best dslr camera for video, stills? shooting stills and video simultaneously?

[rpm]

"can put out a better quality product than a $15,000 HD video camera"

i doubt that, raw video? im sure the 15K camera will obliterate what the 5D Mk II can do. in terms of how you treat, process and render the video, then yes, its possible the 5D Mk II can show comparable results if not better but again all depending on how each material is treated thereafter.

there is a reason they cost that much, same reason why medium-format cameras are beyond the everyday consumer's reach, same reason why not everyone owns a Ferrari, theres a reason it carries that price tag. however the 5D Mk II allows for greater use by the indie crowd as you said but dont try telling me a proper 15K+ unit cant surpass video from a 5D Mk II, it def can and it def will given the professional post-production work that will be done by those who can afford to use those units.

btw the House finale was amazing however im sure im not the only one that noticed the very shallow DoF....

atm whats truly holding back HD-SLR cameras is the lack of shooting raw video. but even then. you wont see it replacing dedicated video equipment amongst those that can afford its use. it will be there to supplement.

 

[Village Idiot]

"can put out a better quality product than a $15,000 HD video camera"

i doubt that, raw video? im sure the 15K camera will obliterate what the 5D Mk II can do. in terms of how you treat, process and render the video, then yes, its possible the 5D Mk II can show comparable results if not better but again all depending on how each material is treated thereafter.

there is a reason they cost that much, same reason why medium-format cameras are beyond the everyday consumer's reach, same reason why not everyone owns a Ferrari, theres a reason it carries that price tag. however the 5D Mk II allows for greater use by the indie crowd as you said but dont try telling me a proper 15K+ unit cant surpass video from a 5D Mk II, it def can and it def will given the professional post-production work that will be done by those who can afford to use those units.

btw the House finale was amazing however im sure im not the only one that noticed the very shallow DoF....

atm whats truly holding back HD-SLR cameras is the lack of shooting raw video. but even then. you wont see it replacing dedicated video equipment amongst those that can afford its use. it will be there to supplement.

Raw video?

There have been numerous comparisons of the 5D MKII to the Red system and although there a limitations, like having to fix the jello shakes in post if they occur and the 15ish minute time limit in shooting, would you rather pay $4,000 or $15,000? That's when the images are comparable.

Now take something like a current Canon pro digital video camera. They have tiny sensors and the ability to change lenses will absolutely murder your wallet. The sensor alone won't allow the quality to touch a 5D MKII.

Canon's XL H1s is $7,600 on B&H.

 

[rpm]

there you go about what id rather pay, you're talking about indie film makers, those video comparisons arent made primarily for film studios. you're making it a monetary comparison. im talking about raw quality + professional post-process work, i can guarantee that the 15K+ unit will have advantages that the DSLR cannot achieve. the House episode had a very shallow DoF for example.

unless you show me Universal Studios or Fox Studios are replacing their equipment with DSLRs or blockbuster movies are being filmed entirely with DSLRs that argument holds little water across the board. it only holds for independent film makers and those wanting to get their hands wet....

you telling me Avatar could have been filmed with a 5D Mk II, you telling me Inception could be shot entirely with a DSLR? im sorry but while monetary wise its a lot of big numbers and economics, for those who use the Red system for example, i dont see them currently replacing their equipment with 5D Mk IIs, its going to supplement their current hardware. because there are benefits to the big boys toys....

the 5D Mk II is not a big boys toy in terms of video and it wont be.

what i argued wasnt that the 5D Mk II and its kin (be it Nikon or other) dont have their place or that they arent beneficial, but you cannot compare a Red system for example to a DSLR in terms of output capacity when not factoring in their costs and when you do....ask yourself this...who is using a Red system or the 15K+ unit? its not you or me. its not the pro-wedding photographer...its going to be Universal Studios, Fox Studios, Speilberg, the people who can budget for it. while the 5D Mk II will open doors for the aspiring upstarts and indie guys first and foremost.

 

[Village Idiot]

there you go about what id rather pay, you're talking about indie film makers, those video comparisons arent made primarily for film studios. you're making it a monetary comparison. im talking about raw quality + professional post-process work, i can guarantee that the 15K+ unit will have advantages that the DSLR cannot achieve. the House episode had a very shallow DoF for example.

unless you show me Universal Studios or Fox Studios are replacing their equipment with DSLRs or blockbuster movies are being filmed entirely with DSLRs that argument holds little water across the board. it only holds for independent film makers and those wanting to get their hands wet....

you telling me Avatar could have been filmed with a 5D Mk II, you telling me Inception could be shot entirely with a DSLR? im sorry but while monetary wise its a lot of big numbers and economics, for those who use the Red system for example, i dont see them currently replacing their equipment with 5D Mk IIs, its going to supplement their current hardware. because there are benefits to the big boys toys....

the 5D Mk II is not a big boys toy in terms of video and it wont be.

what i argued wasnt that the 5D Mk II and its kin (be it Nikon or other) dont have their place or that they arent beneficial, but you cannot compare a Red system for example to a DSLR in terms of output capacity when not factoring in their costs and when you do....ask yourself this...who is using a Red system or the 15K+ unit? its not you or me. its not the pro-wedding photographer...its going to be Universal Studios, Fox Studios, Speilberg, the people who can budget for it. while the 5D Mk II will open doors for the aspiring upstarts and indie guys first and foremost.

Er....you do realize that you can adjust the aperture to get the desired DOF?

A portion of SNL
Entire season finale of House
Lady Gaga's Telephone video
BBC Television shows
Iron Man 2
Harry Potter rumor

5D MKII vs. Red One - Obviously a pre updated firmware model. Now has manual settings and 24p. If you're shooting in low light, the that Red One system isn't going to do crap for you unless you're spending even more on professional lighting.

Why not? Did you see some of the rigs on the 5D MKII? So a movie like Dinner for Schmucks couldn't have been? Or The Other Guys? Your point is moot saying that the 5D MKII can't be used professionally if you're saying that it has to be used on some big budget major CGI movie. There are plenty of big budget movies that the 5D MKII could replace other cameras being used. It's just the indie film makers that embrace it and show that a DSLR can be an amazing tools since it gives them the performance of a much more expensive camera for the fraction of the cost.

That's a trend that completely defeats the people saying that video in a DSLR is a gimmick and that it's something people will only use for their kids and animals.

And the DSLR will have advantages that the $15,000 professional camera cannot acheive.

 

[rpm]

were those moves ONLY shot with it? thats what im asking...i said it can be used to supplement...not replace. you're taking portions of my whole argument and exploding it to proportions i never meant.

i know you can change aperture but im curious to why it remained shallow throughout - its not like its the 'look' house has. it was only in that one episode which coincidentally shot with the DSLR. that everyone likes to tout as an example...

i never said it cant be used professionally...i know its been used alongside the big boys. i never denied that. i never denied it hasnt been used in big films or big budget films like IM2. i just said i dont see it replacing it entirely. i also did say its a big gain for the indie crowd....ill repeat it again you're taking portions of my whole argument and exploding it to proportions i never meant or as isolated statements which they werent.

btw what benefits can you list? aside from price-ratio differences? - you mentioned iso. so ill give you that one. but you're talking about people who CAN AFFORD TO USE IT AND ALL THE ASSOCIATED GEAR TO COMPENSATE FOR THE SHORT COMINGS. which is what i said. for those who can afford it, they will use the Red system foremost and use the DSLR where the Red system cant achieve the desired results...i said they are used to supplement the main hardware...

 

[o hey tyler]

were those moves ONLY shot with it? thats what im asking...i said it can be used to supplement...not replace. you're taking portions of my whole argument and exploding it to proportions i never meant.

i know you can change aperture but im curious to why it remained shallow throughout - its not like its the 'look' house has. it was only in that one episode which coincidentally shot with the DSLR. that everyone likes to tout as an example...

i never said it cant be used professionally...i know its been used alongside the big boys. i never denied that. i never denied it hasnt been used in big films or big budget films like IM2. i just said i dont see it replacing it entirely. i also did say its a big gain for the indie crowd....ill repeat it again you're taking portions of my whole argument and exploding it to proportions i never meant or as isolated statements which they werent.

btw what benefits can you list? aside from price-ratio differences?

Maybe the DoF was shallow throughout to maintain a level of consistency? I noticed it also, but they mainly used the 5D2 for the close quarters shots. If the DoF has to be shallow to support the low light and close quarters, I would assume that the producers would want to continue the trend through the episode (as most of it took place in a collapsed building.)

 

[rpm]

were those moves ONLY shot with it? thats what im asking...i said it can be used to supplement...not replace. you're taking portions of my whole argument and exploding it to proportions i never meant.

i know you can change aperture but im curious to why it remained shallow throughout - its not like its the 'look' house has. it was only in that one episode which coincidentally shot with the DSLR. that everyone likes to tout as an example...

i never said it cant be used professionally...i know its been used alongside the big boys. i never denied that. i never denied it hasnt been used in big films or big budget films like IM2. i just said i dont see it replacing it entirely. i also did say its a big gain for the indie crowd....ill repeat it again you're taking portions of my whole argument and exploding it to proportions i never meant or as isolated statements which they werent.

btw what benefits can you list? aside from price-ratio differences?

Maybe the DoF was shallow throughout to maintain a level of consistency? I noticed it also, but they mainly used the 5D2 for the close quarters shots. If the DoF has to be shallow to support the low light and close quarters, I would assume that the producers would want to continue the trend through the episode (as most of it took place in a collapsed building.)

ah thanks for that, good point, didnt consider that one.

hehe edited my post just before you replied...

i really dont want to carry this debate further villageidiot, im not arguing one is worst than the other, each has its place, each has its benefits and in all seriousness, each industry has their leading product and no way the 5D Mk II will trump the Red system for example. thats a given. so you cannot expect it to replace the system entirely....same way the Red system isnt being used to take stills for model shoots. no we got the medium format cameras for that. its a complimentary system that is happening now between the two...it will stay that way for those THAT CAN AFFORD BOTH...you make it sound like everyone is indie or everyone wants to go the cheapest route or everyone is going to forget why the Red system is there in the first place...

 

[Village Idiot]

were those moves ONLY shot with it? thats what im asking...i said it can be used to supplement...not replace. you're taking portions of my whole argument and exploding it to proportions i never meant.

i know you can change aperture but im curious to why it remained shallow throughout - its not like its the 'look' house has. it was only in that one episode which coincidentally shot with the DSLR. that everyone likes to tout as an example...

i never said it cant be used professionally...i know its been used alongside the big boys. i never denied that. i never denied it hasnt been used in big films or big budget films like IM2. i just said i dont see it replacing it entirely. i also did say its a big gain for the indie crowd....ill repeat it again you're taking portions of my whole argument and exploding it to proportions i never meant or as isolated statements which they werent.

btw what benefits can you list? aside from price-ratio differences? - you mentioned iso. so ill give you that one. but you're talking about people who CAN AFFORD TO USE IT AND ALL THE ASSOCIATED GEAR TO COMPENSATE FOR THE SHORT COMINGS. which is what i said. for those who can afford it, they will use the Red system foremost and use the DSLR where the Red system cant achieve the desired results...i said they are used to supplement the main hardware...

There are benefits over the Red system. If there weren't, then don't you think the people using the 5D MKII would be using the Red system or any other hd digital video camera to film?

 

[rpm]

yet you list none? and again you nick pick but dont answer to the argument as a whole? they compliment eachother...thats why they're used and for those that use it exclusively its cause of price...i said they both have their benefits but iso aside, price aside, list me 5 that are exclusive to DSLRs.

anyway im over this argument. you're not really adding to it and i dont want to restate what ive said before.

 

[Village Idiot]

yet you list none? and again you nick pick but dont answer to the argument as a whole? they compliment eachother...thats why they're used and for those that use it exclusively its cause of price...i said they both have their benefits but iso aside, price aside, list me 5 that are exclusive to DSLRs.

anyway im over this argument. you're not really adding to it and i dont want to restate what ive said before.

You state you don't want to argue about anything anymore and then ask why I don't post differences?

Low noise at high ISO
Lens selection
DOF
Size
Black levels

Happy?

Oh, an price. You still have to put that in there. The fact that you're even trying to defend the Red system against a DSLR that now costs something like $2,500 is funny.

 

[newbnewb]

I snorted. :lmao:

Silly rabbit. Trix are for kids.

Seriously, check out the 7D: Has HD video and you can take pictures while shooting video.

LMAO: "looks like this is the future"

you can laugh all u want, but the 7d can't shoot stills and video simultaneously. it is either one or the other. hence this is the future:

A DIY 9Shooter: Shooting Stills & Video Simultaneously & Audio Too! | DIYPhotography.net

so says the magazine DIGITAL SLR PHOTOGRAPHY from the UK!!!

Great issue of DIGITAL SLR PHOTOGRAPHY from the UK!!!
Check out the very last page where Caroline Wilikinson writes:
“…. HD video is slowly entering the marketplace as standard in DSLRs and pros will be eventually expected to deliver web-worthy package of movies and stills. There are already examples of where stills and moves have been merged. For instance, have you noticed the moving magazine covers or corporate portraits on website? Video is already starting to take the place of pictures on news provider’s websites too. It was always said a picture is worth a thousand words, well now you can get 24 frames-per-second—now that’s a lot more words….
HD video is set to take over commerical and advertising photography as campaigns turn from print to online. And editorial photography is in question too. … People argue that the magazine industry is solid, that most people like the feel of a magazine each month in thr hands…But is the apple ipad just a fad or thr start of something far more progressive? Photographers will more than likely have to learn how to shoot multimedia, edit video and more importantly come up with creative solutions that blow the amateur out of the water, if they’re to continue earning incomes as a full-time pro."
—Caroline Wilikinson, p. 146, Parting Shot, August 2010, Digital SLR Photogaphy, (from the UK)

Really? Because own a T1i, and I can take all the photos I want while shooting video. And it's older than the 7D.

yes, but you cannot shoot video and stills *at the same time*.

the moment you start shooting stills, the video is interrupted.

shoot 1-10-100 continuous stills and the video will not shoot during that time at all.

 

[newbnewb]

there you go about what id rather pay, you're talking about indie film makers, those video comparisons arent made primarily for film studios. you're making it a monetary comparison. im talking about raw quality + professional post-process work, i can guarantee that the 15K+ unit will have advantages that the DSLR cannot achieve. the House episode had a very shallow DoF for example.

unless you show me Universal Studios or Fox Studios are replacing their equipment with DSLRs or blockbuster movies are being filmed entirely with DSLRs that argument holds little water across the board. it only holds for independent film makers and those wanting to get their hands wet....

you telling me Avatar could have been filmed with a 5D Mk II, you telling me Inception could be shot entirely with a DSLR? im sorry but while monetary wise its a lot of big numbers and economics, for those who use the Red system for example, i dont see them currently replacing their equipment with 5D Mk IIs, its going to supplement their current hardware. because there are benefits to the big boys toys....

the 5D Mk II is not a big boys toy in terms of video and it wont be.

what i argued wasnt that the 5D Mk II and its kin (be it Nikon or other) dont have their place or that they arent beneficial, but you cannot compare a Red system for example to a DSLR in terms of output capacity when not factoring in their costs and when you do....ask yourself this...who is using a Red system or the 15K+ unit? its not you or me. its not the pro-wedding photographer...its going to be Universal Studios, Fox Studios, Speilberg, the people who can budget for it. while the 5D Mk II will open doors for the aspiring upstarts and indie guys first and foremost.

yes but the 5d mark ii is a game changer & then some!

amazing how for under $8,000 you can get all this pro video/audio/photography equipment. as a newb i am thinking big.

45surf 9SHOOTER HD video audio stills & dslr photography technology for arts entrepreneurs: The Ultimate One-Man Rig: Increasing Annual Revenue/Money/Cashflow/$$$$ With Audio, Video, and Stills Capability



The Ultimate One-Man Rig: Increasing Annual Revenue/Money/Cashflow/$$$$ With Audio, Video, and Stills Capability

Well, it's tough times for business out there, so we artists and entrepreneurs need every advantage we can get. The 9shooter philosophy is all about improving and expanding one's skills while surfing the technological revolutions to the max. How much money/revenue/cashflow could you add to each shoot by incorporating audio and video? $200? $500? $700+? If you do 30+ shoots a year, this could easily boost your income by $10,000 - $20,000 or more, while also expanding your client base! And $10,000 would be more than enough to cover all the pro equipment below, with cash to spare, even if you were starting from scratch!

How much value would the ability to capture HD video & HD audio be during a photoshoot for you? For that matter, how much value would it add to be able to capture high-quality stills while recording audio and video? Suppose you mounted an HD video camera under your DSLR and offered your clients--be it a wedding party or newspaper editor--a running, unedited video of everything you shot that day? A few hundred dollars here and there extra on each shoot, and it would all begin to add up!

i'm lookin to gain expertise in both video & stills.