For everyone who says dSLRs cannot replace camcorders for normal home movies

Thanks - my problem is if I stretch the budget for the body then its going to have to be a compromise on the lens.
 
True but I need good results from the start otherwise its just not worth it. Needs lots of thought :)
 
latercomer2 said:
True but I need good results from the start otherwise its just not worth it. Needs lots of thought :)
Click to expand...

then why settle for a camcorder? even an entry level dslr with a kit lens will get better video quality than a camcorder, the only thing in the camcorders favour is that a monkey can operate it

i suppose it depends what you class as 'good results'

if good results are flat noisy images in low light but everything in full focus, and good contrast images in birght light then choose a camcorder

but for me good results are gorgeous image quality regardless of lighting, with the downside being a more challenging focus method.
 
Last edited:
joescrivens said:
So I see it time and time again on here that whenever anyone asks about video on a dSLR the same advice is wrongly given and that is something along the lines of:

if you are just wanting to record normal home movies then using a dSLR for video isn't really feasible

I categorically disagree with this. 2 years ago I swapped in my panasonic camcorder and my 450d to buy a 7d and changed all my video onto the dSLR. Now I have moved onto the 5d mark 2
(...)

So to everyone who says you can't film normal home movies on a dSLR, hopefully this will make you reconsider that opinion.
Click to expand...

Hi - I'm firmly in the "use the right tool for the job" camp I'm afraid, and your video - excellent as it is (despite the wobbly focus which isn't to my taste) - doesn't make the case for the average user making home videos - you have produced a minature film, with lots of editing, overdubbing, and thought. It is not "Auntie Mable comes to visit" or "kids playing in the pool" or "Uncle Roger doing a track day"... where a DV (etc) camera does the job.

If you want to make short films, with creative use of depth of field, then great. But don't expect it to be point & shoot, which is the mistake many people make, and why they should start with a video camera and learn the techniques and fundamentals of film making before getting into trying to arty. Since its not practical or make any sense to rapidly flip between shooting video and stills, the advantage of "I can use the same body for both" just isn't there - you are either doing one or the other...
 
joescrivens said:
the only thing in the camcorders favour is that a monkey can operate it
Click to expand...

Thats not a bad thing for me at the moment :D

Buit point taken. We're going to see if we can get some progress on the insurance side of things seeing as that defines the budget available.
 
flossie said:
Hi - I'm firmly in the "use the right tool for the job" camp I'm afraid, and your video - excellent as it is (despite the wobbly focus which isn't to my taste) - doesn't make the case for the average user making home videos - you have produced a minature film, with lots of editing, overdubbing, and thought. It is not "Auntie Mable comes to visit" or "kids playing in the pool" or "Uncle Roger doing a track day"... where a DV (etc) camera does the job.

If you want to make short films, with creative use of depth of field, then great. But don't expect it to be point & shoot, which is the mistake many people make, and why they should start with a video camera and learn the techniques and fundamentals of film making before getting into trying to arty. Since its not practical or make any sense to rapidly flip between shooting video and stills, the advantage of "I can use the same body for both" just isn't there - you are either doing one or the other...
Click to expand...

Actually I'm doing both at the same time. No need to switch modes at all the stills in this video where taken whilst filming apart from the last one. No mode switching at all. So I was using the same body for both. But even if I were switching modes as I often do like today, it's a darn sight easier than carrying two cameras and holding both.

I also have plenty of "auntie mable type vids which aren't put ttogether nearly as well as this was. I will upload when I have the time.
 
Last edited:
Most camcorders, even cheap ones have a reasonable degree of manual control, even dof. A cheap video camera is great for the home shots and gives everyone the opportunity to experiment with the settings that will give optimum sound and picture quality.
It doesn't always have to be on full auto, though this is what most amateurs use as a failsafe. Photographers will by their nature experiment with the iris/wb/focus/gain settings and obtain very acceptable results with these. Likewise with dslrs. Though these were designed for still imaging they can be added to to provide controllable stability, focus and acceptable sound for the video.
 
Nice vids. Didn't realise how nice and clear dslr vids can be.

I've got an old DV camcorder which is hardly used and a first gen digital camcorder which is like a fisher price toy :LOL:
 
Ok, some auntie mabel examples then

Panasonic sd800 fullHD 3MOS sensor, lecia lens

[YOUTUBE]ZC8YGT6RGxk[/YOUTUBE]

7d with 50mm 1.8

[YOUTUBE]GNnHtmuIXX8[/YOUTUBE]

both in the same kind of light, now tell me filming home movies on a dSLR is not fesible :shrug:

and for an outside example, did this yesterday at f/10 so lots of DOF making focusing on a moving subject no problem

[YOUTUBE]Ti48A9Gcs4c[/YOUTUBE]
 
Stop it joe, just stop it! Every time you post I have to watch, then it makes me want the D4 even more, not only do we have no idea when it will be out but money is going to be trouble! :p
 
Awesome video! I never doubted DSLR's for videos. I have a Canon 550D and a 50mm 1.8 (the below videos I shot with a rented Canon 24mm 1.4)

DSLR Video is the way to go!!


[YOUTUBE]MFgwQO332Kw[/YOUTUBE]

One day I'll be able to have that 5D under my belt.
 
Last edited:
Joe - lovely video. I was inspired enough by it that I was going to try to do the same thing when my wife gave birth last week but the event was too much for me to be able to - I got some nice stills at the end though!

I agree that a DSLR can be used for home movie type stuff, I've already got a few minutes of stuff like the baby moving around in my wife's belly a couple of weeks ago, and my baby boy's first bath. I've got no prior experience with any sort of video shooting but I've been pleased with the way it comes out - DSLR video looks so good that I'm going to keep at it.
 
Lovely first video :) I like your style and obviously you take your time with it and enjoy doing it. I rarely use my 7D for video myself. Whilst the quality is good it's not easy to use and the handling is poor compared to my old hf100. Whilst the LCD is better quality I find it awful in bright daylight, basically unusable. I am looking into accessories to improve the experience though, as I do like the results that are possible. I don't shoot a lot of video all told as I find the editing tedious.
 
gman said:
I believe this is what the pro film makers do anyway so if they can do it.... :)
Click to expand...


Yes. I think it's Saving Private Ryan which has one of the longest uncut scenes in a film. It is very tense as there is no cutting to bring relief from the action. I counted between cuts in a film I was watching once and was amazed to find that most shots were only a few sceonds before a cut. I suppose the whole scene was shot for several minutes at a time with two or three cameras and then the shots edited together.

This is the first time I've looked at this section of the forum. I never thought I would use video and it was NOT why I bought the 7D. Most of the photography I do is nature and wildlife stuff and I have found the video invaluable sometimes for recording behaviour which you simply can't record authentically in stills. I don't use it a lot but I am gradually building a library of clips that I want to put ogether as a short film of the wildlife in my area of north Lancashire.

I think I will pop back here from time to time.
 
jj_glos said:
Whilst the LCD is better quality I find it awful in bright daylight, basically unusable.
Click to expand...

i never struggle with this. in bright daylight you have to shoot at f/16 anyway to keep the shutter at 50 and therefore the majority of the scene is in focus already.
 
It helps if you can see what you're framing as well though! I've got a lcd viewfinder on the way :)

I've been looking at the Rode videomic as well, just for general on camera use. It does look like the auto gain on the 7D causes some issues though?
 
Last edited:
Interesting thread, not use the video on my 5d2 but might give it a try when I take dog to the park this weekend focusing will be a challenge but I think by using a monopod I should be able to track much better than hand held... Also those who have been recording hand held how do you deal with camera shake?
 
I agree it is possible to make good movie with DSLR but it is much easier to do the same with dedicated camcorder

joescrivens said:
So I see it time and time again on here that whenever anyone asks about video on a dSLR the same advice is wrongly given and that is something along the lines of:

if you are just wanting to record normal home movies then using a dSLR for video isn't really feasible

I categorically disagree with this. 2 years ago I swapped in my panasonic camcorder and my 450d to buy a 7d and changed all my video onto the dSLR. Now I have moved onto the 5d mark 2.

I have seen huge improvements in my video quality, I have no more skills than i did when using my camcorder. I use no accessories, I do everything in manual focus handheld. I find it a dream to record video on my dSLR and this video would not have been possible on my old panasonic camcorder because in the dark areas I was shooting at 1.4. My camcorder wouldn't have given HD quality video at that light level. Not to mention the impossible depth of field changes that add to the interest

So to everyone who says you can't film normal home movies on a dSLR, hopefully this will make you reconsider that opinion. I'll upload more and more of my videos over time. I actually lost my youtube account so need to start from scratch.

[YOUTUBE]XUEytQ8Pqeo[/YOUTUBE]
Click to expand...
 
And I forgot to add that using dslr one has to practice much more to make good movie.
 
samagroma said:
I agree it is possible to make good movie with DSLR but it is much easier to do the same with dedicated camcorder
Click to expand...

but it is impossible to make a video with a prosumer camcorder that can reach the same quality of a dSLR.

you can make poor and average quality videos with both, but there is a limit to what you can get with the prosumer camcorder
 
dave_bass5 said:
It's not the equipment that makes a good video, it's the person using it.
To say it cat be done just because one produces better quality than the other just doesn't make sence.
Click to expand...

no no no, what you mean is it's not JUST the equipment.

a great videographer can make a good movie with poor equipment
a poor videographer can't make a good movie with great equipment

BUT, but put a great videographer with great equipment and you get a better movie than both of the above.

when i talk about quality i am refering to the actual video quality, the clarity, the color, the high definition the lack of noise, all of this goes towards the quality of a movie. They arent the most important thing, but they add to the overall result.
 
Last edited:
I've see some great independent films shot on consumer camcorders and I e seen some real crap that's been shot on a multi million pound budget but that's not the point of this thread.

Based on the title of this thread i would argue that if you give the average mum or dad a camcorder and a 7D to film their kids or a day out at the zoo and I bet the best footage will be from the camcorder.
I'm not talking about narrow DOF or ultimate sharpness, not even creativity, I'm talking about watchable footage that's in focus with clear audio.
I totally agree that sharpness. Colour etc all make for a better end result but I see a lot of people using one hand to film their kids. In my opinion a DSLR can't replace this type of shooting.
 
Last edited:
Well I have to say that my experience is limited to an older Sony camcorder and a 550D and the 550D takes video which is amazing by comparison. I know its an apples v oranges comparison but I really didn't think that someone clueless like me could get decent video from a DSLR with no experience. I'm very pleased with the ones I've taken, apart from the file size ;)
 
dave_bass5 said:
Based on the title of this thread i would argue that if you give the average mum or dad a camcorder and a 7D to film their kids or a day out at the zoo and I bet the best footage will be from the camcorder.
Click to expand...

well, we'll have to agree to disagree, I have direct experience of exactly what you described, being an average dad and I can prove that my footage is better from my dSLR.
 
But you aren't an average dad joe, you've got DLSR experience and obviously a knack for video.

I think dave was referring to average joe off the street.

I think out of the parents I know, maybe 150 couples, only 3 or 4 could use a vdslr to produce anything watchable.
 
but it also depends how you defnie watchable - to me its about it being sharp and less about the lighting colour etc.
 
Harvey_nikon said:
But you aren't an average dad joe, you've got DLSR experience and obviously a knack for video.

I think dave was referring to average joe off the street.

I think out of the parents I know, maybe 150 couples, only 3 or 4 could use a vdslr to produce anything watchable.
Click to expand...

Well, I had zero experience with shooting video on a dSLR the first day I got it and my video was better straight away. The thing is you guys are all assuming it's hard because of manual focus and shallow dof, my Wife has zero skill with any form of technology lol, all I do is stick the aperture at f/8 to f/16 and everything is in focus anyway so she has no problem.

I'm not saying everyone is going to be able to use it and I do know that the majority will find it easier to use a camcorder, but the point of my thread is that it CAN be very easy with a dSLR too, and everyone has the capacity to use them this way given a little practice. It's just not as hard as people seem to make out in my opinion.
 
joescrivens said:
Well, I had zero experience with shooting video on a dSLR the first day I got it and my video was better straight away. The thing is you guys are all assuming it's hard because of manual focus and shallow dof, my Wife has zero skill with any form of technology lol, all I do is stick the aperture at f/8 to f/16 and everything is in focus anyway so she has no problem.

I'm not saying everyone is going to be able to use it and I do know that the majority will find it easier to use a camcorder, but the point of my thread is that it CAN be very easy with a dSLR too, and everyone has the capacity to use them this way given a little practice. It's just not as hard as people seem to make out in my opinion.
Click to expand...
I agree.

I'd guess it's easier to shoot with a camcorder (never used one) but it really isn't that hard with an SLR.
 
Amazing video that first one Joe!

Really inspired me to have another go with video on my D7000!
 
Makes me think you've got a point there, still a bit wary of all those scary controls though ;)
 
BalSanghera said:
Interesting thread, not use the video on my 5d2 but might give it a try when I take dog to the park this weekend focusing will be a challenge but I think by using a monopod I should be able to track much better than hand held... Also those who have been recording hand held how do you deal with camera shake?
Click to expand...


Tighten your camera strap so your camera gets held taught when you extend your arms to film. Gives a lot more control.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top