Pro's & Con's of switching to SLRs for wedding video. - Page 6 at DVinfo.net

Go Back   DV Info Net > Special Interest Areas > Wedding / Event Videography Techniques

Wedding / Event Videography Techniques
Shooting non-repeatable events: weddings, recitals, plays, performances...


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old June 8th, 2010, 07:47 PM   #76
Major Player
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Red Bank, NJ
Posts: 553
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Vincent View Post
I need to say first that I think my post was a bit harsh, so I'd like to apologize. I do not mean to sound like a hater or curmudgeon. I'm not anti-DSLR, really I'm not. I'm just not impressed much with a lot of the stuff I'm seeing in clips from people who are using them.

I'm not talking about zoom - I'm just talking about keeping a subject in focus as they move from far away to close to the camera. To me you have two choices - set a small aperture that will keep the subject in focus throughout (which most any videocamera already does easily), or you can keep a larger aperture and get that shallow DOF that DSLRs are known for, but in the tradeoff you lose the ability to keep the subject in focus unless you have mastered on-the-fly focus. With some situations and lenses a small aperture is not going to be practical.

To me it's just a really risky proposition to rely on DSLRs exclusively to get great-focused crucial material, for lots of reasons. But keeping a bride in-focus perfectly throughout a walk toward you from the back of the room down the isle is just one example. I'm bringing this up because I've had to deal with this issue personally more than a couple of times - in fact I just did a wedding where 10 bridesmaids came down the isle one-by-one, and I was up behind the officiant and having to keep them in focus throughout with my DSLR. Given the lens I had on the camera, the aperture I was stuck with due to lighting constraints, and other factors, it was very difficult to keep them in-focus as each one walked down the isle. I did pretty well, but some of my shots were not usable. A video cam with decent auto-focus would have made this much easier - not even an issue, usually. In this case I'm not sure I was doing myself or the bride any favors by getting hit/miss focus with the DSLR, and I do feel like I'm at least somewhat practiced and experienced working the DSLR focus. Woe to someone who isn't.

I think these are very valid things to bring up when discussing the pros and cons of DSLRs for weddings. Are we really doing the best job for a bride by trying to use these cameras exclusively on wedding shoots, given how many variables can make for bad focus so easily? I'm not so sure. For some shots it's not a problem at all, and I totally agree that they have their place - a big place - in the toolkit. But exclusive use for weddings? I'm not sold, by a longshot.
Bill, I give my brides the option of choosing my conventional video camera or my DSLR. They are ALL choosing the DSLR. So if they are happy, who are we to argue?
Michael Simons is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 8th, 2010, 10:14 PM   #77
Major Player
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 253
Michael, from an aesthetic point of view, of course DSLR is the way to go. The images are beautiful - that's why we all use them. And any average video editor can probably put something together that hides or masks the vulnerabilities I was discussing. But those vulnerabilities still exist, whether we educate the client about them or not. It's about mitigating risk from a shooting point of view.

The more options you have in editing, the better your end-product will be. If your options are more limited because almost-in-focus or not-even-close focus taints 30 - 40% of your shots due to all of the aspects of the DSLR that have been discussed ad-infinatum, then your end-product will not be as good as if you had more usable material.

You could play it safer with a DSLR by getting more or less static shots and probably squeeze more usable footage out of it than if you were moving around a lot. My wish list right now has a DSLR on it to use just as a stationary cam - I'd love it. I do think that doing stationary stuff with the DSLR is somewhat of an under-utilization of its capabilities, but whatever. They would make great stationary cams, even with the 12-minute limit on certain cameras. I do think, however that most people who get their first DSLR are NOT using it as a stationary camera, thus opening themselves up to those pesky focus issues.

Overall, it's just something that anyone considering DSLRs should know about - that it is more difficult, and somewhat more risky for the average mortal to shoot with than videocameras. You have to make concessions and buy additional gear to really utilize them in a comparable way to videocams. This discrepancy will not be around for too long - but it does exist now.
Bill Vincent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 8th, 2010, 10:55 PM   #78
Trustee
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Santa Clara, CA
Posts: 1,104
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Vincent View Post
My wish list right now has a DSLR on it to use just as a stationary cam - I'd love it. I do think that doing stationary stuff with the DSLR is somewhat of an under-utilization of its capabilities, but whatever. They would make great stationary cams, even with the 12-minute limit on certain cameras. I do think, however that most people who get their first DSLR are NOT using it as a stationary camera, thus opening themselves up to those pesky focus issues.
You might want to consider the Panasonic GH1
Panasonic | Lumix DMC-GH1 Digital Camera (Black) with | DMC-GH1K
It makes a great lock down DSLR. It doesn't have a 12-minute limit and it isn't prone to overheating. It uses an electronic viewfinder which means that it can be used while shooting video. It has a LCD screen than can be tilted so it allows positioning flexibility when shooting. It also has selectable auto focus which can be useful in some shooting situations.
Jim Snow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 29th, 2010, 02:47 PM   #79
Major Player
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 689
Just thought I'd update this as so much has changed after one season shooting events with the T2i's:

Started with:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joel Peregrine View Post
$800 Canon T2i
$800 Canon T2i
$800 Canon T2i
$160 Canon BG-E8 Grip
$160 Canon BG-E8 Grip
$100 10 x Generic T2i Batteries
$815 Canon 24-105 f/4 L IS (used)
$608 Tokina 11-16 f/2.8
$1006 Canon 70-200 f/4 L IS (used)
$420 12 x Patriot SDHC 16gb Class 6 ($35 each)
$179 LCDVF Viewfinder
$99 Neutral Density Fader
$239 Zoom H4N (refurbished)
Current kit:
Tokina 11-16 mm f2.8
Sigma 20 mm f1.8
Nikon 35 mm f1.4
Pentax 50 mm f1.2
Olympus 55 mm f1.2
Rokinon 85 mm f1.4
Canon (IS) 70-200 mm f2.8
2 x Tokina 80-200 mm f2.8

Shopping for a deal on a Canon 135 2.0L...
__________________
WeddingFilms.com>>
Joel Peregrine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 13th, 2010, 08:41 AM   #80
Major Player
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Warren, Pa
Posts: 785
Wow how things change over time.
I just shot a wedding with a ex1r and a 5d II / 50 1.2 with a zacuto z finder and follow focus.

I love my EX1r, but in low light its not as good, IMO not even close.

I am not sure if I want to go all DSLR or not but here are a few things that makes me want to.

First off, I would never shoot with one camera regardless of what kind it was. This makes a card going bad not as tragic as it is made out to be. The EX1r also uses solid state and can also go bad with over an hour of footage on it.

Shallow dof looks great and also there are ways to give you more room for error.
For example using a 5D II
35mm lens at f 2.8 15 foot from the couple gives you 10.5 feet of DOF.
50mm lens at f 2.8 15 foot from the couple gives you 4.7 feet of DOF.
100mm lens at f 2.8 30 foot from the couple gives you 4.6 feet of DOF
200mm lens at f 2.8 60 foot from the couple gives you 4.6 feet of DOF.

So you can have some wiggle room for things like slow dancing etc, I do feel you need a 35mm lens to give you that cushion and use as a safe shot when trying to nail that close up shallow dof look, or at least I will use that when I am working solo.
__________________
2 Canon XF305's
Kyser Photography www.kyserphoto.com
Denny Kyser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 13th, 2010, 08:51 AM   #81
Major Player
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Midlands UK
Posts: 699
Hi Denny.
I've just posed some questions in another thread on this subject. As a long time video camera user with a eye on DSLRs.
Do you carry around a fleet of cameras each with one of those different lenses on to be able to grab the shot you want, or do you work in a team?
I do like the look that can be achieved from these cameras but I find it difficult to get my head around how I'd work spontaneously at a wedding if I had to be changing cameras when I saw a different shot that I wanted.I know that you can use zoom lenses but do they not somewhat loose the benefit that these cameras provide of wide aperture and shallow depth of field. I am use to my Fujinon x20 1.4f that gets me from 30 - 600 (35mm equivalent) on tap.
I notice that many of the lovely atmospheric shots in low light (e.g. a church interior) are only achieved with a 50mm 1.4f prime lens. I haven't use one so I'm happy to stand to be corrected.
George Kilroy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 13th, 2010, 08:53 AM   #82
Major Player
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Warren, Pa
Posts: 785
I will also add my audio would change very little if I switched, here is why.
Ceremony
I use 2 wireless lavs, and a shotgun being mixed with a sd 302 mixer going into both the ex1r and Sony PCM-D50, and have the Zoom H4N recording ambient, full auto, set it and forget it. I have yet to use the Sony recorder, but its there if I need it and would become the main audio if I went all out DSLR

Reception
wireless handheld and zoom H4 on a mic stand at DJ speaker, shotgun on the EX1r, handheld and shotgun mixed and recorded to both ex1 and Sony recorder, Zoom full auto again.

I know the full auto is not a great idea, but its only been used as back up to back up. I listen to it once in a while and its quite good. I have it set up that way so I can have it up and recording in seconds.

Going all out dslr may have me adding a second zoom recorder but I have always been one to have backups.

In my case with my main photography cameras being 2 1D IV's when it came down to the vows, would probably have 3 cameras recording video, one taking the stills I need and sacrificing video capture at that second while the still is being recorded. This way for the most critical part of the ceremony would have 2 2/3 cameras recording video.
__________________
2 Canon XF305's
Kyser Photography www.kyserphoto.com
Denny Kyser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 13th, 2010, 08:58 AM   #83
Major Player
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Warren, Pa
Posts: 785
Quote:
Originally Posted by George Kilroy View Post
Hi Denny.
I've just posed some questions in another thread on this subject. As a long time video camera user with a eye on DSLRs.
Do you carry around a fleet of cameras each with one of those different lenses on to be able to grab the shot you want, or do you work in a team?
I do like the look that can be achieved from these cameras but I find it difficult to get my head around how I'd work spontaneously at a wedding if I had to be changing cameras when I saw a different shot that I wanted.I know that you can use zoom lenses but do they not somewhat loose the benefit that these cameras provide of wide aperture and shallow depth of field. I am use to my Fujinon x20 1.4f that gets me from 30 - 600 (35mm equivalent) on tap.
I notice that many of the lovely atmospheric shots in low light (e.g. a church interior) are only achieved with a 50mm 1.4f prime lens. I haven't use one so I'm happy to stand to be corrected.
George, I am not afraid to use zooms to be able to do exactly what your saying, and also L glass looks great wide open, but does not have to be used that way.

My 50 1.2 was never used at 1.2, I often went up to 2.8 giving me a nice shallow dof and still some room if the couple moved not to loose focus.

While the zooms will not give you as much range as yours do, its a lighter rig so often your feet can help with the zoom.
__________________
2 Canon XF305's
Kyser Photography www.kyserphoto.com
Denny Kyser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 13th, 2010, 09:00 AM   #84
Major Player
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Midlands UK
Posts: 699
Thanks Denny.
George Kilroy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 13th, 2010, 09:07 AM   #85
Major Player
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Warren, Pa
Posts: 785
No problem but remember I am still on the fence and not like the pros on this forum, they know a lot more about it than I do.

My situation is a little different in that I do very little video but wanted it to be great, thats why I got the ex1r, did have 2.

I know technology is changing fast, and although the ex1r will always have a place in the market, I do not want to hold on to it so long its not worth much. I believe there is like 17 hrs on it so if I am going to make the switch its probably a good time to sell it.
__________________
2 Canon XF305's
Kyser Photography www.kyserphoto.com
Denny Kyser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 13th, 2010, 09:12 AM   #86
Major Player
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Midlands UK
Posts: 699
Pity your in the states Denny as I know someone here who is looking to buy one.
George Kilroy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 13th, 2010, 07:03 PM   #87
Major Player
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 689
Hi Denny,

Quote:
Originally Posted by Denny Kyser View Post
For example using a 5D II
35mm lens at f 2.8 15 foot from the couple gives you 10.5 feet of DOF.
.
Just to put that into perspective: Drop that to f1.4 (and lower iso/grain) and you're down to just under 5 ft DOF. Put that 35 1.4 on a crop-sensor camera and you're down to 3 ft. Put an 85 1.4 on that crop-sensor camera and you have exactly 6 inches of DOF - 3 inches in front and 3 inches in back.

Online Depth of Field Calculator
__________________
WeddingFilms.com>>
Joel Peregrine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 13th, 2010, 08:55 PM   #88
Major Player
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Warren, Pa
Posts: 785
Joel that is the beauty of the DSLR, if your subject is not moving you have that option.

I really want to do some testing and get a 5D as wide as the ex1r using my 16-35 2.8 and see which is cleaner while still not have too thin a dof for say dancing at the reception.

I am scared to just jump in with both feet to DSLR, but the footage is so stupid sharp its hard not too.
__________________
2 Canon XF305's
Kyser Photography www.kyserphoto.com
Denny Kyser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 14th, 2010, 07:19 PM   #89
Major Player
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Green Bay Wisconsin
Posts: 553
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joel Peregrine View Post
Thanks Joel...... way cool find there !!!!
Chip Thome is offline   Reply
Reply

DV Info Net refers all where-to-buy and where-to-rent questions exclusively to these trusted full line dealers and rental houses...

Professional Video
(800) 833-4801
Portland, OR

B&H Photo Video
(866) 521-7381
New York, NY

Z.G.C.
(973) 335-4460
Mountain Lakes, NJ

Abel Cine Tech
(888) 700-4416
N.Y. NY & L.A. CA

Precision Camera
(800) 677-1023
Austin, TX

DV Info Net also encourages you to support local businesses and buy from an authorized dealer in your neighborhood.
  You are here: DV Info Net > Special Interest Areas > Wedding / Event Videography Techniques

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 



Google
 

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:34 AM.


DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2017 The Digital Video Information Network