I'm not sure these video guys get it!

[hermmermferm]

So we've (we being the collective dvxuser) decided to shoot video with DSLRs. If so, why are we investing in special rigs, matteboxes and filters made for video cameras? Seems to me there's a ton of still photography equipment available for half the price that does the same job many of these "specialty" rigs claim. Same goes for expensive film lights, ring lights, expensive monitors, expensive steadicams..etc.. We might be quick to critique the photogs for not realizing the video potential, but I think us film guys aren't realizing the potential of the still photog equipment.


IMHO!

[Michael Olsen]

Still photog guys use shoulder mount rigs, steadicams, jibs, sliders, and swingaway matteboxes with provisions for filters and flags? And its cheaper than our stuff? I'm in. Show me where to buy.

[Kholi]

Try pulling off a smooth diagonal tilt and pan with a 100 dollar Bogen tripod then come back and let me know how you feel about it.

[mtan]

the cost of most of this stuff is insane also. A good ole monopod and a cheap spiderbrace is sufficient for me, maybe I will get the manfrotto shoulder brace as well. I love the Zacuto and Redrock stuff and cool $900 matteboxes but seriously I would not even pay half the price they are asking for that stuff.

[hermmermferm]

Thought I should give at least one example:
http://www.cokin.com/ico4-p1.html

[ydgmdlu]

The problem is that Cokin has never been held in particularly high regard by photographers. They are considered "fun" filters, but not "serious" or quality enough for demanding amateurs or professionals.

And besides, video guys have been using Cokin products for many years. It's not like we don't know about them already.

[Tracey Lee]

I would say if there is any rig or tool out there that is cost efficient AND worth using, then a video guy has probably tried it.

[Richard Wilis]

A good tripod and videohead is essential, I agree. But being a hobbyist, I can't afford most of the other high-end equipment. So luckily for me there a good alternatives available in the photog department :)

Lee Filters has some pretty good filterbox and lenshood kits. And a wide choice of ND & Color filters. At a fraction of the cost of a swingaway mattebox with flags (which I don't need). Buy a couple of adaptor rings for all of your lenses and you can easily swap the filterbox/lenshood between them.

[Cranky]

Same goes for expensive film lights, ring lights
You cannot use a low-power flash light for video.

[Taylor Rudd]

It isn't beyond the realm of possibility to utilize some photog gear for some production use...but i don't expect anybody to run out and buy strobes to use their model lights as a key source...

[Taylor Rudd]

You cannot use a low-power flash light for video.

Hah! I'm not sure a high-power flash would do much good either.

If you use things how their meant for, you avoid LOTS of problems later. I won't even tell you about the time I tried to build a handheld support for my XH-A1 + Letus rig out of plumbing pipes from Lowe's...DIY is great if you're skilled with that stuff (but I'm not)

[Cranky]

If you use things how their meant for, you avoid LOTS of problems later. I won't even tell you about the time I tried to build a handheld support for my XH-A1 + Letus rig out of plumbing pipes from Lowe's...DIY is great if you're skilled with that stuff (but I'm not)
I have a DIY dolly I made out of PVC pipes. It works... sort of: http://www.vimeo.com/1262610

[Barry_Green]

Thought I should give at least one example:
http://www.cokin.com/ico4-p1.html
Actually, the Cokin filter holder system is great for VDSLR rigs. A conventional mattebox is a pain in the glutes for using with the stock GH1 lens, because that lens will telescope out six inches as you change the zoom, and a mattebox that's not attached to the lens will just be in the way. Whereas the Cokin, because it sits on the lens rings, slides along as the zoom takes it further out or closer in.

Only problem with the Cokin system is the quality of the actual filters. If you can get Lee or Formatt filters in there, I would think the Cokin system is actually something that a no-budget shooter could get into, instead of buying some $2,000 mattebox that's just going to get in the way...

[Barry_Green]

You cannot use a low-power flash light for video.
Why not? Meaning, a low-power flash? Or an actual flashlight? We use flashlights all the time for accent lights, eye lights, or (when the scene calls for it) actual flashlights... :)

[Kholi]

To a certain degree, light is light. If you have a way to control it and it throws enough power for what you need, generally it can work. Other things like color temperature, etc may come into play, but something like flashlights (Or I'll one-up Barry, a CLUSTER of flashlights as a spotlight/overhead LOL) is just light, and it works.

To me, the most important piece of equipment is stabilization. The rest can be substituted a lot of the times. French Flag? BLACK WRAP + TAPE.

[hermmermferm]

Some more examples ;)

http://www.aerialproducts.com/aerial-photography-systems/large-sized-dslr-balloon-aerial-system.html
http://gatheringmountains.net/Photoweb/balloon.jpg

[Richard J. Johnson]

but they look so much cooler

[Epeck]

Lights who needs lights. After effects can fix that (the old fix it in post comment).
ahahah

[Dan_Kanes]

To the original poster: you're right. Video guys don't "get it"

It's us professional filmmakers who are using these and need to add real pro accessories for professional shooting in a pro environment.

yeah, you can run around with a bunch of goofy stills stuff like umbrellas with hot lights pointed into them, but when your cheap chinese umbrella reflectors melt from the 2k fresnel pointed at it, you'll see why we use a c stand with a duckbill clamp to hold foamcore as a reflector. I'm just saying.

[soniviz]

The problem is that Cokin has never been held in particularly high regard by photographers. They are considered "fun" filters, but not "serious" or quality enough for demanding amateurs or professionals.


Only problem with the Cokin system is the quality of the actual filters. If you can get Lee or Formatt filters in there, I would think the Cokin system is actually something that a no-budget shooter could get into, instead of buying some $2,000 mattebox that's just going to get in the way...

I disagree. Daryl Benson and Dale Wilson both rave about the Cokin 173 in particular (blue/yellow pola) in their book, Canadian Landscapes. I don't think anyone could call them anything but pros.

http://www.dalewilsonphotography.com/
http://www.darylbenson.com/

Considering that the resolution of these DSLR's is so relatively low, and that pro photogs DO use them, I highly doubt quality would be an issue. Even if it were an issue to begin with.

[USLatin]

24 photos a second to worry about

[soniviz]

Huh?

[Epeck]

he is referring to the frame rate. IE 24 fps

[agcohn]

So we've (we being the collective dvxuser) decided to shoot video with DSLRs. If so, why are we investing in special rigs, matteboxes and filters made for video cameras? Seems to me there's a ton of still photography equipment available for half the price that does the same job many of these "specialty" rigs claim. Same goes for expensive film lights, ring lights, expensive monitors, expensive steadicams..etc.. We might be quick to critique the photogs for not realizing the video potential, but I think us film guys aren't realizing the potential of the still photog equipment.
The quick answer is that there is a lot of video equipment that doesn't have an equivalent on the still photography side.

Still photography lights are cheaper than video lights, but that's because they are flashes, which aren't going to be turned on for several hours a day.

If a shooter needs a monitor or a steadicam, then they will have to use video equipment, because there are no still photo equivalents for those needs.

If all of this great cheap still photography equipment you talk about can be used for video, it is either all ready being used for video, or it does not work for video.

[GRENCH]

So we've (we being the collective dvxuser) decided to shoot video with DSLRs. If so, why are we investing in special rigs, matteboxes and filters made for video cameras? Seems to me there's a ton of still photography equipment available for half the price that does the same job many of these "specialty" rigs claim. Same goes for expensive film lights, ring lights, expensive monitors, expensive steadicams..etc.. We might be quick to critique the photogs for not realizing the video potential, but I think us film guys aren't realizing the potential of the still photog equipment.


IMHO!

That's your 1 sided opinion for sure. But as for myself I get the best of both worlds. My rig allows for add ons like sound gear, lighting, matts, follow focus and much more. I believe you are really missing the point. With the right rig configuration you should be able to go from shooting with it and all of it's accessories to being as necked as a jay bird with a twist and click of the quick release plate. That is the right idea.:happy:

[bill totolo]

So we've (we being the collective dvxuser) decided to shoot video with DSLRs. If so, why are we investing in special rigs, matteboxes and filters made for video cameras? Seems to me there's a ton of still photography equipment available for half the price that does the same job many of these "specialty" rigs claim. Same goes for expensive film lights, ring lights, expensive monitors, expensive steadicams..etc.. We might be quick to critique the photogs for not realizing the video potential, but I think us film guys aren't realizing the potential of the still photog equipment.


IMHO!

Try having aluminum equipment custom fabicated, THEN let's talk:
YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LodZaT63y4)

[cheezweezl]

on one hand, it's nice to have the camera stripped down with nothing on it for guerilla shooting.

on the other hand, all of these overpriced tools that you gripe about, exist because they do a better job than the cheap stuff. the only thing that has changed here is the size and weight of the camera. you may be able to get away with a lighter tripod than one that you would use for red or film but you still need a high quality tripod if you want the smoothness.

i don't see how light changes at all. you can get away with less overall light than you would need for some cams but that comes with a price of noise. you can light your scenes with flashlights and home depot work lights. i do from time to time when it works. however, if you think that work lights and flashlights are great for every scene, then you are wrong.

i was the same way a long time ago. i thought everything was overpriced and went for the cheap stuff. then as i gradually got the opportunity to use the good stuff, i finally started to get it. you really do get what you pay for.

the other day, i left my sachtler at home and went shooting with a manfrotto 501 because it's light and compact whereas my sachtler weighs a ton and is huge. it was as crappy as i remember and no better with a stripped 7d than it was with a heavier hvx200. i'll shlep the sachtler from now on.