DSLR moviemaking

Car3o said:
i'm starting to wonder what people mean lack of manual controls...when in reality it seems that all the camcorders out there have control over just the shutter while the iso is constant. so all that's lacking is lack of shutter control....
Click to expand...

Video cameras have gain (ISO). Certainly the D90 has a native ISO that is changed only with electronic gain.

But even then, yeah, shutter control is pretty important on my book. And you said it all, a constant ISO, we can all dream, can't we?


Framerate control would be awesome, and manual control over aperture with electronic lenses would be awesome too.

What people mean lack of manual control, in the end, is: lack of manual control.
 
mattsand said:
documentary work never meant to be shown in theaters or in europe then i guess. i still don't get why people are so hung up on the look when there are other more serious problems
Click to expand...
and a lot of workarounds too.. not to be 24p is not an issue.. maybe an advantage?.. :huh:
 
filmmaker's gang said:
not to be 24p is not an issue.. maybe an advantage?
Click to expand...
so having to convert something is better than already having it? spending time and money yet ending up with something inferior? you simply gotta explain that one. of course there are workarounds, there always are, but workarounds are usually call workarounds because they help you fix or avoid a problem, not to use an advantage, right?

/matt
 
yeah i'm still talking about distribution. there are obviously other advantages with 30p if you want to do slow motion or get smoother motion on 60 hz displays, but that's exactly what i'm trying to not discuss because it's a matter of taste while the distribution format problem is a real one.

/matt
 
Um, which point was "valuable" again? The one about pulldown? Nah, it was too filled with errors and misunderstandings. I'm more inclined to believe in the bitter engineer in that case. :-) the real answer probably has to do with what the frame rate set by the "live view department" had already decided for other reasons, take it or leave it. Live view is an older technology and the whole foundation for video recording. I'm sure it's always been 30p? /matt
 
Your whole point is about distribution. And I think the guy from the linked post is from America; thus making 30fps a more idea choice for television distribution anyways. Right?

Where as shooting in 24p might be more ideal for PAL, film, and DVD.
 
artforme said:
Your whole point is about distribution
Click to expand...
not this time. :-) the guy in the post thinks it's for technical reasons, and he jumps to very strange conclusions. i think the most obvious technical background to it all is the one i just suggested, who disagrees and why? the notion that it would be harder to make a 24p camera than a 30p one is just silly, all else being equal (which it might, according to my theory, not quite be).

/matt
 
mattsand said:
the notion that it would be harder to make a 24p camera than a 30p one is just silly, all else being equal (which it might, according to my theory, not quite be).

/matt
Click to expand...
I agree that there are more market reasons than techie ones. But this doesn't mean that you may not take advantage from 30p shooting anyway.
 
morgan_moore said:
Its simple

With a film camera you choose , ISO, shutter speed, FPS and Aperture/Iris and focus position

that is manual control

DSLRS have manual control in producing still images - therefore it would seem, to the non camera developer, straightforward to allow those adjustments in movie mode

S
Click to expand...


Of course.

Canon just doesn't want to loose market share in their camcorders.


As to Nikon!?!?!?! WTF Nikon!!!!!!

Step up and hit a home run!


Shhhesssshhh!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top