Advantages of DSLRs over Camcorder?

erichK · Jan 15, 2018

Photography is full of people who tout the "better IQ" of "FF" sensors over the mFT's systems Y prefer to use, because of the larger sensor size. Yet it is claimed that the tiny sensor on, for example a GoPro produces superior "4K" video to the merely hi-res video from my OM5ii.

What gives? Surely the larger sensor produces more information. If not, then DSLR video seems a waste of time, because even mid-level consumer camcorders are generally much more ergonomic and feature-designed for video.

Andrew S10 · Jan 15, 2018

Watch this video by Matthew Rosen.

Bear in mind that the size of sensor photosites increase with the size of the sensor, so large sensors tend to have more dynamic range and better low light performance.

Gary3000 · Jan 15, 2018

better bokeh too.

plus for traditional filmmakers, the size of the APS-C sensors more closely match that of 35mm film cameras.

erichK · Jan 15, 2018

Andrew S10 said:
Watch this video by Matthew Rosen.

Bear in mind that the size of sensor photosites increase with the size of the sensor, so large sensors tend to have more dynamic range and better low light performance.

Thank you Andrew. As longtime photographer I fully understand the principles involved in cases like the cameras in the video. My reasoning was exactly what you allude to - that the (mFT) sensor of a Panasonic G85 kit would have adequate DR would save me from having to use obtrusive extra lighting at concerts.

But fighting with the awkwardnesses of using it and my Olympus dslrs for video (form factor and controls, lenses with little iris (diaphragm) and focus control and no power zoom, I often wonder whether I made a mistake by buying the G85 instead of the used, smaller-sensored $2,500 Canon pro style Video Camera with XLR inputs, etc, etc that I could have got for about the same price.

The kicker is watching people having a much simpler time of it, using GoPro or cell phones that supposedly deliver the same 4K resolution. I know that a great deal can be done in processing and software, but still cannot understand how such tiny sensors can possibly achieve similar overall "IQ".

flektogon · Jan 15, 2018

Gary3000 said:
better bokeh too.

plus for traditional filmmakers, the size of the APS-C sensors more closely match that of 35mm film cameras.

Yes, but for the film amateurs/enthusiasts, used to film on 8/Super 8 and 16mm cameras, a small sensor (1/2.5" - 1") camcorders have absolute sense.

erichK · Jan 15, 2018

Gary3000 said:
better bokeh too.

plus for traditional filmmakers, the size of the APS-C sensors more closely match that of 35mm film cameras.

Yes , but like it or not, the overwide and difficult to use vertically 16:9 aspect ratio has become standard.

Cameranoobie · Jan 15, 2018

flektogon said:
Gary3000 said:

better bokeh too.

plus for traditional filmmakers, the size of the APS-C sensors more closely match that of 35mm film cameras.

Click to expand...

Yes, but for the film amateurs/enthusiasts, used to film on 8/Super 8 and 16mm cameras, a small sensor (1/2.5" - 1") camcorders have absolute sense.

Michael1000 · Jan 15, 2018

Andrew S10 said:
Watch this video by Matthew Rosen.

Bear in mind that the size of sensor photosites increase with the size of the sensor, so large sensors tend to have more dynamic range and better low light performance.

I think there is a mistake at 8:50 on this video, or I am missing what this guy is getting at. If you have an image of a girl, and she fills the image height of both sensors, and both sensors have the same number of raster lines, say 1080, then the gap will appear the same in the output of both.

a7sastro · Jan 15, 2018

erichK said:
Gary3000 said:

better bokeh too.

plus for traditional filmmakers, the size of the APS-C sensors more closely match that of 35mm film cameras.

Click to expand...

Yes , but like it or not, the overwide and difficult to use vertically 16:9 aspect ratio has become standard.

--
erichK
saskatoon, canada
Photography is a small voice, at best, but sometimes one photograph, or a group of them, can lure our sense of awareness.
- W. Eugene Smith, Dec 30, 1918 to Oct 15, 1978.
http://erichk.zenfolio.com/
http://www.fototime.com/inv/7F3D846BCD301F3
Photobook: http://www.blurb.ca/b/7525756-the-book-of-gina

?????

Don't know what you refer to as far as "standard" except maybe generally size of people's t.v.'s at home compared with the old 4:3 aspect ratio of CRTs....

But people don't just watch tv anymore.

Do some research on viewing habits on cellphones and tablets.

Also movie theatre's aren't 16:9..

So I guess DCI 4K doesn't exist either...

Forget IMAX.

Also some of the new cell phones are coming out with displays not 16:9.....

What is that social media site with Square images?

Don't tell Panasonic that is really excited about its GH5s and multi-aspect ratio capabilities...

As far as aspect ratio, no one is requiring you to deliver the same as you shoot. It's quite easy to crop, especially with high resolutions available to capture nowadays......

Seems like you have more opinions on the matter but want other posters to draw them out or read your mind, instead of just stating your whole case upfront in the OP....

And no one is also requiring you to hold your Olympus like a still camera. Many indie users put their DSLRs/ILC in rigs that can pull focus with cine lenses, have video EVF attachments with video-centric tools like waveform, peaking, etc.., and gimbels, shoulder mounts, pro audio recording XLRs/wifi, etc.....

Not to mention technical issue I imagine you are aware of with DSLRs/ILC's:

interchangeable lenses to meet the demands of the shoot.

Also many DLSR's can give people access to interchangeable lens video capabilities at cheap prices, especially in the 4K realm (except Canon of course)......

Also point of information sensor size is not dependent on sensor pixel size. Compare a Sony a7s (8.4microns, 12MP) with a Sony a7riii (4.5microns,42MP) BOTH have the same size sensor.....

Also Sony Imaging is putting more effort into cell phone camera sensor tech (guess who's sensor is in almost every phone?) than most other camera manufacturers are into video and DSLR sensors.......

So no doubt,

soon/now the latest phone camera is probably going to mop the floor with a two year old Canon DSLR that can't even do 4K video, while phones are now doing 4K 60p..... save some advantages like depth of field or interchangeable lens or the like......

Andrew S10 · Jan 15, 2018

erichK said:
Yes , but like it or not, the overwide and difficult to use vertically 16:9 aspect ratio has become standard.

Aspect ratio pertains to shape, not size; both small and large sensor camcorders can have identical aspect ratios. 16:9 has been the HDTV aspect ratio since the mid 90s, and it was never intended to be used vertically. I suppose life would be easier if everything followed the Hasselblad 6x6 standard, but I like the widescreen aesthetic.

Andrew S10 · Jan 15, 2018

Michael1000 said:
Andrew S10 said:

Watch this video by Matthew Rosen.

Bear in mind that the size of sensor photosites increase with the size of the sensor, so large sensors tend to have more dynamic range and better low light performance.

Click to expand...

I think there is a mistake at 8:50 on this video, or I am missing what this guy is getting at. If you have an image of a girl, and she fills the image height of both sensors, and both sensors have the same number of raster lines, say 1080, then the gap will appear the same in the output of both.

The MFT sensor has smaller gaps between raster lines, which yields a crisper looking image.

erichK · Jan 16, 2018

My question was simple, How can the tiny sensor on a GoPro or the even a cell phone provide better "4K" footage than the HD footage of on a mFT, APC or FF sensored DSLR? It is based on the fundamentals of optics and information theory.

I completely understand the video initially referred to and the basic physics, optics and most of the electronics involved.

Surely I am not alone in trying to figure out how to make decent videos (mainly of concerts and events) with what I have (Olympus EM-1 and OM5ii and Panasonic G85 many lenses plus a pro sound recording setup) without breaking the bank.

Seems that I should jusr chuck all that stuff and buy the latest iPhone!

--
erichK
saskatoon, canada
Photography is a small voice, at best, but sometimes one photograph, or a group of them, can lure our sense of awareness.
- W. Eugene Smith, Dec 30, 1918 to Oct 15, 1978.
http://erichk.zenfolio.com/
http://www.fototime.com/inv/7F3D846BCD301F3
Photobook: http://www.blurb.ca/b/7525756-the-book-of-gina

Vesku · Jan 16, 2018

erichK said:
My question was simple, How can the tiny sensor on a GoPro or the even a cell phone provide better "4K" footage than the HD footage of on a mFT, APC or FF sensored DSLR?

4k is sharper than HD but it is not the whole story.

We must define what better video means.

Color fidelity, dynamic range, noise, image roughness due to small sensor, line skipping or bad codec, aliasing, moire, rolling shutter, bit depth, frame rate, lens quality etc, etc...

The big sensor/lens in general makes cleaner image and cleaner high iso but when we talk about video there are many ways to destroy that theory. A small camera can shoot "better" video than a big camera.

flektogon · Jan 16, 2018

Cameranoobie said:
flektogon said:

Gary3000 said:

better bokeh too.

plus for traditional filmmakers, the size of the APS-C sensors more closely match that of 35mm film cameras.

Click to expand...

Yes, but for the film amateurs/enthusiasts, used to film on 8/Super 8 and 16mm cameras, a small sensor (1/2.5" - 1") camcorders have absolute sense.

--
Regards,
Peter

Click to expand...

Can you explain further?

What other explanation you want? Simply, today like in the past there have been film professionals and then film amateurs. They used different equipment, which was optimal for their use and purpose. I, as the amateur/enthusiast, used Super8 cameras and occasionally 16mm cameras. Those were perfect for the type of audience I was shooting for - family, friends, amateur competitions. My films were never intended to be broadcasted. I think that the same principles hold today. If you are not a professional video maker (i.e. you are not shooting for any film studio or TV station), you don't need anything even like Panasonic GH4/5 camera or any camcorder costing over 2 grands. I wanted to have an equivalent to my Elmo Super8 film camera, so I went through a series of analog 8, miniDVD camcorders and my last purchase was the Sony CX-12 full HD (small sensor) camcorder. It is still a perfect tool for my type of filming. However I am still thinking about getting some different shooting tool. Why? because I shoot still pictures as well (having a couple of Pentax DSLRs) and it would very convenient to carry just one still/video camera. Unfortunately Pentax is very weak for the video shooting. I already went through hundreds discussions and reviews and my final selection of the absolutely optimal photo/video tool is: the Sony RX10/II. When and whether I'll buy it is another question.

--
Regards,
Peter

erichK · Jan 16, 2018

Vesku said:
erichK said:

My question was simple, How can the tiny sensor on a GoPro or the even a cell phone provide better "4K" footage than the HD footage of on a mFT, APC or FF sensored DSLR?

Click to expand...

4k is sharper than HD but it is not the whole story.

We must define what better video means.

Color fidelity, dynamic range, noise, image roughness due to small sensor, line skipping or bad codec, aliasing, moire, rolling shutter, bit depth, frame rate, lens quality etc, etc...

The big sensor/lens in general makes cleaner image and cleaner high iso but when we talk about video there are many ways to destroy that theory. A small camera can shoot "better" video than a big camera.

My aim is to:

1. Shoot with a small, unobtrusive amount of equipment and set-up to add video to an already pro-level audio recording set-up at live classical music concerts.

2. Be able to situate, start, stop, and to some degree adjust controls (focus, zoom) and vary viewpoints to add to /splice into the essential continuous, single take recording.

3. Be able to produce an interesting, decent-quality, program of video, of the whole group of musicians, of the individual players, of fingers on strings, keyboards or valves smoothly flowing into to each other to accompany a very good sound track.

Really clean image with natural looking colour is more important than very high resolution, especially with the "jaggies" that often come with it.

The musicians have actually been impressed with these qualities in clips from the OM5ii taken in good light. I know and enjoy the ergonomics of that little camera and prefer to keep using it (and/ or any successor), alongside the Panasonic G85 I got for its 4K, which I am still trying to learn. Alongside these two tripod-mounted, I try to shoot zoomed-in footage of players and fingerwork with my EM-1.

uncle dunc · Jan 16, 2018

erichK said:
I try to shoot zoomed-in footage of players and fingerwork with my EM-1.

I do a similar thing, shooting live music and music in the recording studio. If I had the money, I'd get a Canon GX10 for its DPAF, power zoom and 8MP sensor (larger pixels = better low light) but then its color wouldn't match my Lumix gear. In your case, Olympus makes a 12-50mm power zoom lens for M/43, but it's at F/6.3 at the long end - not good for dimly lit concerts.

What if you put a telephoto prime on your G85, shoot in 4k, and do your zooming in post? That way you'd have better low light performance, and a little bokeh if you wanted it. As far as ergonomics go, you could put a wand on the lens to facilitate manual focus, and mount the camera in a cage made out of PVC pipe. Check out YouTube for ideas on that.

The problem with iPhones is ergonomics. Until they incorporate optical zoom and put a zoom button on, hand held shooting is going to be awkward. Plus, because of the tiny sensor, low light performance is always going to be inferior. As I understand it, they deal with low light be slowing down the frame rate and shutter speed, which is going to affect video quality.

FLruckas · Jan 16, 2018

Vesku said:
We must define what better video means.

So so so true.

The operative weasel word here is "better"

Vesku said:
Color fidelity, dynamic range, noise, image roughness due to small sensor, line skipping or bad codec, aliasing, moire, rolling shutter, bit depth, frame rate, lens quality etc, etc...

The big sensor/lens in general makes cleaner image and cleaner high iso but when we talk about video there are many ways to destroy that theory. A small camera can shoot "better" video than a big camera.

This question has been asked in ad nauseum.

Just buy a used C300 Mark II. Put a 18-80 lens on it.

Problem solved.

Camcorders, m4/3, not so good when the sun goes down.

Bigger sensors mean better performance in low light.

Nothing has changed from stills.

:=)

A little tongue and cheek sarcasm here....

You'll have to figure out what matters to you and what you understand and go from there.

--
,,,The Ring,,,

erichK · Jan 16, 2018

uncle dunc said:
uncle dunc said:

I try to shoot zoomed-in footage of players and fingerwork with my EM-1.

Click to expand...

I do a similar thing, shooting live music and music in the recording studio. If I had the money, I'd get a Canon GX10 for its DPAF, power zoom and 8MP sensor (larger pixels = better low light) but then its color wouldn't match my Lumix gear. In your case, Olympus makes a 12-50mm power zoom lens for M/43, but it's at F/6.3 at the long end - not good for dimly lit concerts.

I know - I sometimes use it, and it does work well on bright, sunny days or very well-lit venues. The quality is not great, but usable and the power zoom is always smoother than I can do manually.

uncle dunc said:
What if you put a telephoto prime on your G85, shoot in 4k, and do your zooming in post?

In the current shooting situation I've actually discovered that the 4K on the G85 cuts off so much of the picture that I will have to use something wider than my widest (12mm) prime and I'll have to use my 7-14mm to get the whole chamber group (which can be as many as 7) into the field. Luckily it good quality even wide open at f2.8 so should produce video usable for the PP that you suggest.

uncle dunc said:
That way you'd have better low light performance, and a little bokeh if you wanted it. As far as ergonomics go, you could put a wand on the lens to facilitate manual focus, and mount the camera in a cage made out of PVC pipe. Check out YouTube for ideas on that.

They look interesting, but in the present venue, the Blumlein pair of mics high-mounted on a monster surlock tripod and my fixed cameras on their tripos, XLR cables, Rode camera mic,, etc all all end up between audience and performers, Do use a L style bracket and a double-camera mount, but have to keep things a lean - and professional = looking as possible.

uncle dunc said:
The problem with iPhones is ergonomics. Until they incorporate optical zoom and put a zoom button on, hand held shooting is going to be awkward. Plus, because of the tiny sensor, low light performance is always going to be inferior. As I understand it, they deal with low light be slowing down the frame rate and shutter speed, which is going to affect video quality.

Our daughter, who is probably a better photographer than I, and has taken many great shots and video with her cell phone, does confirm what you say.

erichK · Jan 16, 2018

The answer is not to throw $10k US at the problem, but to find effective ways to use the tools I have, and perhaps spend 1-5% of that amount for items that will effectively supplement them.

Michael1000 · Jan 16, 2018

FLruckas said:
Vesku said:

We must define what better video means.

Click to expand...

So so so true.

The operative weasel word here is "better"

FLruckas said:

Color fidelity, dynamic range, noise, image roughness due to small sensor, line skipping or bad codec, aliasing, moire, rolling shutter, bit depth, frame rate, lens quality etc, etc...

The big sensor/lens in general makes cleaner image and cleaner high iso but when we talk about video there are many ways to destroy that theory. A small camera can shoot "better" video than a big camera.

Click to expand...

This question has been asked in ad nauseum.

Just buy a used C300 Mark II. Put a 18-80 lens on it.

Problem solved.

Camcorders, m4/3, not so good when the sun goes down.

Bigger sensors mean better performance in low light.

Nothing has changed from stills.

:=)

A little tongue and cheek sarcasm here....

You'll have to figure out what matters to you and what you understand and go from there.

Advantages of DSLRs over Camcorder?

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Leading Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Forum Enthusiast

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Keyboard shortcuts