Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 31

Thread: Video Camera vs DSLR

  1. #21

    Default

    Another point worth noting is that most DSLR's don't have an audio input for your microphone so you need to record your sound on something else. This can be done of course, but means an extra piece of equipment, an extra pair of hands, and as simple as it should be to sync the sound when editing it can be difficult to match up lipsync speech and keep it looking right.

  2. Default

    yeh dslr's are great, as a student film maker ( who operates mostly with no budget) dslr's are magic, i was using a jvc 201 previous and for price and versitility the dslr won hands down, the easy se, price and even video quality just blew the jvc out of the water.
    iv been using the 60d simply because i love the flip screen, just opens up what i can do with the camera really.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    972

    Default

    Why DSLR?
    Certainly pro#s like em and many wedding vids are done using Canon - I'm not so sure about Nikon, although expensive I get the impression they are not quite up to it.
    However, whilst a DSLR is invaluable for Stills, because you can fine-tune the focus before taking, with Video there is no mirror advantage . . . and that's why I bought a NEX5 - same APS-C sensor as many DSLRs and the same snags when in movie-mode, but at half the price.
    One advantage of a DSLR/NEX over camcorder, is the ability to take specialist lenses, esp wide aperture long-lenses.
    The ability to take close-ups is also very much the DSLR/NEX territory, since you can fit bellows, etc to get really close.

    Certainly pro camcorders do the Audio side well, with level-meters for manual setting...but Audio is nearly always the poor-part of video and most of the better Canons do have a jack-input and headphone socket, I understand - - so you have to build-up from that.

    As an ex-Nikon user, I'm really surprised Nikon hasn't taken the video-market....instead it appear to be attempting to sell at pro-prices and el-cheapo to consumers. Mindyou I think Sony is also short of a few marbles when it comes to their range - the NEX series is still well-short of decent lens range and is competing with their own DSLRs - it makes no sense to me.
    I bough the NEX5 because the HD quality was brilliant (playback on a Sony TV) and it was far cheaper than a decent Panasonic movie-camera (the 700), although this excells in the audio dept with sockets. I have an adaptor to use my Nikon lenses and an f/1.8 50mm is equiv to 75mm on 35mm, so you get a fantastic light-gathering power with a longer focal length, which is ideal for portrait-shots, interviews etc. You can stand-back and still get in close - much less intrusive than a wide-lens.

    What I'm asking is this.... in movie-mode why does the DSLR matter? Surely a large sensor and "live" LCD is the business. The sensor in NEX5 is the same as in the Sony GH10 which is just over 1k5 - and although it has a longer zoom, it doesn't look value-for money to my mind.

    Finally, another advantage of the Stills camera, is it doesn't look like a camcorder - so you can achieve footage without folks realising.... if that's what you want. Also the flip-screen is a great asset for high-level shooting, which the camcorder cannot do. It is those "unusual angles" that help "lift" a vid IMHO and a camcorder can't do this . . . . and most DSLRs are too heavy, so the NEX5 is quite the business, if you can live with the downs.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Warsop, Nottinghamshire.
    Posts
    4,465
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vidmanners View Post
    ..It is those "unusual angles" that help "lift" a vid IMHO and a camcorder can't do this ..
    But any pro or even semi-pro operator will also have the appropriate grip equipment to get those angles so that statement strikes me as odd

  5. #25

    Default

    It's all a matter of choice and preference. You got to use what you a comfortable with.

    I opted to go with (yet to purchase) the Nikon D7000 for a few key reasons. Firstly the D7000 has a plug-in mic option. In camera mic on DSLRs are no-where near as good as a camcorder. The size of the mic and diaphragm is a dead give away, but it is an issue easily solved. RODE have a range of phantom powered video mics, that produce excellent sound quality. The reset can be fixed in post-production using software like Adobe Audition (I work in radio, and Audition or Cool Edit Pro as it was formally, is the industry standard).

    Another reason I made the switch is that the glass (or lenses) used in DSLR's is of a greater quality than most camcorders, well certainly my old Canon XL-1 anyway. Besides, I'm a Nikon user and have quit a few expensive lenses, so switching to anything but a Nikon would be stupid. Even with adapters, the ease of use and quality won't be the same. Remembering I did have a Nikon adapter for my Canon XL-1, so have experienced that first hand. As an example I used my 8mm Fisheye prime lens on my friends Nikon D3100, and it looked amazing in video mode.

    Over the last year or so many accessories have come out for DSLR video users, so it has never been easier to achieve the results you desire, from a DSLR.
    Matt

    "Given that God is infinite, and that the universe is also infinite... would you like a toasted teacake?"

    about.me/mattauckland
    twitter.com/mattauckland

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    East Riding of Yorkshire
    Posts
    141

    Default

    Currently, I personally think the best DSLR which has the best of both worlds is Panasonic's GH2. Probably because I own one, hehe, so I expect I'm a bit bias about it, but it does indeed have several features that make it stand out from the other DSLRs out there.

    Its onboard mics are actually pretty much on par with most camcorders, being stereo 48khz, and it has extremely good silent auto focus using Panasonic lenses. It's got mic in, a shoe socket, and a twisting screen like camcorders have. It's been "unlocked" with a firmware modification, which allows it to shoot 24p, 50i, and 60i, 720p50, and 720p60, which is great if you need to make videos on both sides of the pond. The modification allows extremely high quality video as well. Take a look at these screenshots from 24p mode... it looks more like a photo than a video, it's just that detailed.

    full sized image

    full sized image

    full sized image

    Colours seem to be more accurate than the Canon DSLRs, but it lacks that "wow" look on skintones that the Canons seem to artificially add. Still, it's a great tool that's very flexible.

    Even so, it's still a lot more fiddly to operate a DSLR, and sometimes if you're in a rush a camcorder will do a better job because you'll do less thinking about how to operate the camera and focus etc, and think about what you're actually shooting etc instead.
    Last edited by MatthewPerks; 11-14-2011 at 01:16 PM.

  7. #27

    Default

    Ithink if you're not a DSLR user at all, and don't want to spend a massiveamount of money, then yes the Panasonic GH2 is a good choice. I wouldn't go asfar to say it is the best DSLR for video work, but in that price bracket Iwould say it is a good choice.

    If you're looking for the best of the DSLR range, for both quality and flexibilitywith lenses and accessories, then it is a fight between the Canon 7D and theNikon D7000. Both cameras are as good as each other, so it really is a matterof personal taste. For myself, as I already have around 2000 worth of lenses,then to go with anything but a Nikon is just bloody crazy. But I've alreadysaid that a number of times.

    Earlier when I was talking about mics I mentioned Rode mics. It was the RodeVideomic Pro I was trying to remember. Not bank bustingly expensive and has thestandard horse shoe mount on it. Highly recommend for its superior quality. Icertainly would NEVER rely on an internal mic, and anyone who works inprofessional audio like I do would understand.

    Any way, I just remembered a video that the super skilled Hippie Glen (GlennMcElhose) of Diggnation and Revision 3 fame did about his DSLR kit. He is aworking professional in the world of video production, and uses both DSLRs andmore professional HD camcorders. This video is a breakdown of his DSLR kit, andis very in-depth. Well worth a watch: http://www.dirtsalad.com/2011/02/27/camera-gear-rundown/

    Hope that helps.

    Matt

    "Given that God is infinite, and that the universe is also infinite... would you like a toasted teacake?"

    about.me/mattauckland
    twitter.com/mattauckland

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    972

    Default

    Andy Lockwood you suggest pros and amateurs have access to high-level shots, and yr posts suggest a crane-hire is 450/day. I don't think that compares well with my pole-cost (about 10) - of course the shots won't be as good, steady, etc. but getting a high-level shot does lift the vid. making possible views that one can't carry about in the car "just in case", along with my Figg-Ring which cost nowt. (Manfrotto 240-ish). Also I can raise the pole in a moment and back - so no-one notices.
    As it's a hobby; - the cost is a real issue.

    Other Posts: #25, I will agree that a DSLR with mic-input is a great feature, but it's never been an issue with me - I guess I must accept a "lower-quality level" and hope that there is another clip to lift "as and when". Sony does make a forward mic at sub 100 but I suspect it's not a lot different. The NEX5 mic is surprisingly good ONLY if you fit a dead-cat - that has made a huge difference.
    Also, a separate mic really needs a boom-operator, otherwise it's just not that much different. The improved freq response means the ext. mic needs much greater isolation, er IMHO.


    #26, #27. The Pana GH2 is advertised at 999* (Jessop), so it's getting close to the price of a basic Canon....and about twice the price of the NEX5 - I know which I rather have - two cameras. That's two views and both having the larger sensor. I've used it for Fireworks and the noise-level is surprisingly low - indeed even after spending hours editing it hasn't once made me worry that "noise" will be "mark down" the vid. Most of the time the 35-200 lens (35 equiv 52-300mm) was at f/22 [Bonfire] to avoid burning the highlights. However, I did miss some fireworks "crowd shots" because I'd left the f/1.8 lens in the car.....so my next project is a barrow to secure more stuff.
    One benefit of two NEX5 cameras would be I don't need to buy that WA (16mm) lens again.....I've never used it in earnest. (It has its uses in Still-photography). It's a great shame the NEX5 range doesn't have an XLR socket option.....this weakness is exposed doing interviews in really noisy situations.

    *Other options show similar price to NEX5,
    Last edited by vidmanners; 11-15-2011 at 12:28 AM.

  9. #29

  10. Default

    OMG what a camera. Does anyone know if the sony F3 is the only one of these type of cameras to offer a servo len?

    wedding videographer shooting modern wedding video

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. DSLR users ... might be off use
    By enc in forum Sound Recording and Audio Editing
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-28-2010, 12:15 PM
  2. Nikon D40 DSLR kit and accessories
    By enc in forum Ebay and other classified ads: gear, cameras and video editing stuff
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-24-2010, 10:11 PM
  3. wireless monitor for dslr
    By rastas in forum Forum Announcements and News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-20-2010, 05:50 AM
  4. DSLR video...
    By benesotor in forum Technology advice and tips
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-03-2009, 10:21 PM
  5. timelapse tutorial with dslr
    By fnkydesign in forum User Videos
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-02-2008, 06:56 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •