Eric : I will take my revenge soon, watch out ;)

Just for the record, the Sony F828 has continuos video feed in either PAL or NTSC while taking stills. Shutter release and zoom control is via LANC and Sony made a cheap and hard to get LANC controller that can be butchered to build an intervalometer.
This isn't a true SLR so no mirror.
Bob

A good controller for time lapse of digital cameras is at www.harbortronics.com. Called the Digisnap 2000 series. Range in cost from $129 to $275 depending on options.

For long exposures jobs over months, use the 2800. It is set up for external power onlhy -- no internal battery at all.

A good way to power the system is to buy the camera's AC adapter and power the Digisnap 2800 (which has a cable that passes power through to the camera) and the camera with the same adapter. Plug that into a small computer UPS to protect from power outages.

I have done very nice "hi def" time lapses using 1024x768 or better digital jpegs from Nikon 990 or 5700 still cameras. You can use a D70 or other SLR but be aware firing thousands and thousands of shots takes a toll on all those moving parts like mirrors and shutters. A little camera with no moving parts can last longer. Almost any digital camera has better image quality and certainly better resolution than any video camera -- even high def cameras.

Vegas brings the jpegs in at whatever resolution you set the project at. Render out as Windows Media default template for a start. Very nice.

Also, don't point a digital still camera at the sun (especially a non-SLR) because the lens is focusing the sun's heat on the pickup chip like a magnifying glass on ants. It'll cook the chip as the sun slowly arcs across the sky over the course of a day or days.

As an aside, I read an article in American Cinematographer maybe 10-15 years ago about shooting stop motion FX with still cameras. The advantage there is that the 35mm still frame is actually bigger than the 35mm motion picture frame (The frame is the width of the film in a motion picture format but wider than that for stills).

Because the frame was bigger the res was higher and matte lines could be made to dissappear when it was all bumped down to 35mm motion picture stock. They were using huge magazines built for the still cameras and I think they may have had to build in some sort of pin registration as well.

Trivia.

Rob Mack

We use a d70 for some things and I can tell you that it's hard to get the thing to stay consistent across image sequences. You have to turn off every possible automatic feature and then hope the thing isn't going to clamp when a really bright opject enters the frame.

Rob Mack

D70 is what we've got here at work. Sometimes I hate it, sometimes I love it.

What cameras let you lock up the mirror? If they do that can you have continuous output to a studio monitor? That would be extremely useful if you use it on a copy stand or animation stand.

Rob Mack

The Nikon D70 is a budget SLR. I've noticed that the image in the viewfinder doesn't actually match the frame captured. Then again, there's no surety that a video output would be accurate either, even in underscan.

What's worse, camera output to a studio monitor is actually pretty poor quality. You can't tell much more than framing with a monitor.

Rob Mack

The mirror lockup function is only used to avoid camera shake. Usually it is active when you select a 2 second self timer. The mirror lifts a few moments before the picture is taken and then goes down. So basically there is no advantage apart from a more stable shot. The mirror still lifts and then goes down. On old film camera there used to be an option to lift the mirror permanantly to make it work with certain lenses but then you don't see the image in the viewfinder...

So I don't really see the benefit of mirror lockup in still animation with an SLR...

My assumption is that you have to lock up the mirror to get continous video output. You'd need this if you mounted the camera in a hard to reach place.

The D70 can't do this so you just have to rely on putting your eye to the viewfinder.

A non-slr would work better but then you don't get a choice of lenses.

If I were shooting a catalog of tabletop items I think I might want the option of an external monitor for composition.

BTW, that sake bottle looks familiar...

Rob Mack

So... I couldn't resist jumping in here... About 2 years ago, when I first got Vegas 4, I decided to try out making a stop-motion video with my Sony 717. My wife and I were assembling a big ol' home gym, and we thought it would be a hoot to try making a video of the several-hundred-part assembly. I forgot all about it until this thread was born.

Enjoy... http://www.LakeAnnaDream.com/videos/gym.wmv (I'm hosting it on one of my other sites - had nowhere else to put it).

David

There is currently no DSLR capable of live output. It would indeed require the mirror to be up. I guess this might come in the future as DSLRs improve. Perhaps they would use a sensor dedicated specially to ouput video.

hmm Sake :)

I kind of find it hard to believe that there are no DSLRs that can do this, precisely because they are so useful for catalog work where you have to photograph hundreds of items.

Not imposible to believe, just hard. (On the other hand, the video output from the D70 looks like such crap that I can easily see someone saying "oh, nevermind")

The ideal thing to do would be to send digital test captures out to a computer that then displays the picture. I've avoided this because the process is a little cumbersome and slow, but it's the solution. The best thing would be to display live output rather than having to snap a shot.

Blah, blah. Back to work.

Rob

First, I have to admit it: I watch America's Next Top Model.
That said, I notice the "main guy" who watches all the shoots is always watching a monitor and immediately says if they're getting good shots or not. I would have assumed that he's getting immediate feedback from every shot being taken. Not the case? or is this not what you're referring to?

I have no idea what the TV show is doing, but there are 802.11 wireless transmitters on DSLRs (at least Nikon and Canon have them for some models) so the camera can transmit a photo immediately after it's taken back to a file server and people could review it in "almost" real time.

No DSLR provides live video output, period. The Sony DSC-R1 http://www.dpreview.com/articles/sonydscr1/ is not a DSLR but it is "kind of like" a DSLR, and it does have live video (at least live LCD display). I'm not sure it's available in stores yet.

There are SLR cameras that use a beam-splitter or semi-silvered mirror to send the signal to the viewfinder and a CCD device simultaneously. These systems can provide continuous video out while still looking through the viewfinder. They could also allow taking the picture without moving the mirror so that there wouldn't be any interruption at all. In 35mm film cameras this is called a "pellicle" mirror system. I haven't kept up with the high end digital cameras, but i would assume this is available in the digital realm as well. The only drawback is that the light must be split two directions so less light goes to the CCD and the viewfinder. With a well lit subject this isn't a problem.

On the low end, my $180 Fuji FinePix 3000s is effectively an SLR camera. The image in the viewfinder is an LCD showing what the CCD sees in real time. True, i'm not actually seeing optically through the lens, but i am seeing the picture that will be taken. I get continuous video feed of the same image (but at much higher resolution) that i see in the viewfinder. With a 1GB memory card i can capture over 1200 2048x1536 images. Sadly, there is no provision for remote shutter release. Maybe i can hack something together ...

> There are SLR cameras that use a beam-splitter or semi-silvered mirror to send the signal to the viewfinder and a CCD device simultaneously.

Are you referring to the video tap on a 35mm motion picture camera? I have never heard of a "live" CCD on any still digital SLR from any manufacturer, and I thought I was pretty well informed in this area. I'd be very curious for the model number, if know of one! Thanks.

Unfortunately i am way uninformed in this area. I know the camera in the portrait boot at the local Wal*Mart has this function. It has an optical viewfinder that the photographer looks through and a video monitor that the customer can watch simultaneously. When the shutter release is pressed the image is captured both on digitally and on 35mm film.

I don't have any idea of the manufacturer or model number. I can imagine it's extremely pricey though.

I hang a lot on DP review and there is currently no DSLRs capable of live video ouput. Perhaps Medium format backs are able to do it but DSLRs currently can't at all.

Maybe I've missed something here and OK it's not a SLR but the DSC F828 from Sony would seem to offer most of what you want, live video feed and remote shutter release.
Bob.

I think the main question was "Is using a DSLR appropriate to do stop motion movies" To which in my opinion the answer is yes if you know how to use the camera...

My Olympus UZ2100 does this as well but whether SLRs do it is another question.

I noticed while searching around today that some of the higher end Canon cameras have a shutter lock up feature. That seems like it would be a requirement for continous output.

Rob Mack

Sorry I didn't follow up on that. This might well be a good choice for tabletop animation, catalogs, things like that. It gives you lots of ways to see the image when the camera is in a difficult position.

The main initial drawback might be a lack of lens choices but that isn't necesarily a problem.

Rob Mack