In pure videography terms does the MK2 have any advantages over the NEX-VG20 ? I used a 5DMK2 last night for a wedding reception in very low light and I have to say I was remarkably impressed, but I was constantly changing the ISO and fiddling with the focus rings while trying to keep the camera on the shoulder rig as stable as possible and can't think of any way to make it simple apart from spending a tiny some on a rig with a follow focus. The most awkward part of the whole event was when I moved around the hall with some sections brighter than others, the amount of times you need to focus and set the iso was annoying. I am considering waiting for the NEX-VG20 is it worth the wait considering they are roughly the same price? I spoke to a few of the guys who own the 5DMK2 about this and they said it does not support Prime Lens and thats what really sets the 5DMK2 apart from this.

I am a 5 D owner, and I am considering the VG-20. I do primarily narrative stuff, but on occasions that I have done the shoulder mount thing, I know exactly what you are talking about.

Now as far as changing ISO continuously when doing an event shoot, you can shoot the 5D in manual mode, setting your fstop and shutter speed, but then setting ISO to "auto" and you will have the camera continually adjust for changing situations.

As far as focus, in event shooting, I found simple is best. I mount my 5D on a simple DIY gunstock mount I made, use one of the cheap lcd viewfinder magnifiers , keep a rubber hood on the lens to keem my fingers out of in front of the lens, and adjust manually as I shoot. I use old nikon lens mostly, that I can do a decent job of keeping in focus that way.

Does anyone else find it ironic that there's a camera on the scene priced such that you can pick up two of them for the price of one 5DM2?

As far as the question goes, somehow I think the VG-20 won't stop recording after 12 minutes. Of course, image quality and control of moire is yet to be seen on the VG-20. Hmmm I wonder if they'll shoot an episode of House with one. :-)

The VG-20 is an e-mount camera same as the NEX-5N and even the FS100 so it supports prime lenses from sony or any nikon or canon prime via an e-mount adaptor.

Personally I would wait if you can as there are many rumours that canon will be introducing a new 5DmkIII and possibly even their own version of the FS100 later this year.

If I had to buy something tomorrow it would definitely be the FS100 but Im waiting as long as I can :-)

My mind has been made up, use my XHA1 and buy a 60D with light panel as I mainly shoot indoors with poor lighting. I will wait till the Sony is released and see how good that really is. Why pay so much for a camera which is surely due for an update for the use of video when something like the Sony can arguably do the same job and is only 4 months away.

Does anybody know if the NEX-VG20 would be able to handle prime lenses?

... there are many rumours that canon will be introducing a new 5DmkIII and possibly even their own version of the FS100 later this year.They are indeed introducing something later this year, but it's no longer a rumor:

http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/digital-video-industry-news/500720-something-new-canon-nov-3rd.html

They are indeed introducing something later this year, but it's no longer a rumor:

http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/digital-video-industry-news/500720-something-new-canon-nov-3rd.html

Wow...that does look very tantalising doesn't it.

Sometimes the waiting game can pay off..I hope this is one of those times :-)

My mind has been made up, use my XHA1 and buy a 60D with light panel as I mainly shoot indoors with poor lighting. I will wait till the Sony is released and see how good that really is. Why pay so much for a camera which is surely due for an update for the use of video when something like the Sony can arguably do the same job and is only 4 months away.

Does anybody know if the NEX-VG20 would be able to handle prime lenses?

Yes, it can handle prime lenses, just like any DSLR. It has the E-mount, but there are adapters for the Sony Alpha-mount lenses. Plus, there are - or will be - other lens adapters for the camera.

Wow...that does look very tantalising doesn't it.

Sometimes the waiting game can pay off..I hope this is one of those times :-)

There's absolutely no indication that this announcement is for a large sensor Canon video camera. Unless someone knows a lot more than they're letting on. Chris, perhaps you have some inside info?

If I had any inside info, then I would be under NDA and therefore not permitted to discuss it. But I haven't been NDA'ed (yet), so my own speculation carries no more weight than anyone else's.

They're billing it as an "historic" event, which I interpret as unprecedented for them, in that they're saying they're going to be "making history" with whatever it is, as in something they haven't done before. It's worth noting that the terms historic and historical have separate meanings. Read into it what you will. I really don't think it's going to be another D-SLR or another 1/3rd-inch chip camcorder.

I really don't think it's going to be another D-SLR or another 1/3rd-inch chip camcorder.

Agreed - unless it's a DSLR or small sensor camcorder with some earthshaking, new, game-changing technology. It won't be an extension of an existing Canon product with incremental improvement.

In pure videography terms does the MK2 have any advantages over the NEX-VG20 ?
I am not replacing my DSLRs with VG10/20, or FS100, or AF100 mostly because of the codec, 21Mbs is just not enough to get all details I want, if VG20 would have 50Mbs and even better 422, I would let 1D and 60D go, but that's not going to happen, 5D will stay for ever, well, at least until I'll get 5DmkIII - I need FF for very wide shots

You can't compare bitrate alone. The 24mbps from the AF100, and probably from the Sony's too, is much nicer than the ~40mbps from the Canon DSLR's. The encoding hardware on the Canon's is severely undergunned, hence the need for a higher bitrate - the camera simply cannot do the math and crunch all the numbers required to compress the image further while still maintaining a decent image.

The higher bitrate on the Canon's is not a positive; it is a negative, because it is a compensation for poor encoding quality.

Re: BIt rate, and compression. I am hoping that John Wiley's analysis is the case. Aren't we able to compare that already with FS 100 footage ??

The higher bitrate on the Canon's is not a positive; it is a negative, because it is a compensation for poor encoding quality.

I'd phrase it differently. The Canon codec is a simple encoder, so it needs to record at a high rate - and it does. With a more full featured encoder, you can get similar or better result with fewer bits. Bit rate alone does not tell the tale.

Anyway, Canon's high bit rate isn't a negative. It's a valid design decision. It just doesn't tell the whole story.

Low bit rate and a simple encoder? Now that would be a negative! And that's why I avoided the Nikon D90 when it first came out. Man, I wanted that to be my camera (before the 5D2 came out), but the encoding package (low complexity + low bit rate) just wasn't up to the task.

BTW, I hear that uncompressed (highest bit rate + zero encoding features) is pretty good. ;)

All that said, I haven't looked closely at NEX-VG20 footage. I have no opinion of how it compares to DSLR video.

Can't comment on VG20 video, but I've had my Zeiss C/Y lenses on a Nex 5N and my 5d2, the Nex looked phenomenal. It would make a great B cam to the 5d, so good that I'm getting one instead of another Canon. The 5d2, IMHO, was still superior when viewed on my 42" TV. The 5d2 footage was more detailed and just had more pop, the 5N had that Sony look - reminded me of the Z1u. Since the 5N and the VG20 share the same sensor we can e-speculate that it'll be similar. If you already have manual glass and separate audio, the 5N is an incredible buy for a stealth or B cam solution.

The VG cams really don't make sense to me, no XLR, no ND filters, no anything to make it a compelling choice for a $2000 video camera other than a traditional video camera form factor - which I do like, but not enough to justify spending 3 times what the 5N costs. You can pimp a 5N with an EVF, a zoom H1 and some nice glass for the cost of a VG20, and the 5N makes a great walk around camera for stills or video. Sony did a nice job of boosting the dynamic range of the 5N over the first gen NEX, the low light performance from such a small package is unmatched.

the camera simply cannot do the math and crunch all the numbers required to compress the image further while still maintaining a decent image.
The higher bitrate on the Canon's is not a positive; it is a negative, because it is a compensation for poor encoding quality.

Still the compression on the DSLR's is pretty good. The sony hx9v does way worse and it has avchd at 28mbps for 1080p. It frankly sucks compared to my 7d. Breaks up in even moderate motion into chunks of blocks. Compared to the Canon which handles motion pretty damn well.

That's the thing about a higher bitrate, simpler coder. It relies less on motion estimation and more on raw bits, so it doesn't go bad when the scene goes beyond the reach of the motion vector search algorithm.

Hello!

Bit rates and codec aside, you still can't discount the fact that there's a wopping great 35mm full frame sensor in the 5d. Add to that an L class f/2.8 lens and it's pretty much unparalleled for the price point.

...and yes, auto ISO will help you out in extreme light changing conditions.

I've now shot professional stuff with the Red ONE, Epic, SI 2K, 5DMKII, F900, AF100 and quite a few other cams - including a few hundred hours on the T2i which out-performs the 5DmkII in post, IMHFO.
My current preferred camera has been the Sony SLT-A55. I think the codec is a nice balance between professional and prosumer, and being able to jam the cam up to my eye and monitor with near-precision focus has saved me a lot of hassle in the field. Autofocus has saved my bacon at events, weddings, and in documentary and journalistic work.
The A55 performs very well in both low light and in cinema-lit situations. I generally don't need to build a LUT for stuff, I just want t to look nice in-camera and also provide enough wiggle room for my post-process. In this, the A55 performs better than the 5DmkII and I don't need the horsepower to work with RedCode. I see where the high-end cameras like the Alexa is going. I don't need that level of performance, and my clients are not paying for that . . . or for an AC, DIT, and a support crew.
I'm hoping that Canon's announcement is something great for the lower-end professional space, but my guess is that it isn't. I'm not going to buy a 5dmkIII - I want something outside of the Canon current box. The t3i was nice, but not a game changer.
I'm actually quite happy with the dof and performance of the small sensor. I'll probably buy a NEX VG-20 or the NEX-FS100. Lenses are getting so good for the APS-C - definitely exceeding micro 4/3 and cost to performance ratio is awesome.
Anyway, just thought I would chie in on this forum. Thanks for your posts and collaboration.

I think with a SLR type of camera you basically must use a monopod or tripod to shoot acceptable footage. With a video cam in particular with the top handle on vg20 it is feasible to shoot some handheld footage. In particular if you plan on some panning. With no pan it might be ok to hold a SLR as well.

Thats at least my experience

Ciao
Andreas

I am about to shoot my first little film with the VG20. I have a 5D. I am beginning to believe that in many situations, the VG20 will beat the 5D.

Here is a look at charts I shot with the two. You be the judge:

Canon 5D chart Tests on Vimeo


ChartTest for Sony VG20 on Vimeo


Also here is a low light test I did with the two:


Low Light Noise Testing Comparison with the Sony VG20 and Canon 5D on Vimeo