Shortcomings of DSLR for Video

[debuys]

I've been impressed by the IQ on DSLR footage I have seen, especially the sharpness of image, color, contrast and especially low light performance but I haven't seen the negatives illustrated out as much. These are pretty much all that I've picked up from reading there must be more: Difficulty to stabilizing, panning issues, awkward monitoring/positioning, secondary audio recording almost required.

Is the video feature accessed through menus? Could a typical non-enthusiast capture first baby steps or will they miss it while getting it fired up in video mode? Is there a viable "full auto" mode or does exposure, WB, aperture, focus etc require babysitting?

And, perhaps a monumentally stupid question, Can you get a large DOF? I see the T2i kit comes with a 18-55mm. 18mm is at infinity how far away?

[Gillvane]

I've been impressed by the IQ on DSLR footage I have seen, especially the sharpness of image, color, contrast and especially low light performance but I haven't seen the negatives illustrated out as much. These are pretty much all that I've picked up from reading there must be more: Difficulty to stabilizing, panning issues, awkward monitoring/positioning, secondary audio recording almost required.

Is the video feature accessed through menus? Could a typical non-enthusiast capture first baby steps or will they miss it while getting it fired up in video mode? Is there a viable "full auto" mode or does exposure, WB, aperture, focus etc require babysitting?

And, perhaps a monumentally stupid question, Can you get a large DOF? I see the T2i kit comes with a 18-55mm. 18mm is at infinity how far away?

Depth of Field is determined by 3 things.

1. Focal length of the lens, like in this case your 18mm example.

2. How close you are to the subject you are focusing on.

3. F-stop. F 1.8 or F 22?

So you combine all three things to get different depths of field. For example, your 18mm is a very wide shot, but will get a different depth of field at f 1.8 and f 22. It will also get a different depth of field if you are 1 foot away from your subject, versus 20 feet away.

As for video of the baby, others can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the DSLR video is MADE for taking video of the baby, not for necessarily directors.

It's the film makers that are trying to make the cameras do something they are not really designed for, not the other way around.

It's like putting an mp3 player in your Iphone so you don't need to carry around both a phone and an mp3 player.

Why carry around a video camera that doesn't take great pictures, or a still photo camera that doesn't take great video, if you can pack both into the same device for the consumer?

I think the only thing you sacrifice is fast auto focus in video mode. If you want to shoot the kids playing baseball under lots of different lighting conditions, like in and out of clouds, probably a video camera with a fast autofocus will be a lot easier to use.

But I could be wrong.

[Dodgy Nick]

As for video of the baby, others can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the DSLR video is MADE for taking video of the baby, not for necessarily directors.

But I could be wrong.

I recently purchased the Canon 7D and I would say the EXACT opposite. This camera is great in controlled situations, like directing a movie, where you can spend time setting up the shot, getting the lighting, sound and settings right, especially getting the focus spot on.

It's harder to get it working straight out of the box in a flash, especially getting the noise levels right as well as getting the focus spot on. I'd say an HVxx is a much better tool for filming babies as it has autofocus and will get you great footage with minimal input.

I'm sure with practice it will become easier for me to get good footage quicker. I really hope so because it's the only camera I want to take with me on my next holiday to Japan.

[movielighter]

The main difference is that the DSLRs pretty much start at a pro level for understanding use. They really are not made to turn on and shoot with some sort of "smiley face" icon easy mode switch.
If you want to do some pretty good work above the consumer level and want to invest the time, they will pay off for you for sure. There are a lot of older lenses already on the market that will work with this camera ($100.00-$1500.00) that you can use for sure to get the DOF you are requesting. You can also take really nice photos.

[Gillvane]

I recently purchased the Canon 7D and I would say the EXACT opposite. This camera is great in controlled situations, like directing a movie, where you can spend time setting up the shot, getting the lighting, sound and settings right, especially getting the focus spot on.

It's harder to get it working straight out of the box in a flash, especially getting the noise levels right as well as getting the focus spot on. I'd say an HVxx is a much better tool for filming babies as it has autofocus and will get you great footage with minimal input.

I'm sure with practice it will become easier for me to get good footage quicker. I really hope so because it's the only camera I want to take with me on my next holiday to Japan.

I stand corrected. I know that I wouldn't have any troubles shooting footage of kids with my Hv30. It's as easy as point and hit record if you want it to be.

[debuys]

I understand the technique and sadly, the math involved for determining DOF. My questions are more for planning an upgrade path. I seem to be enjoying playing with video and the tools. I am able to fund most of it trading, buying and selling. I'll be sticking with the HV20 for awhile. At this point though, it looks like the best course of action is to have both. I think so far you guys are indicating that.

So, I covered all the issues? To rephrase my DOF question. Is it simple to get a HUGE DOF that renders the auto-focus issue moot? If the other automatic settings are on while shooting video is it a nightmare?

[DigitalBard]

In no way shape or form can I be considered a "camera guy". I thoroughly enjoy the "point and shoot" nature of my Canon HF11. When I got my hands on a friend's T2i, I was able to figure out how to shoot video within a couple of minutes. So as far as the ability to "quickly" start shooting video with a vDSLR, I would say that part is pretty easy.

However, as I quickly learned with my "point and shoot" HF11, the devil is in the details. And learning how to deal with low light, IS vs non-IS, shutter speeds, esposure, etc... has been l to get "good" footage. From that point of view, as a "non-camera person", learning how to get "good shots" from my friend's T2i (and the one I'll be receiving in a few days) is where I'll need to work hard as this stuff doesn't come natural to me.

I definitely will not be using my HF11 any less. It still has some advantages over vDSLR (though not many) and if anything the inclusion of a a T2i will drive me to go out and shoot in conditions where I normally wouldn't bother with my HF11. And I expect I'll use both in a lot of situations which will improve my knowledge of using my HF11.

[SanVa]

I would say that canon's vdslr are less than ideal for casual shooting or shooting in auto-mode. I went from the hv20 to the 7D and I am not able anymore to take a video of my son since he started walking. On the other hand the manual controls and quality of image are such that now I am actually planning to shoot a short documentary with a friend.
To me that is the trade off between HVxx and T2i/7d/5dmkII for a beginner/non-pro.
I would add that having probably spent too much time reading dvxuser lately I am now really bothered by the moire with the 7D. Fine lines are really a challenge for those cameras and you have to work around them. It picks up even with the fabric of my jeans.
This is a very extreme example

7D Bricks Moire on Vimeo

but it pops up as soon you focus on something with fine lines and you notice it if there is a repetitive pattern.

Then you see images like these and you are sold on those dslr (here the T2i)

550D T2i Camera Test on Vimeo

As soon as there is some other value to the image than just benchmarking those problems become secondary, or less noticeable in general. If you have a story to tell then those are even less important.

[Ian-T]

As far as DSLRs go it depends on which one you are talking about. The Panasonic GH-1 is great as a movie making tool because of its articulating LCD and fantastic Pana colors. It's also set up more like a conventional camcorder with is ability to autofocus. So you can use it like any ordinary point and shoot camcorder (less zebras...but with a live histogram). But the Canons are a better tool for filmaking. They don't have the articulating LCD but their codecs are 3x's better and most importantly they have the ability to send their images to an external monitor. That's very important for directors and clients etc. The GH-1 unfortunatly does not have this ability which limits its use as a film tool (but still a good one). The 60p in the Panasonic is robust...and looks great.

As far as obtaining a large DOF...I have that same lens (except it's the Auto Focusing version instead of IS) and the wide angle view comes in very handy. At those wide views (18mm...which on a crop 1.6 sensor like these cams comes out to be around 24-28mm) you don't have to worry about shallow DOF being a problem. I'd concern myself more about image stabilization more when zooming in or using longer lens.. SO...I think that lens would be good to use for capturing the kids etc.

As far a aliasing and moire...ALL of these cams produce it. the Canons are more prone to it in 720/60p but what I have been doing is catching it while filming and simply backing up or moving forward. What I mean is...how far you are away from your subject in most cases can prevent that. Alsi, I've recently found out that when shooting outdoors and using smaller apertures like f10...f22 etc.(or are those larger???), you can lessen or even get rid of those issues (diffraction is your friend with these cams). FYI

[Miner]

I just had a thought of an advantage of using a DSLR for shooting a video documentary. In places like National Parks that require permits for anything comercial, getting a photo permit is often cheaper and easier then one for shooting a video documentary since places like Yellostone have rules geared towards big film crews. With the DSLR, you'll look like you are shooting photos. I can see in other places where it would seem less intrusive since people are more use to SLR cameras on tripods in public places.

I'm not in a hurry to jump on the DLSR video bandwagon just yet, but it certainly has me thinking about the next 2 years.

[cgbier]

It is not really advisable to shoot with f/22. Above around f/8-10 you loose a lot of picture quality due to diffraction.
If you are less into selective focus, then a "camcorder" will deliver you a better IQ.

No need for math (http://www.dofmaster.com/)...

[Ian-T]

Your right cgbier but the issue with DSLRs is that they can not resolve above a certain level of detail due to the line skipping techniques used to downsample its footage. This is what causes the aliasing and moire we have been seeing in a lot of their footage. Often times when using a lens that is sharper than what the sensor is capable of resolving you end up exagerating the negative effects of moire/aliasing especially during wide open scenery that contains thin edges or lines (telephone pole wires, bricks on buildings, certain patterns on clothing etc.). In the case of diffraction, this helps to soften that effect...sort of like...a necessary evil. That's why I said when it comes to these DSLRs diffraction is your friend.

But.... one can always purchase a Caprock filter for each of their lenses to help in this situation and avoid shooting like this to begin with.

[cgbier]

Ok, thanks Ian.... I'm originating from photography. Diffraction is one of my main devils to fight ;)

Do I take out of your words, that you better shoot with shoddy kit lenses than with L-glass then?

[Gillvane]

I would say that canon's vdslr are less than ideal for casual shooting or shooting in auto-mode. I went from the hv20 to the 7D and I am not able anymore to take a video of my son since he started walking. On the other hand the manual controls and quality of image are such that now I am actually planning to shoot a short documentary with a friend.
To me that is the trade off between HVxx and T2i/7d/5dmkII for a beginner/non-pro.
I would add that having probably spent too much time reading dvxuser lately I am now really bothered by the moire with the 7D. Fine lines are really a challenge for those cameras and you have to work around them. It picks up even with the fabric of my jeans.
This is a very extreme example

7D Bricks Moire on Vimeo (http://www.vimeo.com/9687129)

but it pops up as soon you focus on something with fine lines and you notice it if there is a repetitive pattern.

Then you see images like these and you are sold on those dslr (here the T2i)

550D T2i Camera Test on Vimeo (http://www.vimeo.com/9744624)

As soon as there is some other value to the image than just benchmarking those problems become secondary, or less noticeable in general. If you have a story to tell then those are even less important.

Wow. Who doesn't want a T2i after seeing that footage?

[Frank]

Wow. Who doesn't want a T2i after seeing that footage?

Yeah, I'm consoling myself with the thought that I can shoot in a blizzard with my 7D (but how often does that happen?)

[Gillvane]

Yeah, I'm consoling myself with the thought that I can shoot in a blizzard with my 7D (but how often does that happen?)

Well, it doesn't snow where I live, so the answer would be never.

If I do go somewhere there is a blizzard, the script is going to look like this:

INT.ROOM WITH FIREPLACE.DAY

I was going to sell my Hv30 to get teh T2i, but I think I might just hang on to it and shoot some more shorts. I like the through a real lens look, and the ability to play with DoF, but at least I know it's there when I can afford it. I think in the meantime I'll just do stuff without a lot of DoF on my Hv30.

[joe1946]

I understand the technique and sadly, the math involved for determining DOF. My questions are more for planning an upgrade path. I seem to be enjoying playing with video and the tools. I am able to fund most of it trading, buying and selling. I'll be sticking with the HV20 for awhile. At this point though, it looks like the best course of action is to have both. I think so far you guys are indicating that.

So, I covered all the issues? To rephrase my DOF question. Is it simple to get a HUGE DOF that renders the auto-focus issue moot? If the other automatic settings are on while shooting video is it a nightmare?
I use lenses from 6.5mm to 2350mm on my Pentax K-7 for HD video and for very shallow DOF I use lenses like my 50mm F1.4 and 85mm F1.4 but for maximum DOF I use my 6.5mm 180° fisheye that fills the full frame or better yet my 10-24mm Tamron zoom. There is no need to focus with my 10-24mm when used @10mm since everything from 3ft to infinity is in focus when you preset the lens to 6ft at normal F5.6-F8 settings.
YouTube- Ripley's Aquarium at Myrtle Beach SC w/ Pentax K-7 , Rode Stereo VideoMic ,10-24mm Tamron @10mm

YouTube- Trick-or-Treating on Halloween at Broadway at the Beach in Myrtle Beach SC part 2

[MAGICOFPYRO]

Just ordered my T2I last night from adorama, love the no tax internet sales.

Should be here sometime next week (hopefully)

[Kin Lau]

And, perhaps a monumentally stupid question, Can you get a large DOF? I see the T2i kit comes with a 18-55mm. 18mm is at infinity how far away?

http://www.dofmaster.com is one of the best DOF calculaters (except the iphone version). You can check out all your options.

Also keep in mind that DOF is subjective and also based on the viewing size.

Standard DOF tables are based on an 8x10 print at regular viewing distances, but we tend to sit a lot closer to that 52 inch screen or projected image, so you'll have to test things out. However, on the web, you can get away with a lot more too.