Well, I think it's also how you interface with your craft. Windows was the key for millions to interface easily with the home computer. The DAW was that key for untold thousands of musicians to start recording at home. The DSLR is the equivalent of that for thousands and thousands of still photographers to interface with video/film making. I love the DSLR as a motion image capture device. It let's me use the tool I've already mastered.
The Great Camera Shootout 2010
- Thread starter Martti Ekstrand
- Start date
GRENCH
Well-known member
I couldn't agree more:beer:
Chris Light
Veteran
IF professional filmmaking is your objective. Some members here, like myself, are NOT professional filmmakers, but enthusiasts in the craft of motion picture, and the preservation of the style and memories that exist in our personal lives thru available technology. Your statement is broad, opinionated, and it's insulting. We're not all pros here...remember that.
Last edited:
Webisode 2 of 3 is expected to arrive Wed. April 7th.
justinslee
Member
Does anybody have a working link to the 2008 Great Camera Shootout that compared 35mm to prosumer video cameras?
John_in_NY
Active member
What is interesting, F64manray, is that I am sort of coming from the opposite side of the street from you, figuratively speaking. My experience and orientation has been in event videography and making movies has been a dream since childhood. But I also have a desire to delve more into still photography. In the past 20 years, I have purchased multiple camcorders, VCRs and the various accessories that come with it. However, I never had a 35mm SLR, never mind a DSLR. My still photography has been limited to point and shoot cameras, both 35mm and digital. So these cinema DSLRs are also appealing to more video oriented folks, like myself, who can appreciate their still photo capabilities.
Interesting, the vDSLR concept brings not only photographers into video, but videographers into a more serious photo experience. I always assumed that videographers would have more than a couple of SLR/DSLRS kicking around in addtion to their video gear.
Canon projects 2 million DSLR sales this year and 4 million next year. It's interesting to note that this rise is taking place in the current economic environment. Correlation isn't always causation, but it's interesting that this spur in DSLR sales coincided with the introduction of good quality video in the DSLR. You can see how Canon has changed their thinking over the last year and a half. They introduced video on the 5DII almost as an after thought, and then followed up with 2 firmware upgrades that introduced features that really changed the 5DII into a whole different creature. During that time, they introduced the T1i which really elucidated how confused and disoriented Canon was on just what direction they wanted to go with the video in DSLR thing which was illustrated by the weird 20P frame rate, then they must have had a meeting in there somewhere because when their T2i was released, it was clear they had clarified exactly what direction they wanted to go in. And that's full speed ahead in offering the best video quality possible on every DSLR they make. Which in the end brings photographers and videographers converging in droves on one product in a "You got chocolate in my peanut butter! No! you got peanut butter in my chocolate!" frenzy. Well played, Canon. Well played.
What the hell, I went out and bought a T2i in addition to my 5DII. Did I need it? No, but it was just to cool to pass up. What a nice little camera ...and practically free relative to some other choices out there. Consider it a donation to Canon's worthy cause. I like to reinforce good behavior.
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/03/canon-industry-news/
Canon Seen to Have Auspicious Start in January-March
Canon Inc.’s group operating profit for the January-March quarter is seen to have nearly qua- drupled year-on-year to about 75 billion yen (US$833 million), spurred by robust sales of DSLR cameras.
On March 17, Canon In. held a ceremony to celebrate the first lot of shipping of PowerShot G11 assembled at Nagasaki Canon, a digital camera manufacturing subsidiary that went into operation on March 1 in Hazami, Nagasaki Prefecture. Canon plans to produce two million digital cameras including DSLRs there in 2010 and aims at 4 million cameras next year.
Last edited:
ydgmdlu
Veteran
How is that insulting? How is it anything but a fair statement? I think that you've misinterpreted yoclay and overreacted. He was specifically talking about what keeps so many people from actually making movies. It was not a value judgment against those who don't try to make movies.
ydgmdlu
Veteran
And yet you insist that there will be an "avalanche" of new work.
Well, maybe you just never paid that much attention to this community until now? You've admitted as much.
There was extraordinary enthusiasm around the DVX100, the HVX200, the HC1, the EX1, the XH-A1, and the HV20 (and its successors). As Barry has said time and time again, there have been too many products labeled as "game-changers" that were supposed to "democratize" filmmaking. What makes you so sure that this most recent wave is different, and more significant, than anything before it?
BTW, what big studios have closed as a result of home video?
This doesn't address my dispute with your assertion that a huge market exists for (otherwise) traditional camcorders with APS-C sensors. As you've said, you were never into the video world until the video world was brought to photo cameras. In the end, HDSLRs are still photo cameras first. How many photographers who like the ability to shoot video would still shy away from a traditional camcorder even now, as it would still seem alien to them? Unfortunately, you are also one person, and your opinion and experience cannot be taken as representative of however many others in similar situations might be out there. The point of market research is to make accurate projections for the actual market. To that end, getting the opinion of just one person is worthless.
At best, only the market for cinematographers might expand. Just because a bunch of photographers now know how to shoot good video doesn't mean that they can or want to make movies. Even bad movies require lots of money, time, effort, creative energy, and headaches to make, from pre-production through post-production, which makes cinema a universe of difference from still photography. So again, how do you justify your prediction of an "avalanche" of new work? What sort of work qualifies as part of that avalanche? Actual movies (shorts and features), or clips that amount to little more than beauty shots?
And how many of those photographers who were delighted to find compelling video capability on the DSLRs will spring for a traditional camcorder now, even one with an APS-C sensor? You said yourself that those photographers, photographers like you, couldn't be bothered to buy separate, dedicated video equipment.
The demand didn't come from photographers who were breaking into the world of video and filmmaking. It came from the video and filmmaking world, from experienced shooters, producers, and directors who decided to use a product outside of their world for purposes that were not recommended or intended by Canon.
No evidence of this at all. In fact, the only thing that Canon has expressed about the matter is the surprise at how many non-photographers were suddenly interested in a photojournalism product. Please tell me this: Why would photographers who couldn't previously "connect" with the video world suddenly make demands that only knowledgeable video people would make?
Why don't you do a survey of photographers to see how many are like you? I don't know. You don't know either, and yet you base your entire argument on your presuppositions. I appreciate your enthusiasm, but let's no go overboard, shall we?
Last edited:
ydgmdlu
Veteran
Then you'd be surprised by just how many videographers have (or had) no serious interest in still photography. Which is most of them, in my experience. Just like you, still photography is an entirely different world to them, and they don't have an inherent interest in it.
The increase in Canon's DSLR sales can be attributed to reaching a whole new base of users, i.e. non-photographers from the video world. If there were a dedicated video product with a large sensor and interchangeable lenses at the price point of DSLRs, then video people would buy that instead.
Last edited:
Chris Light
Veteran
found this: http://www.vimeo.com/groups/gh1/videos/10657409
i'm getting sick of it all. i love my gh1.
i'm getting sick of it all. i love my gh1.
Ben_B
Veteran
One of the reasons I like the Gh1 so much is because unlike Canon, who shoved video into their SLRs for photo journalists to post quick things to their blogs, Panasonic designed the GH1 to be a replacement for a consumer camcorder. This is fact: it's what the designers have said in interviews, etc: the Gh1 is the video one...which is why they've released a G2 with more limited video features: for people that don't want video, and why the GH series cameras have (and will have) kit lenses geared toward video.
This is perfectly illustrated by many little features of the GH1...for example: unlike the 5D the Gh1 actually shows you how much time you have left on your card (when shooting video) and how much you've recorded.
This is perfectly illustrated by many little features of the GH1...for example: unlike the 5D the Gh1 actually shows you how much time you have left on your card (when shooting video) and how much you've recorded.
Chris Light
Veteran
ben...have you watched the video on my last post?...i sure would like to hear your opinion. the gh1 seemed to kick ass in the real world.
Ben_B
Veteran
Yeah it looked great. It performs comparably to the 5D in low light, at least for video. A few months ago I would have been shocked to hear that but that is starting to surprise me less and less. The camera really kicks ass low light...especially when the darker areas are blacks not whites.
Keegan O'Brien
Member
I honestly think this comparison is just plain stupid. 35mm film is 35mm film, DSLR's just can't compete with it. It simply captures more information then DSLR's. I would be much more interested in seeing a 35mm/Red One/CineAlta F35/Genesis comparison. Then they would actually be comparing cameras in the same league. Although 35mm would still be the victor of course, it would be nice to see those cameras put up against each other.
Rory_B
Well-known member
7D has this feature so canon is improving video specs incremently as they go along
Sorry, the reference to big studios closing was in reference to audio recording studios that have lost business due to home recording musicians.
Even though I wasn't part of the video community, I was very aware of the enthusiasm surrounding the DVX100 and read avidly about its use in productions. I'm part of the still photo community, and I can tell you the vDSLR has awakened a whole new market to the possibilities. Photographers I've talked to are very excited about the vDSLR. The response to Laforet's use of the 5DII has largely come from still photographers. There are also some stodgy still photographers that resent the intrusion of video into their still camera, but I would say they are in the minority.
This is very inaccurate. Market research is a science, and in science we use small populations to describe large populations all the time. But the problem with statistics in using small populations to describe large populations is that in the end those numbers are describing a theoritical individual that doesn't really exist. In many ways the single subject experiment can give us much more information than what statistics can give use. Both statistics and the single subject can yield very useful info. Remember, even in China if you're a one in a million kind of guy, there's still thousands just like you.
When I bought my Ridgeline, Honda called me and conducted a in depth recorded interview about what I felt were the strengths and the weaknesses of the vehicle. Why? because they know my opinions also more than likely represent the opinion of many Ridgeline owners. This was a free flowing interview. No numbers were assigned to any of my statements but was just an audio recording that was to be played for the engineers. The individual's reaction is just as important as a statistical representation of some hypothetical person, especially in marketing.
Well, I'm more likely to buy a dedicated video cine camera now. The transition through the vDSLR has made that easier. If I feel that way, there are many other still photographers that feel that way as well. No need for stats to make that statement. There really is no such thing as an individual. What one will want, many will also want unless it's just obviously something wacky.
Because they've been educated by the video people.
No need. In marketing, they know what one person want's, others will also want. They use the single subject as well as statistical representation of the individual's wants and needs. I hardly have expressed anything other than a reasonable person in the field would be wanting or feeling. Good discussion. Thanks.
Last edited:
DSLRs don't compare to film? I believe they stated in the video "Take out the light bulb, and it would be hard to even tell the difference". They were there watching it in person. We are only watching it on the net.
These scenes that were filmed are an extreme stress test to see just how much latitude the DSLR is capable of. As a photographer, when I'm setting up a shot even with film, I'll take a incident reading which is basically the same as using a spot meter with a gray card. I'm not typically concerned with seeing how far I can push the highlights. I arrange the shot so everything comfortably fits within the tonal range of the film. Shoot this stuff properly in a narrative piece, and you won't be able to discern the difference.
35mm would be the victor? They stated in video that DSLR excells over 35mm in capturing shadow detail if I'm recalling correctly. I really doubt that film will be as clean in low light as the DSLR. Just from still work, I know the DSLR mops the floor with film in low light. No contest.
How many movies have I seen where they try to film in low light and there is a obvious jump in grain in the scene. They're not going to get that with the DSLR. Film? No thanks. Just take the light bulb out of the scene and call it a day. Better yet, Replace the clear bulb with a soft white, and you probably won't even be able to tell the difference.
Last edited:
Because they wanted to see how close (or not) the current bunch of vDSLRs come to film. They said film was the untouchable gold standard and for highlights I agree, but as f64manray and I know for deep shadows digital largely wins, unless perhaps you're shooting stills on 10x8, certainly I can get cleaner stills at EI 1600 with my old 5D than I ever could with film, even Ilford Delta 3200 "pulled" a stop.
Having said which 35mm film came in at 13.5 stops while the vDSLRs came in at 10.5-11 stops
Besides I would empirically estimate the market for 5DII/7D/GH1/D90 is rather larger than that for the Red One/Cinealta F35/Genesis, wouldn't you say?
Dave