DSLR over a camcorder?

[table1349]

If you want to drive a nail into a piece of wood, don't buy a pair of pliers you buy a hammer. You can drive a nail with a pair of pliers, but a hammer is more efficient, getting the job done faster with less effort. Of course there are some folks that would prefer to buy the pair of pliers to drive nails with just in case by some remote chance they come across a nut that needs tightening. Me, I use a hammer for driving nails.

But what if I redesign that pair of pliers so that they now have a free hammer attachment that does not impede the regular use of them, but also adds a good hammer function? Cause that is what the DSLR with video is - ok its not a video camera and most photographers are not great videographers on their first go (its a whole other world of skills and methods).

It's already been done. It is called a fencing tool. Trust me, I have many years of experience with them. For fixing or putting up new fence they are fine. They hammer, grab, twist, cut, and pull as needed. But for building a house and hammering that many nails, I want a real hammer. They are not comfortable for all day hammering and will wear you out.

I understand what you are talking about and if it is something that is just for fun and you don't care about getting the best quality from the final product or the extra trouble you have to go through, then that is fine. I use the tool bit because I am also a woodworker. A few of my woodworking friends have the Shopsmith Mark V. A combo tool, as they do not have the space for dedicated tools. Every one of them would rather have dedicated tools if they could. Fortunately I do have the room to have dedicated tools. The tools are easier to use and quicker to set up than the shop smith. The downside is I don't have the room to set them in stations. I have to roll each tool out as I need it, set it up, use it, put it away and pull the next tool. In the old house I had a large shop outback of the house. Every tool was set in it's own place. I took work to the tool instead of bringing the tool to the work. Quicker and easier to work with.

 

[Dao]

I understand where you're coming from, but I have to think a lot of people (read: first time dslr buyers) are lured in by the video option only to find it's not anywhere near as easy to shoot video with an slr as they thought. I'm sure a fairly high percentage of them then abandon the idea of shooting video with it. The first dslr with a viable af system for video will, however, be a game changer.

Yep, those need the video feature for shooting birthday parties, kids soccer games stuff is better off with regular consumer camcorder. For those who are interested in cinematic filming, DSLR is quite useful.

As for autofocus, they do not really need it. Quoted from Wikipedia (Follow Focus)

"A manual lens is usually a requisite for professional filmmaking. This is because some autofocus lens systems use lasers or infrared beams to measure the distance between the lens and the subject. This technique does not anticipate an actor stepping into the foreground of the frame, nor can it focus on anything which is not in the center of the frame. Passive Autofocus (not needing lasers or infrared beams) systems cannot always adjust quickly enough to sudden changes. The job of the focus puller then is to adjust the focus onto different subjects as well as change, or (follow) focus during movement of the camera onto the required subject, hence the term."

 

[Nikon_Josh]

One point about people quoting how 'House' used a Canon DSLR to shoot the final episode?

I hear everyone saying this to me as if it means everyone in Hollywood will be using DSLR's from now on!

I have a strong suspicion that Canon paid 'House' alot of money for them to use a Canon DSLR, just so Canon could use it as marketing material.

My God! It clearly has worked for Canon, as this is all I hear people blathering on about nowadays! Marketing BS!

 

[Crollo]

Would you recommend a friend to use a camcorder over a DSLR for photography?

 

[Dao]

Would you recommend a friend to use a camcorder over a DSLR for photography?

When the camcorder can out a photo as good as a camera, why not?

There are people who shoot video in the past with video camera are now moving to DSLR. It is mainly because of the video quality from the DSLR and most important they can now shoot video with shallow DoF without spending ton of money.

 

[greybeard38 10]

If they do more video than still photos, they'd be better off with a camcorder. DSLRs certainly have some nice video capabilities these days, but they're not going to replace dedicated video cameras any sooner than video cameras with still photo capabilities will replace DSLRs.

Yeah, I've got a D5100 and the video is pretty good but it has its' limitations. One is trying to do a smooth panning zoom. Much easier with a camcorder.