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

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



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



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.
Click to expand...

Reverie was a product of the time and looked great in comparison to EX1+35mm adapters but you're right it technically doesn't hold up now. Not taking anything away from the skills of Laforette and his enviable lens collection. How much would someone pay for a Reverie shoot? More than my clients would pay, they can barely be arsed to pay for good quality production music and bespoke graphics let alone a heli shoot.

5D resolution is SD at best and even on a 24" monitor fullscreen the flaws are obvious but casual viewing can look good. Casual viewing is what some producers do best - unless they're signing off work.
 
Nirv said:
Reverie was a product of the time and looked great in comparison to EX1+35mm adapters
Click to expand...

A lot of people are impressed by Monsters, and that's Sony EX with 35mm adapter.



Obviously, two very different kinds of productions. There's also this with EX1 and a Letus:

 
morgan_moore said:
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
Click to expand...

Well.....maybe kinda, sorta, but not so much sometimes. The difference in my opinion, is that a Steadicam Operator, is a Steadicam Operator.
I mean, some may be good and others bad and so on, but a Steadicam basically does ONE thing. A 5D? Not so much, in my area, most '5D
operators' are stills guys who (and I can not put this strongly enough!) don't have a flying clue about shooting motion. They are wedding
photographers, commercial photographers, corporate photographers, and they saw an opportunity to 'be a 5D operator for motion pictures' and
jumped on it. So they are REALLY GOOD at shooting stills, and to be honest, suck pretty badly at shooting motion. They shoot handheld (because
that's what they can do as a photographer after all) with no tripod, crank up shutter speed to deal with overexposure (because they want
F1.4 for shallow depth of field and also because if you shoot handheld with a high shutter speed, it does away with motion blur right?)
and have no idea of the limitations of their camera. I was talking to one about aliasing and moire and he seriously thought I made them
up because 'Everyone knows the 5D is the best camera for HD video too'. So basically, shaky, crazy rolling shutter video with EXTREMELY
high shutter speed and razor thin depth of field and tons of aliasing and moire. Is that a look?

Now people who shoot motion primarily or very often with 5D's, know how to work around some of these issues. Obviously
there are plenty of 5D operators who are experienced 'motion shooters' who could blow my skills away. But because a 5D is
primarily a still cam, I have found that many '5D operators' are just trouble when you want motion pictures. I was hired by
Toyota to shoot some car beauty shots here in Alaska last summer....like two weeks after the FS100 came out. The agency guy was
looking at my shot and was VERY worried. He kept asking if there was going to be 'rainbow colors' on the front grill on the close
up shot. See, he had hired a '5D operator' to do some beauty shots, and now, he associated a shallow depth of field shot with horrible
rainbow moire, and was really surprised that I could get that shot because his '5D operator' with the 'best HD camera around'
had given him horrible rainbow moire on the same shot.

I'm not sure, I was an ENG guy who NEVER shot DSLR before. I'm not so sure it is harder for one of
the ENG types to move to shooting 'digital cinema' with a large sensor camera or if it is harder
for the stills guys. I may not have the different lensing knowledge that some of them do, but
I sure have them beat by a mile in understanding a lot of the motion picture issues (not to mention
how to 'dress' a lav mic so the cord doesn't just run outside the shirt in plain view). There are
adjustments for both types I guess, just different adjustments. But thats why I waited for a real
'digital motion picture' big sensor camera instead of going the DSLR route. Less adjustments for
me as a 'video' person.
 
Last edited:
quote_icon.png
Originally Posted by kerrigan
I'd rather teach than scare...

Nirv said:
Maybe it's not the 5D the clients prefer but good luck with your sanctimonious attitude anyway.
Click to expand...

Nirv, you misunderstood my post... I'm both a teacher and a shooter.

But, now that I've reread it... It does sound sanctimonious!

Cheers,
Bill
 
Alaska

So many avenues to follow up.

Firstly its worth considering that those stills guys have a look down that is (was?) so refreshing compared to typical corporate video of 2006; they do bring something that the client wants or they would not get any gigs!

Secondly, IMO, most still people chance it as much in stills as with video, I had an argument with an (ex) client who told me there were 100 stills photographers in my county, I only know five

Those chancers are not just creeping in to video,

But they offer clients something that they want, often a product that 'pros' would find unnaceptable, generally price

One therefore has to consider what is 'acceptable'

If find the 5d unaceptable, I also found the zoom recorder unacceptable and bought a Sound Devcies, yet I see 550d/zooms out everywhere being accepted

As for switching from 1/3 to S35 or switching from still to motion.. I dont know which is harder, personally I struggle with the stuff of motion that is not the images, so find that harder, and respect the people who can do it more, but then Im from a stills background so.. that would be natural

A proper 5d op is often IMO someone who comes in an does beauty Broll on a larger (small) production, I think such can add greatly to production values of such shoots and a still tog can often do that well

S
 
Well, I have a couple 'opinions' on that. The 5D operators I am talking about do not have a look down that
brings something the client wants. Most don't even have a reel, because they haven't shot motion before.
What they have, is a bunch of REALLY good stills (which they convince the client they will do the
same thing in motion), a 5D (which is kind of the 'in' camera) AND a VERY low price point. This is
one of the reasons, when I teach classes for the local SBDC, that I emphasize that business owners
looking to hire ALWAYS look at a reel. Anyone can say they can do anything (including me) but can
you SHOW me that you can do it?

I agree about the 'good enough' factor. Some think only an Alexa will do, others 'make do' with an
Epic, or an F3, others with a FS100, still others think a 5D is good enough. There are multiple
stops along the way, and depending on the client any of them are 'good enough'. All I was saying,
is that a '5D operator' may be VERY skilled at operating a 5D.....for stills....but still be
absolutely HORRID at operating it for motion. It can be used for two different purposes, which is
a little different from a steadicam operator. For sure, good motion 5D operators can produce
images that are often 'good enough' because they know how work around certain things and use
the advantages it has. One of the advantages is price for sure, I wouldn't work for what some
are working for. It can also get a 'shallow depth of field on a wide angle lens' look if you
understand what I am trying to say. But just because someone can shoot stills with a 5D does
not mean they can shoot acceptable motion on them.
 
Well I think you are muddling chancer with operator

I agree chancers have been hitting the video market hard in the last three years with the barrier to entry lowering

I am also saying there is a place on a production for a operator to aquire Broll with a 5d, and in some cases that is well done by a person with a heritage in professional stills

BTW the 5d is not really rated IMO as a professional stills camera, certainly not under pressure, its too slow and the AF too unreliable

I think that probably a good marker of proper pro stills, not having a 5d as the primary camera

S
 
morgan_moore said:
Well I think you are muddling chancer with operator

I agree chancers have been hitting the video market hard in the last three years with the barrier to entry lowering

I am also saying there is a place on a production for a operator to aquire Broll with a 5d, and in some cases that is well done by a person with a heritage in professional stills

BTW the 5d is not really rated IMO as a professional stills camera, certainly not under pressure, its too slow and the AF too unreliable

I think that probably a good marker of proper pro stills, not having a 5d as the primary camera

S
Click to expand...
Nope, what I'm saying is someone can
be a good 'operator' of a 5D for stills
and an absolute 'chancer' with it for
video. Lot of them in these parts.
You seem to have translated your
ability in stills over to motion
very well. A lot of others can't
truthfully make that claim.
 
Last edited:
Gary Huff said:
I think that's quite a stretch to say that.
Click to expand...
Count the 5ds..

olympics_togs_gizmodo_com.jpg
I know you will say sport does not count, but most pros do sport or fashion or live events as part of their work so end up getting a proper camera, often using a 5d as a bcam
 
Last edited:
morgan_moore said:
Sure lots of chancers, I bet they cant do stills properly either
Click to expand...
Hmm.... Lots of those sort around as well. But I can
think of several 'award winning' stills guys with succesful
still businesses as well as one who has a 25 year career
with AP as a stills shooter who are all trying to do video and
are 'chancers' in video despite being very successful
with stills. This just in my little area.
 
Last edited:
I'm sure you are right, really the chat is now so general or so specific that I dont think I can add much

My only food thought is that we are all in business and need to learn to sell whatever we offer or change what we offer until it sells

I think its also worth thinking about what is acceptable, if a client pays up its acceptable, however baffling we might find that and however many 'rules' that product breaks
 
morgan_moore said:
Count the 5ds..

View attachment 58156
I know you will say sport does not count, but most pros do sport or fashion or live events as part of their work so end up getting a proper camera, often using a 5d as a bcam
Click to expand...

There were more cameras in the wide view where you could see the whole arena. Also that is from 2008. 5d mk II had a bad autofocus but the 5d mk III has the same as the 1Dx. Though why use a 5d when you can use a 1Dx?

Someone here was complaining about the resolution of Reverie? Was that even in HD anywhere? I thought all the Reverie clips were always for some reason, uploaded in SD. I mean, take a look:

http://vimeo.com/7151244

Not in HD. And Vimeo looks horrible when something is uploaded less than 720p. So why blame the camera? I don't get you people. Complaining that the image falls apart at 1080p is complete hogwash to me. I've been screening 5d/7d material on the big screen. Also material shot on a JVC camcorder with a 35mm adapter. Still looks good. On the flipside, I went and saw the newest Batman on a big ass screen here in Finland. It was extremely soft. Funny. I don't even remember EVER seeing a sharp film here. They are all soft. They start to get "sharp" when you get to the back of the theater. Like next to the projector.
 
Last edited:
morgan_moore said:
I'm sure you are right, really the chat is now so general or so specific that I dont think I can add much

My only food thought is that we are all in business and need to learn to sell whatever we offer or change what we offer until it sells

I think its also worth thinking about what is acceptable, if a client pays up its acceptable, however baffling we might find that and however many 'rules' that product breaks
Click to expand...

You are right, understanding 'business' and how to run a successful one is very important, and was probably the
thing I was (and am) worst at. I think a lot of this stuff, probably depends on the market you are in.
Around here, it is mostly about being 'found' (hopefully first!) by the client. They tend to hire whomever
they contact first, and acceptable is that they actually get a video. Not very high standards for competition
for sure, but some people like me probably couldn't make it in a big city competing with real talent. Better
to be one of the 'better of the worst'. But motion picture production is definately a 'luxury' and when
the bottom fell out of the economy a few years ago, I lost EVERY ONE of my corporate clients. The only
thing that saved me was a bunch of government contracts. So as you say learning to sell what you have,
is important. I guess in that vein, you can't blame a guy with a 5D for hyping up the fact that he has
one,....it might just get him the sale!!
 
Well I use both. That is, DSLR's AND regular videocams. At the moment that use is relegated to the XF100. But seriously guys. The 1/3" look is horrible compared to the 5d. There is a distinct reason the 5d is being used. We switched to the 5d mark III and now the ONLY times we use the XF100 is when we absolutely need to get sound in the cam and for behind the scenes-doc work. That's all.

Edit: Whops, realised we are talking about s35mm videocams. I'm gonna get the FS700 this month and then I can tell my experiences with that one.
 
ok then i'll also join the party... first of all, wasn't the purpose of this thread to summarize some advantages/disadvantages of DSLR's and S35 digital camcorders? it became a DSLR vs. NOT DSLR fight once again...

so first some answers to kerrigan:
i just recently found some fs700 footage, raw of the camera - looks crisp, the avchd codec outputs very nice and clean footage! no moire, alaising and artefacts coming from its codec.

would be cool to show some examples in your document if you want to... place your fs700 beneath your dslr and show the issues in a common situation...

as far as i know the fs100/700 also do show less noise - show some lowlight situations :)

if anyone asks you "can't you minimize that rainbows somehow that we could use that camera?" tell them you could use cinestyle, move down sharpness in camera, but the final picture will not look that sharp anymore - if we use my fs700 you'll get an almost clean and totally sharp picture... (that was my experience using the 7D for a while now)

tell them you could use the 5D as B cam for unique perspectives - they will be satisfied...

i guess the out of camera codec of both cameras will handle quite similar in color correction.

and second for some others here:
does it really matter what camera we are using? does it matter if a stills guy gets into film business if he does some awesome work with it?
it's not the camera, not the previous job or anything else.

i personally use an "old" HVX200 with an Letus Extreme and a 7D as B cam and some various glass, both of these cameras have issues, no doubt, but i have to get along with that for now...

if you are creative, try to make the most out of your skills and if you satisfy the client in the end - you could be proud of you and your work.

cheers!
 
maarek said:
Someone here was complaining about the resolution of Reverie? Was that even in HD anywhere?

It couldn't possibly have been posted in HD anywhere because the resolution of the 5D is not HD, not even close. But I did download camera originals from Reverie that Laforette posted and I stand by my comments.

Personally I would always prefer to be limited by the resolution of my lens than the sensor line skipping of the DSLRs. I have a full spectrum of lenses from the über sharp to the über soft. Why spend £$£$ on L Glass and shoot SD with poor monitoring, poor ergonomics, inefficient blocky codec, moire and extreme rolling shutter? Not a lot to recommend a DSLR.

They were great as a stop gap and without the 5D the FS100 and FS700 may still not exist but the gap has been filled. Time to consign the DSLR movement to history or Canon and Nikon get their act together and deliver production grade DSLRs for video and stills. Canon won't now the C series exists and I'm not sure what's holding back Nikon, they could have a field day.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top