HD video camera?
- Thread starter MarcusGHedwig
- Start date
No prob! And 310 quid with a lens? Damn, I guess I'd have to play the bidding game (uggghhh...) to get it at that price point, cuz the cheapest buy-it-now for the whole kit (used) is $600 atm...
drew_drummer
Dancefap
Ashgarth
Jordi Vaquero
Here you have a comparison between the D5100 and the 600d (T3i, which is the 550d with a couple more features).
It's not the same Nikon you were looking at, but maybe it can be useful.
I have some friends that do lot of video stuff and they all think Canon works better than Nikon for this stuff, as for pics...there's no big difference, I prefered Canon because I already knew how they work and had some old lenses from my dad SLR, so I got the 600d, and couldn't be happier!
Also it's really really easy to find adapters to use almost every type of lens out there on Canon DSLR, and there's a lot of good old manual lenses for cheap on the internet, I got a couple and they are great (no AF and no stabilizer, but still great, and really useful for video).
Last edited by a moderator:
Ashgarth
Jordi Vaquero
And a video comparison for the D5200 and the canon equivalent, the 650d (t4i)
IMO the Canon slays the Nikon, sharper and less noisy.
IMO the Canon slays the Nikon, sharper and less noisy.
Last edited by a moderator:
drew_drummer
Dancefap
Thanks Jordi! 
Yah the Cannon does slay in that last comparison. Hmmm. Looks like I've got some thinking to do!
Yah the Cannon does slay in that last comparison. Hmmm. Looks like I've got some thinking to do!
Thanks Jordi!
Yah the Cannon does slay in that last comparison. Hmmm. Looks like I've got some thinking to do!
haha I've been thinking for a whole year. I'm dead set on the GH3 now, just need to save up for it
Joematthews
Member
- Dec 15, 2007
- 1,547
- 0
- 36
This is all beginner advice, but...
I'd steer well clear of nikon for video, all the low end canons are significantly better mainly due to a higher data rate codec (nikon files are about half the size). The result is greater sharpness and slightly more dynamic range. Also, magic lantern hacks for the canon cameras make them so much more user friendly and adjustable, with stuff like zebra's for exposure and peaking for focus.
As a general rule for video lower megapixel counts are better as they get a 1920-1080 resolution from their huge sensors by line skipping, ie, just flat out ignoring some lines of pixels. This is where the famous DSLR moire (turning areas weird colours) and aliasing (jagged diagonals) come from. Also, in high end cameras lower megapixel counts are better for low light performance (each megapixel is like a photon bucket, less buckets on a given area = bigger buckets which catch more light)
Drew, the canon cameras can do 60fps overcranked, just like the nikons.
For video DSLR's the king is the hacked GH2. The data rate is huge, which means sharpness is much much greater than the canons and nikons, and also it is possible to recover so much more detail in the shadows.
I'd steer well clear of nikon for video, all the low end canons are significantly better mainly due to a higher data rate codec (nikon files are about half the size). The result is greater sharpness and slightly more dynamic range. Also, magic lantern hacks for the canon cameras make them so much more user friendly and adjustable, with stuff like zebra's for exposure and peaking for focus.
As a general rule for video lower megapixel counts are better as they get a 1920-1080 resolution from their huge sensors by line skipping, ie, just flat out ignoring some lines of pixels. This is where the famous DSLR moire (turning areas weird colours) and aliasing (jagged diagonals) come from. Also, in high end cameras lower megapixel counts are better for low light performance (each megapixel is like a photon bucket, less buckets on a given area = bigger buckets which catch more light)
Drew, the canon cameras can do 60fps overcranked, just like the nikons.
For video DSLR's the king is the hacked GH2. The data rate is huge, which means sharpness is much much greater than the canons and nikons, and also it is possible to recover so much more detail in the shadows.
Thanks Joe, great stuff - if I were to get a GH2, would it be more cost effective to just get the body and find a different lens, rather than the kit? And any recommendations on awesome older lenses that can be found for great used prices? (and can the GH2 and T2i both accept the same lenses?)
Ashgarth
Jordi Vaquero
There are adapters from M42 mount (really usual on old cool lenses) to EF (canon) and micro 4/3 (which I think is the GH2 mount).
For this old lenses...there are a ton of different ones, but for video I'd say get a fast 35 or 50mm (if the camera has an APS-C sensor you have the crop factor, so a 50mm becomes an 80mm on a canon t2i).
You can find some old Carl Zeiss lenses that are great, the planar f1.4 is amazing.
The Yashica ML 50mm f1.7 is pretty cool, but if you can find a Yashica Yashinon DS-M f1.7, is even better, some people compare it to the Zeiss. This ones go for pretty good prices, I got a DS-M a few months ago for 70€.
The Super Takumar lenses are also really good, specially the SMC (super multi coated) ones are highly recommended.
There are also some other old mounts like the pentax K, the C/Y and other stuff, a lot of them can be adapted to Canon EF mount, also if you get any of those, get an adapter that has AF confirmation chip, they are really useful.
The downside of this lenses is the lack of auto focus and stabilizer, but for video they are really cool, for photos it takes more effort, as you have to manually focus and choose the aperture, but it's fun as hell and you can get amazing results.
For this old lenses...there are a ton of different ones, but for video I'd say get a fast 35 or 50mm (if the camera has an APS-C sensor you have the crop factor, so a 50mm becomes an 80mm on a canon t2i).
You can find some old Carl Zeiss lenses that are great, the planar f1.4 is amazing.
The Yashica ML 50mm f1.7 is pretty cool, but if you can find a Yashica Yashinon DS-M f1.7, is even better, some people compare it to the Zeiss. This ones go for pretty good prices, I got a DS-M a few months ago for 70€.
The Super Takumar lenses are also really good, specially the SMC (super multi coated) ones are highly recommended.
There are also some other old mounts like the pentax K, the C/Y and other stuff, a lot of them can be adapted to Canon EF mount, also if you get any of those, get an adapter that has AF confirmation chip, they are really useful.
The downside of this lenses is the lack of auto focus and stabilizer, but for video they are really cool, for photos it takes more effort, as you have to manually focus and choose the aperture, but it's fun as hell and you can get amazing results.
Cool man, thanks for that, good stuff! To be honest though, I'm actually back to the Canon M500 camcorder in the 2nd post - the folks at camcorderinfo.com gushed over it (well, technically the version of it with WiFi and more memory, but the same image sensor), and not only is it way cheaper, but it's much smaller, lighter, and easier to use than a dSLR, and might even produce better video than the t2i (as the sensor is actually 2 MP, referring to the phenomena Joe was talking about above)
As for still images, we'll just hire a photographer who knows wtf he/she is doing
As for still images, we'll just hire a photographer who knows wtf he/she is doing
Ashgarth what is your opinion on the Voigtlander 25mm? Specifically when paired with a GH3?
The results on Youtube look spectacular. I was just gonna get the Panasonic pancake lens 20mm to go with the GH3 but I'm thinking it might be better to just keep saving up and getting the Voigtlander.
The results on Youtube look spectacular. I was just gonna get the Panasonic pancake lens 20mm to go with the GH3 but I'm thinking it might be better to just keep saving up and getting the Voigtlander.
drew_drummer
Dancefap
I dunno dude...
I wouldn't be happy based on what I've seen. YMMV of course.
I switched my order to a Canon 650D from DigitalRev - they seem a bit more reputable than SLRHut, and the price was good. They pay all the import duty apparently, and have a 14 day no quibble refund policy. I'm gonna follow what Jordi said and get some prime lenses for video; most of the stuff I am interested in doing will need a wide lens I think, so that'll be my first port of call.
I wouldn't be happy based on what I've seen. YMMV of course.
I switched my order to a Canon 650D from DigitalRev - they seem a bit more reputable than SLRHut, and the price was good. They pay all the import duty apparently, and have a 14 day no quibble refund policy. I'm gonna follow what Jordi said and get some prime lenses for video; most of the stuff I am interested in doing will need a wide lens I think, so that'll be my first port of call.
Last edited by a moderator:
Ashgarth
Jordi Vaquero
Charlie, I never used a Voigtlander lens, but in every photography forum and web I've seen anyone talk about them, they say they are great.
This 25mm is a f0.95, so...great bokeh!
Digitalrev did a review of this lens:
Drew, you can find some cool m42 mount 28mm lenses for good prices, check an ebay store, life_thru_a_lens, I got my yashica there and they work great, also have a lot of manual lenses!
This 25mm is a f0.95, so...great bokeh!
Digitalrev did a review of this lens:
Drew, you can find some cool m42 mount 28mm lenses for good prices, check an ebay store, life_thru_a_lens, I got my yashica there and they work great, also have a lot of manual lenses!
Last edited by a moderator:
Yup, definitely getting different mileage (I hate that expression
), cuz that looks MORE than good enough to me for $350 and assloads of convenience!Also:
Last edited by a moderator:
Sloan
Sounds like shit!
dude, if your not going DSLR, look into getting a Canon HV20 for like $200 on ebay.
you can make your own 35mm adapter and use different lenses.
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5tq_C78-vQ&feature=player_detailpage[/ame]
you can make your own 35mm adapter and use different lenses.
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5tq_C78-vQ&feature=player_detailpage[/ame]
Last edited by a moderator:
drew_drummer
Dancefap
I agree with Sloan actually; that footage looks great! Are they RAW from the camera do you know Sloan, or processed?
My 650d shipped today. Should have it by the end of the week I hope.
My 650d shipped today. Should have it by the end of the week I hope.
Sloan
Sounds like shit!
The only one that looks raw to me is the middle clip with the guitar. It is, however, using a 35mm lens and adapter. Post processing video is pretty standard nowadays and to me it makes a huge difference. Raw video is typically not very impressive.
I've got a hacked Panasonic GH1 with 3 Canon FD lenses and two extra batteries I'll sell you for a good price. Video it captures looks absolutely stunning, and the still image quality is awesome too, but I'm upgrading to a Nikon D600.
drew_drummer
Dancefap
Yeah I get that, but that cat video I posted of the Canon camcorder, just looked all interlaced and liney to me - kinda crap imo.
