Sell 5d Mk1 & DVX100b & 35mm adapter for a new 5D Mk2 Quandry

Lucas Adamson

Lucas Adamson

Well-known member
Should I sell my Canon 5D Mk1, which I only use for photos, obviously, and also my DVX100b with homemade but excellent vibrating 35mm adapter, and consolidate both into a new Canon 5D Mk2?

Photographically, it can only be a good thing, what with Auto ISO, live-view and a few extra pixels.

It's when it comes to video that I'm concerned. Although the DVX100b is only SD PAL, it does look amazing for PAL with the adapter, has all the controls I need in the right places, and I only have a PAL tv. There is absolutely zero jello, and I get a lovely clean image, albeit small definition, with excellent sound recording. I'd prefer the HVX200 with adapter, but I have no money to upgrade. Consolidating the two (5D & DVX) is something I'm now considering, but I need to see how recommended the 5D2 is, and how well videographers cope with the issues, particularly the dreaded jello. I see jello on online vids and think it's horrible, but I'm wondering how much of that is due to processing.

Your twopences are much appreciated....
 
IT depends what you would do with it ,i still taking my progressive camcorder to record some not important stuff /documentary or whatever,but for stuff that needs to look good i use DSLR.
Jello is when you go handheld,with dvx handheld you have shaky and distracting footage too,you shouldnt treat DSLR like handycam,its more like a film camera so youev got to know what youre doing and dont do random stupid things like run and gun etc. it looks bad even on camcorders without jello.
Go to shop,keep 5D in your hands and test it ,if it has too much jello for you.
 
totally agree with bwwd.. truth is they are actually somewhat different instruments, one does not necessarily replace one with the other, depending in theory of course on what it is that you shoot.

If you treat the 5d like a film camera, it's an awesome tool. Don't really want to say the 5D isnt good for run and gun, but it's not as easy as picking up a DVX and letting it roll for an hour. but if you shoot with a 35 adaptor, you are probably already not shooting like that anyhow.

The difference between SD and HD is remarkable in itself (especially inn terms of effects, filters and color correction and how well the footage takes them), so that in and of itself would be worth it.

Keep in mind though, that even at the least amount, you'll have to add some pieces to the kit that can and will add up. Some sort of stabilization is necessary, (straight hand held for long periods can be difficult with the 5D), and if you need to record usable audio, you'll have to come up with a solution there as well (Zoom H4N or similar is about $300). As well, depending on what and how you shoot, some sort of lens options will come into play, and the sky is limit in terms of what you can spend here, nbut maybe you'll be keeping some from your kit now?

I'm personally getting ready to shoot a feature with the 5D - something I wouldn't have considered or even wanted to do with my HVX... (it's crappy in low light, and with a 35 adaptor, it's even worse) I am concerned about the rolling shutter, but not enough in any way to stop me from seeing past the benefits. If the jello thing really bothers you and your eye is inclined to see it and it's a real distraction for you you might consider something else? As well, the 7D is nearly right there in terms of video, and not an awful still camera, it could save you a few bucks getting in.

It's really weighted in large part by what and how you shoot.. I still use my HVX when I'm flying solo and shooting an interview for a corporate client. It's just a safe bet for me, and I don't like to take chances in that environment. That being said, the more I shoot with the 5D, the more comfortable I am in predicting results. I've just got a Zoom H4N so, audio's not an issue... I can see a day very soon, where I'll break it out in that setting, and I'll probably never go back to the HVX!
 
If you aren't already established in one of the two industries, still photography, or videography, then you have the option of marketing yourself as both. I for one provide both professional still photography and videography services, and for me choosing the 7D was a no brainer.

Both the 5D and 7D take amazing still pictures, but a more traditional video camera can not. On the same token, the 5D and 7D can produce pretty favorable results in video mode as well. I highly doubt you will regret purchasing a 5D, or a 7D. Best of all, when it comes time to trade up the 5D, or 7D, you will have two different buyers to sell to, Still Photographers and Videographers.
 
Thanks for all your replies. I must say, it's looking pretty convincing. Just looking at the 7D as an option right now. I'm guessing there would be less jello on the 7D, with the smaller sensor. Is that right? Also, the frame size is an almost perfect match to movie 35mm frame size, so would have a closer dof match to real movies, which may be beneficial in film making, where razor thin dof can be a pain in the arse.
 
Jello is about the same. S35 DOF on the 5D is just a matter of adjusting f-stops. f/5.6 is the new t/2.8. The advantage of the 7D is the ability to shoot slo-mo. You'd want to get something like the new 14mm Samyang or a Tokina 11-16mm if you want to go wide on the crop sensor.
 
squig said:
S35 DOF on the 5D is just a matter of adjusting f-stops. f/5.6 is the new t/2.8
Click to expand...

Isn't that a problem in low light then? Shutter speed is best left fairly consistent in film-making, in my experience. With a 35mm adapter on a video cam, you have the camera lens iris, which doesn't effect apparent dof, as it is just reading the projected 35mm lens image. On a 35mm DSLR, I'm guessing all you've got is the lens aperture to play with and a touch of shutter speed adjustment, so if you want shallow dof, ASA rating is the only real world way to adjust brightness levels. Is that right? I am guessing here/ inquiring.

Thanks
Lucas
 
If you do event work, or even talking head / interview type jobs, I think it's worthwhile to keep something that can record for longer than 12 minutes. There's just a whole class of video that needs more time. For commercials, narrative, etc. it's not an issue but just figured I'd mention it. I used my GH1 the other night for this very reason - would've preferred my 5DmkII but horses for courses and all that.
 
Lucas Adamson said:
Isn't that a problem in low light then? Shutter speed is best left fairly consistent in film-making, in my experience. With a 35mm adapter on a video cam, you have the camera lens iris, which doesn't effect apparent dof, as it is just reading the projected 35mm lens image. On a 35mm DSLR, I'm guessing all you've got is the lens aperture to play with and a touch of shutter speed adjustment, so if you want shallow dof, ASA rating is the only real world way to adjust brightness levels. Is that right? I am guessing here/ inquiring.

Thanks
Lucas
Click to expand...

Well, there's also lighting :tongue:

But if you find yourself in an uncontrolled low light situation, I don't think it's that unreasonable to open up the aperture past 5.6 or even 2.8. Yeah, it's shallow and if you're inexperienced with pulling focus there will be mistakes but with practice and experience (as in being able to observe and predict where people are going, etc) you will improve and nail focus more often. There's also the option of really cranking the ISO and then noise reducing in post using something like Neat Video. That way you can buy yourself an extra stop or two and still keep the DOF manageable.

Honestly though if you've used any 35mm adapter in low light, you're gonna be pleased with what the DSLRs offer in the way of low light performance. If you made it work on an adapter with an effective ISO south of 200 (sometimes more like 50!) you can deal with a DSLR, no problem.
 
Last edited:
I have the 5D Mark II and have been asking myself if I should sell my beloved DVX100B & Letus35 FE. I haven't had the heart to do it yet.

With that said, I haven't touched the DVX since I got the 5D Mark II.

Like you, I am also a photographer and it was a no brainer. The thing you'll love is that you will now be able to look at lighting the same way you would a photo shoot. It's pretty amazing the shots you can get.

As for DOF being too shallow, I shot parts of this scene at f/1.8 HANDHELD. It's not the easiest thing to do, but you'll get the hang of it really quickly.

If I was in your position, I would probably go with the 7D over the 5D because of the slow-motion. Also because of the internal leveling on the photography side.
 
StormFactory said:
If I was in your position, I would probably go with the 7D over the 5D because of the slow-motion. Also because of the internal leveling on the photography side.
Click to expand...

What do you mean by internal levelling? Nice footage by the way. Do you mean the sound levels. I read that the 7D has no magic lantern yet, so sound recording is stuck on auto levels for the time being. Surely that's a ***** until it arrives IF it arrives.

Also, what kind of sound mixer do you guys recommend? I only need 2 channels, but phantom XLR and quiet pre-amps are a must.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top