OT: Video / dslr convergence dilemma

alltheseworlds wrote on 4/25/2010, 2:12 AM
I run a multimedia business: photography, audio interviews and video - most of which is for online deployment, but also a bit of DVD work and some TV commercials.

I need to update my gear soon but just can't decide which direction to go.

One big problem I have at the moment is that each "kit" is about as much as I can carry. For example, if I take my video kit out then I can't also carry my DSLR kit, and instead just rely on a secondary P&S camera. And it's visa versa if I take my DSLR: I can't take my main video kit. And if I take my main field audio kit then it's a pain to carry either of the other two.

Many time I'd like to have two kits out, but because of where I operate I can't take the chance of leaving expensive kit sitting in the trunk of my car - it all has to be with me on a job. So ideally I'd have an "all in one" solution.

A Canon 5DMkII appeals since I'd be able to do video and have a DSLR. But it seems a bit clunky for my high-throughout video routine. I'm also worried about getting the focus right: I'm not really in the "art video" business. I mainly need to turn video around in less than 24 hours. To solve that I thought I'd get a 7-inch external monitor, but it's all starting to get expensive down that road, and I an't see the 5DMkII being the pinnacle of DSLR video for too long.

My two main requirements are:
1) Fitting as much multimedia capability into as small a kit as possible
2) Fast production turn-around time (I want to dump my miniDV video)

This is sort of a "convergence ramble", so any thoughts at all on the subject are much appreciated.

Comments

ushere wrote on 4/25/2010, 3:20 AM
my pov:

neither really does a 'professional job' of the other.

unfortunately, what you need to take is pretty much what you have now.

certainly for 'online' delivery hdv is the best option, since you want speedy turnaround, good audio, etc.,

but you don't specify 'photography', nor 'tv coms'? in any depth. dslrs take gorgeous pics, but at a price, in fact almost the opposite of hdv; time consuming and cumbersome (expensive) externals...
farss wrote on 4/25/2010, 4:29 AM
"To solve that I thought I'd get a 7-inch external monitor"

You REALLY need to do some research!
The signals from the camera is only 480 line resolution. If you think that's enough resolution for setting critical focus then you're doing better than me and many others.
Also keep in mind that the DSLRs have a maximum record time of 11 minutes. That could be a problem for corporate work.
You could wait for Scarlet. Then again shooting 25p I can pull reasonable stills from my EX1 but nothing as good as a DSLR for sure. Then again when I look at the cost of a 1D body and a couple of good lenses I'm looking at spending a lot more than what my EX1 cost.
There really is no solution to your problem. As Ushere says neither does a good job of what the other does and for good reasons.

Bob.
alltheseworlds wrote on 4/25/2010, 5:06 AM
My research pointed to a small external monitor being the best affordable way to make sure you've got the dslr in focus for video. Maybe I blinked at the vital sentence ?

Since the vast bulk of my output is for the web I thought I could get away with some hybrid setup. Trouble is that even though my pics might end up as no more than 1000px online, a good dslr and lens is essential 95% of the time. But as you point out the time limit could be a disaster. Only one job in the past month needed 20+ minutes of continuous footage, but that was absolutely critical.

Another thought I had was to mount the dslr and videocamera together somehow, but I think that might be an ergonomic disaster ! :-)

I know a couple of multimedia journos in the area who have similar issues, but their solution tends to be very low tech and poorer quality than I could get away with.
willqen wrote on 4/25/2010, 11:36 PM
What you need is an apprentice or intern, or maybe even a 2cd pro shooter. Maybe you could find one that is freelance and willing to work part-time for you. That is what would really solve your dilemma!

Will

PS - make sure he has his own vehicle so he can carry that " 2cd kit "!
DGates wrote on 4/26/2010, 12:11 AM
You're getting some misinformation from folks in this thread.

My new Lumix GH1 is a hybrid DSLR that shoots WAY past 11 minutes. In fact, it's the only brand that currently allows that.

Also, the LCD is better because you can flip it out, up and down. Not so with the Canons. I'd say the screen's resolution is on par or exceeds the typical video camera LCD, so focusing is easier.

I think the 5D is probably overkill for what you're trying to do. Go check out the GH1 at a retailer. It might just surprise you.
NickHope wrote on 4/26/2010, 3:04 AM
Can you turn that GH1 LCD around to face the person you're shooting?
logiquem wrote on 4/26/2010, 5:52 AM
Sure!

The principal drawbacks of the GH1 for me are:

1.no video output monitoring when actually recording (you get SD preview out on standby mode).
2.no possibility to disable the AGC on audio (external recorder a la H4N is needed for pro quality)

Otherwise, it's a truly excellent camera...

BTW: http://www2.panasonic.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/prModelDetail?storeId=11301&catalogId=13251&itemId=407080&modelNo=Content04082010101919040&surfModel=Content04082010101919040

DGates wrote on 4/26/2010, 5:33 PM
Yeah, hopefully we'll see a firmware update in regards to the external monitor while recording. I'd have to think the next incarnation (GH2) will surely have this.

As for audio, what about the add-on mic that Panasonic sells?
rmack350 wrote on 4/26/2010, 10:16 PM
I bought a GH1 a little over a week ago as a still camera "with benefits". I wasn't seriously thinking of it as a video camera but it actually looks pretty good. Not quite as good as the Canons but the price is better.

I think you can get about 30min of 720p (30 fps) or 1080i (24 fps) if you have a big enough SDHC card. The data rate for either of these isn't super high but it looked okay when I was shooting kites at the Berkeley Marina.

You'd need to record audio on an external recorder to have any control over it, but you could use the onboard audio as a sync track.

The camera has HDMI output but it's not live, which is a shame. I bought it in a rush and don't regret it but I was hoping that I'd be able to have live HD output for product shots. It seems like that'd be a nice feature for catalog people as well as for video.

I'm still working with the focus on the camera. Automatic focus is often good but manual focus with the kit lens's infinite ring is going to take some getting used to. I'm not always sure if my focus is sharp, despite the automatic magnification in manual mode. Practice will help there.

This is a Micro Four Thirds camera. It accepts a variety of lenses, especially after you buy a few adapters. The sensor is fairly big - about half a 35mm frame - and you can get some shallow DOF if you want it.

One thing about this camera is that it's small. I didn't think I had big hands but this camera makes them seem bigger. My 5' tall girl coworker would do really well with this camera.

I kind of think that if this camera would do the job then so would the Canons. If you need quick turnaround for video then either of these would add some overhead compared to some sort of tapeless HDV or AVCHD video camera.

What else? As a still camera I'd like to have the option to control it from a laptop. This would be another nice feature for tabletop shoots or catalog work.

Doing dual system sound is probably one more reason to bring a tech with you, in addition to having her schlep gear. Hire an assistant and also get a cart.

Yes, the LCD screen flips out and rotates 180 degrees forward. So far I've mostly left it closed and used the viewfinder.

Rob Mack
alltheseworlds wrote on 4/27/2010, 7:31 AM
I love those flip out screens - the fixed screen on my Canon seems so poor in comparison. But the AGC is a killer for me.

I quite liked the Xacti VPC-HD2000 since it had the iFrame format option to allow superfast in-field edit and posting which is what some of my clients want. Same-day is more important to them than high-res.

But then all my footage would be divided between quick low-res (and otherwise unusable) material, and the regular high-res good stuff. And I know for sure that some of the "quick" footage will be requested later for DVD or TV commercials...

And so round and round it goes :-)
Laurence wrote on 4/27/2010, 7:40 AM
I love my Canon SX-1 IS. It has a small 1/2.8 sensor compared to the DSLR sensors, but it looks terrific in good light. No external audio either but the stereo mics sound good for b-roll and the level can be set manually.

I love the dual function approach and the flip-out screen. The SX-1 is just a step but it is definitely a step in the right direction. I really want any camera I get in the future to be dual mode photo and video. There is simply no reason these two things should be separate.
logiquem wrote on 4/27/2010, 8:11 AM
Recording time is entirely dependant of the SDHC size. You can record 130 min. on a 16 Go without any prob.
DGates wrote on 4/27/2010, 11:22 AM
I agree with Loqiquem. I've shot as long as 80 minutes at a Catholic wedding ceremony on the GH1.
rmack350 wrote on 4/27/2010, 12:01 PM
I think the issue was that other still cameras have clip length limits. It seems to me I read a comment recently about letting the (other) camera cool down after reaching that limit.

I'd imagine that the GH1 has something like a 4GB limit. I don't know if it starts new clips nor do I know what the duration/file would be. It's not a very high bitrate on this camera.

But back to the initial question. Could ATW go with a still camera as a primary cam? Probably not. It's getting closer but this convergence hasn't converged quite yet.

Rob