why do VDSLR's look better than the cams we spent twice as much on?

[Kit Hannah]

If you're a handheld run-n-gunner and you don't want to invest in glidecams and all that, you need to add serious weight to the equation.

That's not necessarily a downside for me, though. I'm used to holding heavier and it's very comfortable to cradle. But it sorta defeated the whole purpose of "small package" yeah?

Then there's the hidden costs of making them work. GH-1 has the least hidden fees out of any of the offerings so far. But if you really look at what you're buying and what you're MISSING, it starts to add up.

The MKii's expense is beyond 2600.00. I think to get anything close to comfortable you may spend upwards of 3500.00 to begin with.

Basically, the images might look better (at first glance) but if you can't use the cameras then the image means a hill of beans.

As far as why do the images look better? Well, it's subjective and technical. For reasons mentioned already, sensor tech etc. But, also, some people actually do prefer a deep DOF. Go figure.

Kholi, Kholi, Kholi....

What camera are you going to buy new that is going to get you the image quality of the MKII?

None.

Image is subjective, sure, but when you have more pixels, a clearer, less noisy image with vibrant colors, to my eyes, that looks better than being a soft image like many cameras have.

If you know how to use a still or video camera, you know that you can achieve a deep depth of field with this camera. It doesn't have to be shallow ALL the time if you don't want it to be.

And it doesn't matter what camera you have - they are ALL going to be shaky if you don't know how to use them. More weight = less shake to a degree, but that's why they make the tools that they do, to help you with that. What's so bad about that?

There is a HUGE up side to that though. With the MKII, you can get away with a $1000 steadicam, or a $300 shoulder mount, or a $600 tripod. Batteries are cheaper. Lenses are cheaper in most cases. Memory is cheaper. Try putting together a package for a full size camera. You need MUCH MORE EXPENSIVE STUFF to operate these cameras and they are nowhere near as portable.

Comparing the footage to my HPX500, my footage looks super soft and less detailed next to the 5D MKII.

So I will be switching, very shortly. The 5D has downfalls, but with that nice of an image, and total cost of ownership being MUCH less, I will be dealing around the issues.

 

[Kholi]

Kholi, Kholi, Kholi....

What camera are you going to buy new that is going to get you the image quality of the MKII?

None.

Did you mean what camera is cheap and gets you the image quality of the MKii? It's a good thing there are much more advanced options available to choose from or we might be in trouble! Granted, they cost more, but not everyone is limited to a three-thousand dollar investment. And sometimes we find other ways to pay for equipment (mind out of the gutter). My weapon of choice right now is RED, and when I get the GH-1 that'll be the second.

It's great to have the freedom to choose.

Image is subjective, sure, but when you have more pixels, a clearer, less noisy image with vibrant colors, to my eyes, that looks better than being a soft image like many cameras have.

Image is subjective. As you stated, to your eyes. Again, it's a good thing that we can see things differently or it could get boring fast.

If you know how to use a still or video camera, you know that you can achieve a deep depth of field with this camera. It doesn't have to be shallow ALL the time if you don't want it to be.

This goes both ways. And in general, if you know how to use any tool then you can achieve lots.

And it doesn't matter what camera you have - they are ALL going to be shaky if you don't know how to use them. More weight = less shake to a degree, but that's why they make the tools that they do, to help you with that. What's so bad about that?

I can't say that this statement is accurate as a whole. I mostly shoot RED, and handheld when I can. I don't have any issues with shake outside of the norm, if "the norm" is defined as your average 135mm to 200mm cinematic telephoto shot featuring a light drift or "shake". I simply stated that weight is really essential if A) you do not have an IS lens or B) you are on for everything. Sorry if that sounded like an attack on your personal favorite camera. It's a general statement for VDSLRS.

There is a HUGE up side to that though. With the MKII, you can get away with a $1000 steadicam, or a $300 shoulder mount, or a $600 tripod. Batteries are cheaper. Lenses are cheaper in most cases. Memory is cheaper. Try putting together a package for a full size camera. You need MUCH MORE EXPENSIVE STUFF to operate these cameras and they are nowhere near as portable.

It's great that you're willing to spend more than 3000.00 on your MKii purchase (when you get one). On the flipsides of that, there are a lot of people that may consider your version of cheap too expensive. And the other side is that someo of us already shooting other formats think why bother at that point?

While it may be easier to think that everyone works the same way, it really isn't the case. So I can't speak for you, and you can't speak for me or anyone else, right? The only thing that matters is fact. And the facts are that there are more fees to VDSLRs than just the purchase of the camera itself. No matter how "cheap" memory is or "cheap" lenses may be.

I probably don't need to tell you how much a fullsized camera costs, as you own an HPX500. And I can guarantee you that you have no need to inform me of how much a fullsized camera costs. I'm well aware of it and reminded every time I have to put together a rental for cineprimes to match the RED (when budget allows.)

Comparing the footage to my HPX500, my footage looks super soft and less detailed next to the 5D MKII.

Yeah it sucks. The HPX500 and 300 could definitely be so much more in the future. Just imagine if Panasonic took that 4/3" Sensor in the GH-1 and wrapped an AVCIntra spec HPX170 body around it.

O the other side, comparing my RED footage (with Nikon glass even) to the MKii, there is no comparison: the MKii is definitely a 2500.00 (for the body) still camera with a video mode tacked on. A nice one for the money, and for those who sell on price instead of overall performance, it'll be the holy grail. I'm definitely okay with that!

So I will be switching, very shortly. The 5D has downfalls, but with that nice of an image, and total cost of ownership being MUCH less, I will be dealing around the issues.

I'm very surprised that you haven't already. It's not as if the MKii is hard to find or anything like that and it's so very cheap, as I'm constantly told. Again, it may be a boring existence if we all were okay with the same exact things.

For me, converting 30P to 24P is not an acceptable workflow. For you, it's probably just fine. For me, the jello present isn't something I'm happy with, and for you, well you're okay with working around it and looking past it... and guess what!?

It's okay!

I think it'll be really awesome, the day that when people post a fair and objective opinion based on first-hand experience and less conjecture it'll be left as just that, an opinion that needs no combatting.

It'll be pretty rad.

 

[Kit Hannah]

Did you mean what camera is cheap and gets you the image quality of the MKii? It's a good thing there are much more advanced options available to choose from or we might be in trouble! Granted, they cost more, but not everyone is limited to a three-thousand dollar investment. And sometimes we find other ways to pay for equipment (mind out of the gutter). My weapon of choice right now is RED, and when I get the GH-1 that'll be the second.

Yes, that's what I meant, and no, the RED is nowhere as cheap as the MKII. The RED is a nice camera for sure, but there is no comparison price wise.

Image is subjective. As you stated, to your eyes. Again, it's a good thing that we can see things differently or it could get boring fast.

But you know what good and bad video look like....C'mon.

I can't say that this statement is accurate as a whole. I mostly shoot RED, and handheld when I can. I don't have any issues with shake outside of the norm, if "the norm" is defined as your average 135mm to 200mm cinematic telephoto shot featuring a light drift or "shake". I simply stated that weight is really essential if A) you do not have an IS lens or B) you are on for everything. Sorry if that sounded like an attack on your personal favorite camera. It's a general statement for VDSLRS.

I never felt attacked at all. So no need to apologize. I was saying that I've seen some pretty shaky video with a 20 lb shoulder shot. If you have experience with it, you'll be much better at it and get used to the way it works, no matter how heavy or light it is.

It's great that you're willing to spend more than 3000.00 on your MKii purchase (when you get one). On the flipsides of that, there are a lot of people that may consider your version of cheap too expensive. And the other side is that someo of us already shooting other formats think why bother at that point?

While it may be easier to think that everyone works the same way, it really isn't the case. So I can't speak for you, and you can't speak for me or anyone else, right? The only thing that matters is fact. And the facts are that there are more fees to VDSLRs than just the purchase of the camera itself. No matter how "cheap" memory is or "cheap" lenses may be.

There are more fees to just about every camera out there. Tripod, lighting, batteries, memory, doesn't matter what pro camera it is, you're going to need things for those cameras and typically you'll need "more" for those cameras too, which in turn costs more. A tripod that supports up to 20 lbs is generally going to cost more than one that supports 11.

And I like how you threw in the "When you get one" zinger... Didn't you say that you have not gotten yours either? So right back atcha. :beer:

I probably don't need to tell you how much a fullsized camera costs, as you own an HPX500. And I can guarantee you that you have no need to inform me of how much a fullsized camera costs. I'm well aware of it and reminded every time I have to put together a rental for cineprimes to match the RED (when budget allows.)

Understood, so why are you arguing against the cost? But sometimes other people don't know or understand. We're on a public board, not in a private chat room.

Yeah it sucks. The HPX500 and 300 could definitely be so much more in the future. Just imagine if Panasonic took that 4/3" Sensor in the GH-1 and wrapped an AVCIntra spec HPX170 body around it.

Oh, so you think it sucks too? Our eyes must be the same when it comes to the 500, but not when it comes to the 5D MKII looking good?

Yes, a different format would definitely be nice with this type of sensor.

O the other side, comparing my RED footage (with Nikon glass even) to the MKii, there is no comparison: the MKii is definitely a 2500.00 (for the body) still camera with a video mode tacked on. A nice one for the money, and for those who sell on price instead of overall performance, it'll be the holy grail. I'm definitely okay with that!

It allows a wider range of people to enter into the market and afford to purchase a tool that is very nice looking. So with some lower end accessories and lens, you get the MKII for $4000 lets say. How much is the RED now? Looks like $17,500, just for the body? C'mon Kholi, you can beat that drum all day, but the fact is price is a factor here. Not everyone can afford a RED, and not everyone can afford a MKII, but many, many more people can afford the Canon than the RED.

I'm very surprised that you haven't already. It's not as if the MKii is hard to find or anything like that and it's so very cheap, as I'm constantly told. Again, it may be a boring existence if we all were okay with the same exact things.

It would be very boring. I have not yet because I need to sell my last 500 first. Working on that this week. For me, this will be a substantial savings.

For me, converting 30P to 24P is not an acceptable workflow. For you, it's probably just fine. For me, the jello present isn't something I'm happy with, and for you, well you're okay with working around it and looking past it... and guess what!?

It's okay!

Yep, fine by me. 24p is nice and is what I typically shoot, but the 30p on that camera has a 24p look to my eyes. Doesn't look like 60i. 24p will be nice when it comes out on something full frame.

I think it'll be really awesome, the day that when people post a fair and objective opinion based on first-hand experience and less conjecture it'll be left as just that, an opinion that needs no combatting.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, Kholi, but the more and more I read your posts, the more I feel like you are the one combating everything. I think you have some great things to say, I just feel like if it doesn't suit your style, you seem to be against it and you decide to knock it. It seemed like you were all about the VDSLR's for awhile, now it appears you're not, but at the same time you're going to get a GH-1? Huh...

The bottom line is that everyone IS entitled to their opinion just as you mentioned. You gotta compare apples to apples. Is the MKII and GH-1 in the same class of cameras as a HVX-200 or HPX170 or 500? No - the VDSLR's don't have anywhere near the features of those cameras. But when the image quality is as stunning as it is in the VDSLR's, plus the size is that portable, and overall it will cost much less, and it's a still camera! I'm all for it. That doesn't mean you have to be.

 

[Kit Hannah]

Then there's the hidden costs of making them work. GH-1 has the least hidden fees out of any of the offerings so far. But if you really look at what you're buying and what you're MISSING, it starts to add up.

By the way, explain to me how the GH-1 has less "hidden fees" than any other camera? What does the 5D MKII need that the GH-1 doesn't? Not trying to be a smart a$$, I genuinely don't understand why the 5DII would have more hidden fees.

Thanks
Kit

 

[Kholi]

Sorry Kit, these are the only parts of your post I feel I should respond to, the rest we'll just disagree on.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, Kholi, but the more and more I read your posts, the more I feel like you are the one combating everything. I think you have some great things to say, I just feel like if it doesn't suit your style, you seem to be against it and you decide to knock it.

Please go back to the post I made in this thread and show me where I knocked anything. I personally think it's just hypersensitivity of camera owners in general.

It seemed like you were all about the VDSLR's for awhile, now it appears you're not, but at the same time you're going to get a GH-1? Huh...

I am... just not the MKii. Nothing's changed. Just because I don't like the MKii doesn't mean I don't like VDSLRs. It means I don't like the Mkii.

The bottom line is that everyone IS entitled to their opinion just as you mentioned.

I know, and it's crazy how that theory just never sticks. I specifically stopped posting in the MKii section because MKii owners (or those who don't even own yet and want to yell about it) may be too sensitive about their purchase or future purchase. Yet, here we are again, someone else coming right behind my post and twisting my words.

I can't say there was a single "knock" against any camera in my last post, but you may have taken it as so. Sorry if you did. I'm not combating anyone. I haven't quoted or responded to a single post in this thread attempting to tell someone else that they might be seeing things wrong. I posted my thoughts on the subject and, sure enough, there was an MKii proponent right behind me to let me know this or that.

By the way, I got my MKii when I said I would: when manuall controls were released. I'm speaking from experience with the camera, not other's experiencces.

 

[Kholi]

By the way, explain to me how the GH-1 has less "hidden fees" than any other camera? What does the 5D MKII need that the GH-1 doesn't? Not trying to be a smart a$$, I genuinely don't understand why the 5DII would have more hidden fees.

Thanks
Kit

Well, for starters (if you don't buy the even more expensive kit lens version that seems to be nowhere) ... a lens. Lol

Second? AC power or another battery. The GH-1 comes with a battery and an AC adapter...

That's two already. :beer:

 

[Kholi]

Ah yeah. I should clarify what I mean by "don't like" before I get jumped here.

The image that you get is really nice for 3K. I would love to have that even out of an HPX! Let alone the Gh1. However, which coincides with my initial post, the actual useability factor is not for me.

There are a numbr of reasons why but the major things are lack of an articulating LCD, jello, and locked into 30p. So I like he image, just not the camera itself. The only reason I haven't sold it just yet is strictly because I'm experimenting o find more of what I do like about it. Trying to find a reason to keep it withou sinking more money into it.

I knew I didn't like the cameras ergonomics for my style of video or motion picture acquisition before I purchased because I had already used it a few times. However, I wanted to try it as my own product and explore first hand instead of discounting it either on the experience of others or the small amount of time I had with it.

Am I safe now?

 

[TimurCivan]

i just need to say something to give 2% of perspective here.

lets say canon makes the 5D have 24p. Next people will want variable framerates.... and higher resolution to take advantage of the sensor.... and real XLR audio..... blah blah. and you kno what. it turns into a RED.

I really feel like people are looking at this camera as a video camera that doesnt really work well... ( cough cough RED cough)

Dudes. Its a professional quality SLR STILL CAMERA. Its stills are MAGNIFICENT! MAAAGNNNIFIFCNETTTTTT...... That why i want it. Video is a bonus.