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

I'm actually selling my camcorder to get a DSLR. I find I can't do "enough" on the camcorder, even for home movies, I like to fiddle with the settings too much.

The DSLRs are much better for multifunctionality, they can take super high quality pictures, as well as super high quality video. And the lenses used on the DSLRs are sooo much better than on a Camcorder, so you get a better picture in the long run.
 
Great film joescrivens. (y)

I know the 'Dark Side of the Lens' has been mentioned here before. But these guys make great films with the 5D mkII.

http://vimeo.com/astrayfilms

Obviously not home movies though, good watch none the less. (y)
 
That looked really, really good! One of the reasons I upgraded from a 1000d to the 550 was to try and have a go at this sort of thing, but it'll take me ages to get as good as that (if I ever could!). You've inspired me to have a go though...

Does help that you had some great subject matter - congrats re the little-un! Took me back a few years to my two arriving - wish I could have done something as good as this for them!
 
joescrivens said:
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
Click to expand...

Sorry but have to disagree,maybe you had a cheap camcorder and trying to compare it with an expensive DSLR. Was the Panasonic you had a 1 MOS or 3 MOS version? there is a huge difference between them. Another point you failed to point out was the record time, a camcorder will carry one recording hours after a DSLR movie mode has run out.

I would put my camcorder up against any DSLR in using movie mode and see the quality after 3 hours continuous use (my camcorder can do 8 hours). there wouldn't be any competition as the DSLR would have given up the ghost after the first hour.

Further more you can't just put a DSLR camera in a trouser pocket, but you can with a Camcorder so you don't have a heavy weight to carry around


Just trying to even out the balance as at the moment as camcorders seem to be getting a hammering

Realspeed
 
Last edited:
Duke_Haphazard said:
I'm actually selling my camcorder to get a DSLR. I find I can't do "enough" on the camcorder, even for home movies, I like to fiddle with the settings too much.

The DSLRs are much better for multifunctionality, they can take super high quality pictures, as well as super high quality video. And the lenses used on the DSLRs are sooo much better than on a Camcorder, so you get a better picture in the long run.
Click to expand...

Don't think your statement about lens quality holds up, Leica lenses have always been noted for their quality and that is on my Camcorder

Realspeed
 
realspeed said:
Sorry but have to disagree,maybe you had a cheap camcorder and trying to compare it with an expensive DSLR. Was the Panasonic you had a 1 MOS or 3 MOS version? there is a huge difference between them.
Click to expand...

Cheap camcorder? When I bought it, it was almost £1000 :cautious: it was a 3MOS with a leica dicomar lens, in fact at the time it was considered one of the best prosumer camcorders you can buy. Compared to my 5d mark 2 - it was pants.
realspeed said:
Another point you failed to point out was the record time, a camcorder will carry one recording hours after a DSLR movie mode has run out.
Click to expand...

good filming is made up of lots of short clips, not hours of continuous footage. The dSLR is not limited by any amount of footage time, it's limited by how much storage you have with you in memory cards. If you are referring to the 12 minutes continuous recording limit, then again - I never recorded more than a few minutes at a time even with my camcorder - good filming is about short clips not continuous footage.

realspeed said:
I would put my camcorder up against any DSLR in using movie mode and see the quality after 3 hours continuous use (my camcorder can do 8 hours). there wouldn't be any competition as the DSLR would have given up the ghost after the first hour.
Click to expand...

I would rather die than watch more than 20 minutes of any home movie recorded with a dSLR or camcorder. Less is more.

realspeed said:
Further more you can't just put a DSLR camera in a trouser pocket, but you can with a Camcorder so you don't have a heavy weight to carry around

Just trying to even out the balance as at the moment as camcorders seem to be getting a hammering

Realspeed
Click to expand...

Portability is probably the only thing I like about a camcorder, but to be honest, my iPhone is even smaller and takes some great footage for it's size.

It's good to get different opinions though (y)
 
Last edited:
Joe - excellent points well made. Having just picked up a 7D (originally with no intention of using the video function) I'm suddenly thinking about having a go and seeing what's involved with the film aspect of this camera.
 
This is a topic I have a lot of interest in, and is one of the other reasons why I now have the Sony a77. I am off to take video this week in the projects, and with full 30fps progressive 1080p ,proper auto focusing and built in stabilisation, I am looking forward to seeing if I can produce anything worthwhile.

If I can make something half as good as yours Joe, I will be happy :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top