compact frame, full sensor, a big deal?
- Thread starter Bartman
- Start date
redridinghood
Member
Nice cams but too bad they are in similar price range to...
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...ic_Design_BMD_CINECAM26KEF_Cinema_Camera.html
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...ic_Design_BMD_CINECAM26KEF_Cinema_Camera.html
Last edited by a moderator:
But how much lighter is it than the Black Magic?. Also the price of the BM doesnt include a lense and other add ons. People get caught out by the price of the BM and Reds when all the needed add ons are included.
I have the RX100 and if thats any indication this new Sony camera could be very good. The big drawback for me is that its a single focal length lens at 35mm. Still it is another sign that the slr is going to be overtaken one day by electronic shutters and super fast lcd screens etc.
I have the RX100 and if thats any indication this new Sony camera could be very good. The big drawback for me is that its a single focal length lens at 35mm. Still it is another sign that the slr is going to be overtaken one day by electronic shutters and super fast lcd screens etc.
Last edited by a moderator:
SMP
Member
Careful kids, RX1 is a FIXED lens... So unless you have a hacksaw and some SERIOUS manufacturing skills better love that little Zeiss on the front! Shame too, because if that was interchangeable... oh the possibilities. On the BMCC you might try LaForets initial impressions - With that kind of crop factor on the sensor (not to mention the ungodly CPU intensive workflow) and other assorted bits you've got to hang on it to make it work you run smack deb into a Scarlet.
Holding my breath that Panas GH3 is released on Monday and doesn't need a hack to go to work.
Holding my breath that Panas GH3 is released on Monday and doesn't need a hack to go to work.
This RX1 is not really relevant to AP, I think - it's a close-quarters photojournalism tool. No wired/wireless remote control (but a threaded mechanical release by the look of it) and only HDMI out.
More interesting IMO is the NEX-6 - if they publish the specs for the wi-fi link.
The rate at which manufacturers are pushing the specs of compact size cameras does highlight the big flaw in DJI's Zenmuse approach. You can't take advantage of any of these new releases until DJI offers a conversion kit for your tripod! :upset: Heck! you can't even use the new lenses that are coming up, either! Talk about the tail wagging the dog!
More interesting IMO is the NEX-6 - if they publish the specs for the wi-fi link.
The rate at which manufacturers are pushing the specs of compact size cameras does highlight the big flaw in DJI's Zenmuse approach. You can't take advantage of any of these new releases until DJI offers a conversion kit for your tripod! :upset: Heck! you can't even use the new lenses that are coming up, either! Talk about the tail wagging the dog!
Last edited by a moderator:
Bartman
Welcome to MultiRotorForums.com!!
if Canon would make the T2i 1080/60P i'd stop wondering what my next camera purchase will be. analog video out and a simple two-wire shutter release make my T2i hard to give up. not that i would use the 60p very much but it would be nice to have for certain things.
DucktileMedia
Drone Enthusiast
WTF? a fixed lens??? That will kill all of their sales right there. And it doesnt do 1080/60p like the nex's do. For that price, forget it.
Unfortunately Canon plays the "feature spread" game very effectively - if you want 1080/60P, it's available from Canon - it just costs more.
Bowley
Member
If only! I like Canon and the 550D is a lot of bang for your buck. there always twixtor for those slo mo rushes you want to film on 60p.
Last edited by a moderator:
jforkner
Member
Nah. Ya need the new Nikon. http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/0...with-39-point-af-and-uncompressed-1080p-video
Bowley
Member
Dude, thats 2 grand!.......and only 30fps
Mmmm.... why this insistence on using a stills camera for video? If you want the best video, why not use a video camera? Dollar for dollar (and gram for gram), a dedicated camcorder from Sony et al. will comfortably outperform a stills camera "that can also do video clips".
Bowley
Member
I guess there are pro's and cons' for both. generally get better zoom with a video camera and most of the mid to high end ones use 1080 50p standard.
I gather than image quality and depth of field are better with DSLR's due to the sensor size. I do wonder though how important the depth is for aerial both in terms of requirement and complexity of controlling remotely.
I wish I could speak with authority here but I lack experience so I listen to the thread with much interest.
I gather than image quality and depth of field are better with DSLR's due to the sensor size. I do wonder though how important the depth is for aerial both in terms of requirement and complexity of controlling remotely.
I wish I could speak with authority here but I lack experience so I listen to the thread with much interest.
The hyper-wide angle is indeed the limitation with most video cameras. Apart from a few minor technical issues, I believe there's actually a very valid reason for this - hyper-wide video just looks bloody awful unless you really know what you're doing and want to use the effect deliberately
It seems to me that the GoPro has popularized hype-wide (actually fisheye) video. It's purpose in life (which it fulfills very well) is to "get as much of the action in the shot as possible whilst surviving the water/snow/sand/impact/etc. and/or operating in a very confined space" - so if that's your criteria then the GoPro is a great choice. On the other hand, if the goal is to produce good looking video then you certainly want a lens with a much more natural perspective and good rectilinear performance (the ability to render straight lines as straight). Even the wide end of a camcorder (sometimes as wide as 24mm or 28mm "35mm equivalent") is too wide for many scenes, exhibiting nauseating convergence of vertical lines.
In so far as aerial videography is a rather special, niche usage it might be argued that hyper-wide is needed to "get as much of the landscape in as possible". But such an aim indicates (to me) that the video's purpose is purely "record keeping": in which case, just use a GoPro. For aesthetically-pleasing video, even from the air, a more moderate perspective yields much better results. Don't forget that with an MR you have the "ultimate zoom lens" - if you want to "get more in" you just fly higher
Many Sony, Panasonic, etc. models offer all that you'd need, often for less cost and less weight than a DSLR, as long as you concede on the wide-angle part
It seems to me that the GoPro has popularized hype-wide (actually fisheye) video. It's purpose in life (which it fulfills very well) is to "get as much of the action in the shot as possible whilst surviving the water/snow/sand/impact/etc. and/or operating in a very confined space" - so if that's your criteria then the GoPro is a great choice. On the other hand, if the goal is to produce good looking video then you certainly want a lens with a much more natural perspective and good rectilinear performance (the ability to render straight lines as straight). Even the wide end of a camcorder (sometimes as wide as 24mm or 28mm "35mm equivalent") is too wide for many scenes, exhibiting nauseating convergence of vertical lines.
In so far as aerial videography is a rather special, niche usage it might be argued that hyper-wide is needed to "get as much of the landscape in as possible". But such an aim indicates (to me) that the video's purpose is purely "record keeping": in which case, just use a GoPro. For aesthetically-pleasing video, even from the air, a more moderate perspective yields much better results. Don't forget that with an MR you have the "ultimate zoom lens" - if you want to "get more in" you just fly higher
Many Sony, Panasonic, etc. models offer all that you'd need, often for less cost and less weight than a DSLR, as long as you concede on the wide-angle part
Depth of field is shallower with a bigger sensor - this is one of the major reasons for the sudden popularity of the 5DMkII for video - you can get that "sexy" out-of-focus background when doing close-ups of people, etc.
A bigger sensor doesn't necessarily yield "better quality" since they use a technique called "down-sampling" - basically throwing away pixels, using only every third or fourth or nth pixel.
Unless you have very specific creative or technical aims, I believe you're still better off using a stills camera for stills and a video camera for video. The trend towards hybrid devices is being driven by marketing, not quality.