EX-1 with Letus Adaptor vs Canon 5D. Which is better?

Benjamin Eckstein · October 1st, 2009, 04:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vincent Oliver

Just had look at the Stillmotion web site, and yes, WOW, superb - must sell all my EX3 gear right now.

STOP - STOP Vincent.

Sorry but this stylish production doesn't cut any ice with me. I have shot weddings in the suburbs of London and to pull off something this stylish would take far more than a single DSLR camera. Yes, the footage looks great, but if you look with open eyes, I wonder if this is a staged event for a promo reel or maybe for Canon.

Not calling Stillmotion a professional firm is NUTS.

These ARE real weddings. They get clients looking for this kind of work. It is more "staged" than just being a fly-on-the-wall cameraman but that is what their client wants. The wedding is real, the guests are real. They get paid, well and often, to do this for their clients.

Go watch some of the recent Filmfellas series from Zacuto with the 2 casts of wedding filmmakers to hear them talk about their jobs, their clients, using this gear, etc.

Stillmotion also has at least a couple behind-the-scenes videos on their Vimeo page.

Vincent Oliver · October 1st, 2009, 09:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Benjamin Eckstein

Not calling Stillmotion a professional firm is NUTS.

I don't remember saying this or implying it either.

Benjamin Eckstein · October 1st, 2009, 07:01 PM

Sorry Vincent, I accidentally quoted you. Didn't mean to do that. I was not referring to you.

Gabe Strong · October 2nd, 2009, 01:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nathan Hudson

I do want to say, please don't read into my responses as insults or anything like that, I'm not saying that the DSLR camera's suck, I just hold a different view. I respect everyone on here and applaud you all for being in one of the best industries ever! If you're working, making money, loving what you do, and producing results to inspire others, then you my friend are living a good life.

-Nate

Nicely said and I couldn't agree more.

Keith Moreau · October 2nd, 2009, 05:29 PM

Getting back to the subject, I am seriously considering selling my Letus Extreme and Nikon lenses and getting a Canon 7D.

For most situations, where there is enough room to back the EX1 from the subject, I find that the EX1 fully open or close to it provides pretty acceptable low DOF. Where I think using a DSLR like a 5D or 7D would come in handy would be static situations, like interviews, where you just don't have enough room to back up and there isn't a huge amount of camera movement necessary.

I've used the Letus in interviews, but found that the amount of artificial light required with the light loss and having to open up the SLR lens to get acceptable exposure creates almost too shallow a depth of field. I try not to blast the subjects so I try to get away with as little light as necessary. Nice image but right on the edge of being too dark or out of focus. Not only that, using rails, mattebox, heavy Letus, lenses, is visually impressive but a lot of infrastructure. I'm thinking I'll have an easier time with a 7D and a couple nice lenses and some type of XLR adapters/preamp.

I'd appreciate any opinions regarding my reasoning.

Max Allen · October 2nd, 2009, 09:59 PM

To my eyes the DOF adapters appear contrived, artificial, very unnatural next to 5D footage DOF. What a Zeiss prime will produce on a 5D is going to surpass a Letus rig on an EX, my opinion but also physics.

The image quality of the 5D is undeniable. Like many video professionals I resisted this camera as long as I could. There are jobs where 5D would be an atrocious choice and ones where it would make the content shine. Seeing Phil Bloom's name was brought up, bear in mind however to date most of his paid work is still using video cameras he's said. Online are largely his DSLR tests and a few jobs he's used them on.

From what I've seen in terms of this straight image quality there is little doubt, without personal testing, that the 5D beats out the EX. Let's take note, although a measly 1080p and 21MP (not the greatest specs for a large sensor camera), this is a Vistavision size sensor exceeding 35mm, RED Mysterium, Genesis, F35 and Viper. However, one that comes with aliasing on fine details to the degree that BBC deemed it unacceptable for broadcast, no TC, 44kHz audio, low bit rate, double system preferrable, not handheld-able by itself (stabilization), no smooth iris without fiddly vari-NDs, 30p/twixtor/needs downconversion for post....

The 5D is without a doubt top of the line DSLR image quality. A 7D is not a 5D in this respect, it's a 200% smaller sensor, will crop your wide angles, is less light sensitive and as far as video it is just about conveniences. It was so cheap to put out by Canon, under 2k is high end consumer video cam land, while still having a few bells and whistles over the 5D as a still camera (higher burst rate, etc.).

If you can preplan and control all the aspects of the job that the problems of the 5D require you to then sure it can work but show up to a new run and gun job for a new client with a 5D and expect to tackle it the same as if you showed up with a pro video camera and things may not go as smoothly.

With Stillmotion, I agree weddings are among the hardest jobs to shoot but I think it should be mentioned that 99% of their jobs follow a cookie cutter formula. Not to put it down, that's what they need to do and it's a business. However it's not that hard to adapt a set shooting pattern to a camera's shortcomings even those as extreme as the 5D (audio, TC, stabilization...). It looks to me 99% of the time their 5Ds are on a Steadicam, a Slider or a tripod and most of the many many videos they publish online pretty much looks the same in style and editing. This fixed structure isn't a good enough example to say that the 5D can replace a pro video camera in run and gun jobs.

Canon never planned for the 5D to make a splash in video. This was their accommodation to AP press photographers asking for video. They accommodated well! Nevertheless this remains a still camera to Canon and the profit numbers support this view very well. Saying that in a year DSLRs will be up to par functionally with pro video cameras is a fantasy. More realistic that in 1 or 2 years a 5D equivalent with 7D features. Besides, if and when the DSLR gets there, it won't. It will be a video camera made for video. Why make a DSLR primarily for video shooters?

Whether Canon intended it or not the 5D is also competing with RED. But as great as the look, even after most of the missing basic tools have been compensated for with 3rd party solutions you still cannot grade like you can RED footage. No RAW, what you shoot is what you get. If you didn't protect highlights they are gone. And you can't bypass the camera's compression circuit. Even the little EX let's you do this with HDSDI out. These are two needs for productions using large sensor cameras.

Personally I wish Nikon would come out with a 5D equivalent even if it had all the same shortcomings of the 5D before I start using these cameras. Nikon's build and GUI is superior in my book. Canons simply break much sooner than Nikons. But current video quality of Nikons are unwatchable compared to Canon.

Alister Chapman · October 3rd, 2009, 11:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Max Allen

Whether Canon intended it or not the 5D is also competing with RED. But as great as the look, even after most of the missing basic tools have been compensated for with 3rd party solutions you still cannot grade like you can RED footage. No RAW, what you shoot is what you get. If you didn't protect highlights they are gone.

Even shooting RED Raw, if you blow out the highlights they are gone. No camera or codec can recover blown out highlights as this is caused by the overload of the sensor(s).

The aliasing issues with both the 5D and 7D should not be dismissed too lightly. Pans across high contrast scenes or motion within scenes leads to all kinds of twitter on edges. On compressed web clips this often doesn't show up, but on big 1920x1080 monitors it's really ugly. You can deal with it by softening the image a little and perhaps someone will bring out an optical low pass filter with the correct cut-off, but before you rush out and buy a DSLR for video, make sure you understand the trade off of using too high a resolution imager. It's not unlike the issues encountered when down-converting EX 1080 footage to SD.

Don Miller · October 3rd, 2009, 03:42 PM

Video DSLR is just a short phase into a proper larger sensor video camera. But the fact remains that 35mm adapters do not look good compared to 5DII ot 7D. A simple search through Vimeo provides ample evidence. The 35mm adapter business is dead and buried.

While in Vimeo, compare better 5DII footage to better regular EX3 footage. The interest in these video dslrs is more than just about dof.

John Mitchell · October 5th, 2009, 02:50 AM

There's obviously a fair bit of passion here - I think others have nailed it when they say that for serious DOF work 35mm/APC still cameras have a role until larger sensors start to appear in prosumer camcorder models.

However - if I'm going on holidays and dragging along my DSLR - isn't it great that it can now take quality video :) And vica versa - if I take along a handycam isn't it great that it can now take reasonable quality stills. Viva la revolution!

Paul Curtis · October 5th, 2009, 06:14 AM

A couple of points i don't think anyone has touched on.

the aliasing out of both the 7D and 5D rule them out for me straight away. The method canon have to use to scale down the full resolution of the sensor is terrible. It's the number one reason stopping me. You don't see too much of it online because most of the time you're watching scaled web videos. And the codec is awful too (this has been touched on). I still favour my little LX3 because it's motion JPEG and produces a more pleasing (to my eye) result.

I believe canon will sort this with the new processors in their up and coming version of the 1D.

However what is really interesting is that we must be on a cusp here. So many interesting sensors now all in dSLRs all being let down by codec/processing/form factor

All these manufacturers must be close to sticking them in different bodies, there are persistent rumours that canon are.

If canon could produce a camera that used the APS-C size and accepted my eos lenses i'd have my money down straight away. All the components are there just waiting.

(Also APS-C is better than full frame - DOF is too shallow sometimes on 35. f1.4 APS-C is a lovely balance)

I gave serious though to a lens adaptor, but i can't help feeling it's a very temporary stop gap.

cheers
paul

Darren Ruddock · October 5th, 2009, 10:59 AM

Well folks,

give it a year and Vimeo, Youtube and all the others will be full of people sticking video up with ridiculous use of shallow DOP. The look will become overused and we will all be sick of it ....Ha Ha!

Chris Clifton · October 5th, 2009, 12:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Mitchell

There's obviously a fair bit of passion here - I think others have nailed it when they say that for serious DOF work 35mm/APC still cameras have a role until larger sensors start to appear in prosumer camcorder models.

However - if I'm going on holidays and dragging along my DSLR - isn't it great that it can now take quality video :) And vica versa - if I take along a handycam isn't it great that it can now take reasonable quality stills. Viva la revolution!

I can't agree with you more! I have EX1's and an EX3, no 35mm adapter (yet), and so last month I bought a DSLR to see what it was all about. Sold the DSLR on eBay last weekend. I think it's not ready for primetime, so many limitations. But what a great toy. I'll wait for the 3rd generation that has the rolling shutter and mud fixed, and an audio meter/monitor. Beautiful images though, if all the conditions are exactly right.

Tom Daigon · October 5th, 2009, 01:50 PM

I have both the EX3 and the 5DM2. They are both excellent tools in certain situations.
The EX3 has what professionals expect and need shooting in studio/cleint oreinted situations with clients (video ins and outs, audio ins and outs, TC ins and outs, etc).
The 5DM2 shoots beautiful "cinematic type" images that work great for MOS and b roll needs.
I have seen them used for their strengths and cut together to create wonderful presentations here on the web. They compliment each nicely with their strengths!

October 1st, 2009, 07:01 PM	#33
Benjamin Eckstein Major Player Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Boston, Massachusetts Posts: 380 Images: 1	Sorry Vincent, I accidentally quoted you. Didn't mean to do that. I was not referring to you.

October 2nd, 2009, 05:29 PM	#35
Keith Moreau Major Player Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Brisbane, California Posts: 530	Getting back to the subject, I am seriously considering selling my Letus Extreme and Nikon lenses and getting a Canon 7D. For most situations, where there is enough room to back the EX1 from the subject, I find that the EX1 fully open or close to it provides pretty acceptable low DOF. Where I think using a DSLR like a 5D or 7D would come in handy would be static situations, like interviews, where you just don't have enough room to back up and there isn't a huge amount of camera movement necessary. I've used the Letus in interviews, but found that the amount of artificial light required with the light loss and having to open up the SLR lens to get acceptable exposure creates almost too shallow a depth of field. I try not to blast the subjects so I try to get away with as little light as necessary. Nice image but right on the edge of being too dark or out of focus. Not only that, using rails, mattebox, heavy Letus, lenses, is visually impressive but a lot of infrastructure. I'm thinking I'll have an easier time with a 7D and a couple nice lenses and some type of XLR adapters/preamp. I'd appreciate any opinions regarding my reasoning.

October 2nd, 2009, 09:59 PM	#36
Max Allen Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: NY Posts: 186	To my eyes the DOF adapters appear contrived, artificial, very unnatural next to 5D footage DOF. What a Zeiss prime will produce on a 5D is going to surpass a Letus rig on an EX, my opinion but also physics. The image quality of the 5D is undeniable. Like many video professionals I resisted this camera as long as I could. There are jobs where 5D would be an atrocious choice and ones where it would make the content shine. Seeing Phil Bloom's name was brought up, bear in mind however to date most of his paid work is still using video cameras he's said. Online are largely his DSLR tests and a few jobs he's used them on. From what I've seen in terms of this straight image quality there is little doubt, without personal testing, that the 5D beats out the EX. Let's take note, although a measly 1080p and 21MP (not the greatest specs for a large sensor camera), this is a Vistavision size sensor exceeding 35mm, RED Mysterium, Genesis, F35 and Viper. However, one that comes with aliasing on fine details to the degree that BBC deemed it unacceptable for broadcast, no TC, 44kHz audio, low bit rate, double system preferrable, not handheld-able by itself (stabilization), no smooth iris without fiddly vari-NDs, 30p/twixtor/needs downconversion for post.... The 5D is without a doubt top of the line DSLR image quality. A 7D is not a 5D in this respect, it's a 200% smaller sensor, will crop your wide angles, is less light sensitive and as far as video it is just about conveniences. It was so cheap to put out by Canon, under 2k is high end consumer video cam land, while still having a few bells and whistles over the 5D as a still camera (higher burst rate, etc.). If you can preplan and control all the aspects of the job that the problems of the 5D require you to then sure it can work but show up to a new run and gun job for a new client with a 5D and expect to tackle it the same as if you showed up with a pro video camera and things may not go as smoothly. With Stillmotion, I agree weddings are among the hardest jobs to shoot but I think it should be mentioned that 99% of their jobs follow a cookie cutter formula. Not to put it down, that's what they need to do and it's a business. However it's not that hard to adapt a set shooting pattern to a camera's shortcomings even those as extreme as the 5D (audio, TC, stabilization...). It looks to me 99% of the time their 5Ds are on a Steadicam, a Slider or a tripod and most of the many many videos they publish online pretty much looks the same in style and editing. This fixed structure isn't a good enough example to say that the 5D can replace a pro video camera in run and gun jobs. Canon never planned for the 5D to make a splash in video. This was their accommodation to AP press photographers asking for video. They accommodated well! Nevertheless this remains a still camera to Canon and the profit numbers support this view very well. Saying that in a year DSLRs will be up to par functionally with pro video cameras is a fantasy. More realistic that in 1 or 2 years a 5D equivalent with 7D features. Besides, if and when the DSLR gets there, it won't. It will be a video camera made for video. Why make a DSLR primarily for video shooters? Whether Canon intended it or not the 5D is also competing with RED. But as great as the look, even after most of the missing basic tools have been compensated for with 3rd party solutions you still cannot grade like you can RED footage. No RAW, what you shoot is what you get. If you didn't protect highlights they are gone. And you can't bypass the camera's compression circuit. Even the little EX let's you do this with HDSDI out. These are two needs for productions using large sensor cameras. Personally I wish Nikon would come out with a 5D equivalent even if it had all the same shortcomings of the 5D before I start using these cameras. Nikon's build and GUI is superior in my book. Canons simply break much sooner than Nikons. But current video quality of Nikons are unwatchable compared to Canon.

October 3rd, 2009, 03:42 PM	#38
Don Miller Major Player Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Chicago Posts: 706	Video DSLR is just a short phase into a proper larger sensor video camera. But the fact remains that 35mm adapters do not look good compared to 5DII ot 7D. A simple search through Vimeo provides ample evidence. The 35mm adapter business is dead and buried. While in Vimeo, compare better 5DII footage to better regular EX3 footage. The interest in these video dslrs is more than just about dof.

October 5th, 2009, 02:50 AM	#39
John Mitchell Contributor Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Sydney Australia Posts: 873	There's obviously a fair bit of passion here - I think others have nailed it when they say that for serious DOF work 35mm/APC still cameras have a role until larger sensors start to appear in prosumer camcorder models. However - if I'm going on holidays and dragging along my DSLR - isn't it great that it can now take quality video :) And vica versa - if I take along a handycam isn't it great that it can now take reasonable quality stills. Viva la revolution!

October 5th, 2009, 06:14 AM	#40
Paul Curtis Major Player Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: canterbury Posts: 411	A couple of points i don't think anyone has touched on. the aliasing out of both the 7D and 5D rule them out for me straight away. The method canon have to use to scale down the full resolution of the sensor is terrible. It's the number one reason stopping me. You don't see too much of it online because most of the time you're watching scaled web videos. And the codec is awful too (this has been touched on). I still favour my little LX3 because it's motion JPEG and produces a more pleasing (to my eye) result. I believe canon will sort this with the new processors in their up and coming version of the 1D. However what is really interesting is that we must be on a cusp here. So many interesting sensors now all in dSLRs all being let down by codec/processing/form factor All these manufacturers must be close to sticking them in different bodies, there are persistent rumours that canon are. If canon could produce a camera that used the APS-C size and accepted my eos lenses i'd have my money down straight away. All the components are there just waiting. (Also APS-C is better than full frame - DOF is too shallow sometimes on 35. f1.4 APS-C is a lovely balance) I gave serious though to a lens adaptor, but i can't help feeling it's a very temporary stop gap. cheers paul

October 5th, 2009, 10:59 AM	#41
Darren Ruddock Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Southend, UK Posts: 165	Well folks, give it a year and Vimeo, Youtube and all the others will be full of people sticking video up with ridiculous use of shallow DOP. The look will become overused and we will all be sick of it ....Ha Ha!

October 5th, 2009, 01:50 PM	#43
Tom Daigon Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Las Vegas, NV Posts: 170	I have both the EX3 and the 5DM2. They are both excellent tools in certain situations. The EX3 has what professionals expect and need shooting in studio/cleint oreinted situations with clients (video ins and outs, audio ins and outs, TC ins and outs, etc). The 5DM2 shoots beautiful "cinematic type" images that work great for MOS and b roll needs. I have seen them used for their strengths and cut together to create wonderful presentations here on the web. They compliment each nicely with their strengths!