Cedric Perry
Member
Don't know too much about the Nikon cameras, but I believe Canon cameras are just more accessible and easier to use for documentaries. What do you think?
Canon vs Nikon
- Thread starter Cedric Perry
- Start date
Ryan Patrick O'Hara
Veteran
+100
While traditional video cameras are excellent documentary cameras, I can also understand why you want to use a DSLR, they do offer advantages (and disadvantages). To answer your specific question, at this point in time: I would choose Canon. The main selling point of the new Nikons is uncompressed HDMI out, which means working with an external recorder, and that's not something you want to be doing most likely during run and gun shooting. Also, their current offerings suffer from moire and aliasing, and while you can work around that in some instances, why put yourself in the position of needing to in the first place?
In the end, either will most likely meet your needs, but I'd say Canon is your best route.
In the end, either will most likely meet your needs, but I'd say Canon is your best route.
Victor Nhat Nguyen
Well-known member
I would say Canon, just because more people use it and will have solutions if you ever have a problem.
Phillip Bloom would like to say different... Filmed on Canon 1dx, Audio Roland R26 with Sanken Cos 11
A tool is only as good as it's user, do not let anyone tell you this is not for something....
Do you have an opinion of your own on this, or just pointing at others' work?
I can tell you from personal experience: DSLRs suck for doc work. Sure, anything CAN work for any project (such as when you have a shiny new toy from one of your sponsors and you need to write a blog review for it) but some cameras are tons better for certain projects that others.
Oh you're right, let's all just shoot every project with a phone then.
Last edited:
After changing the Sony V1 to a Canon 7D for a documentary improving our look tenfold, I have to disagree. Traditional videocameras are dead.
I'd much rather work with a Canon DSLR than any of those "traditional videocams" (Sony Z1-Z7, Canon XF100-300 etc). I've been doing some work recently with the XF100 and I hate it. I just hate the look these silly 1/3" cams give. They are for ENG work but nowadays we can make beautiful docs if we have the knowhow. A DSLR works perfectly into the equation.
A C300 is even better but that is no traditional videocam.
There are several years and much technology separating those camera, making it an unfair apples to oranges comparison. Instead compare shooting a doc with a Sony FS100 or F3 to a DSLR and then tell us why you prefer the DSLR.
By my definition is it. What makes it not so in your opinion?
J Davis
Veteran
it depends on the type of documentary
you're interviewing stationary people for a talking head shot???
- video DSLR with mic or 2 sys audio
tough dynamic range situation and little action???
- video DSLR
you're running after fast moving targets???
- camcorder
you're rapidly changing from light to dark location and back again???
- camcorder
you're being shot at and/or there's is crazy action???
- camcorder
you need to be incognito and not look like you're shooting video???
- video DSLR
remember that shallow dof can be you're enemy in a lot of doc situations
you're interviewing stationary people for a talking head shot???
- video DSLR with mic or 2 sys audio
tough dynamic range situation and little action???
- video DSLR
you're running after fast moving targets???
- camcorder
you're rapidly changing from light to dark location and back again???
- camcorder
you're being shot at and/or there's is crazy action???
- camcorder
you need to be incognito and not look like you're shooting video???
- video DSLR
remember that shallow dof can be you're enemy in a lot of doc situations
Reading comprehension...... I can tell you from my personal experience people who complain that this or that camera sucks, they are the ones who truly "suck"......
My tools will not limit me, maybe you, but my mind is too creative.... Sorry not everyone is the same
Peace
This is true.
However, I've found that you will often have a little bit of all the situations listed in a doc project (ok maybe not the being shot at :kali: but most of the rest).
Dave ©
Well-known member
Gentlemen...the OP didn't ask for any opinions about whether or not he should use a DSLR or a video camera. He asked about a comparison between Canon and Nikon cameras. Note, he didn't even use the word DSLR...although it might be safe to assume that he's asking to compare DSLRs since he posted in the Canon FF section.
Why does every single one of these threads turn into these unproductive arguments?
Why does every single one of these threads turn into these unproductive arguments?
Last edited:
Because sooner or later, someone wants to share his/her opinion on something completely unrelated.
Sure. I loved using the 5d mark III more than the ergonomically HORRIBLE FS700 on a recent music video shoot. The FS700 did give me a beautiful image though but it was a real pain to operate. Trillion little buttons everywhere with no logic. Changing gain was horrible. Changing profiles was horrible. Menus were horrible. Is this the "traditional" videocam style? Yes it is.
It's s35mm. That's the reason we use DSLR's. Sensor size and cinematic quality. That's the reason we switched our documentary project from a simple V1 cam into doing dual-audio DSLR setups. More hassle but the image quality was so worth it. So when I hear stuff like "Traditional video cameras are far better for that application."- I just shake my head.
Victor Nhat Nguyen
Well-known member
I don't get this. If you like using camcorder for documentary, then use camcorder. If you like DSLR or larger sensor for documentary then use that. You guys arguing is like a Christian and Muslim arguing.
All you said there is that you like using a camera whose controls you are familiar with more than one you are not familiar with - common sense.
So are the aforementioned Sonys. That is not my criteria, and since I'm the one who first spoke of traditional (perhaps the wrong word since you seem to have misunderstood me, perhaps I should have said "dedicated") video cameras, it's my definition we are talking about here.
You've already agreed with my point, so I'm not sure why you are arguing.
I just love how people pop in to complain about wandering from a thread topic, while at the same time taking the discussion further off topic. We are discussing cameras to use for documentary work - what are you contributing?
Last edited:
ROCKMORE
Veteran
I shoot with a 5D, 60D and a Sony EX3 side by side on all my productions for 3 years now. While the EX3 may be an easier to use tool for docs, with a little extra care the larger Canon DSLR format can produce a better looking image. The Sony is sharper with more detail and information, but most of my clients and all of my commercial clients like what comes from the Canons better.
These days it's very cheap to pick one up and test it for yourself. I'm looking to go the BMCC route but not for another year until they are available and serviceable.