D90 vs 5D Mark II thread
- Thread starter dvxusr
- Start date
filmmaker's gang
Carbonite Member
i said academy aperture and 16mm, not super 35 and super 16. it doesn't really matter as far as my point goes though, four thirds is still a huge frame compared to most imaging methods used for film and video except 35mm, and it has that shallow dof that people seem to want so badly.
/matt
/matt
Thanks for sharing the size sensor chart; its pretty cool to see all the area's compared.
Four thirds is great, don't get me wrong. But their sensors are always a couple generation's behind regular APS-C and FF sensors due to the smaller size. They always try to pack the sensor with megapixels which hinders their high ISO performance. (The first thing the consumer often sees is Megapixiels in the DSLR world)
Some times people want more DOF, so in that case it would become a benefit. As some people might want to add DOF like effects in post. And yes, it's still very possible to get some great bokeh with four thirds.
There also are not that many affordable primes for the four thirds system, so you would have to buy an adapter to use the older OM primes. Where with the D90 no adapter is needed.
Another thing that might be good or bad with four thirds is that they have a 'focus by wire' system. (Think power stearing) It means though that it might take alot more turns to go from one extreme of the focus to the other, which could be bad for pulling focus fast.
But four thirds camera's have twice as much DOF than the 35mm format.
I agree that it's still a very large sensor, and has alot of potential. It will be interesting to see what Olympus and Panasonic make. I think they are really gearing the micro Four Thirds for video. So we shall see, expect something anounced this year by June. (Just a guess, don't quote me...
)
I like your info, so I'm not arguing, just sharing what I do know.
Four thirds is great, don't get me wrong. But their sensors are always a couple generation's behind regular APS-C and FF sensors due to the smaller size. They always try to pack the sensor with megapixels which hinders their high ISO performance. (The first thing the consumer often sees is Megapixiels in the DSLR world)
Some times people want more DOF, so in that case it would become a benefit. As some people might want to add DOF like effects in post. And yes, it's still very possible to get some great bokeh with four thirds.
There also are not that many affordable primes for the four thirds system, so you would have to buy an adapter to use the older OM primes. Where with the D90 no adapter is needed.
Another thing that might be good or bad with four thirds is that they have a 'focus by wire' system. (Think power stearing) It means though that it might take alot more turns to go from one extreme of the focus to the other, which could be bad for pulling focus fast.
But four thirds camera's have twice as much DOF than the 35mm format.
I agree that it's still a very large sensor, and has alot of potential. It will be interesting to see what Olympus and Panasonic make. I think they are really gearing the micro Four Thirds for video. So we shall see, expect something anounced this year by June. (Just a guess, don't quote me...
)I like your info, so I'm not arguing, just sharing what I do know.
or nikon, adapters are readily available and will most likely be so for the micro mount too. i'm not very interested in focus by wire lenses that open to f/4 either.
since we're talking about video i just think it makes more sense to compare it to 35mm motion pictures than stills, in which case that simply isn't true. most movies you've ever seen were shot on a format called academy aperture and that's 21mm wide, movies in cinemascope use an even narrower frame, compared to 23 for the d90 and 17 for the lumix.
/matt
Boy this thread has really taken off since last time Ive been here, great stuff. Personally I wasnt looking to upgrade my D90 (which was an upgrade from an older nikon) but I thought others would find a thorough comparison useful, especially those new to video that are finding a new use for their DSLRs.
Im out there happily practicing shooting with the D90 and learning, my skills definitely dont necessitate the best hd dlsr out there, although for all you with 10+ years of video experience, im sure getting the best footage out of these new cameras is a lot easier since you know tricks from shooting and can invent your own workarounds. It is funny though, how everyone jumped on a new feature that was an innocent unsuspecting add-on to a dslr and now we expect it to equal if not surpass video cameras that have been around for a long time, nice going nikon and canon! Better give us what we want!
As for wasting time reading this board rather than shooting, i think many of us wouldnt be where we are without at least 100 hrs on dvxuser. But going along with his idea, that was the original thought behind a complete comparison in one thread- so as not to waste days sifting through all the canon/nikon threads.
Im out there happily practicing shooting with the D90 and learning, my skills definitely dont necessitate the best hd dlsr out there, although for all you with 10+ years of video experience, im sure getting the best footage out of these new cameras is a lot easier since you know tricks from shooting and can invent your own workarounds. It is funny though, how everyone jumped on a new feature that was an innocent unsuspecting add-on to a dslr and now we expect it to equal if not surpass video cameras that have been around for a long time, nice going nikon and canon! Better give us what we want!
As for wasting time reading this board rather than shooting, i think many of us wouldnt be where we are without at least 100 hrs on dvxuser
. But going along with his idea, that was the original thought behind a complete comparison in one thread- so as not to waste days sifting through all the canon/nikon threads.
i think the reason we're looking forward to it is that it's supposedly made for video, thus it will probably be easier to control and shoot with (i'm not expecting full manual though), and avchd will make it easier to do something with it afterwards. then there's the flip out screen, large sensor, and interchangable lenses. for me it's ok if it's noisier than the nikon and canon slr's. it still looks better than for example the hvx200 and other video cameras.
/matt
/matt
Emanuel
Cross-Examiner
I said up to full frame, not beyond.
Yes, focus pulling is the most delicate issue. For a great outcome, there is not much left behind except hard work.
Or, that's why some aid such as color peaking or magnification can be helpful tools indeed. And why I've been coming to defend an auto solution. Especially when there is new technology such as face detection coming from the DSLR realm despite all the usual quirk resistance (or perhaps not so odd, just often :huh matching wherever the same bias. Why so?
Yes, focus pulling is the most delicate issue. For a great outcome, there is not much left behind except hard work.
Or, that's why some aid such as color peaking or magnification can be helpful tools indeed. And why I've been coming to defend an auto solution. Especially when there is new technology such as face detection coming from the DSLR realm despite all the usual quirk resistance (or perhaps not so odd, just often :huh
matching wherever the same bias. Why so?i only ever used a monitor to check framing to know when to pull, video taps just aren't sharp enough. the actual pulling i do with tape measure, my eyes, and gut feeling. did i mention that it's much easier on super 16 than on 35? the d90 is actually much my first video camera. i have an hv20 but i've only really used it as a deck except a few times. i'm a film person.
/matt
the d90 is actually much my first video camera. i have an hv20 but i've only really used it as a deck except a few times. i'm a film person./matt