Reading mode: Light Dark

Why use DSLR as a video camera?

Go to last post
But your T1i does decent videos as well, if you choose the right lens.

Try the 50mm f/1.8, sells for just around $90. Try shooting a typical gathering in inadequately lighted restaurants. Select f/1.8 and pump ISO up to 1600 - and make sure you do custom white balance after capturing ambient lighting. It is manual focusing all throughout so it helps that the focus ring of the 50mm f/1.8 is very light and can be manipulated by one finger very easily (make sure you put it on MF of course because it does not have FTM). You might be surprised at how good your T1i is :)

--
Noogy
'Photography is my therapy.'
Canon EOS 7D, Canon EOS 400D, Canon D10, Lumix TZ5, Kodak V1253
 
You've seen listed the various advantages of DSLR video, but there are also numerous drawbacks. Don't be fooled into thinking that "serious" videographers have all switched to DSLRs...they haven't.

Try doing the opposite of the DSLR strong points (such as great rather than shallow depth of field). I'd also prefer a videographer to show up to my daughters wedding with a Sony or Canon Pro camcorder than a 7D to do videos. (Mixing both would be fine).
 
The H1 is a welcome addition for all audio applications (I own a H2).

The DSLR has many nice points. The best of which is giving very high IQ (in certain instances) compared to camcorders, such as shallow depth of field and low light.

Go to a forum on videographers' websites and start a thread "What's the big deal about pro camcorders (I use a DSLR)?" and you'll see many interesting replys.
 
With a camcorder, you get the look of a daytime soap.

With a DSLR, you get the look of a classic film.

Choosing the classic film is more effort, but worthwhile IMO.

And since you already own a DSLR, the classic film look is free. So put the camcorder on CL ;)
 
because it's already in your hands and it could save you from needing to shell out $500 for a video camera and one less device you don't need to bring, charge batteries, etc. Plus you can put whatever Canon EF/EF-S mount lens you can find! Can't do that with a video camera that has a built-in zoom lens.
 
A-Frame said:
Watch this to see why filmmakers are excited about dslr video:
http://vimeo.com/groups/filmtalk/videos/11082700
Click to expand...
I just watched those videos. Needless-to-say, I am quite impressed. Most videos I take a strictly family videos and nothing like those experts have done. From my observation, the DSLR's can do that and far beyond.

I am not going to have a knee jerk reaction, but that shootout clearly shows that needing 2 devices are a thing of the past. I can switch my focus over to a good DSLR (not sure how good my T1i is).

I will keep my eyes out and see what I can do.
 
BigRedNole said:
I am not going to have a knee jerk reaction, but that shootout clearly shows that needing 2 devices are a thing of the past. I can switch my focus over to a good DSLR (not sure how good my T1i is).
Click to expand...
Yeah, the lack of manual control would be a downer for me. The 720p is less of an issue - I don't have anything that can play 1080p anyway :)

But you may want to hold off - cameras are coming with decent autofocus in video mode - that would make life so much easier. Then you can just concentrate on aperture, shutter speed, focal length, composition, getting the kids to do something interesting, etc.
 
BigRedNole said:
I am asking out of curiosity. I bought a DSLR to take pictures, not video. I bought an HD camcorder to take video and not pictures. Both excel for their purpose. Neither one can come close to doing the job of the other.
Click to expand...
I never thought I would care much about video in a DSLR and in fact I have a 450D on its way which I guess doesn't do video, no biggie... But several weeks ago I saw a video made on a Panny GH-1 that had been 'hacked' and all I can say is wow, it was really impressive.
 
Pro filmmakers don't use AF or AE - shots must be planned. DVSLRs should be used for more artistic videomaking, consumer camcorders are for home movies.

Excellent DVSLR tutorial here:

http://nofilmschool.com/dslr/
--
Sam K., NYC
 
So, a DSLR is not good for taking family videos?

I am not looking at making films. I am looking at opportunities to reduce what is in my camera bag. It is heavy already and getting heavier in the next few weeks

Canon T1i
2x Kit lenses
2x batteries
Battery charger
Soon: 430EX II flash and 50mm lens

Canon HV 20
2x batteries
Video tapes

General cleaning products
 
Spoken like a true bachelor. If you're a Daddy of three, carrying a stroller and a backpack full of diaper and milk, often a Single DSLR + 1 lens is your only luxury.
  • How often do you shoot video of strangers you don't know? - probably rarely
  • how often do you shoot video of your family on vacations? - probably very often
If you have toddlers, you understand the important of having a VIDEO ability build-in to the DSLR so you don't need to carry 2 separate devices, 2 separate battery charger. Space is at premium and having 1 consolidating device is better.

Having said that, I agree with you the current AF in video is terrible. Family man need something that is automatic. If I'm shooting purely for my enjoyment without family members, I'm inclined to play with focus-pulling via manual focusing. But when I'm with family, I want my video with point/shoot simplicity.

The poster above mention Nikon D3100 and Sony A55 does continuous AF in movie mode. This is definitely the most useful innovation in DSLR video.
BigRedNole said:
I am asking out of curiosity. I bought a DSLR to take pictures, not video. I bought an HD camcorder to take video and not pictures. Both excel for their purpose. Neither one can come close to doing the job of the other.

I did take a small video with my T1i and couldn't stand even trying it. AF is horrible, video is questionable at best. I took the same video with my HV20 and it is astounding. I can understand people only wanting one device. However, I think it will be a long while before a DSLR can be as good as a camcorder for video. They would have to create a specific "video lens" to manage for the speed of autofocus necessary.

For me, I'll stick with two separate devices.
Click to expand...
 
The filming of House on a DSLR was a gimmick, probably funded by Canon. If you watch the show people go out of focus at awkward times, there are awkward cuts to compensate for the out of focus shots. When TV shows actually start using DSLRs on a regular basis, then I'll believe it was something more than a gimmick. Right now, they're an inadequate tool for that.

At best, the filmers of House had to basically turn their SLR into a video camera, adding a followfocus, a steadycam, a loupe. It's ridiculous the costs and the things you have to do to make it work.

And don't go selling your T1i and camcorder and get a 7D. Many of the problems with the T1i and video are also wrong with the 7D.

In order to make video work well with an SLR and its shallow DOF, you need to direct the video participants to stay in one spot and/or move at a certain rate so manual focus is easier. This is possible with a TV show, but not when you're filming your kids.

Yes, the quality of the video can be good, as long as you enjoy frequently out of focus subjects.

For documentary video, a camcorder is still the best thing. Maybe 5 years down the road things will change, once continuous autofocus and silent focusing lenses are the norm, but right now, video in SLR is an infant. And don't believe me. Vincent Laforet, a pro DSLR videographer says the same thing. Go here and watch some of the free videos posted. http://creativelive.com/courses/vince_laforet/ . (You may need Firefox to view them).
 
The shallow depth of focus in DSLRs can really be a detriment in video. In addition, the rolling shutter effect (jello effect) and aliasing artifacts, are issues that point out the fact that our current DSLR sensors aren't really made for video. Video in them is a kludge. Someday the technology will be better, but right now, it's certainly not that great.
 
Yes, DSLR is excellent for staged video, like LaForet has done. Vincent LaForet himself will tell you that DSLR isn't for documentary video, camcorders are better for that.

If you go here: http://creativelive.com/courses/vince_laforet/ , you can watch excerpts of a class he taught for CreativeLive, where LaForet tells you why DSLRs aren't used for everyday (documentary) filming, and he shows you the almost caricature-like rig that he sets up for filming. He doesn't depict what an everyday user can do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top