Corey,

That makes perfect sense to me. I always say, when looking for a camera,
figure out your budget first, then look at the cameras in your budget and
start comparing them. I got an FS100 and not an F3. Why? Budget. Some
people buy an F3, and not a Alexa. Why? Again budget. You always pay
quite a bit to get that last 5 or 10%, and in many cases it doesn't make
any fiscal sense, if your clients can't tell the difference. I think you
probably have one of the best DSLR's there is for shooting video, especially
since you can apply a 'hack' and get even higher bitrates. Now I'm
curious, where in the world did you find a GH1 for $400? That's an awesome
deal!

Now I'm curious, where in the world did you find a GH1 for $400? That's an awesome deal!

Gabe,

I bought 2 GH1's for around $400 apiece (body only, no lens) toward the beginning of the year on eBay. Panasonic still had them in stock for $500, and the GH2 wasn't out yet. I'm glad I got them when I did!

just curious if anyone here has gone back to a traditional video camera for most of the run and gun work during events? I am using a 7D alongside an EX1, and more and more I tend to grab the EX lately.
Maybe I'm just not that thrilled with the 7Ds low light capability. Yes, I may need a 5D2, but I shoot stills also and the 5d2's AF is horrid.
Hey Scott,
You know I purchased the AF100 back in April and I gave you my thoughts. When I had the Canon XHA1 I was using a T2i and liked the mix. I went all DSLR and was frustrated with how harder it was to run the events with the DSLR only. I then went back to XHA1 and waited it out a bit. Then I saw an opportunity to switch to the AF100 and jumped on it. Since jumping to the AF100 I will never go back to filming with DSLRs only, for my events. I will only use proper Larger Sensor Camcorders. Being a single shooter there is far less to worry about through out the day. I love it. If you can get a really good deal on one jump on it. If you can get a great deal on a FS100 jump on that. Once you go large sensor camcorder it's hard to go back as a single shooter. For posters who feel DSLR's are sufficient, great! Enjoy it. No need to degrade the large sensor camcorders. What have they done to deserve such negativity?

One characteristic which seems from postings in this forum to be considered normal by DSLR users is that they typically go out with a "bagful of lenses". Presumably this means that they change lenses often during a shoot. Because I can remember the days when you checked the gate for dirt and hairs after every shot if you could, do none of the DSLR fans recognise this as a drawback when changing lenses in the field?

Back in the days when all professional cameras had interchangeable lenses we only did so to accommodate a special lens (usually rented in) for a particular purpose. For example our "normal" lens was a short superwide zoom, ideal for our regular work. When we did concert recordings and needed one of the two cameras in the front of the balcony to get the super-closeups we rented in a long zoom for the job. Admittedly we also had to check/reset the back focus which DSLRs don't allow for/need but we certainly never considered making the lens change in the field.

Has the dust and dirt changed over the years or is this another drawback DSLR fans just have to live with?

One characteristic which seems from postings in this forum to be considered normal by DSLR users is that they typically go out with a "bagful of lenses". Presumably this means that they change lenses often during a shoot. Because I can remember the days when you checked the gate for dirt and hairs after every shot if you could, do none of the DSLR fans recognise this as a drawback when changing lenses in the field?

Back in the days when all professional cameras had interchangeable lenses we only did so to accommodate a special lens (usually rented in) for a particular purpose. For example our "normal" lens was a short superwide zoom, ideal for our regular work. When we did concert recordings and needed one of the two cameras in the front of the balcony to get the super-closeups we rented in a long zoom for the job. Admittedly we also had to check/reset the back focus which DSLRs don't allow for/need but we certainly never considered making the lens change in the field.

Has the dust and dirt changed over the years or is this another drawback DSLR fans just have to live with?

I've shot about 100 DSLR weddings and never had a problem with dust or dirt. I change lenses on the beach and not a problem. Nice try though.

I've shot about 100 DSLR weddings and never had a problem with dust or dirt. I change lenses on the beach and not a problem. Nice try though.

Come to think of it, any smudge on my "proper" video camera lens and the image would be ruined. I remember working with photographers and I'd see their dirty lenses and they'd have no problem. I was jealous of them and now I am one of them..just shooting video instead with their cameras and smudge free.

Has the dust and dirt changed over the years or is this another drawback DSLR fans just have to live with?

The dust and dirt have apparently changed their behavior over the years, because I've shot a massive amount of footage outdoors this summer, lots of times at the beach and in foliage, and have never had a dust/dirt problem. And I switch lenses like crazy.

I have not read all the threads but would like to gibe my experience. I am a newer shooter I have been shooting photographer (weddings) for 5 years. I started filming weddings this year because there was a need for a cinematic style edit in my market.

I would say except for the ceremony the 5dII really fits my needs. Now the ceremony is a whole different issue. It is extremely hard to cover the ceremony for me with DLSRs only. Mainly because of the 12 minute recording time. Partly because I am shooting with primes only. I am going to have to make a decision soon about what I want to do going forward.

A. Going have a trade in some primes for 70-200's and pickup a couple t3is for the sides. (The t3i's will restart the recording after the 12 minute mark with firmware hack).

B. Not sure yet. I think things are going to change a lot in the next 12 months

One characteristic which seems from postings in this forum to be considered normal by DSLR users is that they typically go out with a "bagful of lenses". Presumably this means that they change lenses often during a shoot. Because I can remember the days when you checked the gate for dirt and hairs after every shot if you could, do none of the DSLR fans recognise this as a drawback when changing lenses in the field?It's no more of a problem than it is for photographers. You just use sensible hygiene when changing lenses.

It's no more of a problem than it is for photographers. You just use sensible hygiene when changing lenses.

Nigel, that was just Phillip's way of putting down DSLR users. There is alot of "camera envy" that occurs on these boards.

I have not read all the threads but would like to gibe my experience. I am a newer shooter I have been shooting photographer (weddings) for 5 years. I started filming weddings this year because there was a need for a cinematic style edit in my market.

I would say except for the ceremony the 5dII really fits my needs. Now the ceremony is a whole different issue. It is extremely hard to cover the ceremony for me with DLSRs only. Mainly because of the 12 minute recording time. Partly because I am shooting with primes only. I am going to have to make a decision soon about what I want to do going forward.

A. Going have a trade in some primes for 70-200's and pickup a couple t3is for the sides. (The t3i's will restart the recording after the 12 minute mark with firmware hack).

B. Not sure yet. I think things are going to change a lot in the next 12 months

Just curious why you are/were shooting with all primes?

Just curious why you are/were shooting with all primes?

Wanted to update this thread also


I shouldn't be using all primes. I am a photographer and have been doing video for businesses for the last year. The primes are not a issue when producing a short business video.

I do need to let them go though... I am actually thinking about selling the 5dii + primes and buying 3 t3is with 24-70's. It pains me in a way but I have looked at Joel's stuff (weddingfilms.com) and it looks nice. He uses 3 or 4 t2is . The fact that I can hack the firmware and the t3i will automatically restart after it hits the 4 gig mark makes me happy. + 24-70 using x3 digital zoom gives me all the range I need.

dude, I have to jump in here. you are going to lose stops of light selling primes!! the zooms
are not fast enough indoors under low lights. You need at least a 50f1.4 in your bag. Definitely
have a 70-200, its flat out awesome for outdoor stuff and churches. the 24-70, I have it, it rarely
comes out of my bag. 24, 50 and 85 are my go tos, along with a tamron 11-16 on my 7D.

dude, I have to jump in here. you are going to lose stops of light selling primes!! the zooms
are not fast enough indoors under low lights. You need at least a 50f1.4 in your bag. Definitely
have a 70-200, its flat out awesome for outdoor stuff and churches. the 24-70, I have it, it rarely
comes out of my bag. 24, 50 and 85 are my go tos, along with a tamron 11-16 on my 7D.

My thoughts too and that why I have the 35 1.4 50 1.4 85 1.8 135 f2 BUT ever try filming @ less that f2 on a full frame camera at a wedding. It challenging to say the least.

Trust me I see your point. I am borrowing a friends t3i +24-70 next weekend and see how it works for me. I am thinking I can push iso 1250 30-50th 2.8.

We will see..

I do need to let them go though... I am actually thinking about selling the 5dii + primes and buying 3 t3is with 24-70's. It pains me in a way but I have looked at Joel's stuff (weddingfilms.com) and it looks nice. He uses 3 or 4 t2is . The fact that I can hack the firmware and the t3i will automatically restart after it hits the 4 gig mark makes me happy. + 24-70 using x3 digital zoom gives me all the range I need.It would be more useful & a little cheaper to get the EF-S 17-55mm IS lens which gives an approx 27-88mm full frame equivalent on the T3i/600D. The 24-70mm EF lens is the equivalent of about 38-112mm on an APS-C sensor.

dude, I have to jump in here. you are going to lose stops of light selling primes!! the zooms
are not fast enough indoors under low lights. You need at least a 50f1.4 in your bag.

You don't 'need' a 50 1.4 in your bag. I don't have one in mine. d;-)

You don't 'need' a 50 1.4 in your bag. I don't have one in mine. d;-)Neither do I as I have a 50mm F/1.2:-)

Neither do I as I have a 50mm F/1.2:-)

Touche........

Hi Guys,

If there were a camcorder that produced the same quality as the 7D what would it be and how much would it cost?

look to the Sony FS100, F3 and Panny AF100. 4-13K plus lenses and adapters.

Too tired tonight to read all these responses, but will chime in.

I tried twice to go dslr, I loved the look and had 4 dslr's capable of doing video.

Not only was it so much more work and pressure during a wedding, the post production was a killer.
We went with 2 canon XF305's and not looking back.

If I want a special look, can grab a 1DIV and shoot something but so far, just do not find its that important.

Post production is so much easier now days.

Hi Denny

I'm with you too!!! I do like the look and the DOF capabilities but on an "anything can happen next" event like a wedding there are plenty of times where I only have seconds to spring into action.

I do like the idea of using something like a 5DII where the scenes are staged and you have no time restraints. I was considering using a DSLR during the photoshoot but I do 99% on steadicam so I couldn't see any advantage with investing in complicated follow focus gear!!

Seriously during the more hectic moments you just don't have any time to play with focussing and being able to grab the camera that's on auto focus and just shoot is a huge advantage and far less stress!!

Chris

I am stuck with a big decision to make at the current moment. I am about to invest into another camera, and I can't decide between the 5dii or the canon xf100. I shot a conference this week that was 3 hours long with 2 t2i's & 1 t3i. I am currently editing it right now and it is a monster with all the little 12 minute clips from 3 different camera angles. It took me 5 hours just to line up all the clips!

So now I'm really looking to invest into a camera that can record longer clips like a xa 10 or xf 100 but I really like the clarity and full frame of the 5d. I've seen alot of the really good wedding videographers using the 5d with awesome results. It's definitely a step up from the t3i, but dslr in general are tougher to shoot events with. However I should mention that majority of my business right now is weddings, so I tend to cater my equip more so around that.

So I guess I'm asking everybody which one I should get? Also, I post it here because i think that I want to really stop using dslr for events, its stressful not only to shoot with them, but post production is a beast and not fun at all!

I had the "luxury" of attending a wedding recently that I was not shooting. Refreshing to say the least. They did hire a videographer and sat there and watched 4 guys running around shooting with DSLR's and was just very thankful I never made that switch. One thing I noticed was how they were all scrambling around during the ceremony for different shots. Not a single camera stayed in place and rolled for the duration. That told me this couple was not going to have their complete ceremony as part of their video. Very sad. I consider that the most important part of any wedding video.

Funny thing was watching how frustrated these guys were getting at missing unexpected moments during the reception. Bride was getting frustrated at them because they kept asking the couple to re-enact what they should have caught in the first place. My wife at one point asked "why aren't they just shooting it when it happens?". My response was "because those cameras are a POS and not meant for this face paced shooting".

The bride was my wife's cousin and she came over to talk to us later that evening and said she was getting fed up with them. She said as long as they got the ceremony she'd let it go. When I told her they were all moving around and no way they shot the full ceremony she was pissed to say the least. I think it really ruined her night. I just had to sit back and laugh.

By the way, if you're wondering why I wasn't shooting it, it's because I had a corporate shoot earlier in the day and couldn't get there until the start of the ceremony and she wanted full coverage.

the post production was a killer.

Do you mean with the extra work when syncing separate audio recordings afterwards? Editing dslr footage is as easy as dealing with sd footage since I convert them to the edius hq avi codec and eventhough I often use up to 4 seperate audio recorders which I have to sync in post it would cost me the same amount of time if I would be using a real videocamera. For me at least post production has not been more difficult or demanding then back in the days where I used a dvx100. Only like Keith mentions when you do long multicam recordings the 12minute limit can cause a lot of extra work but to be honest, a dslr is the last tool I would use to do a long multicam shoot.

look to the Sony FS100, F3 and Panny AF100. 4-13K plus lenses and adapters.

Yes, a specialist video camera is going to cost more that a DSLR, although by the time you buy accessories the difference may not be that huge. However, that should be qualified in that they give better video image quality than the 7D, without the disadvantages. Although, the AF100 may not match up in image terms to the Sony cameras.

You can use your stills lenses on these cameras, so that can remain a fixed cost for both the video and DSLR cameras. Downside is that the DSLRs are better that doing stills than the video cameras.

[QUOTE=Michael Johnston;1675617]I had the "luxury" of attending a wedding recently that I was not shooting. Refreshing to say the least. They did hire a videographer and sat there and watched 4 guys running around shooting with DSLR's and was just very thankful I never made that switch. One thing I noticed was how they were all scrambling around during the ceremony for different shots. Not a single camera stayed in place and rolled for the duration. That told me this couple was not going to have their complete ceremony as part of their video. Very sad. I consider that the most important part of any wedding video.

Funny thing was watching how frustrated these guys were getting at missing unexpected moments during the reception. Bride was getting frustrated at them because they kept asking the couple to re-enact what they should have caught in the first place. My wife at one point asked "why aren't they just shooting it when it happens?". My response was "because those cameras are a POS and not meant for this face paced shooting".

The bride was my wife's cousin and she came over to talk to us later that evening and said she was getting fed up with them. She said as long as they got the ceremony she'd let it go. When I told her they were all moving around and no way they shot the full ceremony she was pissed to say the least. I think it really ruined her night. I just had to sit back and laugh.


This post has more to do with the people she hired than the camera's they used.

Hi Denny

I'm with you too!!! I do like the look and the DOF capabilities but on an "anything can happen next" event like a wedding there are plenty of times where I only have seconds to spring into action.

I do like the idea of using something like a 5DII where the scenes are staged and you have no time restraints. I was considering using a DSLR during the photoshoot but I do 99% on steadicam so I couldn't see any advantage with investing in complicated follow focus gear!!

Seriously during the more hectic moments you just don't have any time to play with focussing and being able to grab the camera that's on auto focus and just shoot is a huge advantage and far less stress!!

Chris

Again, it's not the camera, its the camera operator. I dont think any DSLR shooter is following focusing on a steadicam and they are getting wonderful results. All this negative feedback on DSLR by people who have no experience with them is getting tiresome.

Don't get me wrong guys I love the look of DSLR video, and if I were doing a fun project it would include it.

My worst enemy on wedding day is time, we may get to the reception and have the bride and dj asking if we are ready when we walk in the door, even after we explained we need time to set up.

Nothing is as easy as opening a bag pulling out the camera and recording getting great audio on the fly.

I had all the toys with dslr, zacuto rigs with follow focus etc. I know there are work arounds for most everything but to me they were just that WORK arounds. I am very busy during wedding season and have never had a customer comment on the use of DSLR or non use. They want good stable video with good audio.

This is a personal preference and for some may be what they sell, but for me I need the stress level to be as low as possible on a wedding day.

If you have done any research at all you know that it can be done with DSLR only. Is it more work than traditional video? Yes of course it is.

That is the reason I got into this. There is a market out there that wants the film look that a DSLR gives and that MOST video cameras can not.

Would I switch to a video camera that provided a DSLR look? Of course, as long as it met my price point.

If you have done any research at all you know that it can be done with DSLR only. Is it more work than traditional video? Yes of course it is.

That is the reason I got into this. There is a market out there that wants the film look that a DSLR gives and that MOST video cameras can not.

Would I switch to a video camera that provided a DSLR look? Of course, as long as it met my price point.

Not going to disagree at all, but something to think about.
The look is different and unique right now. I am willing to bet as the dslr capable of doing vide get less and less expensive there will be more people shooting dslr video than anything else.

I can not imagine someone getting into video going with anything other than dslr because of the price point.

So this look will not be different and unique for long.

Yes we all know its the person behind that camera, not the camera. This also goes for traditional vs dslr.
A fantastic film maker will make a fantastic film regardless of what camera he uses.

Hi Michael

No-one is giving you any negative feedback at all!!! My point was simply that I prefer to shoot with a video camera and it's not a slur on DSLR shooters as you seem to think. I love the look and they are amazing cameras but they are just not for me!!

If I decide to not have cheese and ham on a sandwich it doesn't mean that both products are bad news!!! It's simply means I have a choice and my choice is my decision. No I wouldn't shoot a wedding on a DSLR but you do it and many others and make a great job from it. It doesn't mean I hate people that use DSLR's or the cameras themselves.

Just because one person uses DSLR's and one uses video cameras doesn't make either of them a better or worse person.

Chris

Not going to disagree at all, but something to think about.
The look is different and unique right now. I am willing to bet as the dslr capable of doing vide get less and less expensive there will be more people shooting dslr video than anything else.

I can not imagine someone getting into video going with anything other than dslr because of the price point.

So this look will not be different and unique for long.

Yes we all know its the person behind that camera, not the camera. This also goes for traditional vs dslr.
A fantastic film maker will make a fantastic film regardless of what camera he uses.

I don't even think its about being different or unique. I just think it looks more what a movie looks like which is pleasing to the eye. My personal belief is that the look is not a fad. The hardware might be a fad. Time will tell.

"Yes we all know its the person behind that camera, not the camera. This also goes for traditional vs dslr.
A fantastic film maker will make a fantastic film regardless of what camera he uses"

So true....

I have been working with a photographer for this past year. One thing she taught me was how good you are is only half of it. Being able to network and connect with people is just as important.

DSLR's are not for everyone. And neither is Chris's cheese and ham sandwitch. Mmmmm, sandwich <drools>

DSLR or regular cam is the same argument as Sony or Panny. Each to their own. It all depends on your style, how you use the gear and how you work. Solo shooting with a DSLR can be hard work. Not impossible, just harder.

We believe we are better with our DSLR's but some people, their work is actually better when they use a regular cam. The great thing is were all different.

Ever walked out of a movie and thought "That film was crap" yet someone else is saying "Best movie ever!!!". Are they wrong? Or is it just their opinion.

BTW, chicken and bacon toastie FTW!

We have and use both. We used all DSLR for a few weddings but there are some things that simply more suited to real video cameras with better DOF and timecode. It's all about what you are trying to delivery.

Funny, history repeats itself in so many ways.

Medium format users snubbed the 35mm photographers
Film shooters snubbed the digital shooter
Video camera users snub or have mixed feeling about HDSLR users

What next?

I am an early adopter of the HDSLR camera, I both love it and hate it at the same time. The whole concept of using a very portable camera to shoot video or stills is great. The only trouble is that in order to produce anything of professional quality you will need to add so many extras to the camera, finder, shoulder mount, focus/zoom ring, eternal mike and recorder, etc. This now defeats the whole idea of convenient shooting.

I use the HDSLR for extra wide shots or shallow depth of field work, but my main camera is still the EX3 or XF305.

As a footnote. I am now using the Nikon D7000 together with some very old manual focus Nikkors, the results are outstanding and I get full aperture and focus control to boot. I didn't get on well with the Canon 7D for video, but it was great with stills.

Funny, history repeats itself in so many ways.

Medium format users snubbed the 35mm photographers
Film shooters snubbed the digital shooter
Video camera users snub or have mixed feeling about HDSLR users

What next?

I am an early adopter of the HDSLR camera, I both love it and hate it at the same time. The whole concept of using a very portable camera to shoot video or stills is great. The only trouble is that in order to produce anything of professional quality you will need to add so many extras to the camera, finder, shoulder mount, focus/zoom ring, eternal mike and recorder, etc. This now defeats the whole idea of convenient shooting.

I use the HDSLR for extra wide shots or shallow depth of field work, but my main camera is still the EX3 or XF305.

As a footnote. I am now using the Nikon D7000 together with some very old manual focus Nikkors, the results are outstanding and I get full aperture and focus control to boot. I didn't get on well with the Canon 7D for video, but it was great with stills.

You don't need a "finder, shoulder mount and focus control". I'm not sure where you are getting your information.

No, of course you don't need them, just like you don't need shoes to walk - but they help.

My information comes from shooting video on a bright sunny day trying to use the LCD screen to compose video. The shoulder brace comes in when trying to keep the hand held shot steady. The external mike information comes from hearing my handling noises. T

Funny, history repeats itself in so many ways.

Medium format users snubbed the 35mm photographers
Film shooters snubbed the digital shooter
Video camera users snub or have mixed feeling about HDSLR users

What next?

I'm going to create a filter adaptor so that DSLR users can get that coverted Mini-DV look! It's the next big thing!

ill post an update to my own thread. I just watched part of a blu ray prior to delivery, shot mostly with 7D and HMC150. on my 50" Samsung plasma, man o man, the 7D video looks fuggin spectacular! Some of it looks oversharpened (daylight shots of grass, trees, etc..) but I see the same with my EX1 when it comes to landscape shots. So, if thou can make it work, then that's what thou should do. the reception footage with all natural lighting is where it really shines.