35mm adapters vs GH1?

S

SaN

Member
I recently purchased a 35mm adapter that I haven't received yet, but I am starting to wonder if I really made the right choice, since there are new DSLR cameras like the GH1, D90 and 5D Mark II, that have a stunning image quality with a shallow DOF, and allowing you to film in low light conditions.

So can anyone tell me what are the advantages of using a 35mm, compared to a GH1 for example, when you know that a GH1 investment is about twice as less as a 35mm adapter kit+HDcam.

I just don't want to regret my order :/
 
Advantages:

Fully manual controls, XLR audio jacks for sync sound recording, academy frame, no post-workflow issues.

cons: light loss.
 
Don't forget that audio completely sucks on all present model VDSLRs. They all have AGC circuits that cannot be switched off, unbalanced inputs and generally sound awful.

The ergonomics are really funky for shooting handheld motion video in comparison to most video cameras.

On VDSLRs you constantly have to worry about getting dust on the sensor as you use and change lenses. Zoom lenses are not airtight and every time you zoom the lens, it is sucking some air and dust into the mirror box. Not sure if this is as much of an issue on the GH1 though since the GH1 is not a true SLR.

Codec on GH1 is easy to break and is only 17MBps AVCHD

All VDSLRs use CMOS imagers with the resulting rolling shutter artifacts and Jellovision present. If you are using a video camera and adapter, you have plenty of CCD choices still.

Canon 5D MKII is a PITA to try to set or keep consistency with exposure from take to take. GH1 is full manual and much better in this aspect.

My 5D MKII arrived yesterday but you won't see an ad in the Marketplace for my HPX170.

Dan
 
I have a love-hate going on right now with VDSLRs. I use the MKII and I love the image and the fact that it is so easy to get a nice shallow DOF. But a global shutter still reigns king for me so I don't think I will ever get rid of my XHA1/adapter combo. Plus I love the filmic and soft image my adapter creates (call me old fasion in that respect...film has a soft-grainy image and I love the look).

Audio doesn't have to be a problem. When using actual 35mm film cameras, external audio is always used. The lack of real 24p and manual control is still a problem with the VDSLRs but I imagine that even if this was resolved, I would still find my regular HD cam very useful.
 
And don't under estimate the look of the camera as well. If you show up to a video shoot with a VDSLR as opposed to something that looks like a video/film camera, it may give the impression that you're "not professional". First impressions are important and a professional looking video rig helps in that area.
 
mvansomeren, I am curious to see any footage you made with your rig. I also have a XH-A1 and ordered an SG Blade. Do you have any film you could show me? There are actually pretty few of them on vimeo or youtube...
 
puredrifting said:
Don't forget that audio completely sucks on all present model VDSLRs. They all have AGC circuits that cannot be switched off, unbalanced inputs and generally sound awful.
Click to expand...

Second Sound System is imperative. IN the same note, double system is pretty much what you have to do with RED, also.

The ergonomics are really funky for shooting handheld motion video in comparison to most video cameras.
Click to expand...

Indeed. You will need a handheld rig like this:

D90RR.jpg


However, OIS makes handheld a bit better.

For ENG work, jury's out. Nobody knows which one is going to be easier. The weight of a shoulder mount camera or the form factor of a VDSLR?

On VDSLRs you constantly have to worry about getting dust on the sensor as you use and change lenses. Zoom lenses are not airtight and every time you zoom the lens, it is sucking some air and dust into the mirror box. Not sure if this is as much of an issue on the GH1 though since the GH1 is not a true SLR.
Click to expand...

With 35mm Adapters you're constantly worrying about getting dust anywhere.

They're both in the same respect. But photographers have been switching lenses for decades. Nothing's really changed.

Gh-1 has a dust cleaning function, supposed to work well.

35mm Adapters (Save the G35) need to be ripped apart for one spec of dust.

Codec on GH1 is easy to break and is only 17MBps AVCHD
Click to expand...

Codec on GH-1 is easy to break at 1080/24P (shooting interlaced) and is great at 17mbps AVC-HD and Motion JPEG in 720 modes. Unfortunately, no 24P in 720 modes. Only 60 and 30.

All VDSLRs use CMOS imagers with the resulting rolling shutter artifacts and Jellovision present. If you are using a video camera and adapter, you have plenty of CCD choices still.
Click to expand...

Most CCD imagers are of low resolution. Adding a 35mm Adapter further degrades that. The Ultimate, in my opinion, is the best for netting resolution.

CMOS will have jello, count on it. If you're afraid of jello I suggest you not even think about a VDSLR or any CMOS camera. Including RED.


Canon 5D MKII is a PITA to try to set or keep consistency with exposure from take to take. GH1 is full manual and much better in this aspect.
Click to expand...

Indeed. No question about it.

My 5D MKII arrived yesterday but you won't see an ad in the Marketplace for my HPX170.

Dan
Click to expand...


Same here. My HPX170 and Letus Ultimate will remain with me until I see a decline in requests for it.

I love my GH-1, I'm not about to sell my HPX170 and Ultimate for it.

Here's what it is:

-24P straight up or Workaround to get 24P
-Lowlight unmatched or Increase the wattage of your lighting kit
-Lightweight Kit or a Heavy unnaturally long setup
-Onboard Synced Audio or Second System and Slate
-Discreet shooting or Pretty Obviously Shooting
-Look like you've got a bad-ass rig or What the hell do you think you're doing with that little camera?
-Shoot through diffused screens or grab the image from the sensor
-Pay 4500+ for an adapter setup with positives and negatives or 2500 for a full fledged DSLR kit with positives and negatives

My solution: get both. lol
 
I wonder if Nikon realizes how many videographers are out there with 35mm adaptors that already have Nikon lenses . Point being: when Nikon comes up with a good video solution a lot of these same people will be interested. (myself included) :)
 
Last edited:
Not to debate: I think Nikon could give two right now about video. Why? They have no need to give good video to their consumers (the people who keep them employed, not indie niche people) because their consumers generally JUST want a still camera. IF they wanta video camera they'll go and buy one as well.

Right now you can use your Nikon lenses on the GH-1. I've got the 17-35/2.8 ont he Gh-1 and it's incredible.
 
Kholi said:
Right now you can use your Nikon lenses on the GH-1. I've got the 17-35/2.8 ont he Gh-1 and it's incredible.
Click to expand...

Wow! Thanks Kholi. I didn't know about this. Is there any focal length multiplication? If not, I bet the 17-35/2.8 DOES look incredible!

If what you say is true about Nikon, then why did they put video in the D90? I'm guessing Nikon is keeping an eye on the success Canon is having with the 5D MkII. Wanna make a friendly wager? hehehehehe (just kidding)
 
No Mitch, there's about a 2x crop factor when using 35mm still glass compared to 35mm full frame FOV. You can read up on it in the GH1 forums.
I would agree with Kholi, Nikon is doing plenty well selling to those still photographers who are mainly interested in shooting stills. In fact, I know many photogs "purists" who poo poo the notion of video in their still cameras. I doubt the D400 will seriously challenge the GH1 for video, unless Nikon suddenly decides to start workin with a better video codec or suddenly loses all its upper management due to Ninja assassins.
 
You guys should go over and hang out at the www.dpreview.com boards. The guys on the Canon 5D board, other than a few vidiots, despise the video features, they are militantly against it, they feel that video features are just "polluting" their still cameras.

It's kind of funny really. The convergence is in full swing but a lot of people just don't want it to happen.

Dan
 
I think the MKII like many other tools has a place. It's low light performance is incredible. The ability to go into a restaurant for example and shoot incredible video with NOTHING but available light. The right tool for the right job. No way I could have done this with my HVX and certainly no way I could have done with my HVX/M2.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top