Porter Sav
I am a amateur filmmaker, and I would very much like to get a new video camera. My price range is up to $1500 (preferably below $1000), I will ONLY go for Sony and Canon, as JVC, Panasonic and all the other companies tend to use CCD sensors that seem to wash your face out more than a CMOS, and I was looking at these two cameras that I think look pretty nice. Here are the cons and pros to each of them:
Canon EOS Rebel T2i (about $800 with a 18-55mm lens):
Pros
-Much more portable and less intimidating to crowds of people than the Sony
-18 mega pixels still images, versus the 6.1 MP image on the Sony
-Interchangeable Lenses
-Weighs less
-Along with the single CMOS sensor, it also has a DIGIC 4 image processor
-Doubles as an excellent photograph camera
Cons
-Doesn't look as professional as the Sony
-Doesn't have any microphone (3.5mm or XLR) inputs
-Isn't shoulder mount design
-Included Lens (in most kits) is only 18-55mm (around like 9 or 8x zoom), not 10x zoom
Sony HVR-HD1000U HDV Camcorder (about $1500):
Pros
-Professional look
-more steadiness and control with shoulder mount design
-Barn doors on the end of lens
-Don't have to spend extra money on interchangeable lenses
-Has a 3.5mm mic input
Cons
-only 6.1 MP still images, not too hot of quality
-Weighs a lot
-Not portable
-intimidates crowds of people
-Built in memory, which is rather large, but you can't get a bigger memory card if needed
-Batteries are expensive
-more pricy than the T2i
-Can't get a larger zoom lens
-Have to spend hundreds on extra batteries, the carrying case and a sturdy tripod.
Anyway, that's the battle with myself here. If I were to get the T2i, I would also get a Zoom H4n Handy recorder to plug my mic into and store the audio on, and it would also be cheaper than just buying the Sony alone. I'm more veered towards the T2i, and if I really wanted it to look professional when I'm filming my movies and short films, then I could save up and attach a matte box to the end as well as mounting a LED light on the shoe mount. My current mic is a Rode VideoMic, which has a built in shoe mount and has a 3.5mm output. I just needed some input on this because the area I live in has barely any film makers.
Answer
The main words you use are "amateur film maker" not photographer.
Reading specs is fine but the main test is getting your hands on the cameras and trying them out, the stills camera will fall short as a good quality video camera, for a few reasons but the main one its not designed to be a video camera its a stills camera that can take video. you have a limit of the amount of video you can take at one time just under 4GB this can be for two reasons, either the file system is not designed for anything over that size (the same as fat32 and NTFS) or the camera will have over heating problems.
mega pixels have no relevance to video, HD video is around 2mp so unless you are going to take stills as well, then its not a factor, if you are going to take stills, then unless you are going to blow the stills up into huge pictures, again its not going to be an issue,
read this http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/mpmyth.htm
Kindly sent to me by Iridflare very interesting!
A HDV tape based camera will by definition give you a better quality video, you are only limited to the length of the tape, 60 minutes. every single froma of video is captured which cannot be said with the T2, and that is one of the huge pitfalls when it comes to editing.
Again specs are not the final say, try them out, when you have taken your video watch it back on a large screen TV instantly you will see why the Video camera is better than the stills, there will be no artefacts, especially on the edges of subjects.
There is no such thing as video on the cheap, (if you want high quality) I wish there was it would save me thousands, Sure some studios have started to use DSLR's but they are not consumer cameras. -
You do not say what type of video you are planning to take, if there is any fast action then again the camera will fall behind very quickly as they type of video format it records does not capture fast action very well.
I am not going through your list as its going to take to long, but some of your "pros and cons" are not realistic, such as zoom, get closer, better to be closer than use zoom, basic first year student stuff, try a little experimant, if you have a camera zoom until you are about 10X then focus on a subject, maybe moving a little then keep the camera steady for 20 seconds you wont, there is not point in getting a camera with 20 X zoom if you cannot keep it steady, that will be the same for bothe cameras a professional camera man always has a tripod, with out fail. . batteries you can get a belt battery pack, that will give you 8 hours plus. weight you are in a better position to keep the camera steady, compared to the T2, "intimidates crowds of people" its your job to make people feel comfortable, part of being a professional cameraman.
A little information, Having been in the business for a while, (maybe to long) I have seen many "camera men" (just a term, not forgetting the ladies) come and go, more so today, its hard to get work, no one has money, but a huge part is to look professional, and act accordingly, turning up with a little DSLR is not going to give a good impression, people think big, big camera "means better pictures" and "professional" even if in reality its not right. If you get work (assuming you are any good) on a set, you will be there about the same amount of time it takes you to unpack you T2 and pack it back up. at least you will have half a chance with the Sony.
I wish you luck, just do one thing, make sure you are not one of the many so say "camera men" that profess to be "professional" but in fact know very little about the basics of camera work, it takes many years, but its worth it, when you see your video (or some of it) on the screen be it TV or, the movies. There is not better feeling.
RR
The main words you use are "amateur film maker" not photographer.
Reading specs is fine but the main test is getting your hands on the cameras and trying them out, the stills camera will fall short as a good quality video camera, for a few reasons but the main one its not designed to be a video camera its a stills camera that can take video. you have a limit of the amount of video you can take at one time just under 4GB this can be for two reasons, either the file system is not designed for anything over that size (the same as fat32 and NTFS) or the camera will have over heating problems.
mega pixels have no relevance to video, HD video is around 2mp so unless you are going to take stills as well, then its not a factor, if you are going to take stills, then unless you are going to blow the stills up into huge pictures, again its not going to be an issue,
read this http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/mpmyth.htm
Kindly sent to me by Iridflare very interesting!
A HDV tape based camera will by definition give you a better quality video, you are only limited to the length of the tape, 60 minutes. every single froma of video is captured which cannot be said with the T2, and that is one of the huge pitfalls when it comes to editing.
Again specs are not the final say, try them out, when you have taken your video watch it back on a large screen TV instantly you will see why the Video camera is better than the stills, there will be no artefacts, especially on the edges of subjects.
There is no such thing as video on the cheap, (if you want high quality) I wish there was it would save me thousands, Sure some studios have started to use DSLR's but they are not consumer cameras. -
You do not say what type of video you are planning to take, if there is any fast action then again the camera will fall behind very quickly as they type of video format it records does not capture fast action very well.
I am not going through your list as its going to take to long, but some of your "pros and cons" are not realistic, such as zoom, get closer, better to be closer than use zoom, basic first year student stuff, try a little experimant, if you have a camera zoom until you are about 10X then focus on a subject, maybe moving a little then keep the camera steady for 20 seconds you wont, there is not point in getting a camera with 20 X zoom if you cannot keep it steady, that will be the same for bothe cameras a professional camera man always has a tripod, with out fail. . batteries you can get a belt battery pack, that will give you 8 hours plus. weight you are in a better position to keep the camera steady, compared to the T2, "intimidates crowds of people" its your job to make people feel comfortable, part of being a professional cameraman.
A little information, Having been in the business for a while, (maybe to long) I have seen many "camera men" (just a term, not forgetting the ladies) come and go, more so today, its hard to get work, no one has money, but a huge part is to look professional, and act accordingly, turning up with a little DSLR is not going to give a good impression, people think big, big camera "means better pictures" and "professional" even if in reality its not right. If you get work (assuming you are any good) on a set, you will be there about the same amount of time it takes you to unpack you T2 and pack it back up. at least you will have half a chance with the Sony.
I wish you luck, just do one thing, make sure you are not one of the many so say "camera men" that profess to be "professional" but in fact know very little about the basics of camera work, it takes many years, but its worth it, when you see your video (or some of it) on the screen be it TV or, the movies. There is not better feeling.
RR
Would I be able to use a digital SLR camera lens for different camera makers?
ShyGirl
I have an Olympus E420 camera that I recieved as a gift from my parents on my birthday last year. To be honest, It just doesn't appeal to me that much and after playing around with my friends Canon T1I Rebel EOS, I've decided that I want to look into purchasing one with my own funds. The only concern I have is that I'm not exactly willing to pay $1000+ for the camera itself and also the camera lens that comes with it.
The reason being is because for christmas, my dad got me a really nice 40-150 MM lens. (I also have a 14-42 MM lens that came with my Olympus). The only problem is that my lens' are both by the camera maker Olympus. Would it be possible to just buy a Canon camera body, and still be able to use my Olympus lens' so I wouldnt have to shell out the extra cash?
Thanks!
Answer
Not without an adapter. Each camera manufacturer uses a proprietary lens mount geometry, thus effectively restricting one to a particular brand.
Having never used such an adapter, I cannot comment on them.
Not without an adapter. Each camera manufacturer uses a proprietary lens mount geometry, thus effectively restricting one to a particular brand.
Having never used such an adapter, I cannot comment on them.
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
No comments:
Post a Comment