A photographer's journey to video

C

cetac

New member
I have for the past month or so been fighting with myself over the decision of how to best begin this journey into the hybrid DSLR world, and the decision seems only to gain complication with time.

For some time I was considering only the GH1 and the D90, the latter as some sort of internal grasping onto of photography to the exclusion of video (I figured the D90 video performance was not so great, so the temptation to really get into video would be minimal). A few days ago, however, I realized I had completely forgot about Canon, and from this came to the conclusion that there was some sort of inherent Canon xenophobia ingrained in my psyche from only having used Nikon products. I had literally forgotten Canon existed. So, of course, now I am looking at both the 7D and 5DmII as direct competition with the GH1, completely forgetting the D90 all together (What's up with Nikon and not adequately competing in the HDSLR market?).

I can theoretically purchase any of these cameras, but the real difference comes with what I am able to purchase after I have the body. I am working realistically with a budget of around $3,200. Ultimately, I will make a sound decision based on what is best for me as a photographer and future videographer, but I am very interested in the opinions of members in the community - what you would do in my position.

Thanks

Edit: I am working with a blank slate. For purposes herein, I effectively have no Nikon equipment.
 
Last edited:
Welcome to the world of moving pictures. Personally I never understood how someone could be really into one and not at least have a passing interest in the other.

This coming from someone who has a background in both photography and video.

Yeah Canon seems to have the upper hand in video. I guess it depends on how much Nikon gear you have. Do you already have a lot invested in Nikon glass?
 
I should have mentioned that I'm working with a blank slate here. No pre-existing conditions.
 
Last edited:
Ok, well let me give you a little background on video DSLR's since i was basically in your shoes and im about a year ahead of you.

A bit of background on myself, I have been into photography for years, probably nearly 20+. No not in the professional or even semi-pro sense but in the sense that i love to take pictures, preserve memories etc... I had probably had about 7 digital cameras of all types from pro-sumer Sony F series, to pocketable P&S varieties, my fav being my trusty canon SD series. I decided i wanted to step it up and i got my first DSLR the Nikon D50 used a little over 2 years ago.

I loved this camera and took a photography class to further my skills. Meanwhile I am also into writing, and after i finished my bachelors degree i decided to take a creative writing class for fun before starting my masters. I loved it so much, that i took two more, and then a photography class. I started seeing videos pop up done with the newly announced Nikon D90. I watched EVERYTHING done on it, they were amazing. Brilliant looking footage without the hassle of having to log and capture mini-dv tapes, and the DOF in HD footage that cameras costing 3-4x as much have a hard time reproducing. I decided that videos were a way my passions for both photography and writing could be combined.

I did months of research, and eventually decided that i wanted one. Many nay sayers criticised my decision saying if i wanted to try videos to get a video camera. My retort was that i dont have a $800 video camera budget. I have a $800 budget for BOTH still AND video camera. So, i sold my D50 and got a D90 after months of looking refurbished from jr photo.com. They messed up my original order for a refurb Kit, so they sold me just the body for a really low $650 shipped (lucked out on that). I started with a nifty 50 (also had a 70-300mm sigma, but not the best for video). I immediately discovered that I needed something wider. I found a 28mm 2.8 for around $100 and it worked great.

I now had the tools i needed to make some videos. You can follow along with my progress as a videographer from literally day 1, to current if you check out my vimeo page as i started right off the back making short films.

I decided to take a film class, and it was great. I made 2 short films and a documentary in it and learned a lot. The last project i bought a dedicated sound recorder for (zoom H4n), and its great.

Now. What does that mean for todays market?

At the time, the D90 was the first to do HD video, it was the pioneer, nikon was revolutionary. The 5DMKII came out with great video to, but most people still preferred the nikon look overall.

The drawback? Nikon has a shakey codec and jello, meaning you have to come up with a very careful workflow to use it (no really fast pan shots etc...), it also has no manual controls. There is a way to trick the camera into letting you adjust aperature manually, but you have no control over shutterspeed, and iso. This was problematic for me for a few reasons. First of which being that i have a day job. So most of my films had to be made at night, for good 24p footage you need to have your shutterspeed as close to 48 fps as you can get. This just isnt possible with the d90, also your iso would be set to whatever it felt like. You could at least open the aperature enough to get the lighting you wanted, but often times with some grain.

Then other options came out. The GH1, and the T1i. Both had some new features and improved jello. Still some say they prefer the d90's look as it closer approximates film, and i agree, but its hard to argue with the manual features that the d90 lacks.

Then, the Canon 7D came out. This had everything we had been wanting. Full 1080p, full control over iso, shutterspeed, aperature, and white balance while in video mode, and even a sound input, and custom downloadable color curves!

This camera is such a step ahead that even George Lucas invited Phillip Bloom out to skywalker ranch to shoot some footage with it (and a 5DmkII) and screen it for him on his 40ft screen.

The temptation was to great for me. I picked up my 7D after loving my D90 for 9 months (in which i made 5 shorts, a documentary and an add for my work) I found a 7D locally used for a decent deal, and even made a few hundred off the sale of my D90.

So, nikon really pioneered the idea, but sadly they never developed it further, and the other big names have came along and passed them up. The 7D is the best on the market right now, and I cant wait to get started in making films with it.

To check out everything i ever did with my d90 check my vimeo as i said. Sometimes its good to see amatuer footage. Sure a professional can make anything look awesome, but from a first time videographer and long time photo enthusiast, what can they do?

hope this helps.

jon
 
Last edited:
Oh, and to comment on your budget heres what i would buy with that money providing yoru starting with scratch. (or rather here is what i have bought)

Canon 7D $1,700 (body) *
50mm 1.8 $100 *
24mm 2.8 $350
Zoom h4n $300 *
16gb card x2$400
Video Tripod $150
Steady Cam $150 *
shoulder rig $20 (DIY) *

That would be my plan with your $3200

The * items are the ones i already have. (i only have 1 16gb card so far.)

You may want a nikon lens adapter, as a lot of video people prefer nikon lenses. I never understood why until i got my canon 50mm 1.8, its VASTLY inferior (build quality wise) to the nikon version and feels like a toy. (I havent had enough time to evaluate it optically)

Also, you may find better deals if you look used. I found a glidecam 1000 pro for $100 shipped on ebay. And i paid less than that for my 7D.

Keep in mind you need a pretty beefy machine and a decent editing software to edit the 1080p footage the 7D records.


jon
 
Last edited:
you fail to mention if you own any nikon lenses or a nikon (stills) body

Using the 5, 7 and D3 for stills - my money is still in nikon glass

S
 
jonE5, thank you for all of the suggestions.

The 7D indeed is a fine camera. The one thing that makes me think GH1 over the 7D is the ability to adapt so much different glass (and many times both better, and cheaper, glass at that!). Of course the downside is investment into a brand that is not established in the photography market just yet. The shutterless patent that Panasonic seems to have in the works is extremely promising, however.

I guess it sounds like I have my mind made up with respect to GH1 vs. 7D, but I really don't. The video coming out of the 7D is truly impressive.

morgan_moore said:
you fail to mention if you own any nikon lenses or a nikon (stills) body

Using the 5, 7 and D3 for stills - my money is still in nikon glass

S
Click to expand...

Third post should clear things up.
 
Last edited:
ooops missed that

I reckon you should work towards..

Canon 7d
Tokina 16-50 2.8
50 1.4 of any make preferably manual focus
70-200 F4 canon
tripod
shoulder mount
glidecam

GH1 is not a good stills camera (IMO) and also you may have difficuly aquiring a good wideangle

For the long term money in nikon or zeiss (used olympus or contax) will serve you best becasue it will work on most cameras

S
 
It seems as though everybody is of the same opinion!

To both of you, does the format of the m4/3 in allowing the use of so wide a variety of third party lenses not significant enough a plus for the GH1?
 
you can use a wide variety - but they are all telephoto on the small chip

also a small chip means more DOF in day to day use

IMO

S
 
Looks like there's a still photographer's club here! I'm in a similar position, coming from the world of stills. I shoot Pentax, and started experimenting with video on my wife's K-x. I'm thinking about the next step and am seriously considering the GH1 because it seems to be best optimized for video with things like the pivoting LCD, quiet AF and stepless aperture of the nice kit lens, the way the display automatically zooms 10x when using manual focus - even when shooting video, etc... Plus, I can get a Pentax K-mount adapter and use some of my existing glass, including a sweet Pentax M-50mm/F1.7 that's old enough to drink. While the GH1 may be a step behind in still image quality, I still have my Pentax gear.

I've even considered the Pentax K7, which would be the logical upgrade for me, but the lack of manual controls and odd formats make it tough to say yes to.

At the end of the day I've got to recognize that I'm just at the beginning of a journey. The GH1 seems to be the most flexible and forgiving of tools at the moment, and the one best-suited to learn with.

Good luck with your decision....
 
If money is no object, i still say the 7D is better.

And remember its not by virtue of which system is truly better on the whole, they all came out at different times, so think of it this way.

1st gen HD DSLR - D90, it was the first to introduce us to HD video and brilliant bot LOTS of short commings.

1.5 gen the GH1, it improved somethings over the d90, but some things couldnt do as well. The overall look in good light was hard to match of hte d90, but id did have better setting options etc...

2nd Gen is the 7D, it has all the improvements basically. Better rolling shutter jello handling, audio input, 1080p, full manual control etc...

Your going to have more and better glass options with both the canon or the nikon. IMO, but i have noticed this. Regardless of which platform most people are shooting, they all seem to prefer nikon glass, so this may be a moot point.

Id wait to see if and when a GH2 drops, because that would truly be panny's 2nd gen offering, but the GH1 really doesnt stack up to the 7D. It is however a lot cheaper, so if you just want something to get you started go for it. But if you have the $$$ to do it right the first time, just go straight to the 7D.

From someone who owned a D90 for only about 8-9 months and upgraded i know you need the features that the 7D had, im guessing youd run into similar things with the GH1.
 
For those mixing stills and video I think in the long term one has to go with a system

to dream of carrying one body and set of lenses to do all work

my dream is of a decent nikon (I have a D3 for stills)

Currently Im using canon for motion but most of my cash is still in nikon glass

IMO the GH1 4/3 ststem is not a good solution for stills and there for for a mixed media type it is not a good solution

It of course may be for a motion only person who wants a few snaps on the side

S
 
Yeah, I suppose what is really holding me back is this silly Canon xenophobia I mentioned. Even though I'll be making an amazing purchase in the 7D, I'm quite confident that I will take my first chance at grabbing a D400 (Or whatever Nikon offers as direct competition) whenever they decide HD video is actually something their customers are interested in.

From what I read this magical camera is so far in the future I really shouldn't be holding my breathe.
 
cetac said:
Yeah, I suppose what is really holding me back is this silly Canon xenophobia I mentioned. Even though I'll be making an amazing purchase in the 7D, I'm quite confident that I will take my first chance at grabbing a D400 (Or whatever Nikon offers as direct competition) whenever they decide HD video is actually something their customers are interested in.

From what I read this magical camera is so far in the future I really shouldn't be holding my breathe.
Click to expand...

Im a canon phobic been nikon for two decades

that why ive got a 7d, and two zooms in canon fit - a fairly low investment considering the resale value

all my primes are nikon

if you look at nikon they are generally better than canon - but two years behind them

(IMO)

S
 
cetac said:
I should have mentioned that I'm working with a blank slate here. No pre-existing conditions.
Click to expand...

I, too, am a photographer moving into video.
I, too, have an affinity for Nikon.

I bought a D300s as an upgrade from my D80 with the added ability to shoot video. The video feature set is sorely lacking.

I purchased a GH1 and a Nikon Adapter as this was the cheapest way to get full manual controls yet keep my investment in Nikon Glass. The GH1 is far superior in terms of video features.

If I had a blank slate I would go with Canon. I FAR FAR prefer the Nikon ergonomics, but they have just dropped the ball on video. At some point features outweigh ergonomics.

Go with Canon.
 
nikon have not picked the ball up yet ..

Do you remember nikon..

late with af (1989)

late with sub $20k digital (1999)

late to break 10mp (2005)

late with Full Frame (2007)

I probably got the dates wrong but nikon are always late and always get it right eventually

go with nikon glass and a canon body for now IMO or keep it canon and keep it cheap - likethe 24-105 rather than a pile of prime

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