EX-1 with Letus Adaptor vs Canon 5D. Which is better?

[Buba Kastorski]

Originally Posted by Nathan Hudson

I've heard about people attempting to do weddings with the 5D and D90. Ridiculous!!!

hey Nathan,
I'm guessing you've never heard of stillmotion

[Benjamin Eckstein]

Originally Posted by Buba Kastorski

hey Nathan,
I'm guessing you've never heard of stillmotion

Buba, you beat me to it. Was just about to write that.

In addition to StillMotion there are dozens (I am sure way more even) of amazing videos that people are shooting at a professional level on DSLRs. It is a tool, like the EX-1, and both have their advantages and disadvantages and their time and place (according to each particular operator) but they both have the capability of shooting professional looking video (often when in the hands of a professional or a capable operator).

I just think there is too much proof to indicate that we now have these DSLR tools out there to work for us in creating fabulous moving pictures.

[Gabe Strong]

Originally Posted by Buba Kastorski

hey Nathan,
I'm guessing you've never heard of stillmotion

I may be wrong, but the story I read about them said they used it 'in conjunction' with
other 'video' cameras. They used it for some specific 'beauty' shots, but not as the
primary camera.......I think it was a story in Event DV, I'll have to try to find it and
make sure I am not remembering it wrong....

[Jonathan Shaw]

Still motion shoot the majority if not 95% on 5D's, they are sponsored by Canon so officially they can use A1's / G1's but I know that they used to use EX1's a little but now they are pretty much fully 5 and 7D's

[Tom Hardwick]

I reckon Doug nailed it when he said:

Originally Posted by Doug Jensen

The worst thing about shooting with the D300s yesterday is that I blew a chance to shoot it right with the EX3 or EX1 instead. A lost opportunity.[/url]

[Vincent Oliver]

Like them or hate them, the DSLRs are here to stay. I remember when digital cameras first came on the scene, there was an outcry from film users, they said digital would never replace film. The rest is history.

Give the DSLR another year or so and I also think we will be looking at our EX1 & EX3 and wondering why we need all the excess baggage.

Don't get me wrong, I love my EX3, but after trekking up Snowdon (mountain in the UK) I now feel I could be a serious competitor in the Weight lifting category for the 2012 Olympics.

[Chris Barcellos]

Originally Posted by Nathan Hudson

.I don't want to step on too many toes so please realize, I think the 5D has a purpose. Professional Film/Video is not one of them. Photography and capturing some stunning clips here and there, YES! I just can't stand it when people think that these SLR camera's are the be all and end all. ...

Better take care Nathan. Pros like Phil Bloom here, and people at Saturday Night Live seems to disagree with you:

http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/canon-eo...-shoot-7d.html

[Jonathan Shaw]

Originally Posted by Vincent Oliver

Like them or hate them, the DSLRs are here to stay. I remember when digital cameras first came on the scene, there was an outcry from film users, they said digital would never replace film. The rest is history.

Give the DSLR another year or so and I also think we will be looking at our EX1 & EX3 and wondering why we need all the excess baggage.

Don't get me wrong, I love my EX3, but after trekking up Snowdon (mountain in the UK) I now feel I could be a serious competitor in the Weight lifting category for the 2012 Olympics.

Yeah but give it a year and they will do everything that they need to and we will all be very happy.
I hear you on the excess front.... I'm over carrying 40 kgs of camera gear around, but something in my head says the rig may get a bit lighter but it still won't be any easier!

[Darren Ruddock]

Dunno what all the fuss is about!

There will always be video cameras and stills cameras. Yeah stills may take some nice video but I doubt you will see big budget productions shot by some blokes standing around with stills cameras on set!

Look ridiculous! Yet alone turning up for a paid gig. I'd feel a bit silly, it's a perception thing!

[Tom Roper]

Originally Posted by Vincent Oliver

Give the DSLR another year or so and I also think we will be looking at our EX1 & EX3 and wondering why we need all the excess baggage.

For the Letus, yes.

If you carry enough lenses to cover the zoom range of the non-Letus EX, the weight becomes a deficit for the DSLR. Steady video is also a problem with it, as is the need for external monitor if tripod mounted.

But I agree about giving it a year or two anyway. The video of my 5DMkII is flawed with aliasing artifacts. I love it for the stills, but the EX1 makes more controllable video, easier to get the good result, and it's more detailed resolution wise, both to my eyes, and the imatest software I've used to test both.

The 5DMkII makes stunning video. But I can closely achieve the same result with the EX, shallow depth of field is possible through technique, and low light is good also. Those are the only two advantages conceded to the 5D2 anyway. Everything else, from recording times, audio, stabilization, customization, frame rates, slo-mo, ergonomics, all go to the EX. I'd climb out on a limb as say 24p frame grabs from the EX are as DSLR-like as video from the 5D2 is to HD video, discounted for pixel size.

I'll be in line for the next great full frame DSLR and sing the praises when it's deserved. Right now, I don't feel it is. I am totally in love with it for the still photography it's primarily intended for, as well as the compliment of Canon L glass I own, are outstanding. But for video, no way. I'll give Sony it's due, heck even Canon XH-A1/ XL-H1 was excellent.

But a neat thing I can do with the 5DMkII is walk into a museum with it, and using fast primes shoot low light HD video that otherwise is often forbidden from pro video cams either by available light, or policy.

[Tom Hardwick]

Originally Posted by Tom Roper

But a neat thing I can do with the 5DMkII is walk into a museum with it, and using fast primes shoot low light HD video that otherwise is often forbidden from pro video cams either by available light, or policy.

Good post Tom, and good point (above). It reminds me of the wedding shoot I did for a couple this year, where the couple poutingly informed me that the priest had said 'no video', so would I wait outside until they emerged please?

Fine, I said. But was the vicar and his clergy going to frisk all the parishioners, guests and choir looking for VDSLRs, mobile phones and compact cameras set to movie mode? The obvious answer was no, so the only footage of the service was going to be wobbly, grainy, poorly composed stuff with hissy, indistinct sound. Really great for the vows, I bet.

tom.

[Vincent Oliver]

Originally Posted by Darren Ruddock

Dunno what all the fuss is about!

There will always be video cameras and stills cameras. Yeah stills may take some nice video but I doubt you will see big budget productions shot by some blokes standing around with stills cameras on set!

Look ridiculous! Yet alone turning up for a paid gig. I'd feel a bit silly, it's a perception thing!

Don't be so sure on this, I know of a production company that is using the 5D for in car shots and other difficult to access loctaion work. However, these are only used for short fill in shots, the bulk of the production is shot on high end video gear.

[Nathan Hudson]

Sorry, but stillmotion excuse doesn't cut it as far as being professional. PERIOD.
Neither does H264 acquisition or in the case of other cameras does AVCHD cut it. The AVCHD codec was developed for consumer use and should stay there!
Neither do all the other shortcomings of that camera as a PROFESSIONAL video camera.

As far as the Phil Bloom comment, I believe in his own blog he even admits to the shortcomings, while praising the direction things are going along with the look of the picture. I never said the picture didn't look good. I simply said that thinking along the lines of a DSLR being the BE ALL and END ALL is ridiculous. ESPECIALLY as of right now!

I also noted that there are uses for the camera's video function so instead of harping on just the negative side of what I said, please try and realize that I am trying to be fair about it and openly admit that it could come in handy for limited uses.

I think in years to come they may develop further and it may get better but I think we will never see the DSLR fully replace a dedicated professional video camera. I love how all the makeshift ways of getting around the downfalls end up being responses. My thoughts on that are, get a camera that performs for it's function instead.


I do want to say, please don't read into my responses as insults or anything like that, I'm not saying that the DSLR camera's suck, I just hold a different view. I respect everyone on here and applaud you all for being in one of the best industries ever! If you're working, making money, loving what you do, and producing results to inspire others, then you my friend are living a good life.

-Nate

[Piotr Wozniacki]

My personal opinion on this controversy is that we will soon see the best of both words: a big CMOS (perhaps even full 35mm), but in a proper video camera form. Interchangeable lens will top it up.

[Vincent Oliver]

Just had look at the Stillmotion web site, and yes, WOW, superb - must sell all my EX3 gear right now.

STOP - STOP Vincent.

Sorry but this stylish production doesn't cut any ice with me. I have shot weddings in the suburbs of London and to pull off something this stylish would take far more than a single DSLR camera. Yes, the footage looks great, but if you look with open eyes, I wonder if this is a staged event for a promo reel or maybe for Canon.