Video Options

[LCandMe]

Hello all, my name is Matt. I am new to these forums, but not new to forums in general. I spent a good amount of time searching and reading through this DSLR Video sub forum. I am sure my questions are trivial to the regulars here, but I ask for your patience….because I seemed to encounter conflicting information with many things I read.

I am posting in the DSLR Video forum because; I am looking to purchase a DSLR with a decent video option. Many people suggested buying a video camera to shoot video, but I want the versatility of both.

My intended use will be short films. I enjoy the cinematic shallow depth of field/selective focus shots that from what I understand cannot be captured with a video camera. I also read a drawback of DSLRs is the price tag coupled with the cost of additional attachments to make them comparable to video cameras. Regardless, I am still intrigued by them (them being DSLRs).

I have been reading up on the Nikon D7000 and Canon 7D….I know, I know….roll your eyes. This topic has been discussed to death, BUT, I encountered little video comparison. I have also heard good things about the Canon T4i.

With the release of the Nikon D7100 nearing, I am sure there will be, if there hasn’t already, a flood of D7000’s.


I was just hoping to gain feedback from you guys/gals on the three options I listed above or if I am barking up the wrong tree in general.


Thanks everyone for your help and patience!

 

[TheKenTurner]

Have any type of budget? A 7D with Magic Lantern will do anything you demand from your camera, but you could even just go with a T2i and have the SAME EXACT quality, then spend the extra money on lenses, and stuff like that.

to make them comparable to video cameras[/B]. Regardless, I am still intrigued by them (them being DSLRs).

What do you mean by "comparable to video cameras"? When you have a DSLR, you're pretty much ahead of everyone else unless you want autofocus and a CCD sensor.

 

[brunerww]

Hi Matt - welcome to the forum! There was a similar question in another thread recently, called Video: Nikon or Canon. I hope you don't mind, but I'll give the same answer here as I gave over there:

"...Nikon and Canon are both more than adequate for video, and shooters are getting great results with them. One brand is not really any better than the other. But, in my view, the best brand for video in the DSLR/DSLM form factor is Panasonic. Panasonic GH cameras have viewfinders that work in video mode, for example. Canon and Nikon do not.

Panasonic cameras also have silent, autofocusing lenses that continue to work in video mode, while Nikon lenses are noisy and Canon only has one camera where autofocus keeps working in video mode (the Canon T4i).

All Canon and Nikon DSLRs are subject to a shot-ruining phenomenon called moire, except for the new Nikon D5200, the $3000+ Canon 5D Mark III and the $12,000 1D C.

Canons are limited to 12, 22 or 30 minutes of continuous video before you have to restart the camera. Nikons are limited to 20 or 30. Panasonics can shoot continuously for hours.

Here is what the $1300 Panasonic GH3 can do, for about $600 less than the Nikon D600:

[video=vimeo;49420579]http://vimeo.com/49420579[/video]

The GH3 is also a great still camera, with in-camera RAW HDR stacking, wi-fi, a splashproof magnesium alloy body, a headphone jack, and a fully articulated LCD.

This camera is backordered at Amazon, but there are a few in stock right now for $1299 from Kenmore Camera via eBay and for $1298 at Adorama.

Hope this is helpful,

Bill
Hybrid Camera Revolution

 

[LCandMe]

comparable to video cameras"[/B]? When you have a DSLR, you're pretty much ahead of everyone else unless you want autofocus and a CCD sensor.

By way of comparison, a top-of-the-line prosumer camcorder like the $668 Panasonic HC-X900
Bill

I guess after reading this post from Bill on another thread, I assumed a $668 camcorder paves the way for DSLR video. Maybe that's my problem, my inexperience/ignorance brought on my assumptions...

I go back and forth on budget. Do I need the abundance of options the 7D offers? Not now, but I don't want to wish I had them later. The more I think about it, I feel like I should buy an inexpensive model and just get out and use it. Find out what I like and dislike. I don't know, my head hurts with all the options...

Bill- Thank you for the post, it was very helpful. I read through many of the threads in the sub forum and as I re-read them I realize the redundancy in my thread. My apologies. The Panasonic seems like a great fit, but a little more then I want to spend right now. Infinite film time does not seem too important as it sounds like life still goes on without the option. As for AF, I guess I won't know until I try.

 

[paross2]

If money isn't tight, the 5D MKIII is the way to go.

For cost savings, go get you a T4i. Either way, I vote Canon.

Keep in mind these overheat after extended use, so make sure you're aware you'll only get 10-12 minutes of use before you have to shut if off and let it cool down. (Much less if you have to shoot in a hot environment)

 

[grafxman]

I use a 7D. One thing to consider is the variety of lenses offered. Full frame cameras such as the Canon 5D can't use many of the great lenses available because those lenses are meant for APC size cameras. Panasonic cameras seem to have a very limited lens selection. I think you've got things pretty well figured out with the Canon or Nikon you mentioned. FWIW you might dig around on flickr for some comparison videos. All my recent videos are with a Canon 7D. There are video groups and Nikon groups there so you should be able to find some comparison stuff to satisfy your curiosity.

 

[paross2]

Have any type of budget? A 7D with Magic Lantern will do anything you demand from your camera, but you could even just go with a T2i and have the SAME EXACT quality, then spend the extra money on lenses, and stuff like that.

to make them comparable to video cameras[/B]. Regardless, I am still intrigued by them (them being DSLRs).

Not to be rude, but I have to disagree.

The 7D is a full frame camera, so it gets more light and has a different ratio to the lenses you use. Plus the ISO can be pushed further with the 7D, so unless you light your shoots, the 7D has a slightly better picture.

Still, considering everything, the difference isn't huge, so I do agree that a T2i (or T4i now) with some better lenses may be a good choice.


Another thing to consider is the overheating issues. The 5D MKIII handles heat better than the 7D or the T2i, T3i or T4i. If you plan on shooting more than a few minutes at a time, any of them will overheat and shut off to cool down.

 

[TheKenTurner]

7D isn't full frame. Same sensor as T2i, T3i, and 60D.

-Ken Turner

 

[brunerww]

Ken is correct. The 7D is a crop sensor EF-S camera, just like the Rebels - just in a bigger body.

7D specs here show sensor size of 22.3 x 14.9mm (APS-C size)

T3i specs here show exactly the same sensor size - 22.3 x 14.9mm (APS-C size).

LCandMe - if you can't spring for a GH3, take a look at the new $697 Nikon D5200. It costs less than the Panasonic and doesn't have the challenges that the Canons have with moire.

Here is a D5200 shootout with the GH3 (download for a clean comparison):

[video=vimeo;59832019]http://vimeo.com/59832019[/video]

Cheers,

Bill
Hybrid Camera Revolution

 

[brunerww]

And here is a D5200 low light shootout with the $3300 5D Mark III:

[video=vimeo;60135187]http://vimeo.com/60135187[/video]

Pretty good for a $700 camera.