Digital camera with large sensor or camcorder with small sensor?

Started Jan 23, 2013 | Discussions thread
Jezebel Masterson Forum Member • Posts: 71
Re: Digital camera with large sensor or camcorder with small sensor?

Francis Carver wrote:

Why does anyone need 60p lately? Are you shooting at 60p and editing it at 60p and only playing the stuff back at 60p, or what?

If most people hated "The Hobbit" that was shot at 48p and played back at the same refresh rate, why is 60p going to be a more pleasant experience? Or is it only for the compulsory slow-mo shots of the dog jumping up to catch the Frisbee or shaking off water in glorious slow-mo?

Regarding the sensor sizes.... DOF has got nothing to do with sensor sizes, or perhaps I should re-phrase by saying that one should not pick a sensor size merely for a particular DOF attainable. I dislike shallow DOF tremendously, but I would be very had pressed today to spend any money on any camera that does not have a sensor that is at least 1-inch diagonal. You would need that for image quality, you would need that for low light capability, you would need that for quality matching size optics on the camera, and so on.

Now, in the PROFESSIONAL camcorder realm, we still have 1/3-inch sensor and even 2/3-inch sensor shoulder-mountable Goliaths, but this breed is dying out fast. Seems like most everybody wants to shoot video with larger sensor cameras -- 1-inch, Micro 4/3rd, APS-C, Super 35, full-frame 135. I believe I am one of them.

Cant speak for others, but I thought the hobbit looked great, so did avatar. For one, more frames equals smoother motion. I like smooth movement because that is the way I see things in real life. Perhaps the issue is that our minds are used to associating choppy 24p with professional, so when we see a smooth 60p, we think amateur home video. It suited hollywood in the past, because it was less data. We have supercomputers in our palms now though, 24p will become extinct. I have said before, I like my photos and video to reflect what I see IRL, and my eyes don't see 24fps.

I'm not sure we can say people don't buy based on DOF needs. The Walking Dead series used a Canon 7D for specific shots, namely the "gun view", where you look down the barrel while the zombie has it's head filled with a bullet. I watched the producers explain the reason for the 7D use was it's larger sensor, for the shallow DOF. They wanted to isolate the zombie head. I have also read constantly in forums about DOF this and that. We are in the video threads, but if you go read the sony forum, or canon, where there are a lot of video users, they mostly detest camcorders because of the huge DOF. Many people shun the GH2 because it is "only" MFT sensor size. Noise can be less on larger sensors, yes, but only if you have the glass to match (fast zooms are $pendy though). IQ is not dependent on sensor size, my tiny 1/4.1 3mos system proves that, it absolutely crushes any FF DSLR, if nothing else, in sharpness.

I don't have a Pro cam yet, but I am going from APSC video to small sensor camcorder, not the other way around. I could have easily invested in a FF, my apsc was $1200, my camcorder was $750, I could have picked up a 6D or D600 for that. I chose to buy a 1/4" camcorder. 2 months ago I would have agreed larger is better, I consider myself more educated now. Fast glass is easy to make when it's small, and 1/4" sensors are small. So all in all, I think DOF is a good way to choose your medium, that is likely the biggest difference. It will cost you though, heavy, big, expensive. And thin DOF is very unforgiving, try manually focusing a 6D @F1.4, not a fun experience.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow