Total switch to dslr?

FiddlerMD

FiddlerMD

Well-known member
I am considering selling my dvx and my nikon d70s (and lenses/accessories/etc) and reinvesting that money into something like a 5d mk2.
However, this means i'll also have to buy some sort of audio device (zoom h4n) and probably some mounting accessories.
However, my biggest concern is - can a dslr be a replacement for a proper video camera? Most of my shoots tend to be run-n-gun so the lack of auto-focus will probably be a huge deal.
how have you adjusted to dslr shooting? do you only reserve it for really rehearsed/scripted shoots? Do you still whip out the ol' dvx/hvx or whatever for your typical video shoot?
 
The answer is yes and no.

For run and gun quick style video, I would definitely say no. Even with a follow focus, it will be hard to keep proper focus in the field. If you shoot with a wide aperture (f1.4-2.8) and shallow DOF, then obtaining constant focus will be tricky. But if you are able to stay around f4, then it's easier to hold focus.

Focus is only one part of the problem for field use though. If you decide to go the Canon route (5D/7D/550D) you will be faced with the 12 minute HD recording limit. On Canon cameras, the file recording structure is FAT32, which only lets you write data in 4GB chinks (equates to about 12 minutes of HD video recording).

One a Canon DSLR camera hits 12 minutes recording stops, and you have to press record again. the camera will not continuously write data like a video camera will. this has to do with tariffs and video cameras in Europe. If the camera continuously wrote data (continuous 4GB files), then the camera would be classified as video camera and be subject to extra tariffs in Europe. So if you plan to only shoot DSLR with Canon cameras, you better make sure that you have eitehr backup video cameras running, or several DSLRs recording at different intervals.

Now with this being said, for a studio production, DSLRs are great. As you have plenty of time to setup and control your environment and shoot as needed.

For me we are suing DSLRs in combination with video cameras. With the DSLRs being used for the wow shots. SO for example on a wedding shoot, a 550D will be used for preparations, establishing shots, and reception footage. Video cameras are sued for entire ceremony shoots and reception footage. This is a nice combination, as you have constant backup video being shot at the same time, with no worries about constant start and stops.
 
Personally I think auto-focus is more of a bug than feature. I get that it's easy to use but then you also have no control. I guess focus is not as big an issue on a small ccd sensor based camera with narrow DOF. Yes, it's going to take a bit of practice to get into pulling focus but then you will have acquired an artistic skill that will separate your work from handycam type work. I suppose it is going to be a little more tiring though.

I'd suggest the kit lens with IS on the 5DII simply because with IS on it's quite capable of pulling focus without a follow focus. It's a little slow at f4 but tack sharp wide open. Unfortunately it does breath but not drastically. Nice focal lengths too, but then I use it on the 7D. At focal lengths higher than that you'll probably need a ff, for eg. my 70-200 is unusable at hand-held at 200 but the IS really helps to stabilize the shot.

You'll probably need a battery grip too as the power runs out pretty quickly - that's my biggest concern with the SLRs. There will be other challenges too....like editing h264 etc etc, but the run 'n gun stuff that people shoot on these looks fantastic IMO. you might also consider waiting for video form-factors to be released - canon has announced one by the end of the year.
 
FiddlerMD said:
I am considering selling my dvx and my nikon d70s (and lenses/accessories/etc) and reinvesting that money into something like a 5d mk2.
However, this means i'll also have to buy some sort of audio device (zoom h4n) and probably some mounting accessories.
Click to expand...

The idea of shooting double system sound to me is like going back to hammering out images on stone tablets. Sometimes I hand over footage to clients who then post produce themselves or take the stuff somewhere and (at least for most of the stuff I do) I think they'd look at me like I had two heads if I handed them audio files and footage and told them all that stuff had to be synced up.

FiddlerMD said:
However, my biggest concern is - can a dslr be a replacement for a proper video camera? Most of my shoots tend to be run-n-gun so the lack of auto-focus will probably be a huge deal.
Click to expand...

Auto focus doesn't figure into pro shooting, but I find a lack of zoom lens with zoom motor the biggest negative in considering DSLR over video camera. I mount a portable mixer to my camera rig and wireless receivers when I need to, so the sound aspect is not all that difficult.

FiddlerMD said:
how have you adjusted to dslr shooting? do you only reserve it for really rehearsed/scripted shoots? Do you still whip out the ol' dvx/hvx or whatever for your typical video shoot?
Click to expand...

I'd probably never use it to shoot documentary run and gun stuff, but in more controlled situations, I seem to be using it more often than a video camera.

.
 
FiddlerMD said:
However, my biggest concern is - can a dslr be a replacement for a proper video camera? Most of my shoots tend to be run-n-gun so the lack of auto-focus will probably be a huge deal.
Click to expand...
The answer, for you, is no. Don't jump on the DSLR bandwagon just because everyone else is or because of the hype.

You don't have to sell your Nikon lenses. They can be adapted to fit another DSLR. If you get the T2i (same video performance as the 7D) or the GH1, then you could afford to keep the DVX100. The GH1 even does decent autofocus while recording (provided that you use a compatible lens, such as the kit lens). I see no reason why you're making yourself choose between what you currently have and the 5D.
 
i currently use the EX1, HMC150, 5DmkII & T2i.

there is no way i would attempt much of the run & gun stuff with a DSLR. way to shallow unless you like shooting with wide angle all the time. now comparing an older DVX100 against newer HD stuff? i would try to dump it (i did a year ago) and get even a modest HD video camera to cover the deeper DOF stuff and still have the benefit of having a zoom lens, audio on board and easier ergonomic body. quick and effortless to operate and will "just get the shot". when i think in terms of "i must get the shot" because if i dont im screwed...then its the EX1 or the HMC150. i only think of the 5DmkII when it comes to shallow DOF. once i stop it down then i feel i might as well be on the EX1.

both types of camera really compliment each other nicely. right now i couldnt imagine only having one or the other.

david
www.davidprobst.com
 
You can use your Nikon lenses with a Canon body if they have manual controls.

Anyway, no, a DSLR doesn't cover all the bases a video camera can. If you were only shooting scripted work I would say ditch the DVX...but you're not.

Here's my advice. Pick up a GH1 as shallow DOF B-cam. You can get it for $650 body only and you can use your Nikon lenses on it with an adaptor ($60 or so,) or you can get it for $1200 with a 14-140mm f/4-5.8 zoom lens that autofocuses during video and has image stabilization (only downside with this lens is that it's a little slow and you can't zoom without seeing a flickering effect.) Use the GH1 as B-cam, keep it around your neck at all times, do whatever you need to do with it...dual wield and the DVX (badass!!) and get your shots. It has no recording time-limit, doesn't overheat, has a flip out LCD and a great liveview finder (both of which are higher res than the ones on your DVX.) It also doesn't alias or moiré quite as extremely (or at least as noticeably) as the Canon DSLRs. The only downside is the codec is a little bit weak, and doesn't respond well to fast movement, but if you're downrezing to SD to cut with the DVX you can shoot 720/60p (easily converted to 30 or 24p in post) which has less of an issue, and anything else you won't notice in the downscale. The GH1 with some fast Nikons has excellent low-light performance, and with the kit lens at 14mm (you can always zoom in mid shot, just don't expect the zoom itself to be useable), image stabilized, and stopped down, it makes a great run and gun cam, which is capable of getting really shallow DOF at the telephoto end, or with fast primes (with ND filters during the day.)

I've shot some run and gun type stuff with the GH1 and the kit lens (on an ENG type rig) and what I did was keep it at 14mm, walk around, and if I saw something interesting I'd zoom in, give the autofocus a pulse, and keep filming.

I am known for recommending the GH1, but I really do think this will help you here as a B-cam while you wait for something like the AF-100 or the GH2 or whatever Canon or Nikon comes out with that will alleviate some of the problems with making a total switch.
 
wow, great answers. I'm curious - for the cameras that output live via hdmi - are there any portable hdmi recorders out there? Also, are they always outputting or only during record (I'd guess it's the latter).
For those of you that do shoot dslr mostly - how do you handle sound? I hear that the onboard sound is pretty terrible (even with a beachtek).
thanks
 
Oh and part of the reason I'm looking to switch is cause i've been wanting to upgrade my dslr for photo as well. And lately i'm leaning more towards the Canon camp even though I've been a Nikon man for about 13 years. I just seem to like canon's processing better - something about their images that I find very pleasing.
 
Here are a few of the reasons I switched from my Canon XH-A1 to a 7D. I'm am sure others here have different experiences and different opinions, but hopefully this will give you some insights.

I purchased a Canon XH-A1 and Redrock M2 in hopes of producing high quality video projects that looked close to the quality of film. The A1 setup accomplished this very well...at a cost of time, equipment, and frustration. First, the set-up time for the proper calibration of a 35mm adapter was a little ridiculous for me. Not only was it not always accurate, but if I needed to change my camera setup I would sometimes have to recalibrate again. The light-loss issue of having an adapter coupled with a flip device meant that I was either shooting all exteriors in broad daylight or charging clients a lot of money for lighting rental for interior day shoots. Also, I would almost always need a first AC - there was no run and gun on my own at all. I bought an external card recorder (the Sony MRC1K) in order to make my workflow tapeless. But this had it's own drawbacks as it wasn't specifically engineered to work with the A1. The cost of all of the camera itself and the adapter and the Sony device meant that there was very little money left over for me to afford a decent (and necessary) follow focus, matte box, and HD monitor for critical focus issues.

After renting a 7D for a experimental music video, I was absolutely blown away. For the first time, I could use whatever lenses I wanted with no added light loss, not worry about calibration of an intermediate device, and shoot tapeless. 1080p picture that looked crisper than my A1 all at half the cost of the A1.

That same week I started researching about the camera and decided that even though it had limitations (discussed later), they were nothing compared to the inability to shoot when and how I wanted to because of the cumbersome quality of the A1. I sold my A1 outfit at a loss and now own an entire setup for the 7D for less than the basic setup of the A1. I was able to get 3 decent lenses, including a fast prime for just a little bit of money. The fact that my zooms are not so fast doesn't really matter because usually I am in a controlled environment where I am lighting anyway and even slower lenses can perform remarkably with the 7D because you don't have the giant 35mm light-eating adapter in the middle of things.

I could also now afford a high-quality 8.9" HD monitor, follow focus, and matte box. Additionally, I had already been in the market for a decent still camera to replace my very outdated Nikon D40. So I had basically killed two birds with one stone. With the low cost of the camera I could afford an awesome flash for this and some other accessories.

There are of course some drawbacks - some that I knew about going in, some that I discovered after purchasing the camera.

1. Moire. I have witnessed it on one of my shoots. Actor wears a waffled shirt and at a certain distance using a certain lens, purple moire. All in all, this doesn't really bother me and didn't bother the client at all. I had some problems with chromatic aberration with the A1/Redrock and certain lenses so I think of it as a trade-off. There will be artifacts on any camera in specific situations just assess whether it's something you can live with.

2. Audio. The AGC is terrible and the fact that apparently Magic Lantern WON'T be able to come out with new firmware disabling it is disheartening. I don't know why you would even put audio on a camera without having even some sort of visual level system. Juicedlink has a physical solution, but I have heard mixed reports about its ease of use. There is also a workaround with injecting tone into the camera, but I'm not sure about it. I have just resigned myself to using an external recorder and syncing in post (something I did on about half my A1 shoots anyway).

3. Jello. There is a rolling shutter problem that slants your footage on quick pans. I personally don't do quick pans and in the event that I do, it doesn't bother me that this micro-second long movement seems maybe a little slanted if I look really hard. Some can live with it, some can't.

4. No autofocus while recording. I haven't decided if this is a big problem for me. Usually I pull my own focus anyway even on the A1 because I didn't like the way that it "popped" stuff into focus in the middle of the shot instead of a smooth pull.

5. Post production support. Seems to be a bit lacking. Premiere CS4 can't natively use DSLR footage and have smooth playback, but I have CS5 now (after making a 64-bit dual boot on my system) and it runs like butter. The latest Avid Media composer devours DSLR footage. Another issue is with any DSLR footage is the lack of timecode. Not a biggie if you're one person doing all finishing on your one computer. It is a problem if you're offlining in one place, onlining and mixing at the same time in separate places. Canon has a FCP plug-in that puts on fake time code (and loads of other metadata). This plug-in is not yet available for Premiere or Avid (as far as I know).

The benefits:

1. Interchangeable lenses with no intermediate device!
2. Multiple levels of HD capture with variable frame rates!
3. Lightweight and easy to transport.
4. You can take stills even in the middle of shooting which kind of solves that whole trying to get set photos that look exactly like the footage problem.
5. Price!
6. Tapeless

For my needs, the 7D is the ideal camera. It's not full frame like the 5D but its sensor is larger than my A1's was. You really have to weigh your own needs and the camera's abilities to decide if going DSLR is for you.

Hope this was of some help.
 
Chris Santucci said:
The idea of shooting double system sound to me is like going back to hammering out images on stone tablets. Sometimes I hand over footage to clients who then post produce themselves or take the stuff somewhere and (at least for most of the stuff I do) I think they'd look at me like I had two heads if I handed them audio files and footage and told them all that stuff had to be synced up.
Click to expand...

Aiming for the needs or technical requirements of your client is one thing, but there's no reason to poo-poo double-system sound. This is a tried and true process that is still very common practice... and is the rule rather than the exception on high-end production.

I think that you do whatever you can to make sure that you have audio that's just as good as your images, if not better. Recording to camera with these Juicedlink and Beachtek boxes for DSLR may have gotten better over the last few months, but using them limits the audio to a single record channel. That's just too constricting too often. Having two viable record channels creates much more flexibility in post. Of course, on big projects there will typically be a multi-track recording that keeps each of the 4, 6, or more mics in use on its own discreet record channel.
 
C2V said:
Recording to camera with these Juicedlink and Beachtek boxes for DSLR may have gotten better over the last few months, but using them limits the audio to a single record channel. That's just too constricting too often. Having two viable record channels creates much more flexibility in post.
Click to expand...


My 5D uses both channels. And, it goes to 11 ;-)

And I'm stepping up to the FP24 and yes, on a real real project things would be different.

.
 
Last edited:
There And Back Again…

There And Back Again…

My willingness to completely change out my gear has become somewhat of a bad joke in the circle of shooters I know.

I started shooting with the DVX, moved to the HVX-200, then the HPX-170 and finally (from a camcorder standpoint) to the EX1. Each of those cameras, in my mind, was a step "up" in either image quality or convenience (size, portability), or both. After shooting with these cameras for a while, I had reached the point where everything I "needed" for a shoot (adventure-documentary and travel work, mostly) could fit comfortably in a large backpack and/or rolling carry-on.

Enter the HDSLRs.

The first one I owned was the GH1, and I really enjoyed shooting with it. I'd have kept it, in fact, if it wasn't for the "color shifting" I found in many of my on-water clips. To be honest, the footage I shot with it in Costa Rica "felt" richer and more cinematic than the footage I shot on the very same trip with my EX1 and Nano Flash. When I got home, I immediately started cutting the GH1 footage. The Nano Flash footage sat for months before I even touched it. But again, the "color shifting" was something I couldn't accept (being that most of what I shoot is around water), and with the 7D coming, I moved on.

For a shoot in Brazil last fall, I had no choice. I had to shoot with the Canon 7D, simply because of travel restrictions and space I couldn't take a larger camera. So, I rolled into the Amazon with two 7D bodies, three lenses and my Nexto. It was all run-and-gun shooting, on-camera audio (AGC and all), working from dawn to dusk and beyond. When one body would overheat in the jungle sun, I'd switch it off and move to the other. Given the limitations of the shoot and location, the 7Ds worked perfectly.

When the shoot was over, and I started editing the footage, what I saw was simply some of the most amazing peacock bass fishing footage I've ever seen. The fish weren't huge, but the image quality was stunning. Except of course for the handful of shots that showed the moire and aliasing (especially in 720/60p) that the Canon 7D is famous for. And the audio, naturally, is passable, but not what I would call great.

Now what? I still had my EX1, but the thought of carrying both it AND the 7D gear just didn't appeal, so I sold the Sony. But I love the images that my 7D and (newly-acquired) 5DII cameras can deliver, and I enjoy working with all the great lenses I've acquired.

Over time, I've grown less and less comfortable with some of the "solutions" to the issues that these cameras struggle with. Whether it be double-system sound, camera-mounted mixers, OLPF filters, or moire/aliasing, I reached the point where what it took for me to "solve" the issues to my satisfaction involved carrying MORE gear than I ever had to before.

So, where am I now?

Back to the world of the broadcast camcorder, and the new (to me) Panasonic HMC40. Yes, I'm shooting with a 5DII, and perhaps the largest sensor you can find, and an HMC40, and some of the smallest sensors you'll find.

Basically it came down to the fact that I just got tired of trying to make a camera perform in a way it wasn't meant to perform. Shots I could have nailed with my EX1 I missed with the 7D simply because of having to change lenses. As much as I tried to make them "camcorders," they're simply not, and energy I should have been putting into seeing and shooting was going into wrangling gear and workarounds that simply weren't necessary with a real camcorder.

A few weeks back, while I was out on a shoot, my lovely wife went in my place to a screening of fly-fishing films, including mine, at the local Alamo Drafthouse Cinema. This wasn't the first time my work would be on the big screen, but it's always good to see it in the theater "context." After the show she called and said that my work, shot on the HVX and HPX cameras, not only looked as good as anything else in the program, but it looked like it belonged on the big screen. (She's my wife, so she's supposed to say nice things like that.)

And so, after all of this, my conclusion is simple: I live in a two-camera world. Instead of carrying a Zoom, I carry an HMC40 with XLR adapter, giving me both another camera and quality audio recording. I get pro video tools (waveform, focus assist, huge focal range and smooth zoom), and best of all, I get a camera made to capture video, with no moire or aliasing.

But I also carry the 7D (and 5DII, if needed), so I can capture the richness and contrast that makes these cameras so amazing. I can get those beautiful shallow-DOF inserts and cutaways that add so much to my productions. And I have the perfect rig for interview setups and low-light shooting.

Most of all, I've learned to use the right tool for the right job. It's not always an HDSLR, and it's not always a camcorder either.
 
FiddlerMD said:
I'm curious - for the cameras that output live via hdmi - are there any portable hdmi recorders out there?
Click to expand...
It's called the nanoFlash. There's a thread about it in the 7D/T2i forum (on the first page, at the moment).

Also, are they always outputting or only during record (I'd guess it's the latter).
Click to expand...
There's always an output signal. Basically, when you plug an HDMI device into the camera, then the onboard LCD is disabled, and the signal gets rerouted to the HDMI.
 
stephenmick said:
So, where am I now?

Back to the world of the broadcast camcorder, and the new (to me) Panasonic HMC40. Yes, I'm shooting with a 5DII, and perhaps the largest sensor you can find, and an HMC40, and some of the smallest sensors you'll find.

Basically it came down to the fact that I just got tired of trying to make a camera perform in a way it wasn't meant to perform. Shots I could have nailed with my EX1 I missed with the 7D simply because of having to change lenses. As much as I tried to make them "camcorders," they're simply not, and energy I should have been putting into seeing and shooting was going into wrangling gear and workarounds that simply weren't necessary with a real camcorder.

...

And so, after all of this, my conclusion is simple: I live in a two-camera world. Instead of carrying a Zoom, I carry an HMC40 with XLR adapter, giving me both another camera and quality audio recording. I get pro video tools (waveform, focus assist, huge focal range and smooth zoom), and best of all, I get a camera made to capture video, with no moire or aliasing.
Click to expand...
So what will you do when the AF100 is released, assuming that it solves the problems of the DSLRs and offers all of the features of a real prosumer camcorder?
 
Probably nothing. From what I heard (and saw) at NAB, the AF100 will be a great camera, but won't likely have any kind of image stabilization. It's also probably not going to have any kind of smooth zoom ability, and almost certainly won't have any ability to interface/communicate with non-M4/3 lenses. There's a lot to love about the AF100 specs, but until a working model lands in someone's hands for testing, it's hard to say any more than that.

But given what I've seen come out of my 7D/5DII cameras, and with the form factor and convenience of the HMC40, I don't see the AF100, at around $5-6K, being a worthwhile investment/upgrade for me.

All of this is subject to change, of course, once the AF100 starts shipping. I'm not above switching out all of my cameras (again). :D
 
stephenmick said:
My willingness to completely change out my gear has become somewhat of a bad joke in the circle of shooters I know.

I started shooting with the DVX, moved to the HVX-200, then the HPX-170 and finally (from a camcorder standpoint) to the EX1. Each of those cameras, in my mind, was a step "up" in either image quality or convenience (size, portability), or both. After shooting with these cameras for a while, I had reached the point where everything I "needed" for a shoot (adventure-documentary and travel work, mostly) could fit comfortably in a large backpack and/or rolling carry-on.

Enter the HDSLRs.

The first one I owned was the GH1, and I really enjoyed shooting with it. I'd have kept it, in fact, if it wasn't for the "color shifting" I found in many of my on-water clips. To be honest, the footage I shot with it in Costa Rica "felt" richer and more cinematic than the footage I shot on the very same trip with my EX1 and Nano Flash. When I got home, I immediately started cutting the GH1 footage. The Nano Flash footage sat for months before I even touched it. But again, the "color shifting" was something I couldn't accept (being that most of what I shoot is around water), and with the 7D coming, I moved on.

For a shoot in Brazil last fall, I had no choice. I had to shoot with the Canon 7D, simply because of travel restrictions and space I couldn't take a larger camera. So, I rolled into the Amazon with two 7D bodies, three lenses and my Nexto. It was all run-and-gun shooting, on-camera audio (AGC and all), working from dawn to dusk and beyond. When one body would overheat in the jungle sun, I'd switch it off and move to the other. Given the limitations of the shoot and location, the 7Ds worked perfectly.

When the shoot was over, and I started editing the footage, what I saw was simply some of the most amazing peacock bass fishing footage I've ever seen. The fish weren't huge, but the image quality was stunning. Except of course for the handful of shots that showed the moire and aliasing (especially in 720/60p) that the Canon 7D is famous for. And the audio, naturally, is passable, but not what I would call great.

Now what? I still had my EX1, but the thought of carrying both it AND the 7D gear just didn't appeal, so I sold the Sony. But I love the images that my 7D and (newly-acquired) 5DII cameras can deliver, and I enjoy working with all the great lenses I've acquired.

Over time, I've grown less and less comfortable with some of the "solutions" to the issues that these cameras struggle with. Whether it be double-system sound, camera-mounted mixers, OLPF filters, or moire/aliasing, I reached the point where what it took for me to "solve" the issues to my satisfaction involved carrying MORE gear than I ever had to before.

So, where am I now?

Back to the world of the broadcast camcorder, and the new (to me) Panasonic HMC40. Yes, I'm shooting with a 5DII, and perhaps the largest sensor you can find, and an HMC40, and some of the smallest sensors you'll find.

Basically it came down to the fact that I just got tired of trying to make a camera perform in a way it wasn't meant to perform. Shots I could have nailed with my EX1 I missed with the 7D simply because of having to change lenses. As much as I tried to make them "camcorders," they're simply not, and energy I should have been putting into seeing and shooting was going into wrangling gear and workarounds that simply weren't necessary with a real camcorder.

A few weeks back, while I was out on a shoot, my lovely wife went in my place to a screening of fly-fishing films, including mine, at the local Alamo Drafthouse Cinema. This wasn't the first time my work would be on the big screen, but it's always good to see it in the theater "context." After the show she called and said that my work, shot on the HVX and HPX cameras, not only looked as good as anything else in the program, but it looked like it belonged on the big screen. (She's my wife, so she's supposed to say nice things like that.)

And so, after all of this, my conclusion is simple: I live in a two-camera world. Instead of carrying a Zoom, I carry an HMC40 with XLR adapter, giving me both another camera and quality audio recording. I get pro video tools (waveform, focus assist, huge focal range and smooth zoom), and best of all, I get a camera made to capture video, with no moire or aliasing.

But I also carry the 7D (and 5DII, if needed), so I can capture the richness and contrast that makes these cameras so amazing. I can get those beautiful shallow-DOF inserts and cutaways that add so much to my productions. And I have the perfect rig for interview setups and low-light shooting.

Most of all, I've learned to use the right tool for the right job. It's not always an HDSLR, and it's not always a camcorder either.
Click to expand...

Pretty sure the color shifting has been traced to using certain scene modes...I don't believe it happens in Standard or with manual lenses.
 
Ben_B said:
Pretty sure the color shifting has been traced to using certain scene modes...I don't believe it happens in Standard or with manual lenses.
Click to expand...

Well, it was Caffesse and I (mostly him) who figured out that the Standard mode didn't show the color-shifting. But that bit of discovery didn't make me feel comfortable enough to use the GH1 for client work, so off it went.
 
stephenmick said:
Well, it was Caffesse and I (mostly him) who figured out that the Standard mode didn't show the color-shifting. But that bit of discovery didn't make me feel comfortable enough to use the GH1 for client work, so off it went.
Click to expand...

I feel the same way about moiré ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top