cant wait till shooting with A DSLR fad dies

[Charles Papert]

Agreed, Chris--I've just found the term "game changer" to become overused to the point of parody of late (kind of like super-shallow depth of field test videos)!

[Bill Davis]

Originally Posted by Charles Papert

Bill:

I too read Simon's article but I took a different tack with it. Looks to me like he was railing against the "test videos" specifically rather than the actual technology of the cameras and the images they can make. Actually I agree with all of his essential points (including his frustration with the rabid obsession regarding absurdly shallow depth of field--who really needs an f1.2 lens, when the camera is capable of ISO's into the thousands?) although I wouldn't state it in quite as snarky a fashion myself, but that's just a stylistic choice.

SNIPED TO SAVE SPACE

field, not automatically opting for the shallowest possible look (bokeh porn). Every shot requires consideration in dozens of ways; composition, movement, lighting etc...focal length and aperture choices tie into all of this, and along with that the depth of field consideration.

At this point, large sensors are obviously here to stay, so it will be interesting to see if the "shallow masses" will eventually learn to move beyond their current fascination into a more mature approach.

Charles,

Many of your points (moiré problems, rolling shutter jello, etc) deserve serious consideration, and I know we're both hoping that as the development continues, the engineering teams will address them to the extent possible given this exciting new technology. I have some faith that they will, if for no other reason than the fact that gross unit sales is still a significant factor in profitibility for nearly every manufactured product on the planet.

As to the issue with eyebrows, et al. I fear that's *always* going to be a factor because raster density and the spacing of alternate luminance level content will always interact in some fashion. The tighter packed the image sensors get, the different "frequencies" of pixel change will likely cause them to cycle - but I suspect that as long as discrete pixel sensor arrays are used, we'll have to live with some part of this.
(I continue to have success "solving" most of those problems by simply moving the subject to camera distance or zoom setting subtly until the "ringing" subsides, but I know this isn't always possible and it is clearly a compromise between the shot you want and the shot that that camera/sensor/lens will provide.

Finally, one thing that can't be overlooked is that even with your EX3 example, that represents a camera retailing for approximately 3 TIMES what an 5D Mk ii retails for. I note that because for all of us who make our living making content, it's easy to forget that when we're talking about camera systems that cost less than the craft services budget for many regular gigs. But for the new folks, one-third the camera cost - coupled with an arguably superior image - is a powerful driver.

As I've come to think of, for example, the iPod - I'm not sure the "game changer" was actually the device at all. It was the devices IN CONTEXT of a new ecosystem that made for the runaway success. It was the iPod PLUS iTunes PLUS widespread internet access - all functioning together that changed the game.

For DSLR video we already have Final Cut Pro with a Million paid seats capable of ingesting and editing the result. We have a new taste for HD content based on BOTH the television broadcast conversion AND on the maturing and quickening of the internet. And NOW we have a tool that can cheaply shoot content for the above taking TOTAL advantage of the image density that the system can accommodate.

THAT is the "game changer" NOT the camera.

It used to be that knowledge FOLLOWED equipment. You couldn't learn to make the movie, without access to the tools to do so. Now, the tools are everywhere. So now equipment must follow knowledge.

The camera that everyone can afford is a meaningless camera in terms of barrier for people seeking to communicate through video.

What's left? What was always there in the beginning. Knowledge, experience, talent, drive.

It will be interesting to watch what happens next.

[Dom Stevenson]

Bill

Don't disagree with you. I bought a 5d myself and i love it, though ideally it would be a 2nd camera to a "real" video camera which i can't afford just now.

I simply thought it was a thread that Simon's article might invigorate. Seems i was right.

[Chris Barcellos]

I have to say, I haven't run into as many issues of moire and aliasing as others seem to be experiencing- and it has never been to the point of distraction. Maybe that is because of content I shoot, but I also wonder if the fact that I probably shoot lower end economy glass actually shields me from some of the problem that might be apparent in a tack sharp high end lens ? I wonder. A lot of times, just for convenience, I will shoot a lowly Canon 28 to 80 mm zoom, or a Takumar 28 -80 with adapter from Pentax K mount, and without AF. I also have a lot of old Nikon primes I use, and can run into problems with those lenses more.

And talk about aliasing. I have seen an awful lot of it on HD television shows, especially sports programming, so it seems like there is some acceptance of it within the industry.

[Charles Papert]

Originally Posted by Bill Davis

Finally, one thing that can't be overlooked is that even with your EX3 example, that represents a camera retailing for approximately 3 TIMES what an 5D Mk ii retails for. I note that because for all of us who make our living making content, it's easy to forget that when we're talking about camera systems that cost less than the craft services budget for many regular gigs. But for the new folks, one-third the camera cost - coupled with an arguably superior image - is a powerful driver.

Not if you are talking apples to apples--considering that the EX3 comes with a fast zoom lens, HD-SDI output capability, an onboard monitor/viewfinder, and is handholdable out of the box (this last point is arguable--the EX3 is a lousy handheld form factor in my opinion and the DSLR's can be used bare). Comparably equipping the 5D will ramp up the purchase price notably. Of course there are ways around all of this but it depends on what compromises one is willing to make.

[Don Miller]

But as the light decreases the EX3 IQ decreases compared to the dreaded vDSLR.

Anyway, I'm not sure what the OP dislikes. Complaining about DOF control on a budget and low light capabilities seems the modern day equivalent of feature films being ruined by sound and color. "I'll be glad when this talkies fad is over".

It seems that in practice that vDSLR may represent the lower end for awhile. Large sensor videocams with ND filters and other niceties we've grown accustomed to may be in the $5K plus range. Or at least that's the big boy's plan. Whether Canon and Nikon are allowed to destroy the traditional better vcam price structure of Sony and Panasonic is unknow to this westerner.

Canon happily sells the T2i, with an excellent optical viewfinder and high res lcd, for $800. They certainly can remove the "SLR" and sell the same guts with an electronic viewfinder and interal ND system for $800. That isn't quite as good as the panny AF100 announced, but it's not far off either.

So I think the answer to the OP's literal question is that it depends what Canon and Nikon do. Some video people will shoot with vDSLRs until they can get similar IQ from a true videocam at a similar price point. But the hope of returning to the good old days of infinite dof and a cheap looking image in anything but good light may be just a dream.

[Charles Papert]

The whole point is that once there are alternatives, the challenges of shooting with a system designed to do one thing and being used for another will force them in to the background. Just a couple of years ago, it was virtually uncool not to be using a 35mm adaptor of one kind or another, despite the light loss, inverted image, ground glass texture, light and focus falloff issues--now they seem amazingly old-fashioned compared to the DSLR's, don't they?

[Don Miller]

I'm certainly hoping to not buy another vDSLR for the purpose of video.

I have a suggestion for those still wondering what all the vDSLR fuss is about. Go to Vimeo and compare 5DII images to EX3. Or to any interchangeable lens videocam in that price range. I've done this exercise twice and it's rather shocking.
I wouldn't even bother comparing vDSLR to 35mm adapters. That's just depressing.

[Liam Hall]

Originally Posted by Dave Morgan

what are your thoughts? sure the image might look good. but its not like that's the future for the camcorder. also some of the rigs just look silly, it looks like your a photographer and not a pro videographer.

My thoughts:

Choose a camera that suits your needs and stop moaning about people who choose a different route. To some of us the image is everything, how we get there is entirely arbitrary.

I'd rather eat my own arm than shoot on a 1/3 inch chip camcorder or a digibeta, so I'll happily put up with the curious vagaries of the 7D/5D until Scarlet hits the streets. But that's me:)

BTW What does a pro videographer look like anyway?

[Thomas Barclay]

Originally Posted by Laurence Janus

The only thing wrong with DSLRs is the awful videos that people make with them.
If I never see another locked off shot with blurred background video showing someone smiling at the camera, reeds blowing in the wind, etc, I will be a happy man.

Damn you Laurence! You shouldn't write stuff like this without considering the reader. I have to say, dead on. It is like, "story" is dying. These shots are great as b-roll but watching some video leaves me wanting my time back.

[Tom Roper]

Originally Posted by Don Miller

I'm certainly hoping to not buy another vDSLR for the purpose of video.

I have a suggestion for those still wondering what all the vDSLR fuss is about. Go to Vimeo and compare 5DII images to EX3. Or to any interchangeable lens videocam in that price range. I've done this exercise twice and it's rather shocking.
I wouldn't even bother comparing vDSLR to 35mm adapters. That's just depressing.

Vimeo is not the answer. The 5DMkII that I own does not merit mentioning with the EX3. The problem with moire and aliasing is too severe.

[Don Miller]

I'm sitting here watching the TV series 'Flash Forward' partly shot with the 5DII. So for the next 20 minutes there's an alternative to Vimeo. The show even has a story line for those bored by pretty images.

[Enzo Giobbé]

Originally Posted by Liam Hall

My thoughts:

Choose a camera that suits your needs and stop moaning about people who choose a different route. To some of us the image is everything, how we get there is entirely arbitrary.

Agreed.

I'd rather eat my own arm than shoot on a 1/3 inch chip camcorder or a digibeta, so I'll happily put up with the curious vagaries of the 7D/5D until Scarlet hits the streets. But that's me:)

Beta and 1/3" chip cams still have have a place in my shooting inventory. The Beta format is what I HAVE to use when I shoot TV Junkets for the studios, and the form factor of the JVC shoulder mount cams works great when I cover "live events".

Agreed that the vDSLR is not going away, it's only going to get better, and it's not really "new", as the RED is basically a vDSLR, and nobody is making fun of the RED.

While the RED was a great first effort, the Scarlett is still in the vapor stage, and while RED has some great ideas and designs, I'm afraid it's going to be a case of too little, too late for them. They just don't have the design and manufacturing capabilities of the Japanese firms, and you can bet the success of the 7D has not gone unnoticed by those manufacturers.

A year ago, all the independent productions were shooting on the RED, today, they are using the 7D. End users will always determine the success or failure of a a product (good or bad).

In the end, it's us, the end users that win, so it's all good.

[Don Miller]

Red is hardly dead. Their plan to have successful products in all market segments from high-end consumer on up seems less likely compared to a year ago. All the manufacturers are going to have to deal with commoditization of image quality as happened with film and in the last few years digital still photography. Red is still positioned to provide a well differentiated product line.

[Jim Snow]

That may be, but now that the big players are getting a bit too close for comfort, they are going to have to pay more attention to meeting product release dates.