs for video
« Reply #9 on: July 20, 2010, 02:50:04 PM »
0
pretty sure I'll be getting a T2i this week.  thanks for the sweet link RK

What's your experience been like with the T2i? Anyone else? I'm considering getting one, but the footage from the 5/7d is just beautiful, so I feel a bit underwhelmed when I see footage from the T2i.
WWPTAD?

Champion Souza

  • The Road of Trials
  • **
  • Posts: 97
  • Respect: +8
Re: DSLRs for video
« Reply #10 on: July 20, 2010, 08:41:32 PM »
0
I recently got a T2i.  I like it just fine.  Before purchasing it I did I read a lot online.  Most of what I read said it was practically identical to the 7D as far as video quality.  I've never shot anything with a 7D though, so I don't know...

Gamblour.

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 3465
  • Respect: +12
Re: DSLRs for video
« Reply #11 on: July 21, 2010, 09:45:58 AM »
0
That's what I've read too, and I've been digging through comparisons and tests on Vimeo. It looks very comparable. This would be my first camera purchase, so I'm trying to do as much research as possible. I've been borrowing an HVX for a while for shooting, but it's just got the standard lens, which is pretty awful. It just isn't cutting it anymore.

That brings me to my second hurdle: what lens should I get? I've read the kit lens with the T2i is pretty bad, but I've seen some stuff where it looks fairly decent. I'm kind of lost here in general, so again, any suggestions or directions to go would be wonderful. I'm going through various telephoto lenses on Amazon right now.
WWPTAD?

Champion Souza

  • The Road of Trials
  • **
  • Posts: 97
  • Respect: +8
Re: DSLRs for video
« Reply #12 on: July 22, 2010, 12:38:56 AM »
0
One thing to consider about the T2i is that it has a smaller sensor that magnifies the lens by 1.6.  So a 50mm lens becomes the equivalent of an 80mm.  I got a 28mm f1.8 lens.  On this camera it's the closest to a 50mm and I'm happy with it. 

If you haven't already then check out http://www.cinema5d.com.  It's one of the best resources I've found for info on the Canon hdslr's. 

Gamblour.

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 3465
  • Respect: +12
Re: DSLRs for video
« Reply #13 on: July 23, 2010, 09:13:48 AM »
0
Awesome, thanks!
WWPTAD?

pete

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 5510
  • freakin huge
  • Respect: +361
    • my site
Re: DSLRs for video
« Reply #14 on: August 17, 2010, 05:28:02 PM »
0
did I miss someone posting this link?

http://www.zacuto.com/shootout

comparison with a lot of the dslrs out there.

also, the August's print version of American Cinematographer has a good little article with the DP who shot the season finale of House entirely on the 5d mark ii.

I'm learning these cameras, I hate them but I'm still learning just to stay competitive (the result can be seen here, as posted elsewhere on the board).  It's like playing Tetris on the gameboy vs. the arcade and how they switched from lefty to right-handed control and even though you know how to kick ass you still can't.

“Tragedy is a close-up; comedy, a long shot.”
- Buster Keaton

 

DMCA & Copyright | Terms & Conditions | Privacy Policy