Jump to content

Dslr Hd Video Vs Camcorder Hd Video


Rusevelt

Recommended Posts

I need to grow some testicles

QFT.

btw Adam/Mark when do we get the 1st tarty videos in HD actually same applies to Rowan too.

As soon as we've made one :P haha.

Realistically... a few weeks I guess providing the weather is decent and we can get out riding. My ankle is rogered at the moment and I'm keen to play with new camera so that helps...

Did a video of a local rider at the weekend: http://www.trials-forum.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=150388

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Google Vincent Laforet, as he is the Mac Daddy when it comes to dSLR shooting. His two videos Reverie (First video done on 5Dmk2 and shot over a weekend) and Nocturne (Shot all in available light on a 1Dmk4 at ISO 6400+ I think) show just how good dSLR video is.

Oh, and Phillip Bloom.

However, for the ordinary user, they're really rather awful at the moment. You need to worry about aperture and shutter speed, manually focus, follow focus, worry about sound, use constant lighting instead of flash, etc... If you have the time to shoot slowly then you'll get great results, but as Mark says, you can't just point a camera at something and hope it'll do the rest.

Frankly, it's a digital cinema and stills camera at the moment. If you want a video camera, just buy a video camera.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seen some of Phillip Blooms stuff and it is very cool... Just wanted 'Nocturne' as well and that was sweet too.

From your post Chris, it sounds like you're not much of a fan of DSLRs for video..? Taking into account their price in relation to a 'normal' video camera with similar 'performance' (used lightly! I guess I mean features, low light performance, ability to manually control stuff, etc) then surely they are a bit of a revelation. Of course, you need to know what all the settings are to get the best out of it (same for any sort of camera I suppose...), but to have the option is very cool in my opinion. You can just wang it on auto if you get stuck... I guess the main downfall is manual focus, but most normal video cameras at the same price would just close their aperture up and have a huge DOF anyway, which auto mode seems to do too.

Edit: Reading back, sounds like you think they're not a great idea for the average user as they are too complex to get the best out of? Sorry if that's all jumbled, my head isn't working very well at the moment!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

btw Adam/Mark when do we get the 1st tarty videos in HD, actually same applies to Rowan too.

mine have been in HD for a while now ;)

seriously though - I will probably get one of martyn, kurt or Blake up in the next couple of months. I may never end up in front of this camera - just because it's so hard for a stand in camera man to use. I guess it may be second angle / atmos shots... But I'm not too bothered - I bought this as a toy for me to play with and have fun with. Hopefully I'll be able to start rigging it up better and have a few more lenses available soon!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Edit: Reading back, sounds like you think they're not a great idea for the average user as they are too complex to get the best out of? Sorry if that's all jumbled, my head isn't working very well at the moment!

Bingo. When people want to buy a dslr to save money on buying a separate video camera then I think they're missing the point. Like people who want to buy a trials bike with a 400mm seat post to use for XC as well, they're missing the best of both worlds.

Apart from Dave Marshall. But then he's mental. Where was I?

Using a dSLR for video has great lenses, sensors and image processing, but the ergonomics are terrible. Just look at the collection of strap on viewfinders, carrying rigs and Lego-esque focus followers you can buy for an absolute fortune. It's buildng video into a body not designed to be carried and operated at the same time.

I'd love a 7D, 5D2 or any video body. Would be fascinating to explore what can be done, but I'd still take a camcorder on holiday...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So i've had a bit of a play with the camera over the course of the day and at first i was ready to throw the thing back as it was all grainy and blurry. Not cool at all.

After a bit of reading up and flicking through the settings i removed the low light gain setting and some other features that cause problems with overall quality and it's looking much better now. Still got to try and figure out a way to smoothen out fast motion with it but it is improving and it is certainly a step up from my mini-dv Standard definition camera. At the very least i have 3 years accidental damage so if i use this one for a bit and it ends up breaking when some nicer ones are about it won't be a complete waste.

Now for a blurry, unclear fisheye to make me ride better..... :giggle:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Using a dSLR for video has great lenses, sensors and image processing, but the ergonomics are terrible. Just look at the collection of strap on viewfinders, carrying rigs and Lego-esque focus followers you can buy for an absolute fortune. It's buildng video into a body not designed to be carried and operated at the same time.

I'd love a 7D, 5D2 or any video body. Would be fascinating to explore what can be done, but I'd still take a camcorder on holiday...

Ah-ha, we are singing from the same hymn sheet then :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Still got to try and figure out a way to smoothen out fast motion with it but it is improving

You, well, won't.

It's an effect called 'rolling shutter' where when the image is read from the sensor, it's read one line of pixels at a time. If you move the camera quickly as the sensor is being scanned, then you'll get the top of the image being different from the bottom half. It happens to any camera with CMOS sensor (including a lot of camcorders, all dSLRs and even the RED one.)

To not get it you either need to shoot static things, or get a camera with a CCD sensor, like the JVC HM700.

There is a plugin you can for After Effects to try and reduce the effect, but it is abuot $500. More details here.

There are ways to help ease a rolling shutter effect though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Watching that skate park video, reminds me of a blog post Vincent Laforet posted about using lots of ND filters to keep shutter speeds down to 1/60th or 1/30th of a sec as required while still keeping the lens wide open. Interesting idea.

What would the benefits of that be exactly...? Just removing the 'rolling shutter' effect I'm guessing? *thinking out loud* ... But it would give you motion blur instead I guess...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you want to maintain a certain shutter speed (such as 1/30th if you're shooting at 30fps) then if you're shooting in bright sun and you can only get down to F16 (for example), then a strong ND filter would allow you to maintain the shutter speed while limiting the depth of field to F5.6 or whatever you want.

There's a whole world of science and experience around setting shutter speeds and the like for video. Rules over camera shake apply far less when your subject is moving, it's not just the same as photo stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You, well, won't.

It's an effect called 'rolling shutter' where when the image is read from the sensor, it's read one line of pixels at a time. If you move the camera quickly as the sensor is being scanned, then you'll get the top of the image being different from the bottom half. It happens to any camera with CMOS sensor (including a lot of camcorders, all dSLRs and even the RED one.)

To not get it you either need to shoot static things, or get a camera with a CCD sensor, like the JVC HM700.

There is a plugin you can for After Effects to try and reduce the effect, but it is abuot $500. More details here.

There are ways to help ease a rolling shutter effect though.

It's not so much that, but i found out it's recording in 1080i. If you pause the video you can quite clearly see two versions of an object when it's paused as opposed to the 1080p not really having that problem. Took it out in the sunshine and i have to say i'm pretty happy with the quality. It'll certainly do for the odd biking video here and there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Using a dSLR for video has great lenses, sensors and image processing, but the ergonomics are terrible. Just look at the collection of strap on viewfinders, carrying rigs and Lego-esque focus followers you can buy for an absolute fortune. It's buildng video into a body not designed to be carried and operated at the same time.

Yeah, that's the main thing I'm not keen on with dSLR filming, really. I quite like doing more fluid, movement sort of filming which often means you've got to hold the camera at random angles, and I'm not sure I'd be able to do the same with a dSLR. I guess it's different strokes for different folks though, there's pros and cons to all of it.

Weak ending there, haha.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

surely you can set the shutter speed to whatever you want when shooting video as long as it allows you to still get the frame rate ?

sure a high shutter speed is going to reduce motion blur but it will also reduce rolling shutter effects too with fast moving objects too?

I dont see a problem with going out in the sun setting your apeture wide open and whacking up the shutter speed to get the DOF you want.

EDIT: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shutter_angle

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmm, had a quick Google...

It seems that the 180 degree shutter idea (i.e. 30fps equals 1/60th shutter, 60fps = 1/120th shutter, etc...) If you bump the shutter up, then it does reduce motion blur (and makes slo-mo shots done in computer smoother) but there's also a desirable amount of motion blur to give a certain look and make motion more natural and less stuttering.

(Pixar actually invented a way of adding blur onto objects in computer animation to make the subjects look more real and less computer generated. Just a thought.)

As with photography, there's no perfect answer, just that "It depends"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess it's just a matter of playing around to find the best 'look'. I did read that fast shutters end up making computerised slo mo more crisp, and it makes sense... but also follows that some motion blur is more natural.

All adds more weight to the 'no good for people who just want to point and shoot' argument :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

wee bit of shitty video that demonstrates wide open + high shutter....

motion in the frame doesnt seem as bad as motion of the frame - pans etc - they just look weird.

ill upload the night time one in a sec.

first video and shots during the day (which was incredibly bright - not a cloud about)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

wee bit of shitty video that demonstrates wide open + high shutter....

motion in the frame doesnt seem as bad as motion of the frame - pans etc - they just look weird.

ill upload the night time one in a sec.

first video and shots during the day (which was incredibly bright - not a cloud about)

Looks bloody good quality to me :D

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Same here (Y) when the subject is in focus, the detail is bloody amazing even with the HD turned off. But getting the right balance is clearly a case of trial and error......not an easy thing to master as Rowan's video shows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...