Going DSLR for wedding videography

[Tom Hardwick]

You have to be so careful when buying. The new Sony Alpha 55 looks to be a good DSLR for video work because of it's pellicle mirror and constant autofocus. But although it'll film for 30 mins, you can only film for 9 mins if you want the image stabilisation on. What? The vibrating chip IS gets so hot it shuts the camera down. You want to film with IS on in a hot climate? Look to 4 or 5 mins max.

Sigh. The proper camcorder does things properly.

tom.

[Jeff Harper]

That's too bad about the Sony. The GH2 at least has no heat issues, and appears to have been designed as much or more for video than photo...but I guess the fact that it is AVCHD makes that obivous.

I'm really trying to find a video of someone demonstrating the cam, but to no avail. Using the the touch screen for choosing where to focus sounds really amazing, and I really want to see that in use during video recording.

Edit: I found a demo on the Panasonic website...on the lower right side of the page. Very interesting...almost looks to good to be true: http://panasonic.net/avc/lumix/syste...2/control.html

Of course, even touching a screen while trying to follow a subject sounds difficult, I must admit. I can see myself tearing my hair out after missing a shot because I was trying focus on a subject that moved out of the frame.

[Ger Griffin]

Ive been following this thread but havent been posting.
The thing i love most about DSLRs at a wedding is how natural everyone stays when you point one at them.
They dont react at all. Then when they look at your camera they hold for a photo. Such beautiful footage of people looking right at the camera. A nod and a smile and they think the photo was taken. Slow the overcranked footage of someone smiling into a Shallow DOF lens an see what you've got! Golden stuff.

[Jeff Harper]

Griffin, you reminded me of that very thing...I absolutely hate the way people often react to video cameras.

I have become better at it, but even with the gentlest touch and the most careful of handling of people, some people just absolutely hate videocameras.

Speaking of slowing down footage, the GH2 offers some feature where you can record in slow motion or speeded up...can't imagine how it works...but sounds interesting....

[Ger Griffin]

Hey Jeff. Let me try to explain as simply as I can without sounding too condescending as you may or may not already know all about this.
I can imagine with the amount of posts you have I risk offending you but anyway, for the benefit of anyone who may need filling in....

Basically with both my 7d and T2i I can record in 50p mode. Basically this clip by default in Adobe plays at 50 frames per second. So there are twice the amount of frames passing by in the second as we are used to seeing. When I tell Premier to play this footage at 25 frames per second the footage plays at half the speed, and its smooooth. And then to add to this the generic built into premier slowmotion (or even better twixtor) to what is already taking place things can get very slow but remain very smooth.
The beauty of this is that its there but by default all clips play in realtime as per 'normal' 25fps footage.
Some shots scream 'slow me down'. Check this out

More Super Slow Motion [Water] - 550D on Vimeo

[Jeff Harper]

Ger, first of all, I can't imagine what could be offensive about your post, but thank you for being polite.

Despite the # of posts I have, I have absolutely no idea of how this DSLR thing works, and I am one of the least technically knowledgable people on this forum, so I can use any thing you can offer!

Second of all, that is AMAZING footage. I cannot believe the detail that stays after you slowed it down.

I am nearly speechless, and I'll tell you why. I see the amazing slo-mo in commercials and films and I'm so dazzled by it, never imagined that I would ever own equipment that might enable me to do that.

With my present video cameras slo motion look pretty rough, as a rule. So I thank you for posting.

[John Wiley]

The Panasonic brochure for the HMC40 shows that in 24mbps mode, you'll get about 160 minutes (just over 2.5 hours) in a 32GB card. Personally I'd prefer more smaller cards, maybe one 16gb card to give you plent of safety room for the ceremony and a few 4gb or 8gb cards for the rest of the day/secondary cameras.

With regards to slow motion, there is an option on the GH2 to shoot slow motion, at 80% or something like that. Panasonic don't give too much info on this feature but I think it saves the recorded file at a slower speed but at 24fps - this unfortunately means you don't have the choice to play it at normal speed later on - so you need to know exactly which shots you'll use it on in advance. Good for action sports, but not so good for live events. Of course there is still the 50p/60p mode which allows you to slow it down in post for super smooth slow-motion, but can still play back in realtime.

[Jeff Harper]

John, thanks for clearing that up about the cards and the slow motion feature. It would seem to be of very limited value, save for specific and rare occasions, I would imagine.

[Ger Griffin]

Its not my footage Jeff, just something that stood out to me on my surfing vimeo.
Since it was done on a T2i I felt it was pretty relevant.
Of course 50 frames per second is good,especially in combination with actually shooting with a high shutter speed to get each frame sharp. More frames per second would be even better. Then footage like this might even be possible....

floating on Vimeo

[Josh Swan]

There is always the AF100 as referenced on the first page. This is what I'm going with, coming from XHA1's. As much as the DSLR's capture the look I so desperately want, rigging one out can be fairly expensive. Buying a nice rig for handheld stuff to achieve good form factor can run a few thousand by the time you get a nice recorder and mic involved. The AF100 retails for $4700 and some change, but it's a "video" camera, with the form factor that I love. Onboard XLR, waveform, LCD, EVF, overcrank, the list goes on and on. For the money in my eyes the AF100 is a solid investment for me. Just think of the time you'll save in post production not having to sync up audio from a recorder. If your doing 40-50 good paying gigs a year, that's a lot of time you could be saving. And just like the old saying "time is money", how much are you really saving buying a DSLR?
Now that the AF100 is out, I can achieve the look I want, with the form factor I want.

[Jeff Harper]

No argument here regarding the AF100, nice cam if you can afford it. But you still need lenses, of course. You still need to outfit the AF100 with a decent microphone, and lenses will cost a couple of thousand. Your looking at $6400 investment, or much more if you buy fast lenses. I personally can't afford it.

For $999 the same chip is available on the GH2, but if you cannot deal with the form factor, the smaller cam will do you no good anyway. (I think it's the same chip. It's definitely the same size.)

Conventional DSLRs have never interested me. That's where the GH2 comes in: it is not a DSLR, it just looks like one. It is optimized for video and reportedly has the fastest auto focus on the planet, so they say.

The GH2 might make a good second cam for your AF100. The GH2 has stereo mic input (true, it's a mini plug, but that doesn't bother me), touch screen focus and the list goes on.

One thing I especially agree with you on, is the form factor. On the other hand the prospect of having a DSLR form factor that will allow my wedding folks to feel more much more comfortable for candid shooting than a video camera does sounds good to me.

For all of my talk about the above camera, I still have many questions that must be answered before I take the plunge. It is still not a true video camera and as you infer, the form factor would be very odd to say the least.

And lastly, as has been dutifully pointed out, it is not easy shooting with these things. I'm only hoping this new camera will be "easier" to use then the current crop of DSLRs that people have been shooting with.

[Noa Put]

Hi Jeff, Don't know if you plan to shoot solo but I can give my point of view based on my own experience so far as a solo shooter when using a dslr. I did purchase a 550d almost a year ago and currently I am looking to replace my xh-a1 with another newer model but it's going to be a real videocamera, not a dslr.

Now first of all, I would never ever do any full dslr shooting for weddings alone, those dslr's don't give me the realtime controll like I get by using a "real" videocamera, it takes more time to set up your shots and for getting it right with virtual no setup time with a dslr is asking for trouble, with my xh-a1 I have some piece of mind that a dslr never could provide me in run and gun situations.

For businessevents however were I do have the time to set-up and where audio can be a less important factor I have started to use my dslr for about 90% and my xh-a1 10%
For weddings it's still 70% xh-a1 and 30% dslr where those 30% is almost only "beauty" shots (don't know the right name for it in English but I think that's clear :))

dslr footage, eventhough I do notice that my xh-a1 produces sharper images when viewed side by side and up close, can look very sharp in full hd on a full hd screen. It's the combination of color, dof, and different lenschoices that can give a dslr a look that's almost impossible to copy with any videocamera in it's price range.

I did purchase 2 second hand nikon nikkor lenzes ( 28mm f2.8 and a 50mm f1.4) and I am also using a 10-22 canon lens that actually belonged to my wife (not anymore now :D). Recently I got a blackbird steadicam as well to combine with the 550d/10-22 lens and that's the last investment I will make in regard to my dslr. I do use the dslr for some very specific shots and I try to shoot complete parts of a wedding day f.i. like a photoshoot, reception (where it can get real dark) but a church recording or in any run and gun situation or when audio is needed it's back to my main videocamera. I avoid to mix xh-a1/dslr footage as much as possible because it's harder to match.

This has worked out very well so far, I absolutely love my blackbird/dslr/10-22 lens combo, it's very light and I can get realy cool shots with that, below something I did recently, basically as test and partly just for fun and this is where those dslr's really shine. But then again, I realy toke my time to prepare each shot, only then it works out great.

To look at it in HD you have to go to the vimeo page direcly..

Abandoned castle on Vimeo

On the other hand I also noticed that a shot is easily ruined, especially with wide angle lenzes where moire can get very noticeable when you got very fine detail, like small bricks, in the back.

I would see a full dslr wedding only possible with at least 2 and preferably 3 cameraoperators/dslr's, respect to those that do this alone but I would never do this.

A perfect situation for me would be a Panny AF100 combined with my 550d with some good (expensive) lenzes so I could exchange lenzes (not sure if that's possible but that would be a bigger advantage) but I almost would have to break the bank for that and I"m still thinking very hard if it's worth the investment. I think if you plan to go full dslr anyway, don't save out on the lenzes, they make a difference. (the man behind the camera even more :)

ps: sorry for any spelling errors, my spelling checker is not working on this pc :))

[Jeff Harper]

Noa, thank you for the thoughtful feedback. I really appreciate it.

Your video was amazing, really. Too many cool things to mention, but they way it appeared that you went practically flying out the door was way awesome.

[John Wiley]

Originally Posted by Noa Put

I would see a full dslr wedding only possible with at least 2 and preferably 3 cameraoperators/dslr's, respect to those that do this alone but I would never do this.

I wholeheartedly agree with this regarding the Canon DSLR's - but I think the AF100 and GH2 have enough features that they can be used exclusively by a single shooter. You would need quite a few cameras though, maybe even up to four.

I would picture one main rig, with a good, fast zoom lens, perhaps with a follow focus, and an audio recorder recieving feeds from a shotgun mic and a wireless, all mounted on a tripod on some kind of shoulder mount/handheld rig. Then a 2nd camera on a monopod, again with a nice zoom lens, and if you really want to impress then a camera on a steadycam with a wide lens, sitting ready and waiting for particular shots only. The final camera would be your wide/safety camera. Round off the kit with a few audio recorders to stick on the lecturn or the officiant for extra/back-up sound, and you have a rock solid kit with all bases covered by reserves. The only problem I see with this set up is that the shotgun mic would pick up noise from the lens as well as the little control dial on the GH1/GH2, so you'd have to be aware of that when making changes and not do it at critical times when you can't afford to edit out a sound source.

Four cameras may seem excessive, but when you consider you that you can get GH1's body only super cheap right now, and you'll already have all the necassary lenses in your kit, additional bodies are not a bad idea. They can save you time changing lenses, tripod plates etc. With the set-up I described above, I would imagine you'd have the tripod camera set up inside ready to go (but obviously not yet in position in the aisle) then you could shoot everything up until the brides arrival with the monopod and steadycam kits. Once she is on the alter, move the main rig into position in the aisle, frame it nicely, check the audio levels and leave it running. Then you could grab the monopod/steadycam rigs again to move around the location and shoot some nice cut-aways and beauty shots, checking back on the main rig from time to time to reframe, monitor levels, etc. All the while having the 4th camera and audio recorders running as backup.

Only problem would be packing it all up quickly afterwards - might be helpful to have a nice padded case big enough to fit all your kit in, even without fully packing up the tripods/monopod/steadicam.

[Jeff Harper]

John, I'm glad you listed your ideas of how to shoot with the cams. You can't have too many cameras, but in my case I'm dealing with the reality of a limited budget. A fourth cam would be out of the question for me, in my price range.

Two cameras with fast zoom lens, and one with a wide angle would be sufficient. The camera in the back would have the wireless, the first camera would have a shotgun, and then use a recorder or two and I'd be good.

That wide lens would be fine for the exterior shots of the venues, the cake, and other shots. The wide lens would also be great for the dancing as well, along with a second cam with a zoom.

I'm glad you think the GH2 is feature rich enough that it is feasible for single shooter. I haven't played with one in person, but I've been hoping they would be user friendlier than the Mark 5 and 7, etc. It certainly seems to be. I also hope that the LCD is accurate so that I could accurately make adjustments on the fly. One reviewer has written that it is very much WSIWG, as it displays what the sensor is seeing, not what the lens is seeing.

Do you find that to be true regarding the LCD display? Is it reliable enough to trust for setting exposure and white balance, in your experience?