A question about noise/quality

Please excuse me if this has been posted before, i'm trying to find what the difference is between DSLR video (lets say 5diii) vs a professional video camera (not sure of model or anything)? The latter is what I can't seem to find information on, what do professional videographers/ HD-TV stations shoot with and how does their ISO sensitivity compare to DSLR's?

I seem to recall my cousin saying they use insanely fast lenses for video work... what kind of lenses are out there? What are the sensor sizes?

Thanks for any help,
Allan

Canon Broadcast Lenses...
http://www.usa.canon.c​om …s/lenses/broadc​ast_lenses

The final output of both a broadcast camera and a dSLR is identical. Both deliver 1080p HD.

Broadcast lenses are built for speed and light-gathering ability but they suffer the same characteristics as still lenses. Most notable are variable max apertures (in real-world situations) and losing a stop or more with extenders (teleconverters)

They have much more hardware in/on them though for servo-driven zooms and ability to communicate with the camera.

Here's something I posted a while ago explaining the differences. This is more geared towards to Xf300 (canon's flagship small-sensor video camera), but it's a similar story to most small sensor video cams.

*I'm assuming by 'professional video camera' you are talking about small sensor ones, not the pro cine ones. Basically, I'm assuming you talking about the type news boradcasters use.

"The 3-chip XF300 will be super sharp, but remember, It's not a replacement for your DSLR. It's a small sensor video cam that's more geared for news broadcast. You will not achieve the 'dslr' look with it. The XF300 has a 1/3'' sensor which equates to a 7.21x crop. I've used 1/3'' videocams as well and I vastly prefer the 5d3 over them. Even though the 5d3 is softer, the image looks so, so much nicer. With the XF300, you'll have to deal with abysmal (compared to the 5d3) low light performance and you won't be able to get any blurry background goodness as easily. What you do get with the 300 is a razor sharp HD image, broadcast ready codec (50mbs 4:2:2 MXF) and pro video features (peaking, zebras, XLR inputs etc). But the two CANNOT compete wen it comes to the images. They're two COMPLETELY different cameras for different purposes. XF300 is more suited to news gathering, ENG work, whereas the mark3 is geared better towards cinematic work. (you can use them vice versa, of course...but in general, you get my point...it's harder to use the 5d for ENG and harder to get the same filmic look with the 300...not impossible, though)"

Bottom line:

small sensor video cam:
-Good lens reach (usually 30-600+ mm)
-terrible low light performance (compared to a 5d3, for example)
-Really nice, sharp, full HD image
-full controls on the body for easy access
-good internal codec
-proper audio inputs
-proper video features

DSLRs:
-Great low light performance (in general)
-image slighty soft dye to downscailling. (the FULL HD tag is a lie, its HD, but hardly full 1080)
-really nice cinematic look/DoF
-no XLRs for audio
-usually* pretty poor internal codec

By "insanely fast lenses for video work"

Assuming small sensor video cams, yes their lenses generally start at f/1.6 - f/1.8. The high end models are constant f/1.6 while the cheaper ones (sub 10k) are variable and end at f/3.6-ish.

The F/1.6, is, however, offset by the horrible high ISO noise performance on the tiny sensors.

*** now, if you're talking about the cine pro video cams (alexa, c300, fs100 etc) with large sensors, then there's no contest. They beat DSLRs hands down in almost every category when it comes to video. They also costs many times more.

what about the black magic? price wise it's the same as the 5DM3.

maverick75 wrote in post #15618096
what about the black magic? price wise it's the same as the 5DM3.

Yes, it's the same price out of the box. But you can't use it out of the box. You need several thousands worth of accessories to make it work.

http://vimeo.com/48956​550

Also, the hardware required to process the files will also add to that budget.

Didn't know that, thanks for the info!

Wow great info everyone, this forum is the place to be! What are the huge cams they use on news sets/movies? Half the reason for this question coming up tonight was because I keep seeing such low light (night time) video shots with like zero noise. I have noticed this for a while but it got me thinking further. I guess im talking about expensive video cameras, how do their sensors compare to DSLR's? Does the c300 sensor beat the 5diii? (for exmple).

Allan.L wrote in post #15618427
Wow great info everyone, this forum is the place to be! What are the huge cams they use on news sets/movies? Half the reason for this question coming up tonight was because I keep seeing such low light (night time) video shots with like zero noise. I have noticed this for a while but it got me thinking further. I guess im talking about expensive video cameras, how do their sensors compare to DSLR's? Does the c300 sensor beat the 5diii? (for exmple).

If you're talking 'ollywood....

Yes, the c300 beats the 5d3. Obviously. One is a 16 grand pro video camera, the other is a 3.5k stills camera which happens to shoot great video. Don't get me wrong, I love my 5d3....but it's just no contest.

The 'huge cams' you see on movie sets are not necessarily huge cameras in their own right...although they could be. Certain films are shot on Red cameras. Those cameras by themselves are tiny (slightly bigger than the 5d3)...However, to get them to function properly, you need to build huge rigs around them to place monitors, decks, batteries, recorders etc.

Then there are also the cameras that are genuinely huge, like the Arri Alexa, Sony f65 and various film cameras like the Arriflex. These cameras are already huge and rigs add to that even more.

Of course unless you are are shooting a feature film, there's no reason to buy these cameras. They will set you back more than $50,000 for just the base camera, let alone the lenses and accessories needed to run them. Hell, most feature films rent the cameras. I know a few well off DoP who own Red Epics/scarlets....But I don't know of anyone who actually owns an Alexa...which will set you back over 100k. If you're shooting a feature, by all means rent one...or buy a RED if you can afford to. If you aren't, a 5d3 is more than good enough.documentary guys seem to like the c300 and most will agree the fs100/700 are great value too. These are the affordable pro cine cams that you can easily buy if you're doing this professionally.

*On the topic of zero noise in low light, that's because they light their scenes properly. You can't just go out at night and shoot pitch black with zero noise on any camera.

-
-
-

Now on the topic of news sets...I'm assuming you're talking BBC studio shots/ Tonight etc....
Those are generally small sensor 2/3'' studio video cams with pedestal systems. I'm not too familiar with this line...But i know they aren't cheap as well. They usually go for >20,000 for just the camera and another 20,000-30,000 for the lenses. The pedestal systems they put the cameras on also costs a fortune. http://www.vinten.com …uct/osprey-light-pedestal


*Bottom line, just buy a 5d3, c300, fs100/700 if you want to get into professional video. Leave the 'huge cams' for hollywood and News.

You're missing a zero on the cost of both pieces there...

FlyingPhotog wrote in post #15618648
You're missing a zero on the cost of both pieces there...

Haha which one? I know my Red and Alexa pricings aren't missing zeroes. The News ENG cams vary a lot and I'm not too familiar in that front...

The 800X and 1000X lenses for broadcast use will set you back six figures, not five.

The pedestal you linked to and the camera shown on it are both industrial at best.

All up with Sony's best camera, Canon lens, pan head and sticks, you're looking at $200,000 to $300,000.

FlyingPhotog wrote in post #15618685
The 800X and 1000X lenses for broadcast use will set you back six figures, not five.

The pedestal you linked to and the camera shown on it are both industrial at best.

All up with Sony's best camera, Canon lens, pan head and sticks, you're looking at $200,000 to $300,000.

Oh no..i wasn't talking about the 800x/1000x. Not to that extreme. But yeah, it is expensive. My point exactly. Thanks for the clarification. I really haven't been paying too much attention to the small sensor world ever since i got the 5d3. ;D

Donald Ong wrote in post #15618078
Bottom line:
small sensor video cam:
-terrible low light performance (compared to a 5d3, for example)

I would tend to disagree with that statement, we utilize JVC GY-HD200/250 camcorders and I have shot video at night under lighting that rendered my competitions HDSLR (7D) useless for video and with daytime shots at zero gain with a 1/60 shutter it is quite common to have to set the neutral density filter to notch 2 or 1/16 just to get the iris open to f8.

Wayne

FlyingPhotog wrote in post #15618685
The 800X and 1000X lenses for broadcast use will set you back six figures, not five.

The pedestal you linked to and the camera shown on it are both industrial at best.

All up with Sony's best camera, Canon lens, pan head and sticks, you're looking at $200,000 to $300,000.

FWIW WPTV News in West Palm Beach FL has gone HD with the JVC GY-HD250 camcorders on KA-HD250U studio docks on Vinten peds for just around $40K each.

The days of spending $200+ for a studio camera is rapidly disappearing into the rear view mirror.

Wayne

Allan.L wrote in post #15617765
The latter is what I can't seem to find information on, what do professional videographers/ HD-TV stations shoot with and how does their ISO sensitivity compare to DSLR's?Thanks for any help,
Allan

90% of electronic news gathering is still done with shoulder mounted camcorders, they are rugged and can be setup with a lot of battery power, there is a move toward handhelds like the Canon XA10 but that move is primarily driven by the bean-counters not engineers nor the cameramen who are stuck with them.

They have two primary problems, one being they are a puppy mother when it comes to pulling long shots without a tripod and their 7 volt power systems are incompatible with the industry standard 12 volt nominal camcorder accessories and their power systems lack decent capacity.

As for sensitivity I can shoot with my JVC’s in light levels that makes many HDSLR’s for video useless.

Wayne