Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Wide angle camera options for 5D user

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Wide angle camera options for 5D user

    We all know the 5D isn't fantastic at wide shots of interiors, landscapes, etc. It has the full-frame look, but for the most part the image from a 24-105 @ 24mm F4 in something as simple as a kitchen yields very soft results. In med, cu, etc. the 5D shines and I'm not just talking in shots where DOF is a priority but also in shots where you stop down. Detail wise the 5D looks wonderful to me. The only time it's lack of resolution bugs me is in wide shots.

    As I watch more film, I notice deep focus shots more and more. They're used far more often then we think, and the whole shallow DOF craze has equated DOF with something filmic instead of the framing/light, etc. having more to do with it then anything else.

    I'm wondering, are any of you using another camera for wide shots? Are you using a 1/3rd chip camera perhaps? Some people mix Panasonic HMC's with GH2's or AF100's...is anyone using the XF100 or XF300 and intercutting 5D/7D/T2i, etc.? Any thoughts there? Odds are in a typical narrative (which is my main aim) a large portion of what I'm doing is med-cu since the budgets are often low and the time to get a ton of wides isn't great...I need to be selective. However when I want it, I don't want to do all that work for something that looks basically out of focus. It's a consequence of shooting on a Canon DSLR I realize so I'm trying not to whine too much here.

    Does anyone think a 1/3rd chip camera like the XF100 might be too deep DOF wise to intercut in a typical narrative setting? Do you think it could be jarring? I'm also unaware of the DR differences between the cameras but I'm sure they could be intercut well, especially if a particular wide shot has me controlling lighting. Any concerns it'll look too different from the feel of the 5D?

    I've recently picked up a GH2 to test and while I love it's increased resolution (esp. hacked) it's far noisier then my 5D (expected that) and the "feel" of the image is very different. I'm not entirely sure it's worth investing in longterm with the cost of a wide lens, ND, etc. when an XF100 could solve my problem, get me sharp wides, be closer to the DSLR colors/mojo, use CF cards, etc.

    I'm not an expert here, so if anyone has any comments...all are welcome.
    http://www.prohaskastudios.com

    #2
    I shoot lots of wide interiors in video. The mk2 just isn't the tool. ANd if there is any sort of need for high gain or ISO, the 1/3 cams suffer there. Lately I've been going the MK3 route with a 16-35 or my 17 T/S and upping my ISO to 3200 or even 5000 and stopping down. I've had success with the Gh2 or af100 and the 7-14, but the "look" or lack of looks in controls on the gh2 limits me. So I turn to the Mk3, ISO up to 5000 and stop down to 5.6 or 8 and get a nice deep "er" DOF. That is what the MK3 gives me, the ability to stop down over the Mk2 with it's high ISO performance. I think if the next gen APS-C canon can come along and have lowlight performance like the MK3 and retain some detail over the MK3, problem solved. I will sometimes go to the XF105 and light up the interior keeping gain down, but at wide you will run into barrel distortion.
    I have gotten my XF105 and Mk3 to intercut quite well however.

    Comment


      #3
      Awesome, thanks for the information. I've PM'd you with a request
      http://www.prohaskastudios.com

      Comment


        #4
        Look at these wide shots shot from the GH2 using the Tokina 11-16mm.... The user imo did an awesome job!

        Originally posted by vesubio View Post
        Last edited by vision_filmz; 06-26-2012, 10:25 PM.

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by dustylense View Post
          I shoot lots of wide interiors in video. The mk2 just isn't the tool. ANd if there is any sort of need for high gain or ISO, the 1/3 cams suffer there. Lately I've been going the MK3 route with a 16-35 or my 17 T/S and upping my ISO to 3200 or even 5000 and stopping down. I've had success with the Gh2 or af100 and the 7-14, but the "look" or lack of looks in controls on the gh2 limits me. So I turn to the Mk3, ISO up to 5000 and stop down to 5.6 or 8 and get a nice deep "er" DOF. That is what the MK3 gives me, the ability to stop down over the Mk2 with it's high ISO performance. I think if the next gen APS-C canon can come along and have lowlight performance like the MK3 and retain some detail over the MK3, problem solved. I will sometimes go to the XF105 and light up the interior keeping gain down, but at wide you will run into barrel distortion.
          I have gotten my XF105 and Mk3 to intercut quite well however.
          Is this because you're using natural lighting? Otherwise why couldn't a 5dmk2 be stopped down to f5.6 or f8 and achieve basically the same deep DOF as the mk3?

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by Kubrick71 View Post
            Is this because you're using natural lighting? Otherwise why couldn't a 5dmk2 be stopped down to f5.6 or f8 and achieve basically the same deep DOF as the mk3?
            Exactly, I'm not sure what the OP's issue is. I shoot 28mm and occasional 24mm interiors all the time. You're inside... you have power.... unless there is an artistic reason for shallow DOF you should be lighting it so you can shoot at 5.6 which will be quite sharp on a decent lens.
            Youtube
            IMDB
            Twitter

            Comment

            Working...
            X