HDSLRs takes over TV industry

Take Over = Columbus "discovery" of the New World.
Invade = Former Soviet Union's control over Eastern Europe.

One is permanent, the other will end eventually or evolve in to something else. :)
 
HDSLR's were developed for new media photojournalism. It is their best professional application.
For entertainment production they fill a niche here and their, but with one or two possible exceptions they are not being used as primary A-cams.
For poor indies they are a godsend.
 
Im not sure why they are good for journalism

synch sound, easy miss focus, must convert workflow makes deadlines a nightmare no proper zoom

I wish they were good for journalism

I dont really get productions using them either when red is cheap in production %

low end corporate and indy it makes sense

glove box POV makes sense

S
 
morgan_moore said:
Im not sure why they are good for journalism

synch sound, easy miss focus, must convert workflow makes deadlines a nightmare no proper zoom
Click to expand...

You can use the on-board mic in a pinch. The whole idea for the camera is someone taking photos and some event happens they want video for.

Better a half-assed video version of the event than none at all, right?
 
sure if a bus gets bombed in front of you a bit of shakey cam will sell

but they are far from journalistic tools

monitorable sound AF and a VR sensor , built in ND might make them usable

to be honest really its just sound thats the killer (and yes Ive heard of ML)

S
 
Fahad said:
but not really great for photos in comparison to a video dslr
Click to expand...


My SR 12 could mount on the hotshoe of my D3 and be less of an encuberance than trying to take pics with a tricked out DSLR with FF etc

Seriouslty if I still did papping Id have a handycam on the hotshoe (or similar)

I used to think my EX1 was big but considering it works naked its actually small compared to a DSLR mic and soundrecorder rigged for reasonable stabilty - and of course no trancode means deadlines met

S
 
It has been well reported that the Canon 5DMkII was developed by Canon with video capablities because of request from the news organization Reuters. It was to give photojournalists some video capabilities, and specifically designed for web video (hence the 30p only in the original camera).
 
David G. Smith said:
It has been well reported that the Canon 5DMkII was developed by Canon with video capablities because of request from the news organization Reuters. It was to give photojournalists some video capabilities, and specifically designed for web video (hence the 30p only in the original camera).
Click to expand...

That may be the case but they produced something useless for news gathering

lack of audio monitor
impossible to focus
super shakey
no zoom


etc
 
morgan_moore said:
That may be the case but they produced something useless for news gathering

lack of audio monitor
impossible to focus
super shakey
no zoom


etc
Click to expand...

Yeah but they beat the sh*t out of iPhone video. The video DSLRs are pretty much an anomaly and I think that the video part was purely a make do, after thought kind of design, to use as a secondary means of image gathering for photojournalists, not as a primary news gathering video camera. I think that the implementation of the 5DMkII says a lot about Reuters opinion of photojournalists, or at least their grand design to get double duty out of those folks. I am sure that they never speced out their request to Canon for a full featured video camera, but as a still camera with video capabilities. Decisions like that are not made by technology literate persons, but by spreadsheet obsessed pencil necks. Hats off to the Canon tech obsessed pencil necks, when it is all said and done, they made a hell of a camera. Not perfect, but give me a break.
 
HDSLR's in their current incarnation are neat toys - but frankly still toys at best.

Even the 1DSMKIV is a joke of a camera for shooting video when compared to professional digital cinema cameras.

I shot the world's first feature on the 5D, and the world's first feature on the 7D. Glad I used them compared to anything else budgeted for (probably would have been an HVX or an EX1) but still they don't have what it takes if you are serious about color or resolution.

The World latched on to cheap, disposable and relatively decent aesthetic for the price. Spend a day looking at some pro digital cinema camera footage (I'm not talking about looking in the eyepiece or on the back of camera) and you'll quickly see the difference.

The post production budget (in man hours and equipment) for that one episode of house far exceeds the production budget of my HDSLR features.

I'm just sayin'...
 
Dan_Kanes said:
HDSLR's in their current incarnation are neat toys - but frankly still toys at best.

Even the 1DSMKIV is a joke of a camera for shooting video when compared to professional digital cinema cameras.

I shot the world's first feature on the 5D, and the world's first feature on the 7D. Glad I used them compared to anything else budgeted for (probably would have been an HVX or an EX1) but still they don't have what it takes if you are serious about color or resolution.

The World latched on to cheap, disposable and relatively decent aesthetic for the price. Spend a day looking at some pro digital cinema camera footage (I'm not talking about looking in the eyepiece or on the back of camera) and you'll quickly see the difference.

The post production budget (in man hours and equipment) for that one episode of house far exceeds the production budget of my HDSLR features.

I'm just sayin'...
Click to expand...

Good enough, cheap enough beats a Royal Flush, everyday and twice on Sunday! :thumbsup:
 
So hey guys, what are some of the problems in the footage that get in the way of these cameras from being good for documentary work, news footage, or even filmmaking? I know we all hate the sound thing, and rolling shutter, but footage wise, what are some of the more advanced problems that always seem to come up compared to the more 'official' digital cameras used in the market, or even compared to film? I just wanna know what to look out for when I start my own projects. It's really the things like artifacting in movement, noise at ISO 100, artifacting in dark areas, moire, ect ect that I'm worried about; what are some of the things that make you guys say that the DSLR cams aren't useable?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top