kodjo
New member
This is the Zacuto camera shootout 2010, third episode:
http://www.zacuto.com/shootout
It is a great test but it would have been better if they had tested different type of cameras instead of different models of the same type.
I would have tested:
Two different 35 adaptor systems, two different DSLR systems, Red one, two different high end cameras, and Fuji plus Kodak. That would have been 9 things to test and compare. I would have tested movement and audio as well.
It is unfortunate they did not test adaptors. They say there are too many cameras and you can't compare apples and oranges. They also say the test is objective because they used outside experts to conduct it. They say they do not make any money with this test because this is not an in house test to promote these things.
But they don't say this:
a) The fact the tests includes only DSLR makes it already a promotion for DSLR since it encourages people to not take a chance with equipement not tested here.
b) The tests did not include movements, pans, and tracking shots which we know are the weak spots of ANY video camera. Am I to assume these type of tests are irrelevant? They are not. Even a low end camera will look great until you move it.
c) They show us 3 films made by professionals. That means we see only the final images, graded and colour corrected after a person has spent incredible time selecting the best takes. I could make anything on any camera given enough time and post production work. So these films tell us nothing pertinent for the average producer.
d) The video is embedded on the Zacuto main page next to the pictures of all sorts of DSLR items for sale. That is not very subdle. If I wanted to sell 35 adaptors, I would conduct an adaptor test and place it in the middle of my adaptor sales page. Certainly I would not want to show too much of the negative aspects of the adaptors.
e) The most poweful works spoken here are "this is the end (of film)". This suggests that it took DSLR to beat film (and not 35 adaptors which have been around for 3 years). Who speaks these words? I don't know. It could be anybody. But showing the person speaking these words in the middle of a large auditorium suggests everybody in the audiotorium agrees. That is called the crowd credibility effect.
f) A film is only as objective as the person who edits it. All of the comments were generally positive. Am I to assume there were no really negative opinions?
In conclusion while the tests are very interesting, they were conducted in very controlled conditions, included only DSLR cameras, and were edited by people who make a living with selling DSLR accessories. One should be mindful of its objectivity. :happy:
http://www.zacuto.com/shootout
It is a great test but it would have been better if they had tested different type of cameras instead of different models of the same type.
I would have tested:
Two different 35 adaptor systems, two different DSLR systems, Red one, two different high end cameras, and Fuji plus Kodak. That would have been 9 things to test and compare. I would have tested movement and audio as well.
It is unfortunate they did not test adaptors. They say there are too many cameras and you can't compare apples and oranges. They also say the test is objective because they used outside experts to conduct it. They say they do not make any money with this test because this is not an in house test to promote these things.
But they don't say this:
a) The fact the tests includes only DSLR makes it already a promotion for DSLR since it encourages people to not take a chance with equipement not tested here.
b) The tests did not include movements, pans, and tracking shots which we know are the weak spots of ANY video camera. Am I to assume these type of tests are irrelevant? They are not. Even a low end camera will look great until you move it.
c) They show us 3 films made by professionals. That means we see only the final images, graded and colour corrected after a person has spent incredible time selecting the best takes. I could make anything on any camera given enough time and post production work. So these films tell us nothing pertinent for the average producer.
d) The video is embedded on the Zacuto main page next to the pictures of all sorts of DSLR items for sale. That is not very subdle. If I wanted to sell 35 adaptors, I would conduct an adaptor test and place it in the middle of my adaptor sales page. Certainly I would not want to show too much of the negative aspects of the adaptors.
e) The most poweful works spoken here are "this is the end (of film)". This suggests that it took DSLR to beat film (and not 35 adaptors which have been around for 3 years). Who speaks these words? I don't know. It could be anybody. But showing the person speaking these words in the middle of a large auditorium suggests everybody in the audiotorium agrees. That is called the crowd credibility effect.
f) A film is only as objective as the person who edits it. All of the comments were generally positive. Am I to assume there were no really negative opinions?
In conclusion while the tests are very interesting, they were conducted in very controlled conditions, included only DSLR cameras, and were edited by people who make a living with selling DSLR accessories. One should be mindful of its objectivity. :happy:
Last edited:
