Who shoots primarily video here?

Desert Pictures wrote in post #13586263
If your primary interest is in shooting video, why on earth would you buy a dSLR instead of a dedicated video camera? Is it a case of "just because I can" or it there a technical reason for choosing what is in essence a camera design intended for still photography that has video capability added on (or in)?

Dave

It's purely TECHNICAL .....

1) Sensor Size
2) Lens Interchangeability

Then there is the COST factor, a DSLR is much less expensive than a dedicated video unit with a comparable sensor.

There's a big difference in the quality with your standard dedicated video camera and the quality you pull with DSLRs. The shallow depth of field is always great and the low light capability.

Of course you need to have practice using it. It's like photography, you have to work on it to get good at it. Once you get a feel for manual focus and controlling light, DSLR filming produces amazing results.

mesakid wrote in post #13587266
There's a big difference in the quality with your standard dedicated video camera and the quality you pull with DSLRs. The shallow depth of field is always great and the low light capability.

Of course you need to have practice using it. It's like photography, you have to work on it to get good at it. Once you get a feel for manual focus and controlling light, DSLR filming produces amazing results.

when i first started filming, i used a sony handycam with AF
when i started using DSLRs i was sad i didn't have autofocus.
now, its like i NEED manual focusing wherever i go
when i picked up a camcorder that had autofocus on, i was more focus on trying to get the thing to work on manual focus than i was on shooting it at things.

talbot_sunbeam wrote in post #13586831
You can of course pimp up DSLRS with rails, shoulder mounts, follow focuses, matte boxes, audio recorders etc and make them into a little indie filmmakers rig, which improves things.

unfortunately, many of us filmmakers cannot afford those types of equipment, for now atleast. I wish those equipment were more.... affordable haha

I found shooting video with my 5D2 to be a hassle, I can deal with manual focus but not having 60p is one of the many reasons I went out and bought a Panasonic TM90, got this HD cam for only $350 on black friday sales at bestbuy. It does 1080/60p, AF is dead on accurate with 100% hit rate and very fast, the image stabilizer is light year ahead of the 3~4-stop IS from canon lens, it has an optical zoom range of 21x equivalent to 28–729.0mm, video quality is still great with Intelligent Zoom at 40x (1000+mm), it's super compact and light weight (245g) so I can fit the thing in my pocket! it has no record limitation like the 5D2 being capped at 4GB per clip and the built-in mic is superior to 5D2. The draw back is low light performance and DOF not shallow enough due to the tiny sensor and puny lens. I wouldn't use it to shoot wedding or any serious film(put intended) production, but for typical home video like shooting kids at the park, family vacation trip or whatever, I would grab the camcorder instead of my DSLR for sure.

I shoot a lot of video with my 7D and primarily the 17-55 f/2.8 or the 70-200 f/2.8L MKII. I find a constant aperture a must for video. If you are shooting at f/3.5 and set up exposure for such and zoom out, the aperture stopping down will affect exposure.

5x5 photography wrote in post #13588849
I shoot a lot of video with my 7D and primarily the 17-55 f/2.8 or the 70-200 f/2.8L MKII. I find a constant aperture a must for video. If you are shooting at f/3.5 and set up exposure for such and zoom out, the aperture stopping down will affect exposure.

Yep, definitately. Also, full-time manual focus is a great feature - it means you can initially autofocus on your subject, start shooting and pull manual focus throughout.

On cheaper lenses without FTM, you have to keep switching between autofocus and manual modes on the lens, or give up using autofocus at all.

talbot_sunbeam wrote in post #13589203
Yep, definitately. Also, full-time manual focus is a great feature - it means you can initially autofocus on your subject, start shooting and pull manual focus throughout.

On cheaper lenses without FTM, you have to keep switching between autofocus and manual modes on the lens, or give up using autofocus at all.

I use manual focus when shooting video, the auto focus is pretty slow on video on my 7D.

5x5 photography wrote in post #13592379
I use manual focus when shooting video, the auto focus is pretty slow on video on my 7D.

If you read my post again, you'll see that I said I often use auto-focus to *initially* focus my scene, and then pull manual focus while recording.

talbot_sunbeam wrote in post #13586831
DSLR's are great video tools, in the right circumstances (it's a big reason I got the 7D, though not the only reason)

They make rubbish video cameras, run and gun or documentary video machines - they simply don't have the ergonomics, manual controls and features of a semi-pro video camera, and particularly in audio terms, and it's quite difficult to move the camera and make it not look bad.

However, they do make *amazing* shot gatherers, because shallow DOF video looks so pretty, compared to regular video cameras. I can get a lot more latitude, particularly in low light, with my £1K 7D than my £5K Sony Z5.

You can of course pimp up DSLRS with rails, shoulder mounts, follow focuses, matte boxes, audio recorders etc and make them into a little indie filmmakers rig, which improves things.

But basically, people are using DSLR's for video because you can simply get a "more expensive" creamy look to shots than you can with a regular small chip video camera.

Both tools have their uses, and if you have both you can combine the best of both worlds which is obviously even better.

So no, they are no substitute for a handy camera to take some footage of your holiday or mates wedding etc, but if you want to take the time to set up shots, and have some post-production knowledge as well, they are super useful tools...

Yes, these are not ideal for many shooting circumstances because they are designed for stills and not video. As talbot mentions, for well planned shooting like sit down interviews and low light narratives, these cameras really deliver excellent image quality. For a true video camera with the same quality sensor at this price range, there really aren't many options. If you have $$$$$ though, go get a RED Scarlet when they're released next year.

For lens, many HDSLR shooters use fast primes for exceptional natural low light work. 50 f/1.4 is a great start. If you have the 24, 35, 85, or 135, you're in good shape.

DSLRs are being used for many different circumstances, they are filming portions of major motion pictures, sitcoms, commercials. With a nice rig DSLRs are just as good if not better than dedicated video cameras. They are much smaller and can get in a lot better angles than the traditional set cameras. Yes they have limitations but to say they are not ideal to use is completely wrong when they are being utilized to make a lot of money.

7D_Sniper wrote in post #13596579
With a nice rig DSLRs are just as good if not better than dedicated video cameras.

For *some* things, yes. Not all things.

7D_Sniper wrote in post #13596579
Yes they have limitations but to say they are not ideal to use is completely wrong when they are being utilized to make a lot of money.

Well, it's not wrong to say they are not *ideal*, because they are not. *All* current DSLR's that shoot video are not ideal for shooting video, because they are primarily still cameras with some bolt on video features. They still lack the ergonomics and control of "proper" cameras but you can get around some of those.

But the fact is, if you are willing to work around the limitations, and invest over time to improve the shortcomings, you can get great results which are *easily* worth the money...

I got a 7D mainly for video and I use a 35mm 1.4 L.
I own a EX1R but I like the 7D look better for most things and although it's not a perfect video camera I just like the look much better.

I was totally against DSLR's for video until I shot with one. Now I looking at the 1DX or maybe the DSLR-C.