I'm thinking of switching to HD-SLR, coming from HDV would like your views on the new 60D for video.
I come from the Sony Z5, someone has made this change?

Thanks...

Using a HDSLR myself i never sold my hdv cam though and getting good good footage with these dslrs takes far more effort and a friend who bought a 60D just hated it[the moire/aliasing] after selling his pana 700

When I got my T2i, I put my Canon XHA1 for sale. Had a few interested inquiries but nobody bought it, and I'm glad I haven't sold it.

I'm sure you've read some articles on the pros and cons on shooting with DSLR...if you haven't, google them right now. If you shoot short films or music videos, DSLR's are great, but if you're shooting longer events, you'll wish you had a camcorder (that's my opinion, anyways).

Don't forget the costs of lenses, audio equipment and accessories...which will easily cost double or triple than the 60D did.

I have Sony EX1 and am looking at the 60D. It's not a replacement for the EX1 but another tool.

Long record and run and gun is good for EX1.
60D is for shoots with known short takes which may be local cable spots and more theatrical type shoots (that can certainly include corporate work).

60D Upsides:
Control over shallow DOF
Interchangeable lenses
low cost compared to other shallow DOF devices
great low light performance
small size may mean inexpensive stabilizer use
small form factor good when discrete is important
(good still camera . . . let's not forget that)



60D Downsides:
12 minutes records
Alias and Moire
need for second sound recording device
no time code
possible overheating (although less common than it would appear)
need to buy ancillary gear for many uses such as follow focus, rods, shoulder device, external video monitor
transcode the H.264 codec to something else for editing
Rolling shutter issues may be worse than CMOS video cameras

I'm kind of shocked this thread stalled. I'd have thought this would be a hot topic.

I'll throw a couple of curves and see if anyone takes a swing.
Why get a 60D instead of a Letus or Redrock 35MM adaptor?
Why get 60D instead of Sony VG10 or Panasonic AF100?

My own answer is that for many situations 60D would be faster and easer to setup for shallow DOF work than a 35MM adaptor. The new large chip video cameras are first generation in a field which I think will have very rapid changes. The 60D body is inexpensive and the lenses will likely transfer to whatever happens as the Video Bodies mature. The less you spend on the body, the more you can spend on lenses. The 60D will get you those pretty pictures for less money and greater flexibility (depending on what you consider flexibility of course).

If I may join in here, I also have a Z5 and I recently bought the 550D to supplement the Z5.
But let me tell you:

For video work get a camcorder
For still pictures get a DSLR

Stelios

For video work get a camcorder
For still pictures get a DSLR


Not very useful without explaining why. DSLR serves a specific purpose and many people are doing Broadcast work with them given the limitations. It's not a replacement for a video camera. It's a tool with a specific purpose that is very difficult to do with a video camera.

So I'll respond. If you want affordable and flexible control over lenses and shallow depth of field get a DSLR for video 'cause you aren't doing that easily with camcorder without having a much big rig and budget.

Why get a 60D instead of a Letus or Redrock 35MM adaptor?

Because a 60D gives you more dynamic range, much better lowlight performance with no light loss, no vignetting and no softening of the image due to the ground glass. It's also quicker to set up and it means you can have two cameras (your camcorder + DSLR) for the same price as one camera plus an adaptor. Plus you don't have to get rails like you do with an adaptor, and it gives you much more mobility than a adaptor rig will.



Why get 60D instead of Sony VG10 or Panasonic AF100?


Because a 60D much cheaper than an AF100. And compared to the VG10 the 60D is cheaper and has better lens selection, multiple frame rates, and manual audio levels - three very important things for the serious videographers.

Of course the 60D's weaknesses compared to the other two are the aliasing, softness & 4gb record limit.

The DSLRs have pointed out that they are very capable of producing cinema-like quality IF care is taken on crafting the shots (in a controlled atmosphere like a movie set) and realizing the limitations of the cameras and working around them.
The moire/aliasing can be fixed, but do you think that these companies that also make professional camcorders will fix the problem to our satisfaction? Probably not, as then they risk exposing themselves to lost sales in the lower-end prosumer line.

I'm kind of looking forward to see what Nikon will produce with the D7000, as they don't have the problem of a camcorder lineup to lose sales from.

Having said all that, I'm planning on buying a 60D once I save enough! :)
(My G10 just doesn't cut it very well for video... :P)

Coming from HDV I always feel that the holy grail for video besides the high resolution, is to make video look like movie--the dynamic range of color, DOF controll, low light and absent of video noise. I think that DSLR is just far better than HDV in all of those areas.
Though I still have my HDV these days I almost never use it. I keep the HDV for the sake of playing the DV tapes only.

I did sell our Canon XH-A1 HDV cameras after we bought our Canon 5DIIs but now being pretty experienced with working around the limitations of DSLRs I am looking at buying a couple of proper camcorders for use in addition to the DSLRs. I will definitely get a Canon XF305 for all that work for which a proper camcorder is superior. I will be looking carefully at whether a Panasonic AF100 could replace the DSLRs although as we like the 5DIIs for stills & now have a lot of nice Canon EF glass it's more likely that we would use it in addition.

I was so glad that I saw footage shot with the Canon 5DII at just the time when I was seriously considering purchasing a Letus 35mm adapter which saved me a ton of hassle by not going down that route.

So now we're getting a picture why a DSLR is a good alternative to a 35MM adaptor. We're also seeing the importance of continuing to have a typical camcorder in addition to a DSLR.

So why get a DSLR vs a Panasonic AF100, Sony VG10, Sony's future large chip "pro" camera?

John Wiley pointed out the frame and lens advantages. VG10 is 30p in 60i. 60D is native progressive and also has 24p for those not aware.

I've had a few moments to look at the AF100 up close at a recent trade show. It certainly is a nice camera at a reasonable price. My concerns are that it's 4/3 chip rather than APS-C. That's also a 2x crop rather than 1.6 (Canon 5D MkII is 1.0). That makes it just a bit harder to be wider and shallow.

I have mixed feelings about the AVCHD 24Mbps. It's OK but I understand the 60D may be closer to 40Mbps although there are other factors besides data rate. Another concern is that it's a first generation large chip camera and I think there may be changes coming very quickly. The 60D is much less expensive and ultimately the lenses will transfer to whatever video camera bodies come down the road.

The 60D being smaller makes it easier to sue for steadycam/stabilizer type work as well.

There are advantages to the AF100 regarding audio in and video monitoring to consider but I can't help feeling it's still first generation as noted above.

Sony will have something in store as well. Unknown is whether it'll be a "pro like" VG10 or other more radical design changes and lens compatibility, codec, price, etc.

I'm not sure what Canon will do but my hunch is their plan may be already reveled. I've talked to a couple of people at Canon and the sense I get is, the XF series is their run and gun fixed lens camera. The DSLR cameras will not change form factor as they want a still camera that can be used for video. Basically they feel the form factor is one of the strong selling points. It seems they're not inclined to make a line of large chip video form factor cameras at the moment. I can speculate that might change in a year or so but you can start shooting now with their DSLRs.

Any thoughts on Canon 60D vs the first generation of large chip video bodies or any more about previous points?

One thing for sure though HDSLR or HDV or any video it is still miles from matching what GWTW a 71 year old film looks like on Blu Ray for colour and contrast.

One thing for sure though HDSLR or HDV or any video it is still miles from matching what GWTW a 71 year old film looks like on Blu Ray for colour and contrast.

Just rent a Sony F35 then or maybe just shoot on 35 film. Sorry but your comments are pointless unless of course you're willing to give each of us $250,000.

The fact that Canon DSLRs are making into major broadcast and some feature work speaks for itself. People like the look.

You want to cool down it was a point, i own DSLR[550D still looks video] but was pointing out there is no video cam of any price at present that cam match what was filmed on this film 71 years ago.

http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Gone-with-the-Wind-Blu-ray/758/

I'm thinking of switching to HD-SLR, coming from HDV would like your views on the new 60D for video.
I come from the Sony Z5, someone has made this change?

Thanks...

Just be sure you keep your Z5 because you will regret selling it, ofcourse it will depend what type of video work you do but dslr's are a real handfull to operate. I have had footage that was totally useless with the dslr because of the moire and i can only focus right if I use the magnifying function before I shoot.
As a combination with my main "real" video camera it was one of my best investments I made, it's great for those artsy shots with crazy dof or when you want to get a real wide view that you can't get with your main cam or, and that had been by far the most time I use my dslr, in dark places.
If you got fast primes it's amazing how much they can show, if it gets too dark my xh-a1 gets real noisy and looses all colorinformation so there I need a strong light to minimize that. With a dslr with a fast prime I can often shoot without light and still retaining sufficient color in the image. It produces also less noice compared to my xh-a1 at 6db.
Also at wedding receptions when sound is not important my favorite lens is a nikon nikkor 28mm 2.8, that one gives some realy nice skin color and an image that i would associate with "filmlike" look.

If I where you I would buy a 60D with the stock lens and start playing with it so you start to learn what it takes to operate, and then slowly buy your needed lenzes. I"m sure at the end you"ll be happy you kept your Z5 but you also will be happy you got the dslr, both serve their purpose very well.

I'll play...

Why get a 60D instead of a Letus or Redrock 35MM adaptor?

What you said, plus... Smaller, able to work incognito, can work handheld with appropriate 'precautions', great for cramped locations like cars, elevators, offices, crowds. Able to work at faster speed for run-gun situations.

Why get 60D instead of Sony VG10 or Panasonic AF100?

Better, wider, faster lenses - a 550D and Tokina can be had for only a little more than a Century Optics 0.8x LC Wangle for an EX1, with less distortion, better transmission.

Something else has cropped up: any video production, of any sort, benefits from having a few stills associated with it. And quite frankly, these Canons are quite good at taking pictures - even squeezing a couple off at the beginning or end of any given shot.

But I increasingly find that when shooting candid with a DSLR, the crowd instintctively stops and pauses and all strike a pose as if I am photographing them. It does not make good TV. And I don't like the palpable sense of betrayal they all show if they find out I am actually shooting video...

And one has to juggle between the joy of recording 24/96 with an external audio recorder, versus the convenience of Phantom Powered XLRs offering sync sound - albeit at 16/44.1 - using a JuicedLink or similar. At least the camcorders stick to 16/48.

Not very useful without explaining why. DSLR serves a specific purpose and many people are doing Broadcast work with them given the limitations. It's not a replacement for a video camera. It's a tool with a specific purpose that is very difficult to do with a video camera.

So I'll respond. If you want affordable and flexible control over lenses and shallow depth of field get a DSLR for video 'cause you aren't doing that easily with camcorder without having a much big rig and budget.

Graig all you are saying is correct, but as you said above a DSLR it's not a replacement for a video camera. That's exactly what I said. So I will never advise anyone to sell it's Z5 for a DSLR. He will regret in a very short time.

Stelios

Although RED is fast catching up with their HDR video. Still, your point is valid. Film just has the quality that can't be beat--although digital sure is much more affordable! :)

[That would be telling Timothy ],i have to admit though that some tv programns now filmed i am pretty sure on video look realy nice but i guess the cine alta or whatever they use runs film a close thing on price.

When I got my T2i, I put my Canon XHA1 for sale. Had a few interested inquiries but nobody bought it, and I'm glad I haven't sold it.

I'm sure you've read some articles on the pros and cons on shooting with DSLR...if you haven't, google them right now. If you shoot short films or music videos, DSLR's are great, but if you're shooting longer events, you'll wish you had a camcorder (that's my opinion, anyways).

Don't forget the costs of lenses, audio equipment and accessories...which will easily cost double or triple than the 60D did.

How have you managed blending shots between the T2i and your XH-A1? I tried using an EOS preset in the XH, but it makes the shots from the T2i look over saturated or the T2i shots make the XH look washed out, I'm not sure which. "Real" is somewhere in between but it seems to take a lot of adjustment in post to use them together. What's your solution?