Canon 7D or videocamera? HD or SD? AVCHD Editing problems? Worth it? Opinions?!

O

Orpheus

Active member
I need opinions people! Even if this forum might be a little biased!

**If you have an opinion on anything I discuss, please post below because every "vote" counts in my decisions going forward.**
My Goal: To shoot small / short film projects to upload to the internet and burn to DVD. (I would also like to do some still photography on the side, whether it is with the camera I buy or a separate still camera---this is factoring into my decision somewhat, but I want to focus on video.)

Note: I have Adobe Premiere Pro CS4 (the production package with after effects, etc..)
Do I buy a 7D? Price vs performance seems tempting, but many people have problems editing AVCHD and I don't have CS5 with the Mercury Playback Engine. (I am buying a new computer soon, which I will make sure has the capability to edit HD, but is that worth it since I plan to output to DVD and the internet?) All of the codecs and conversions don't seem worth the effort depending on where my footage is going to end up...should I stick with Standard Definition? (The videocamera I have now is standard definition: Panasonic DVX100)

I would like creative options, and being able to change lenses seems like more creative options. Also, my projects will mostly be small indie-film-like projects, so I won't really be doing live events.
The downside to 7D is that there are many accessories that will add up if I want to use it primarily for video? Would I be better off putting that money into a videocamera from the start?
I can always buy a separate still camera that takes great pictures to have alongside a videocamera.

OR

That brings us to my second option: Do I buy an HD videocamera? After I get my new computer, I would love to have great looking footage, but since I am only going to be outputting it to DVD in the end, does HD matter? How much better does it look than SD on DVD? People want video on the internet to load really fast these days, and if I shoot HD and upload HD, sure they have the HD option, but I would guess the majority just watch it Low Resolution anyways.

So, that brings us to the big finale: What to do? The Panasonic AG-AF100 is 5,000 dollars and out of my budget. The 7D is within reach, but has lots of drawbacks. An HD prosumer videocamera might take a bit more time to save up for, BUT is it the right way to go if I want to focus on video? Then again, I can take still photographs anytime to practice photography, with some video projects on the side when friends are available to help.

**Please feel free to join in with your opinion on what you would do in this situation, and explain WHY? What things would make you lean towards one option over the other?

Thank you for your opinion!
 
Your questions are kind of unfocused. I don't blame you because it seems like you really don't know which road to go down.

Well first off I have to say it depends on what you are shooting. You say short film then I would say go with a DSLR. It will give you a great film look. Very cinematic.

Now if you were doing something more run and gun and you hate doing things like syncing up audio because of dual recording system then I would say HD videocamera. Or if you were doing documentary too. But you're not you're doing short film. So you should get something more film like.

Keep this in mind though. If you buy a DSLR you will be spending a lot more on accessories for it, especially to make it more like a videocamera. In short you will be spending more then the DSLR itself.

I did the math and last year I spend over 10 grand on accessories and such. I didn't realize but I did. That is everything from lenses, viewfinder, memory cards, card for the zoom, cleaning supplies, filters, vari-ND filter, hard drive space for computer due to copying and transcoding, ect ect. You get the point. I still haven't bought a shoulder rig yet. So that will give you and idea.

Also the DSLR and Video camera are different. Not only in looks but in operating. I miss things about a video camera. So much that I am actually now looking for one so that I can use as a different option to shoot stuff on.
 
I'd also suggest a DSLR, but again cheaper options than the 7D

right now, you have to choose between:
* GH2: cleaner images (less aliasing/moire, which might make you nuts if you come from video cameras), but some people just prefer the canon look
* t2i: same image quality as t3i/60D/7D, but has magic lantern (custom cropmarks, live histogram or waveform, zebras, focus peaking, etc) (t3i/60D might have this as well in the future, 7D probably won't)
* t3i: swivel screen
* 60D: swivel screen, plus bigger body and secondary control wheel
* 7D: full-res HDMI-out while recording, magnessium body, better for stills

in my case, I have a t2i, and have spent around $3000 on accessories... and I have a cheapish tripod and ultracheap shoulder support (breakdown: around $1K on vintage lenses, $700 on audio equipment, $300 on cheap lighting equipment, the rest on things like filters, a DIY LCD loupe, a cheap follow-focus, a carrying bag, and lots and lots of small things)

and I edit on HD even when all of my stuff is for the web (thank you vimeo)
 
I own an Hmc150 and a 7d, which I bought after owning a t2i. The 7d IMHO is a better camera, as far as hdslr goes compared to T2i but I do miss magic lantern features, but it's environmental protection is worththe price alone. It's controls are great, BUT it is not a replacement for a shoulder mount or similar. you might try looking at the newer hmc80 from Panny.not quite as good as a 150 in low light, apparently , but quite similar in it's controls. If I were buying now I would seriously be looking at that. Also, it outputs Sd or hd, so you wouldn't need to update your computer first, which you should take very seriously if going to HD. the dual quad co i7s are getting cheap in the w7 world, and you can move to it with your adobe with no problem. If you go Mac hold off for a Lightspeed port.it is a must have upgrade. USB or Lightspeed on windows too. I think buying into Mac (which I own as well) is not worth the difference in price anymore, with adobe and Sony Vegas available on windows. They all work great and the price performance is now in it's favor, which I would not have said two years ago.

For a hdslr, I agree that it adds up fast. I've spent about $5k building a 7d setup,but it does offer some advantages over e 150 (superb lowlight performance, for one). You should check out the Lumix which might be a good fit with Panny avchd.

So my rec. Is hmc80, computer upgrade and then hdslr in that order.

Good luck!
 
Last edited:
I feel everybody should learn on a camcorder before using a dslr. But thats just my opinion. I don't think mickymousing the audio, and monitoring is necessacery a good thing to do before learning to use proper gear to shoot on.
 
A lot of people voting for the GH2, which I'd have to agree with but.....just checked at 20 or so merchants - ALL of them are out of stock or backordered, so you might be waiting a little bit. I personally agree with 8string and maranfilms....I think the best approach other than an AF100 or F3 (out of budget) is to have a dedicated video camera, even a high end consumer model, and use that in tandem with a DLSR for special shots (low light, shallow dof, CU etc). For example a T2i, 60D, or T3i and a TAMRON 17-50 2.8 + a Canon HFS200 would cost less than $2000 and would be quite a versatile set up. The other manufacturers high end consumer models do not have native 24p, at least not last years close out models at great prices (the new Sony's include it).
The GH2 almost acts like a video camera with the 14-140, so if you can find it/don't mind the wait that might be a good choice.
 
The GH2 is within my budget and I can also practice still photography. Also, I can acquire gear that I can use with it and other cameras down the line if I am selective. I do have to get the computer first, which I am almost ready to purchase. Having dumped money into CS4 I really hate the fact CS5 is out and by the time I'm ready for that I will probably buy it right before the next version comes out.

From what I am gathering, video production is in a very transitionary stage and I'm just not finding a clear cut answer for my situation, but the GH2 might be an OK first step.
 
maranfilms said:
I feel everybody should learn on a camcorder before using a dslr. But thats just my opinion. I don't think mickymousing the audio, and monitoring is necessacery a good thing to do before learning to use proper gear to shoot on.
Click to expand...

Not sure that recording external sound is "mickymousing", in fact I thing it is the opposite. You learn the principles of audio better that way, with less of a tendency for beginners to use the on camera microphone (with it's generally crappy sound anyway) and when you do finally get a camera with integrated XLR's you appreciate it more.
 
Orpheus said:
The GH2 is within my budget and I can also practice still photography. Also, I can acquire gear that I can use with it and other cameras down the line if I am selective. I do have to get the computer first, which I am almost ready to purchase. Having dumped money into CS4 I really hate the fact CS5 is out and by the time I'm ready for that I will probably buy it right before the next version comes out.

From what I am gathering, video production is in a very transitionary stage and I'm just not finding a clear cut answer for my situation, but the GH2 might be an OK first step.
Click to expand...

Read through your original post again and:
...if I were you I'd go GH2. Get it with the 14-140 and add a fast lens for low light shots and nice shallow CUs. With the panasonics GH1/GH2, you don't need the add ons as much right away, since you get a EVF and an articulating screen/monitor right out of the box. I had the GH1 and believe me. it was just as easy to pick up and shoot video with as my GS500 was or my HFS200 is right now (WITH the 14-140, that is) Other lenses, you may need to pay more attention with because they might not be as seamless as that lens.
The other thing not a lot of people talk about with the GH1/GH2 is the motion jpeg option. For shooting quick stuff for the web, talk about easy - the motion jpeg edits real easy even on my Super underclassed computer. THe quality is actually pretty good as well. Then for more serious work, use the highest quality 24p mode.
Also forgot to add it will shoot SD widescreen as well...pretty convenient for going straight to DVD.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top