60D or HPX170
- Thread starter Cabrera
- Start date
Loren Simons
DVXuser Sponsor
If those are your choices, I would consider the Canon 7D, simply because if your budget is that wide you might as well jump up to the 7D which is currently only $1,499 (which for some reason is not displayed on our website, but it lasts through March). The 7D can feed HD through the HDMI port while recording, as opposed to the 480 output you get on the 60D/T2i/5D while recording. I love using a full HD monitor on my 7D and it makes hitting focus marks substantially easier.
Are you serious? What lead you to each one of those in particular, especially the HPX170? They could both be used to shoot a music video but they are two completely different animals that will product different styles of footage. So, without knowing 'which' style you want, it's impossible to advise!
M. Gilden
Canon DSLR Moderator
Actually, while I agree with options OTHER than the 60D should be considered, I'd actually go the opposite route, down to the 550/T2i rather than up to the 7D. In fact, for someone coming from the world of camcorders, the 5D and t2i are the only options I'd recommend because of Magic Lantern's availability.
ML gives the little cameras features that are missing compared to larger video cameras, such as live exposure zebras, realtime audio monitoring (and actually decent in-camera audio recording in the first place, something even the 60D with AGC off can't do well), focus peaking, etc. Sadly, the 7D is not compatible with Magic Lantern due to a technical limitation.
But... an HPX has advantages over all the mentioned DSLR options, which suffer from moire, file-system imposed recording limits, and lack of autofocus. Its a different style and look (and price), however neither is "better" IMO.
The 7D HDMI out thing is a real consideration and definitely nice to have, which is why if that is important to you, I'd consider a 5D (real HDMI out as well, plus Magic Lantern is still available). But to me, ML > HDMI out.
Basically, there is no perfect camera.
Snapper123
Well-known member
While the HDMI feature is a tool that seems to be a feature that really can help get the focus spot on, I would suggest buying a $900 Gh2. I just found out, after this camera has been out for about half a year, that it actually does full 24P, no bones about it. The GH series is known for having sharper quality than the Canon's, which to me are very muddy and full of moire, and much like the 60D or T3i, the Gh2 has the neato swivel screen. If it comes to using your camera for more rugged styles of shooting (handheld styles, super-fast panning, ect ect), I would warn that all DSLR's have horrid jello, and it may be a better idea to go with a camera that doesn't have it, more like a newscasting camera. With filmmaking and music videos, sometimes the wardrobe is the most important part of the art, and you can't go off changing that hot singer's denim jacket to a turtleneck just because there's moire. Luckily, even then, there are plugins that reduce moire to an extent and even sometimes fully.
So all in all, I'd say that no matter what you get, either a Nikon D700, a Canon T2i/T3i/60D/7D, or a Panny Gh2, you should be able to film some pretty good projects - personally though, after having the T2i for 8 months and being unable to accomplish the type of quality I need for my own work, I would suggest pinching together all you can muster and simply getting a Gh2, or heck, there's also some older $400 Panasonic DSLR's out there you can hack and they turn to 24p all the same. It's a big DSLR world, and I would honestly say that quality matters first, hands down, no matter if you have to hack, pay an arm and a leg, or go against the sheep to get it. And in my opinions and with my testing, it's pretty shocking how lo-fi and blurry the Canon video files look full rez, just my two cents.
And if you were to go Canon, the 7D is a popular choice, but the T3i is so jam packed with updated features (for $500 less) that it would be a tempting deal. While the 7D has HDMI, the T3i has in-board photo editing (the ability to test out different picture styles quickly for your video shoot), various 1080P crop modes (turns your DSLR into a moire-free crop sensor camera), better exposure modes, swivel screen and manual audio, ect ect. But all in all, it's not much that the Gh2 doesn't have, as well. There's really so many choices, and honestly, I would almost suggest nothing short of making sure to buy your camera from a place that can return them before your 30 days or up, it takes about two weeks to really know if a camera is right for you.
So all in all, I'd say that no matter what you get, either a Nikon D700, a Canon T2i/T3i/60D/7D, or a Panny Gh2, you should be able to film some pretty good projects - personally though, after having the T2i for 8 months and being unable to accomplish the type of quality I need for my own work, I would suggest pinching together all you can muster and simply getting a Gh2, or heck, there's also some older $400 Panasonic DSLR's out there you can hack and they turn to 24p all the same. It's a big DSLR world, and I would honestly say that quality matters first, hands down, no matter if you have to hack, pay an arm and a leg, or go against the sheep to get it. And in my opinions and with my testing, it's pretty shocking how lo-fi and blurry the Canon video files look full rez, just my two cents.
And if you were to go Canon, the 7D is a popular choice, but the T3i is so jam packed with updated features (for $500 less) that it would be a tempting deal. While the 7D has HDMI, the T3i has in-board photo editing (the ability to test out different picture styles quickly for your video shoot), various 1080P crop modes (turns your DSLR into a moire-free crop sensor camera), better exposure modes, swivel screen and manual audio, ect ect. But all in all, it's not much that the Gh2 doesn't have, as well. There's really so many choices, and honestly, I would almost suggest nothing short of making sure to buy your camera from a place that can return them before your 30 days or up, it takes about two weeks to really know if a camera is right for you.
Loren Simons
DVXuser Sponsor
It actually currently does not support full (or est. 900 line) HD out while recording. It drops down to 480.
I've never used a camera that has had ML on it so I can't speak for using that. But my 7D with external sound (Tascam DR100 or Zoom H4n)0 and an external HD Marshal Monitor that has peaking and a nice false color system is all I need.
M. Gilden
Canon DSLR Moderator
http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/canon-e...full-hd-hdmi-while-recording.html#post1362411
1080i, not P, but still usable for focus purposes. Plus all the other goodies (focus peaking, false colors, etc) built in, most of which my old DVX/HVX systems did not offer.
M. Gilden
Canon DSLR Moderator
I suggest a 1.8 prime instead.
Loren Simons
DVXuser Sponsor
I remember that a while back, but I don't believe it ever came to production.
From the Magic Lantern Site:
Don't get me wrong I'm not arguing with you, I would love for this feature to come out. But I had gotten my hopes up one too many times in the past=(
maranfilms
Veteran
battery grip is a must have for me.
M. Gilden
Canon DSLR Moderator
Ah- Well, the link I posted above has a video showing it in action, however it was still a "work in progress", and I haven't seen anything listed as completed feature. It seemed kind of buggy, perhaps it was left out of the completed builds.
I have apparently been informed incorrectly that the 7D and 5D both offered this feature, and never looked into it fully since the 5D is outside my budget. Thanks for pointing that out.
It appears that you're right, only the 7D has the dual-processor support, which would also explain why the 7D has been difficult to mod into running ML in the first place (code execution differs when there is more than one ARM core).
All things considered, I'd still take a Magic Lantern camera with SD live view over live HD monitoring without ML. I used to pull manual focus on older full-sized cameras using the viewfinder, and I'm pretty sure every viewfinder I used was no more than standard definition anyway. Still, just goes to show you that there isn't a perfect camera yet!
Actually, I'm going to chip in here and disagree with Snapper123, for discussion purposes at least.
I read and fell for all the hype of the GH series. I'm had a (hacked) GH1 and have since played with a GH2. I've seen the resolution charts, I've read the reviews and watched the sample videos. I've been there and done all of that, but I sold the GH1 and didn't buy a GH2 in the end because after all the comparisons were done, I (and every one else looking at the stuff we shot) just preferred the Canon look. Everyone thought the Canon footage looked clearer and sharper. In fact, I had to add a very mild gaussian blur to make the Canon footage look like the GH series. You can argue all day long about 'how' that sharper look is achieved (people are claiming it's edge artefacts), but if it looks better to a client than it 'is' better for all intents and purposes. The GH1/2 series looked more muddy than the Canons on all our real world tests, while the GH series looked better on the test charts. Go figure. I also did some test shots with the AF101 (with good glass) and came to the same results, the Panasonic footage just looked 'less sharp' AND more noisy too. Adding unsharp mask in post just made the noise worse (and de-noise removed the sharpness further). Higher ISO also proved to be better on the Canon, so if you are going to be shooting in lower light conditions without a lighting crew then this is where the Canon does seem to have the edge.
Now, we can go back and forth all day long about test charts, aliasing and moire problems (which the Canon does suffer from more than the Panasonic), but it's fair to say that I can find fault with any camera, and I have certainly seen aliasing and moire from the Canons, the GH series and regular camcorders too.
There is no right or wrong answer to any of this really. Both cameras (Canon & Panasonic) do a great job but they both have their issues. It's not as simple as GH2 is better, or Canon is better. If you never compare footage side by side then you are unlikely to have a problem with either one.
My advice it to choose one, shoot with it, learn to process it accordingly and be happy. Neither one should hold you back because of it's brand name or model number.
In terms of choosing the right Canon model (if you choose to go Canon), we have a mixture of Canon bodies, including the 5D2, 7D and 60D. We haven't bought a 550D because we use the intermediate ISO settings all the time and I don't currently feel comfortable using the Magic Lantern firmware for mission critical stuff. If I had to buy another body it would likely be either the 5D2 or 60D rather than the 7D. To me, the 7D only offers one major feature that the 60 doesn't (ignoring HDMI out for a second), and that's the ability to see the effect of changes to the K setting on the white balance as it happens. On the 60D it's in a menu so you can't change it while in live view. After that, the 60D has features that the 7D doesn't have, like the articulating LCD screen, the locking mode dial, manual audio etc. The 7D is also more expensive. I'm not knocking the 7D in an way, but the 60D is cheaper and gives identical video quality if you don't mind the white balance being in the menus. We don't hesitate to use the 60D or 7D interchangeably, but prefer the results from the 5D2 as soon as light starts dropping.