Why the hate for video capable DSLRs?
- Thread starter Beautor
- Start date
- Status
KeithR said:
Surley this completely depends on how its edited?! I LOVE watching vidoes of mountain bikes and things such as kite surfing and all that, especially when its been ran through twixtor (slow motion interpolation programme) and edited well with good music. It looks incredible. Check out some the redbull stunt stuff if you can be just a bit more open minded about it.
I like watching videos of birds flying through the air when its done well. BBC documenty team always seem to do a good job of making their videos on animals in their natural habitat interesting, so im sure its not impossible for someone else to do the same with the right editing and narrative.
I agree if someone puts no effort in at all and literally just films a subject such as bird flying about for 10 seconds yes it is boring, but thats the same as people taking very average photographs with no effort or though about how to make the subject interesting.
Upvote
0
D
daveswan
Guest
There's something else besides "birds in flight" "mountain bike jumping" etc.
It's called "narative". Ever heard of it?
The cinematic DoF that comes with a 35mm (Cine) sized sensor is wonderful for narative. No you don't have to use super-shallow DoF all the time, it's a creative tool, same as grading in post.
I'm thinking a lot of the "hate" I'm seeing is the mirror image of the cine-snobery I find on certain cine forums I go to, sort of "Thicko cheapskate photographers, why don't they use Cooke S5 lenses (At £20,000 a time)"
It's called "narative". Ever heard of it?
The cinematic DoF that comes with a 35mm (Cine) sized sensor is wonderful for narative. No you don't have to use super-shallow DoF all the time, it's a creative tool, same as grading in post.
I'm thinking a lot of the "hate" I'm seeing is the mirror image of the cine-snobery I find on certain cine forums I go to, sort of "Thicko cheapskate photographers, why don't they use Cooke S5 lenses (At £20,000 a time)"
Upvote
0
Jedifarce said:
Day exteriors in narrative film are usually shot between t4 and t8 (there are tons of exceptions, Social Network way more open, New World way more stopped down) for the sake of the AC's sanity and so it doesn't all look soft and mushy. Taking into account the size of a 5d sensor relative to super35 film, that would be more like f5.6 and 1/2 to f 11 and 1/2. Plus that's where lenses perform best.
You can shoot whatever you want, though. Social Network was almost all t1.3 (f1.2 or f1.1 likely). On a 5d that feels like f2, maybe?
Upvote
0
KeithR said:
If you put up your still of a bird in flight next to my video shot at 300fps played back at 24fps, I'm gonna get more viewers.
Upvote
0
D
daveswan
Guest
Axilrod said:
Magic Lantern has enabled video on the 50D
QED
HurtinMinorKey said:
And have you seen footage of starlings coming in to roost? Beautiful ever-changing patterns, or slo-mo of a fish-eagle taking a fish in flight?
As I said, the mirror image of the cine-snobbery I see on other forums.
Upvote
0
when this whole idea came out of video on DSLRs i wasnt for it, just because i almost felt like it wasnt a pairing that shouldnt happen. but its evolved in such a successful manner well beyond the amateur level that i have accepted it and have even myself, shot shorts with it. its great. i shoot fully manual to begin with, so its fun and fairly easy to grasp imo
Upvote
0
F
FredBGG
Guest
Just go and shoot with a medium format digital and you'll see that sensors designed for stills only do a far better job. Both color and black and white is better. Today's 35mm DSLRs still can't match the color quality of 5 to 6 year old MF digital backs. It would be interesting to see what could be done with a 3 layer stills only sensor in one of today's high end 35mm bodies.
Upvote
0
+1FredBGG said:
I don't understand why they (Canon + Nikon) won't give us at least one body designed only for stills. Me and many many other photographers would buy it in a heart beat, because we don't give a sh1t about video in our DSLRs.
I really hate that IQ for stills is being sacrificed for stupid video.
Upvote
0
T
tt
Guest
briansquibb said:
Doesn't even the RED need help with that though? If it's consistent, can you sort to some degree colour? I remember seeing the Zacuto shoot out and wondering how it'd pan out in a year or two (I think the Scarlet wasn't available at the time). The d800 and 5D successor should have sorted some issues out (eg wobble)
Upvote
0
OK, why the hate? Here is why ... in a hateful rant:
1. I never shoot video (except on rare occassions a brief crappy clip of a scene on my iphone). Main reason is that the creation of at least halfway decent moving images requires levels of visual and staging creativity and amounts of time I do not have. I find still photography including post processing more than challenging enough.
2. I and millions of other photographers around the world would like to be able to choose cameras that are unfettered by any video features and unharmed by any of the many compromises inherent in enabling video capture along with stills capture. Those compromises manifest themselves like a bad disease ... starting with type and design of imaging sensors, data pipeline and processing, hardware and firmwar/software down to control elements and ergonomics of todays bastard stills/video cameras. Capable of 2 things, but none of the two at 100%.
3. Rather than wasting half or more of the DIGIC's prowess on bloody video encoding I would like all of this processing power harnessed for the capture and processing of still images and to drive AF-systems with yet unheard of capabilities. Including a 2012-worthy reincarnation of the Canon Eye Controlled Focusing [ECF], the most intuitive and ergonomic interface man has ever created to get a picture in focus.
4. I would like a camera body without a dedicated red video "record" button and without any other physical control elements, unnecessarily bloated "video" options in its menu tree and without any of the other video-related gimmicks that just get in the way of what I would like to do with my camera: capture the best possible still images in the most uncompromised and straightforward way!
5. The most convincing tools are dedicated to one and only one prupose. A hammer is the best tool to drive in nails with as little effort as possible. For screws ... take a screwdriver, for gods sake! Seeing all these video types taking DSLRs and putting them into those monstrous rigs with follow focus control and steady cam rigs ... they would be way better served and overjoyed with dedicated video cams ... of course with a large sensor and of course not more expensive than a 7D, a 5D II or maybe a C300. The video types don't care for stills - and I fully appreciate that.
6. For me please a 7Ds or a 5Ds or even better a mirrorless Canon SOL S (finally retire those old EOS-DSLRs of yesteryear!) with "s" for "stills only".
Make it so, Canon ... engage!
1. I never shoot video (except on rare occassions a brief crappy clip of a scene on my iphone). Main reason is that the creation of at least halfway decent moving images requires levels of visual and staging creativity and amounts of time I do not have. I find still photography including post processing more than challenging enough.
2. I and millions of other photographers around the world would like to be able to choose cameras that are unfettered by any video features and unharmed by any of the many compromises inherent in enabling video capture along with stills capture. Those compromises manifest themselves like a bad disease ... starting with type and design of imaging sensors, data pipeline and processing, hardware and firmwar/software down to control elements and ergonomics of todays bastard stills/video cameras. Capable of 2 things, but none of the two at 100%.
3. Rather than wasting half or more of the DIGIC's prowess on bloody video encoding I would like all of this processing power harnessed for the capture and processing of still images and to drive AF-systems with yet unheard of capabilities. Including a 2012-worthy reincarnation of the Canon Eye Controlled Focusing [ECF], the most intuitive and ergonomic interface man has ever created to get a picture in focus.
4. I would like a camera body without a dedicated red video "record" button and without any other physical control elements, unnecessarily bloated "video" options in its menu tree and without any of the other video-related gimmicks that just get in the way of what I would like to do with my camera: capture the best possible still images in the most uncompromised and straightforward way!
5. The most convincing tools are dedicated to one and only one prupose. A hammer is the best tool to drive in nails with as little effort as possible. For screws ... take a screwdriver, for gods sake! Seeing all these video types taking DSLRs and putting them into those monstrous rigs with follow focus control and steady cam rigs ... they would be way better served and overjoyed with dedicated video cams ... of course with a large sensor and of course not more expensive than a 7D, a 5D II or maybe a C300. The video types don't care for stills - and I fully appreciate that.
6. For me please a 7Ds or a 5Ds or even better a mirrorless Canon SOL S (finally retire those old EOS-DSLRs of yesteryear!) with "s" for "stills only".
Make it so, Canon ... engage!
Upvote
0
but without income from customers interested in video, there's very little money for developing new sensors and processors!
stick to 1Ds3, pay an arm and a leg, or be done with this silly argument
and in any case let me remind you that for decades the stills world was subsidized by the movie industry (which made film cheap thanks to its huge demand)
stick to 1Ds3, pay an arm and a leg, or be done with this silly argument
and in any case let me remind you that for decades the stills world was subsidized by the movie industry (which made film cheap thanks to its huge demand)
Upvote
0
NormanBates said:
not correct. There were 15 years of enormous progress in sensors and processors development used in DSLRs ... way before any of them was video-enabled. Ever since, most of the development money seems to be spent on this effort to try and turn still cams into half-assed videocams too.
All those who want to put sorry little video clips on youtube would be well enough served with their smartphones or compact digicams. And "serious" videographers at all levels from semi-pro to Hollywood-aspiring Indie filmmaker would be way better served with pure and true video cams. Sony, Pana, Canon could have started making large-sensor videocams a long time ago - customers were not holding them back.
Demand for HDSLRs was and is solely fueled by the fact, that they offered good video-quality for significantly less money than true videocams, but definitely not by overwhelming demand of users who wanted to have one combi-tool to capture video and stills with. It would be more than good enough, if both lines - stills and videocams - have the same or fully compatible lens mounts, so that quality
Video-enabled still cams are just being stuffed down photographers' throats ... if there was free choice between say a 5D-V (video+stills) and a 5D-S (stills only) for 20% less money I would expect that 80% of cameras sold would be the stills version. But again, we are beinmg denied that choice.
outdated, end of life DSLRs without video - e.g. 1Ds III - are no solution. But offer me a 1D-S (1D X minus video functionality) for 4k and I take it any day.
hammers for nails - screwdrivers for screws.
trucks for heavy loads - sportscars for speed.
videocams for video - still cams for still images!
Upvote
0
B
briansquibb
Guest
Used 1Ds3 are going for about the same price as a 5DII in the UKAvTvM said:
It may be outdated but it still produces very fine pictures. If you are prepared to put up the 21mp, 5fps, 2 card slots, pro AF with a limitation of iso 3200 then it makes a lot of sense - and it is cheaper than the 5DIII too
A 1960s Rolls Royce is outdated by a VW Golf - but I would still prefer the RR if it was in good repair
And the RR would be less than the Golf too.
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
