Document explaining the advantages/disadvantages of SLRs vs super 35mm video cameras

LeavingTheCandy said:
They are all different tools for different gigs... I shot almost exclusively with the 5DMKII for 2 years and produced some of the best footage of my career. Not because it is technically sound footage, but because the rigs that made it EASY and PRACTICAL to put it anywhere we affordable and available. (sliders, hand-held stabilizers, shoulder rigs, etc.). I guess part of it is attitude: I'd rather my DSLR take a plunk than my F3 or 700! :crybaby:
Technically, the footage on the S35 cameras is FAR superior. Put it in Davinci and start moving things around and you'll see why quickly.
Ultimately, depends on what you're shooting--better is the enemy of good enough!
Click to expand...

I think DLSR are great but its a shame when someone up the chain is speccing them when they are the wrong tool for that job if a better tool is avaialble

S
 
I agree with almost everything and everyone said. Also I think that DSLR mania will not last that long (only if manufactures do not come up with a dream dslr) and like people before me stated, use right tool for the right job.
 
morgan_moore said:
I think DLSR are great but its a shame when someone up the chain is speccing them when they are the wrong tool for that job if a better tool is avaialble

S
Click to expand...

With the FS100 and FS700 available what surprises me is there's still a market for DSLRs for video. I haven't specced out a DSLR shooting package but you can't be saving any money going in that direction and you'll always have in the back of your mind that a client will want to be interviewed against a chain-link fence wearing a checked shirt.

I must admit to waiting for the 5D MkIII and the two Nikon cameras to be announced before buying my FS100 but it was a no-brainer. I was really surprised by Nikon, they could've dealt Canon an almighty bloody nose but fell laughably short. Hats off to Sony though especially with their AVCHD codec which is a pleasure to work with in post.
 
I have the FS700, AF100 was just sold. I also hav the EX1R and my favorite shoulder cam the EX3. I have and use both 5DmkII and a 7D.

I use them all for video and the DSLRs for stills and timelapse, timelapse and stills are where they shine you can do HDR RAW 22 mpx shots that can be panned and greatly manipulated in post. I also like the DSLRs for their stealth aspect, you can shoot virtually anywhere, and they are super easy to always have along. I even use video from my IPhone at times. I also have a GoPro, it is fantastic at what it does.

But the real video cams win most of the time. I like the 1/2" chips for shoulder and deep focus and the 700 is just a fantastic camera that offers sdof and really wide choice of lenses.

By offering all these options to my clients as well as rental of whatever other cam you may need, there is never a conflict. Most clients until now have opted for the XD cams. But I think this is about to change to the 700 and EX combo with some crash/pov and probably still some timelapse or stealth DSLR shots.

One of my upcoming jobs, we are waiting for perfect weather a rare commodity in NH this summer, to do a shoot at an attraction that features trained bears. I will use the 700 as my primary camera on sticks and possible dolly/stedicam shots. The EX3 will be my shoulder cam and the GoPro will be with one of the trainers in the cage, probably chest mounted. We will also do a timelapse with the 5DmkII of the whole park from a high vantage point.

So my point is all cameras have a place. Use the right tool for the job. Don't try to sell a client on just what you have be flexible and you will have happy clients. Often a client wants a particular camera for a job, and end up being very happy with another cam because it was more appropriate.
 
Last edited:
Nirv said:
With the FS100 and FS700 available what surprises me is there's still a market for DSLRs for video.
Click to expand...

I guess it depends by what you mean by 'video' !

A lot of people try and use a DSLR for A cam which I define as needing
-XLR sound
-a decent monitor
-long power/roll times

I think using DSLR as A cam is a dead end

But there are a million things in images that are not A cam
-little BTS clips
-stills!
etc,

Even lots of jobs Ive been hired as Bcam op - so wasnt on critical sound, or critical anything really - 'go shoot something pretty' - a DSLR is not bad for that

today Ive just bought an NEX5n - will that kill my 5d - being even smaler, lighter etc

it will also be really interesting to try it on top of my EX1!

S
 
Thank you all for the input... it's helped me find a solution.

Using Wikipedia, I'm going to write a short history of the evolution of inexpensive large sensors cameras being used to shoot video.
The timeline will begin on Sept. 17th 2008 with the introduction of the 5D Mark ll, then end on Aug. 11, 2012 with the FS700.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EOS_5D_Mark_II
 
I am not sure why we even need to compare between the two.
I might be wrong but to me it sound like whom ever is asking from you to use a 5d to film what ever he wants you to film, is only because he is looking for a specific look which is very unique to any camera.
If it was me, I would not write any document but show sample footage of yours from a DSLR and some from your FS and let the producer decide what ever he likes.
I just dont think they care if a DSLR has video camera fetures or not. they only care about the look of the footage.
and the truth is the 5D has a unique look to it and as well the fs100. So like others responded here, its a tool and you use it when ever and for what ever you need.
 
Nostalgic said:
I am not sure why we even need to compare between the two.
I might be wrong but to me it sound like whom ever is asking from you to use a 5d to film what ever he wants you to film, is only because he is looking for a specific look which is very unique to any camera.
If it was me, I would not write any document but show sample footage of yours from a DSLR and some from your FS and let the producer decide what ever he likes.
I just dont think they care if a DSLR has video camera fetures or not. they only care about the look of the footage.
and the truth is the 5D has a unique look to it and as well the fs100. So like others responded here, its a tool and you use it when ever and for what ever you need.
Click to expand...

I think you give those producers far too much credit. 5D is synonymous with shallow depth of field and that's a far as the understanding goes and these producers wouldn't even know the difference between full frame and s35 look. 5D is also synonymous with cheap and people who use the wrong camera for the job or as we like to call them, chancers.

You are right, the 5D does have a distinctive look especially if you're after very obvious rolling shutter, a lack of resolution, moire and codec noise. Are these features really what the producers are after?

The whole conversation has drifted into dangerous territory for any working professional where the equipment you own becomes the most important asset rather than the years of experience and skill one has. Are we saying to these producers that request 5Ds, ignore our skilfully crafted showreels that show our prowess as camera operators and just direct them to a rate card and list of equipment we own?
 
Nirv said:
The whole conversation has drifted into dangerous territory for any working professional where the equipment you own becomes the most important asset rather than the years of experience and skill one has.
Click to expand...

Yes and no, or sort of

5d Operator can be seen as a specific skill , like Steadicam Operator, ect, a lot of ENG people are clueless with a 5d, having other skillsets

I think our OP is concerned that by having an FS100 he is not seen as having that 'special' skillset, wheras in fact the typical FS100 operator is a 5d with more skill/taste/experience..

I guess most FS people have owned and abandoned 5ds

S
 
One interesting lesson for users is that the FS100 a difficult camera that is a bit poo out of the box,

Sony did not do themselves any favours around its launch, nor did early adopters, posting a bunch of cabbage online

Canon were extrememly lucky in what Vincent LF did to launch the 5d, totally using it to its strong elements, mounting, lowlight in a way that blew a lot of 50 cameras out of the water

The positive publicity was huge

S
 
If you get any camera out of the box and never calibrate it, adjust it, ect. then the problem is you, not the camera.
 
Gary Huff said:
If you get any camera out of the box and never calibrate it, adjust it, ect. then the problem is you, not the camera.
Click to expand...

I dont know what camera you own but my 5d looked cool in about 45mins, I bought an NEX5n yesterday, again cool out of the box

Conquering the FS100 has been a process over a year, extensive threads here and hours spent in the studio performing tests

partly due to PP and partly due to being typically used with stops of 4ND which introduce an issue set

totally different
 
Last edited:
morgan_moore said:
but my 5d looked cool in about 45mins, I bought an NEX5n yesterday, again cool out of the box
Click to expand...

You have limited options when the DSLRs are concerned, and I'd would say the only thing cool about the look is the shallow DOF. The FS100 has a myriad of options to allow you to more specifically dial in what you want.

I fail to see how that negates my original point anyway.
 
Gary Huff said:
If you get any camera out of the box and never calibrate it, adjust it, ect. then the problem is you, not the camera.
Click to expand...

That's not what he said was it? But I agree with your sentiment that YOU have to get the best from YOUR camera.

The FS100 is very poor out of the box and Sony did themselves no favours by not setting up the camera better if only for the reason early adopter footage finds its way onto the internet and forever more the camera is judged by those first poor efforts. A marketing fail as much as anything.
 
Sony has always had cameras that aren't quite there out of the box have they? I had to tweak the settings on an EX-3 before I was satisfied with what was coming out of it.
 
Indeed - the thread is about why do producers love the s*%tty 5d that operators hate - a lof of that is hype like 'Reverie' which whacks the look of an EX3 into a different park

Im not saying that there are not a million reasons to prefer an EX3 - or a cam like my EX1.. Im talking about hype driving producers desires

The thing is the 5d looks cool for a 'random people at brighton, sunset' or 'the market, marakesh' shoot, if you are prepared to chuck out 60% of your shots, the other 40% are amazing (on the net)

The 5d also looks cool if you employ a 20year expericenced puller,with cinetape, a preston and cinelenses like Mr Halibut

S
 
morgan_moore said:
Indeed - the thread is about why do producers love the s*%tty 5d that operators hate - a lof of that is hype like 'Reverie' which whacks the look of an EX3 into a different park
Click to expand...

Not really. Watched Reverie on a 1080p display and fullscreen and see it if holds up, outside of the DOF of course.

Im not saying that there are not a million reasons to prefer an EX3 - or a cam like my EX1.. Im talking about hype driving producers desires
Click to expand...

I totally agree that it's about hype. And you really can't fight it.

The 5d also looks cool if you employ a 20year expericenced puller,with cinetape, a preston and cinelenses like Mr Halibut.
Click to expand...

I disagree. The 5D looks cool in a little 640x360 YouTube/Vimeo-sized window, but once you watch it on a quality 1080p display at full screen, it falls apart.
 
On the net .. thats what I said or an Ipad .. thats where producers get hyped

But does the 5d fall apart? as long as you edit for just 50 at 2 shots it looks pretty cool

S
 
Yeah, I think Sony does their cameras as dis-service with their out of the box settings which do not look good. The Canons look good right out of the box, the biggest problem with them is the Canon's have a very baked in look that is very hard to get away from. You can spot Canon footage from a mile away and so many videos have the exact look.

I've heard that the FS100 needs a lot of tweaking, but I can say that the FS700 is very easy to get a nice cinematic look out of it. Cinegammas are great. For my first tests, I just set it on Cinegamma 1 with the Cinema color mode and it looked very good. I liked the look better than my Canon's that's for sure.

As for all the producer comments... I've been working in TV in Los Angeles for 10 years and have worked with countless producers. The one's who knowledge goes past what they read on Canonrumors.com or Gizmodo is pretty sparse. It's hard to find producers that really understand (or care to understand) the technical end of the process.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top