Canon 5D Mark II or a Real Video Camera?

[l1nkje]

Hello guys,

Well the Subject kind of talk for itself but let me be clearer about it ;

I'm a french camera man/editor (so i already apologize for my poor english ) and i've been willing to get a video camera for a couple of years now. I'm also a passionate of photography so here is my dilemma :

I wanna do both (videos / pictures) which means i wanna include my work within my passion into the same device, so my first choice went for a DSLR (such as the 5D mk2).

But, for my job, i do a lot of interviews which can be very tricky for a DSLR; I'd rather have some XLR microphone(s) that i can plug than some jack ones; I know there are some adapters (such as dxa-5d) but that's pretty huge & heavy i think. Maybe there are some other choices to have proper audio during interviews, and i'd be thrilled to hear them, but is a 5d mk2 a good choice for certain purposes in videos?

I've rent and used the 7D and 5dmk2 for 2 years and i always used the sennheiser mke400 but i need some real mics for now on.

I don't know if i explained myself very clearly to you guys, but i'm around if you need more details.

Thanks!

 

[Ewinter]

Many Videographers who use a DSLR for video use something like the Zoom H4n. It's a separate audio recorder, and you just sync the audio in post. It has 4 track recording, 2 XLR inputs and isn't that expensive.
I've got one and they're great

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Canon says use a camcorder!
http://cpn.canon-europe.com/content/education/technical/canon_inc_on_the_eos_system.do

 

[Axilrod]

If you're shooting run and gun documentary/interview stuff I'd go with a large-sensor camcorder. DSLR's aren't ideal for interviews, especially the 5DII with it's 12 minute recording time limit.

 

[HurtinMinorKey]

If you're shooting run and gun documentary/interview stuff I'd go with a large-sensor camcorder. DSLR's aren't ideal for interviews, especially the 5DII with it's 12 minute recording time limit.

True that. Adio synching can easily be done in post, but you can't change the recording time limit.

 

[paul13walnut5]

Go for a T4i: Flip out screen very very useful for single operator. Recording cap not so much of an issue.
Look at Beachtek DXA-5Da or DXA-SLR for a way of getting proper microphones into any canon DSLR.
Gives you single files & single unit to hold no synching or forgetting to hit record!

The APS-C cameras have more forgiving depth of field for video (you can still acheive the shallow DoF look) exhibited slightly less jello shutter too.

 

[TAF]

If you're shooting run and gun documentary/interview stuff I'd go with a large-sensor camcorder. DSLR's aren't ideal for interviews, especially the 5DII with it's 12 minute recording time limit.

Based on the OP's comments, I would recommend the 5D3, with a Zoom H4n for audio recording. The combination meets all the requirements he laid out.

A large sensor camcorder is better for video, in the sense that the controls and features are more optimized for video, but it doesn't do stills. The OP indicates that he wishes to do both. The 5D3 has a longer time limit for recordings, and the Zoom is so cheap ($250) it isn't much of a consideration in the overall purchase.

 

[paul13walnut5]

Based on the OP's comments, I would recommend the 5D3

That he had twice the budget he was actually talking about? I reckon if he wanted to spend the money on a 5D3 he would be asking that question.

This is the one thing I HATE about this forum. A lot of posters wanting folks to double their spend. And this just isn't possible in the current climate for a lot of people.

 

[l1nkje]

Well of course i was thinking about a 5D3 but that is way too expensive and i don't think the difference between a 5D2 & 5D3 is really THAT big.

I'd rather have a good customized 5D2 than a 5D3 with clearly less stuff to work with!

I've been looking on some websites about DXA-5Da, and it actually fits what i need i guess. It doesn't seem as heavy as i thought, so it could be nice to pair it with some awesome microphones ; i was thinking about Sennheisers (ew100 or if you have any ideas i'm all ears)

So basically if i'm on about 5d2 + DXA-5Da + mics (but not a priority as i got a MKE-400 to start with), i would either need a tripod or a glidecam (i was thinking glidecam hd-2000) to get some really smooth footage and enjoy it in Paris_by_night !

What do you think?

 

[M.ST]

I recommend to use a good video camera and a DSLR that fits you budget.

 

[dave]

Go for a T4i: Flip out screen very very useful for single operator. Recording cap not so much of an issue.
Look at Beachtek DXA-5Da or DXA-SLR for a way of getting proper microphones into any canon DSLR.
Gives you single files & single unit to hold no synching or forgetting to hit record!

The APS-C cameras have more forgiving depth of field for video (you can still acheive the shallow DoF look) exhibited slightly less jello shutter too.

+1...totally agree.

I have a 5D2, T2i(550D) and XF100 camcorder.

For any work that requires flexibility the APS-C sensor is that bit more manageable. I definitely use the 550D for video more and with the updates now present in the T4i I imagine it is much more user friendly. It is possible that the 5D2 would be too limited if there is much impromptu/fast moving footage required.

I really like the XF100 - the sensor is average - but it has a great codec for edits (especially premiere pro)...but it is not good for stills.

A good tripod is a necessity - I use a Sachtler FSB4 and am really happy with it.

Overall, it comes down to what you really will do the most. 5D2 is great if you want good value with excellent still image quality, but if more than 50% of your use would be video I would look elsewhere.

good luck with it.

 

[FunPhotons]

If you're doing any professional video I'd suggest getting a real video camera. I get frustrated with my attempts at non professional video on a DSLR. Poor focus control, poor live controls, poor viewing screen, poor audio control and input. If you're a poor indie filmmaker, or a Photog who wants occasional video it is nice, otherwise I wouldn't bother.

 

[l1nkje]

If you're doing any professional video I'd suggest getting a real video camera. I get frustrated with my attempts at non professional video on a DSLR. Poor focus control, poor live controls, poor viewing screen, poor audio control and input. If you're a poor indie filmmaker, or a Photog who wants occasional video it is nice, otherwise I wouldn't bother.

Well you seem to forget that i also wanna shoot pictures.
Also, I don't really agree with you on certain points; tried 7D (latest firmware) + 5d2 (magic lantern 2.3 firmware) and i didn't notice any of those things you mention.

I also tried real video cameras such as Z7, it of course feels nice, but i always prefer the colors & the DOF on a DSLR.

 

[l1nkje]

God, real video cameras are SO MUCH expensive compared to a DSLR :<

 

[paul13walnut5]

THey aren't the same hammers: they crack different nuts.

Sometimes I wouldn't be without my ENG, sometimes I wouldn't be without my HDV, sometimes I wouldn't be without my DSLR.

If you don't need long record runs (suchas for documentary) then DSLRs can give you a visually richer end result - with the right settings, right audio and right light, DSLR footage can look incredibly expensive.

Unless you get a 2/3rds type camera conventional video always looks like video.

 

[TAF]

Based on the OP's comments, I would recommend the 5D3

That he had twice the budget he was actually talking about? I reckon if he wanted to spend the money on a 5D3 he would be asking that question.

This is the one thing I HATE about this forum. A lot of posters wanting folks to double their spend. And this just isn't possible in the current climate for a lot of people.

You are absolutely correct. My response was way too short and without detail to explain why I was making the recommendation I was. At a minimum I should have added the qualifier "given the limitations discussed by the other posters above" as to why I was suggesting going a bit beyond his original plan (hardly double...$2K to $2.8K at present US advertised prices).

I suspect that the reason many posters on this board will recommend spending more than the questioner initially suggests is this...based on many years of experience (40+ in my case), one learns that it is frequently better to save up and spend what is necessary to have what you need (or more subjectively, what you actually might want) than to compromise and simply spend what you have. Especially when the difference is not that great.

I will reiterate that regardless of the camera chosen, get the Zoom. It's a superb solution to the audio problem, and performs far beyond what the manufacturer guarantees it will (esp. at the higher sample rates).

 

[unadog]

I, too, would recommend the T4i.

It adds the touch screen with auto focus for video. It has face tracking focus, so if you set it up for an interview, it would automatically keep teh subjects face in focus if he/she moved forward or back whiel takinjg.

In my mind, that helps move it closer to the "camcorder" realm.

You can also get teh new 18-135 mm STM lens, which has silent autofocus for video. It also "hunts"for focus differently than older lenses, in a much nocer way that looks better on video.

You can also do auto focus "focus pulls", by touching a new spot on the LCD where you want the focus to move. This same auto focus technology with STM lenses will be implemented on the C100.

Thr T4i has teh same basic sensor as the 7D.

You might keep an eye out though,, it seems there is a camera missing between teh T4i and the 1D-C. Perhaps something like a 3D-C or a 7D-C yet to be announced? Although if Canon announces a 40 MP camera, that may push another video DSLR further out.

Good luck!
Michael

The auto focus for stills is also very good.

 

[paul13walnut5]

@TAF

hardly double...$2K to $2.8K at present US advertised prices

Here in the UK you are still looking at £2600 for the 5D3 vs £1600 for the 5D2. A bigger percentage gap, and if you look at the equivalent in dollars, not a small gap at all.

Don't assume everybody has, or wants to spend the same amount of money as you. Sometimes you don't need to, and sometimes you need to make do.

 

[dave]

To paraphrase Paul13Walnut5, most devices are going to have a core use (something they are best at) but with many devices having additional capabilities it is tricky to make a decision. It sounds like you really need to think about what you want to focus on the most.

If it is video, there is no doubt IMO that there are better options than the 5D2 -- possibly the next (rumor only!)entry level Canon Full Frame, on the horizon - if you are set on full frame. The T4i is a great low cost suggestion, with a sensor that will hold up exceptionally well against most prosumer camcorders.

If you really want to shoot a lot of stills with a bit of video, the 5D2 could be very satisfying. I love my 5D2, because it is the best stills camera I have ever actually used.

If you want to shoot your cats chasing each other round the house you may as well throw the 5D2 out the window, or invest in some serious add-ons to make up for it's shortcomings.

I have found that the quality of my video has not improved dramatically based on which camera I actually use. I have multiple cameras but this is more about the right tool for the job rather than quality. The T2i stands up great.

My video improved most because of things I picked up over time like a decent tripod, slider, mics and editing software.

I am not saying that you necessarily need all of these, but something like a T4i would presumably leave some room in the budget (given that you are suggesting a 5d2) for a couple of add-ons that could improve your footage and final product no end.

These are just my suggestions and I hope mine and others are helping you.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

God, real video cameras are SO MUCH expensive compared to a DSLR :<

The problem with a HDDSLR is that the body is about 10% of the total cost for professional video. with a Camcorder, its closer to 60%