the last episode of the shootout!!
- Thread starter ramdop
- Start date
- Status
Finnegan
Well-known member
When Steve Weiss talks to Jens Bogehegn about objective tests, don't believe a word of it. They are objective only insofar as they use color charts and "outside" opinions. The choices of the type of tests and the type of Gear is Zacuto's. It is as if I tested only South American countries to find out which way the world is evolving. I could make a Donkey look like the fastest land animal if I limited the test range to Donkeys only. Nice try Zacuto.
I am pretty sure I disagree with everything you have said in every single one of your posts in this thread. I have spoken to Blain Brown and John C. Hora, ASC (my mentors) about these tests in great length because both of them were present during the discussions, screenings, and for some of the tests themselves. Both of them had voiced to me, on numerous ocassions, how impressed they were by the professionalism, integrity, and diligent manner of not only the tests themselves but the people constructing and managing the tests. The purpose of running a test such as this is to compare, through measurable, quantifiable or qualitative means, the pros and cons of camera systems. You can't stick an an adapter + EX1 rig next to an HDSLR system and compare the "organic feel" of the image, simply because there is no way to measure such a thing which makes it pointless to test.
Now, you can make the argument that choice does play a factor since obviously someone had to choose which cameras were being tested, how they were going to be tested, the conditions of those tests, how the results are screened and in what manner, or even what makes it into the final video of what is recorded during discussion - but making that argument does not lend any credibility your implication that this entire ordeal is designed to sell Zacuto equipment. The two are not equivalent claims, and you are implying that they are.
So, please point me out some hard evidence supporting the theory that these videos directly result in an increase of Zacuto gear sales, and maybe I'll take you seriously. I think that the theory that is best supported as to why these tests exist is far more simple than your implication that it's a massive conspiracy to sell Zacuto gear and that HDSLR systems suck. Since the release of the Canon 5D and 7D, the amount of projects being shot on HDSLR systems has skyrocketed, for two reasons. First, they're quite capable of holding their own in terms of image quality to the untrained eye and they do so at a fraction of the cost. No cinematographer I know would ever imply that HDSLR systems, even at their best, are better than or equivalent to 35mm film in terms of image quality given all other factors are the same (lighting, and such). However, what I do believe is happening here is that that many, MANY people in addition to some professionals are saying that the quality HDSLR systems provide is good enough. I feel pretty confident in saying that I could inter-cut 5D or 7D footage with 35mm film, given consistency in lighting, and the normal person would not notice.
And yes, I shoot 35mm and 16mm regularly in addition to owning and operating a Canon 7D. I have seen pretty much every format prevalently used at great length. I even owned and operated a Canon XH-A1 + SGblade 35mm adapter combination for a while. And guess what? It was a nightmare. I specifically remember being blown away by how much light I had to blast the set with to even get a F2.0 or an F2.8, so much light was eaten by the adapter. But these personal experiences have no bearing on the big picture. The big picture is this: HDSLR systems have made enough of an impression that working professionals in broadcast television and in the Hollywood, are willing to stake their projects and reputations on them (read: House MD). The same CAN NOT be said of adapters, at least, as far as I know.
Last edited:
I really don't agree with this. It was amazing of Zacuto to conduct this test!When Zacuto conducts these tests, they are testing the stuff like hackers. You can't measure texture and image feel by looking at DSLR color charts. At some point you have to think in terms of aesthetics. That is why they should have gotten a DOF adaptor into the test for comparison sake. I would have been interesting to get these professional DP's to give their opinions on that as well. My feeling is Zacuto was trying to promote their DSLR Gear by making a DSLR ONLY test. The last thing Zacuto wants is for people to spend the extra money on an adaptor when they could be spending their spare money on a Gorilla Kit or Z-Cage or Target Shooter or whatever Zacuto sells for thousands of dollars.
When Steve Weiss talks to Jens Bogehegn about objective tests, don't believe a word of it. They are objective only insofar as they use color charts and "outside" opinions. The choices of the type of tests and the type of Gear is Zacuto's. It is as if I tested only South American countries to find out which way the world is evolving. I could make a Donkey look like the fastest land animal if I limited the test range to Donkeys only. Nice try Zacuto.
The whole point was that DSLR's are being talked about and embraced so much now in relation to how close they are to replacing film. There wasn't any need to include other cams because the point was to test the current dslr's and see just how much they do compare to film, it has nothing to with how much adaptor's look like film and hence they were never mentioned or included. To me the whole shootout just shows how excited they are about all the new developments.
I'm so thankful to the guys from Zacuto for doing the series and look forward their series' in the future. There's no need to rag on them for spending the money to do a test of the scope that most of us could never afford or justify.
kodjo
Active member
The Zacuto test was the cheapest way to get the highest number of hits on their webpage. That is a fact. Everybody went to see their webpage for this. Let's get back to reality. One does not test the digital evolution vs film by testing DSLR cameras only. That is just ridiculous.
Now I do agree the low light capability and low weight of DSLR make it the practical choice. However the theme of test was not about practical choices. The theme of test was about comparing digital to film. That is the theme of the piece. If I write a piece about American Astronauts, I can not just talk about the Space Shuttle. I need to talk about de Gemini and Apollo program as well. Otherwise the theme is treated in an incomplete way.
I'm sorry but this test is a major promotional gig for DSLR, Zacuto gear and also Steve, Jen and Philip who have just promoted themselves to top industry insiders who mingle with the top people. This was their best bang for the buck. Now there is nothing wrong with promoting yourself. Just don't call it objective. And please... they did not do this out of charity. Next thing you will be thanking them for is for selling you their gear.
Now I do agree the low light capability and low weight of DSLR make it the practical choice. However the theme of test was not about practical choices. The theme of test was about comparing digital to film. That is the theme of the piece. If I write a piece about American Astronauts, I can not just talk about the Space Shuttle. I need to talk about de Gemini and Apollo program as well. Otherwise the theme is treated in an incomplete way.
I'm sorry but this test is a major promotional gig for DSLR, Zacuto gear and also Steve, Jen and Philip who have just promoted themselves to top industry insiders who mingle with the top people. This was their best bang for the buck. Now there is nothing wrong with promoting yourself. Just don't call it objective. And please... they did not do this out of charity. Next thing you will be thanking them for is for selling you their gear.
Last edited:
In the Zacuto video at 05:18 there is one DP who mentions the absence of grain (and who was not cut out of the video
Yes, that is entirely possible, I definitely felt like a cooked vegetable myself by the end of the shoot.
Finnegan
Well-known member
If you misunderstand the theme, then I can see this being the case. Maybe its up to interpretation, but I don't think the Zacuto test is a test designed to evaluate the digital vs. film argument. Rather, I think the test is to evaluate HDSLR systems against each other whilst using 35mm film as a control group, and as a basis for comparison. As you pointed out, there are no digital cameras included in the test aside from HDSLR systems. Clearly, if it were a test designed to evaluate digital vs. film, it would have already failed because it neglected to include other high end, prevalent HD systems like RED, Genesis, D21, or the F35. If you think that Zacuto, or anyone for that matter, was looking to draw conclusions about digital formats as a whole in relation to film from this test, then you're crazy.
To further support this theory, look at the film stocks they're using from Kodak and Fuji. If the "theme" of the test was to compare digital formats vs. film formats, then you'd more than likely want to at least have one control group using the best available film stock from Fuji and Kodak. I don't remember the Fuji stock by number, but I didn't see a single test utilizing Kodak's 5219. Again, why would you conduct a test comparing digital to film, when you're missing half the best digital cameras and the best film stocks? Simple - you're not comparing digital to film.
And yeah, you're right about this being a good move for Zacuto - it probably did them quite well. But that shouldn't factor in at all to the equation about the design of the tests or the methodology, or the discussion about the results that follow. The entire film industry is based on making profits first, and making quality products later. If you can do both (which seemingly Zacuto has done by putting out a series of videos that professionals, enthusiasts, and camera geeks like to watch AND driving people to their website and therefore products) then boom, you've hit it out of the park.
handsome pete
Well-known member
Well from what I can tell, the series was never meant to be that at all. It was always DSLR vs. Film. They've never said anything different.
gabrielflorit
Well-known member
This has turned into a very interesting thread, great read.
I do have to say that 35mm adapters do add something beautiful to a naked camera (in my opinion). I don't know if it's "organic" or "filmic" or "grain-like". But it's beautiful. I haven't seen DSLR footage look that kind of beautiful, not yet. It's too clean.
I do have to say that 35mm adapters do add something beautiful to a naked camera (in my opinion). I don't know if it's "organic" or "filmic" or "grain-like". But it's beautiful. I haven't seen DSLR footage look that kind of beautiful, not yet. It's too clean.
Sure, but that wasn't the point of the test, now was it?
Ian-T
Veteran
The way I see it the whole reason folks started using adapters was to get that “shallow DOF” they couldn’t get with a smaller sensor. Because of the GG the adapters all of a sudden had a “different” look that people associated with being “film-like.” I used to get shot down when I said that adapter footage looks like…..adapter footage (not like film). Organic was the term I used. Most of us had to open up the aperture as much as possible due to light loss which basically made a lot of the shots unnecessarily too shallow (mainly associated with amateurish looking footage). On top of that one had to blast the area with a lot of light (color correcting in post couldn’t hide that in post a lot of the times). Another problem for me was when mixing the adapter with the naked camera (for wide shots) they looked obviously different (colors became muted and washed in comparison).
But here we are with the DSLRs which can do everything we were looking for (less light, shallow DOF, rich colors, clean image) and now we are going backwards and crying foul…..”it doesn’t look like my organic adapter footage.” Or “it’s too clean.” I don’t get it. Sure, there’s aliasing and moiré to watch out for…but if you avoid all of that then you can have a lot more to work with in post. Yes…DSLRs have their own…um…look. Some like it…some hate it…. But like adapter footage…it’s just “different.” One thing they don’t look like however is…”video.” Maybe we should all just accept “different” and stop trying to look like film.
But here we are with the DSLRs which can do everything we were looking for (less light, shallow DOF, rich colors, clean image) and now we are going backwards and crying foul…..”it doesn’t look like my organic adapter footage.” Or “it’s too clean.” I don’t get it. Sure, there’s aliasing and moiré to watch out for…but if you avoid all of that then you can have a lot more to work with in post. Yes…DSLRs have their own…um…look. Some like it…some hate it…. But like adapter footage…it’s just “different.” One thing they don’t look like however is…”video.” Maybe we should all just accept “different” and stop trying to look like film.
djkarn105
Well-known member
Precisely. RED, F35, DoF adaptors have all already been compared to film. I think too, Zacuto wants to push the issue that these cameras are totally capable of producing professional images that could inter-cut seamlessly with film.
As far as DoF adaptors vs hdslrs, I've used both, both have seriously frustrating drawbacks but I've found that the agility and stealth that hdslrs afford compared to an adaptor rig are irreplaceable.
kodjo
Active member
As a director and screenwriter I am very aware of the implied thematics of a film or a written word. I would like to point out specific facts:
a) The test is called: " THE GREAT CAMERA SHOOTOUT" (Not the great DSLR only camera shootout). The title alone implies that they are pitting the GREATEST against the GREATEST. The implication is that DSLR is the final frontier of digital. The cowbows in the beginning suggest we are at the forefront of the frontier and that DSLR is the top dog in town.
b) At one point Steve says "we don't care how these cameras fare". This comming from someone who said at NAB 2009: "If you want to make money in video you've got to attach it to a product." Well I have a bridge for sale. DSLR is a volume business. Each DSLR camera calls for a potential 1000 to 3000 dollar expense in rigs. Who sells rigs? Fill in the blank. This is the greatest opportunity ever for a company like Zacuto. Of course he wants these cameras to sell like hot cakes. Each DSLR owner is a potential new customer willing to spend thousands on gear. DSLR are the perfect gear hungry product. Neither RED nor Adaptors are such a high volume business. I therefore don't buy that statement.
c) In episode 2, Steve says: "We removed ourselves completely from the test". May I say that they were hardly taking any chances. Only a DSLR could be the winner of an all DSLR test.
d) In Episode 3 (10:00) one of the viewers explains the 5D is like a Panavision platinum or Arri camera while the 7D is the B camera. What the heck is he talking about? I did not see much of a difference between the two cameras. They are both standard DSLR with standard DSLR problems. Neither lives up to movie camera standards. Yet the lofty background music suggests he is describing the holly grail.
e) The biggest whopper comes In episode 3 at (31:50). They finally explain why they did not include other cameras. It's because there are too many things to remember. Yes. Well, you can't argue with that. Why bring in other cameras indeed? DSLR is the final frontier anyways, isn't it? Give me a break.
DSLR strikes me as being too contrasty and too sharp or cold. It feels "metallic". It does not feel organic. I wish I could use more scientific terminology but there is none. If they had compared DSLR to adaptor rigs, adaptors would have won hands down and tens of thousands of dollars in DSLR Zacuto rigs would have vanished.
a) The test is called: " THE GREAT CAMERA SHOOTOUT" (Not the great DSLR only camera shootout). The title alone implies that they are pitting the GREATEST against the GREATEST. The implication is that DSLR is the final frontier of digital. The cowbows in the beginning suggest we are at the forefront of the frontier and that DSLR is the top dog in town.
b) At one point Steve says "we don't care how these cameras fare". This comming from someone who said at NAB 2009: "If you want to make money in video you've got to attach it to a product." Well I have a bridge for sale. DSLR is a volume business. Each DSLR camera calls for a potential 1000 to 3000 dollar expense in rigs. Who sells rigs? Fill in the blank. This is the greatest opportunity ever for a company like Zacuto. Of course he wants these cameras to sell like hot cakes. Each DSLR owner is a potential new customer willing to spend thousands on gear. DSLR are the perfect gear hungry product. Neither RED nor Adaptors are such a high volume business. I therefore don't buy that statement.
c) In episode 2, Steve says: "We removed ourselves completely from the test". May I say that they were hardly taking any chances. Only a DSLR could be the winner of an all DSLR test.
d) In Episode 3 (10:00) one of the viewers explains the 5D is like a Panavision platinum or Arri camera while the 7D is the B camera. What the heck is he talking about? I did not see much of a difference between the two cameras. They are both standard DSLR with standard DSLR problems. Neither lives up to movie camera standards. Yet the lofty background music suggests he is describing the holly grail.
e) The biggest whopper comes In episode 3 at (31:50). They finally explain why they did not include other cameras. It's because there are too many things to remember. Yes. Well, you can't argue with that. Why bring in other cameras indeed? DSLR is the final frontier anyways, isn't it? Give me a break.
DSLR strikes me as being too contrasty and too sharp or cold. It feels "metallic". It does not feel organic. I wish I could use more scientific terminology but there is none. If they had compared DSLR to adaptor rigs, adaptors would have won hands down and tens of thousands of dollars in DSLR Zacuto rigs would have vanished.
Last edited:
Ian-T
Veteran
If they had compared DSLR to adaptor rigs, adaptors would have won hands down and tens of thousands of dollars in DSLR Zacuto rigs would have vanished.
Perhaps. Or perhaps this is just wishful thinking on your part.
Bassman2003
Veteran
I can appreciate your points, but do not know why you have an issue?
Your opinion is a common entitled view from interent-rose colored glasses.
Quite simply, they paid for the tests. Zacuto can make them any way they want and for any purpose.
You just tuned in for free. It took a lot of effort to get all of the industry experts involved and do the tests. Yet it gets dismissed.
I am thankful they did this as it is a barometer for all to see how these new cameras really behave. Maybe give them a little respect?
one thing about grain and "organic look", if you look at movies from the 80 and 90s and look at newer film stock, and the new arri grain remover, not to mention higher quality compression without grain, you will see that everything is trying to go away from grain, it's not an artistic thing, it doesn't make the movie look any better, it doesn't help anything compared to grain-less images, in fact the clearer image is of much better quality.
gabrielflorit
Well-known member
I don't have an opinion on making my DSLR look like old film. Oh wait I do, who am I kidding!
I want my T2i to look like this http://vimeo.com/8937335. But at the same time, I'm really glad DSLRs are crazy cheap. Now there's no excuse - if you want to tell a visual story, you can!Kodgo why you keep arguing that there was no real winner, that its all a fluke. If you're that smart and stuff where did you see that these tests were in fact a competition?? They were tests FFS! What if they want to make money? Don't we all? What do you do in life? You get paid right? Why does it bother you what Zacuto did for money? Its their business, period. You watched it for free, they didn't charge you anything, stop moaning.
Who cares about adaptors? DSLRs are huge, adaptors were always.. well, adaptors. they're dead! get over it.
Who cares about adaptors? DSLRs are huge, adaptors were always.. well, adaptors. they're dead! get over it.
To me, it seems like the shootout was a clear marketing move with some personal interest in the results, and although the tests themselves may have been professional, their framing was a fairly enthusiastic pitch for DSLRs. Yes, it may be a somewhat appropriate enthusiasm, but purely objective in tone these were not. As has been said, this cost a lot of money to put on, so of course there's going to be an expectation of sales down the road. And to get attention, it helps to throw in a lot of excitement and talk up the subjects (cameras) as much as you can (and throw in some narrative features for the heck of it).
- Status