We had a meeting with some brides to be, and we showed them some sample clips gleaned from some of you on this site. Most haven't seen or heard of Canon 5D footage before, but some are photography/video savvy. After watching about 5 clips in a row, these are some of their responses....interesting!

1. Some of the shots are terrific and spectacular!
2. Why does every shot start out blurry, then go into focus?
3. When in focus, the images are very sharp and clear.
4. Too many out of focus shots. For example, on a closeup of the bride's face, the focus should be on her eyes, not on the tip of her nose or the back of her ear.
5. Some of the individual shots aren't good because it's too fuzzy, but the music and editing makes the sequence better.
6. The color is very nice!
7. Some out of focus shots are ok (for artistic purposes), but I hope most of my video is in focus.

Thanks that was very helpful & eye opening.

My biggest concern is that the overuse or misuse of these great cameras will give them a bad name. When used properly, some of the footage from these cameras is breathtaking, but too much usage of shallow depth of field and "wandering" focus isn't pleasing to watch. They do a number of things very well but they don't do everything very well. Did you ever try to drive a nail with a screwdriver? What about putting in screw with a hammer? - Two tools for two different purposes. No matter how well one works for a particular task doesn't mean it works well for another.

My question is what clips did you show them, because there are really different styles of shooting and editing on here and some styles of shooting and editing are not meant for all couples which is why uncle bob still has a job.

Also, why were you showing clips from this site when you were meeting with clients and not showing your own work.

I'm assuming Warren meant clips on sites like vimeo, exposureroom etc that have been refered to on this site. They are in the public domain unless they have a password and I'm sure Warren didn't represent the work as his - I understood his post to say he was showing them examples of a style.

The responses are interesting, regardless of what we think - we need to listen to the customer. I like comment number 7 - I might call it artistic but she calls it out of focus and it's her call.

All of these brides-to-be have weddings planned for '09-10, and were already booked with us before the 5DMII came out. I don't shoot with a 5D, but was considering getting one.

However, for my style of shooting weddings (lots of slow-mo, creep zooms, and dissolve transitions) and after talking with these brides, I may just stick to using my EX-1 for now. My fear is that with the 5DMII, my attention would be mostly focused on the technicalities of the camera (having to switch a bunch of lenses, maintaining critical focus, not shaking, etc.) rather than the wedding itself.

That's my experience too, they love the look. They don't notice the skew or aliasing artifacts that bother me.

Focus is definitely one of the tough things, and some have complained about the shakiness of a few of my handheld shots. Hopefully the new full-res HDMI output from Magic Lantern will help me nail focus more often, as well as alerting me when I'm a little too unsteady. (The shakey shots look fine in the LCD, but I really notice it on full-res playback.)

That's my experience too, they love the look. They don't notice the skew or aliasing artifacts that bother me.

Focus is definitely one of the tough things, and some have complained about the shakiness of a few of my handheld shots. Hopefully the new full-res HDMI output from Magic Lantern will help me nail focus more often, as well as alerting me when I'm a little too unsteady. (The shakey shots look fine in the LCD, but I really notice it on full-res playback.)

True on all the above points... especially regarding focus. The only lens I'll shoot handheld is the fisheye. Even then I take the time to slip it on the Glidecam 2000 if I can. Using the 5d for weddings is more work for sure and you should have quality coverage from somewhere else or you may be scr*wed.

I often find I want to change lenses to often (need to plan ahead better), and it does take a bit of getting used to, to get the most out of the camera for weddings. I find I use it almost exclusively after the ceremony when covering the photo shoot and stuff. Also it's sooooo good in low light for the reception (first dance etc.). Beware though that it doesn't like flash photography at all.

I hope and look forward to the technology used in these cameras being incorporated in real video cameras. The difficulty in using these photo cameras for video applications make using them as a primary video camera a problem. They are amazing still photo cameras that can ALSO shoot video.

One of the problems with this is that the camera manufactures are very focused on market positioning of their full range of products. It's important to them to have price / performance consistency across their entire product lines. If you incorporate the sensor and in-camera processing technology into a video camera, the product positioning "calculations' would be turned upside down. For example, look at the specs on the Sony HDW-F900R Sony | HDW-F900R CineAlta 24P HDCAM Package | HDWF900RPAC1D (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/633399-REG/Sony_HDWF900RPAC1D_HDW_F900R_CineAlta_24P_HDCAM.html) It's a 2/3", $81,000 camera. So where do you price a new generation of video camera that at least in some respects will out-shoot an $81K camera!?

Also it's sooooo good in low light for the reception (first dance etc.). Beware though that it doesn't like flash photography at all.

We had a deal going with the still photographers (who were also shooting 5D!) that they would only flash for part of the dance. No dice on the cake-cutting, though.

I hope and look forward to the technology used in these cameras being incorporated in real video cameras. The difficulty in using these photo cameras for video applications make using them as a primary video camera a problem. They are amazing still photo cameras that can ALSO shoot video.

One of the problems with this is that the camera manufactures are very focused on market positioning of their full range of products. It's important to them to have price / performance consistency across their entire product lines. If you incorporate the sensor and in-camera processing technology into a video camera, the product positioning "calculations' would be turned upside down. For example, look at the specs on the Sony HDW-F900R Sony | HDW-F900R CineAlta 24P HDCAM Package | HDWF900RPAC1D (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/633399-REG/Sony_HDWF900RPAC1D_HDW_F900R_CineAlta_24P_HDCAM.html) It's a 2/3", $81,000 camera. So where do you price a new generation of video camera that at least in some respects will out-shoot an $81K camera!?

You're right Jim, but still I sit looking at the best elements of my XLh1 and 5d2 and think... really how far away are they from marrying the best of the two together. It's still wouldn't be perfect (what is?) but The 5d2/7d is only lacking in form factor, articulating viewfinder and xlr audio inputs with controls. I use manual controls with EOS lenses on my H1 anyways, so that's not a big deal.

You're right Jim, but still I sit looking at the best elements of my XLh1 and 5d2 and think... really how far away are they from marrying the best of the two together. It's still wouldn't be perfect (what is?) but The 5d2/7d is only lacking in form factor, articulating viewfinder and xlr audio inputs with controls. I use manual controls with EOS lenses on my H1 anyways, so that's not a big deal.

Hi Ken, I won't hold my breath for any near-term products that incorporate the 5d/7d technology into a video camera. For the reason that I mentioned, and I'm sure other reasons as well, this isn't going to happen anytime soon. I see the 5d and 7d as best suited as a second camera where it can be used when its DOF and low-light capabilities can really add to a production. I would love to have one.

.... its DOF and low-light capabilities can really add to a production. I would love to have one.

I think here is where the apples to oranges comparison comes in (especially for the 5D with even shallower DOF than the 7D).

The only way you can get good low light on the DSLRs is with the iris very open and therefore producing shallow DOF. A DSLR at F8 or a little lower would be a comparison to a typical video camera DOF (especially 1/3" sensor). But the 5D dosent have good low light at F8 which is understandable in consumer camera terms.

Your 80,000 camera example still needs a 20 to 30K lens to work. However, those 2/3" cameras are designed to shoot at F11 or even higher to overcome the shallow DOF issues in a shoot. So a DSLR is no where near a $100K+ camera, although it's getting better every iteration. But even if it were sensitive enough, you still need that 20 to 30K lens to make it usable.

So, I don't think it's a matter of marrying the two or working them out, I think it's just a whole different tool.

It doesn't surprise me that the capabilities of the new toys are perhaps overused - they have a place, like anything else, and it will take time to integrate this new and different sort of gear into the workflow. Personally, I see the DSLR-V as the creative/glamour cam, nothing wrong with that, for me I like the idea that it integrates with "traditional" footage, but adds to it.

I think the thing you have to remember is that in effect, DSLR-V's have shown us that the camera can be modular, and at a price point that is reasonably affordable.

The average consumer isn't going to want a camera that has shallow DOF, a bunch of optional lenses, lots of controls, and all that stuff. Thus the EASY button...

BUT, if since we want a bit more as "professionals" we can see the advantages of a nice SENSOR, interchangeable LENSES, advanced image processing (with tweakable firmware, even better!), and a reasonably easy to use compact form factor.

Ultimately, a camera, whether video or still is a modular agglomeration of susbystems:
A sensor block/chip
image processor/firmware
Lens
viewfinder/screen
Audio subsystem (almost forgot that!)
storage media
power supply/battery
Support/stabilizer system (somewhat optional)

If one thinks modular (as RED did), then it's just a matter of integrating the best of each subsystem into a final product that you can sell at a decent price and make a profit. Canon has changed the game with the 5D and 7D, I can't help but think the other manufacturers are trying to figure out what comes next. I can't help but wonder if the "prosumer" camera as we have thought of it for many years may be on the short road to extinction.

I tend to think my next "big" camera will be a DSLR-V (if Sony had released an Alpha body with workable video this round, I'd already be in line...). I'm very happy with tapeless, and so tape options leave me cold... I also shoot stills, so a good still camera sounds good to me, as long as the video is good too. Manual control and interchangeable lenses again fit the bill for "creative" shooting. I can always do "double source" for audio, though usable on camera would be good.

I'm pretty sure the market is out there, we all want a camera with decent auto features (for those times when it is handy), manual control of the essential functions (for when we want to be creative), versatility, and compact form factor, with of course the best image quality possible...

The DSLR-V just offers a different "take" on the approach - I'm not sure Canon really had any idea that the whole video thing would be such a huge feature - looks more like an "add-on" that overtook the main features (and that seems like how the other manufacturers are approching it - the video is an afterthought, NOT the main thing...). Obviously the market reaction will alter that perception, and a year or two from now we MIGHT start seeing what the next generation really can offer. Till then, we just have to concentrate on creating the most exciting (and marketable) images the tools allow for - what a great time to be in creative imaging... the selection of "hammers" to build with is just getting better and better!

All of these brides-to-be have weddings planned for '09-10, and were already booked with us before the 5DMII came out.

However, for my style of shooting weddings (lots of slow-mo, creep zooms, and dissolve transitions) and after talking with these brides, I may just stick to using my EX-1 for now.

and there lies the rub.

a bride that books you and enjoys that style would look at something we do, as an example, not find as much in it. if you show one of our brides your films, they too would come up with a list. you need to match the tools and style to the demographic your trying to reach. for the traditional wedding video style (bw, slow motion, slow zooms, dissolves) you don't need to add in shallow depth of field, tonality from a full frame sensor and L-glass, nor the extra latitude gained.

this sounds a little misguided. imagine me showing my couples samples from a new camera that does slow motion and black and white. they certainly wouldn't be encouraging.

P.

Patrick, that's a good point that I would like to add to. In several posts in the past, I have commented that these cameras are great tools to extend the capabilities of a videographer. There are things that can be done with them that can't be done very well with "standard" video cameras. When skillfully used, they can add a HUGE amount of production value. BUT, there are a couple of problems that I have noticed. One is overuse of shallow DOF. There are a number of shots that I have seen where the use of shallow depth of field would be very nice if the aperture were closed down somewhat so that the shallowness is not so extreme. It isn't usually flattering to see an angle closeup of a bride prep where one of the bride's eyes is in focus and the other not. Maybe it should have been an f3.5 shot, not an f1.4 shot - or whatever. A master artist knows how to use their "paint brushes" and his or her work is a pleasure to see. But Michelangelo didn't run around crowing that he painted the entire Sistine Chapel with a "#9 slather blade" or whatever artists call specialized brushes. You don't often see a golfer bragging that he won the tournament using only his putter. But there are a few videographers who are throwing away all of their "clubs" except for their newest one.

The other problem that I have seen quite often is wandering focus. Part of this is lack of practice with a new camera. That's reasonable but don't inflict it on a paying customer until AFTER the use is mastered. Until then, maybe it's better to shoot that ceremony at f8 or f11 except for those FEW special shots where the aperture can be opened for those carefully calculated shots where shallow DOF of field adds that special touch that adds so much to the finished production.

Jim, your club analogy is right on. There will be those that argue that the 5D or 7D eliminates the need for multiple "clubs" but I disagree. If, for no other reason, you won't have a consistent timeline recorded of anything that runs longer than 12 minutes (unless you run two 5D's offsetting each other, but that is still not a consistent timeline from one cam.)

These DSLRs make really pretty pictures - they are like still photos with motion. But, too often in the hands of zealous shooters they are like drinking syrup - on top of some good pancakes syrup is great, but I don't want to drink it like a beverage. Ugh.

I like the latest offerings from Canon. The video it produces is certainly out of this world and probably we'll go for a MKII soon (we'd prefer it over 7D due to the full-frame sensor, although converting 24p to 25 will be surely disturbing). But to use it as a main camera it should be downright wrong, at least for our way of work. Surely the decision has to do with the style of shooting and editing as Patrick said, but it also has to do with the ease of use. 5D and 7D are perfect on a tripod or steadicam or flowpod for example, but in handheld (for those that, like me, want the handheld shots from time to time) you can create serious problems to your footage.

Sure, I can live without handheld (wedding is not a Bourne movie after all) but also the need to overcome DOF issues in low F shootings, as well as the need to exchange between lenses to have the desired result (unless you have some 7Ds hanging around, which is not that convenient) is an extra problem. If you add the lack of serious mic options and the 12 minutes limit, we can see that the average videographer will have some important things to think about in a live event like the wedding.

My point of view about it in a few words is that the use has certainly to do with the personal style each videographer wants to give, but also with the abilities of each one to overcome and master certain technical difficulties. It was never an easy job in my opinion, but it certainly doesn't get any easier with these offerings. It surely gets prettier though. :)

I will admit though that for jobs like a Next Day Shooting or productions other than the weddings (like the creation of a documentary or a music video) it may be an ideal solution. But of course, opinions are subject to change, and nobody knows the equipment he'll be working with next summer! :)

One thing naive consumers may not understand is that corporate collusion and what would be considered blatant anti-trust violations in the US may be biz-as-usual in Japan.
This seems still better strategy for the consumer in the long run that the 90 day profit horizon of US companies. ( Witness Prius vs. GM Bailout.)

it's obvious Canon could bring out a killer modular video camera with a big sensor, removable lenses, and even- gasp!- a replaceable Digic xxx processor board.
How about an EXPANSION SLOT for custom boards, like a regular computer, tapped into the main buss,
where people could put third party or optional codec boards for their preferred codec.

I'm not even an engineer and it's obvious how they could do it.

They have hundreds of millions of dollars to spend, and that's not because they give the consumer the best deal every time.

That's Red's only advantage-- they're tiny, but they're trying to actually make the things upgradable.

Just two posts above that, I proved to myself that people's minds change fast, because there are two things I wrote there that I took back the last couple of weeks. First (and less important), I said that wedding is not a Bourne movie, and yet we uploaded a wedding trailer which reminds exactly that! :) Second and most important, is that we finally decided we will go DSLR. Not 100%, but preparations, photoshoot and other stuff will be a 7D's job very soon. Well, a Chinese philosopher was saying that "Only wise people and fools don't change". Well, I definitely am not the first and I sure hope I am not the second, so changing point of view after just three months seems justified by the quote! :)

What happened and I changed my mind? I saw the DSLR's output in full HD glory and was totally sold. Simple as that.

Amen Demitris. I use the 5D at receptions with a 2.8 lens at 3200ISO so that I get a decent shot in the cave receptions I shoot. If my clients have been happy with the muddy, noisy picture of the A1 for 18 months, then I think I'll be able to pass off this not so good 5D stuff :) I do still use the A1s for the ceremony (mainly for audio continuity), but my main goal is convenience, and the 5D allows me to shoot receptions with very little light and have alot less work in post.
Bill

Bill, can you get good exposure at the typical reception at F8 using 3200ISO?

Or, what is is the smallest aperture you can use (to get a good DOF of everybody) and still get enough light?

I believe the crop sensor on the 7D will make it a lot easier to get wide DOF video shots over the 5D. So therefore the 7D would be better if I need low light ability with wide DOF. Does this sound correct?

Thanks!

Jeff,
I don't sweat a high aperture. Usually I'm at 2.8-4.0 Seems to work fine. I'm not a sticklar for very technical details. I got the highest compliment from one of my brides on their 5D footage, She said it looked like a beer commercial. I thought that was pretty cool. It seems that in this argument, the people trying to justify NOT buying one of these cameras are arguing with the people that DID buy one. It is a moot point, just get out and shoot. No doubt that this camera is difficult to shoot with. But, my A1 is difficult to watch in low-light, so I balance the 2...
Bill

Well tomorrow I am doing the proverbial "good friends" barmitzvah celebration. The temple does not allow filming during the ceremony itself, or any "work" during the daylight hours, but that ends at sundown with the celebration.

I have done an occasional family wedding, with my standard def camera or the FX1, but I am back and forth between my FX1 and the 5D for this affair. I will be a one man show. My feeling is that I can get a lot of cool clips with the 5D, but that the FX1 will shoot straight up an clean for the speeches and testomonials and traditional dancing from a documenting perspective. Because of that, and just to keep it simple I am leaning the FX1 direction.... Comments?

FX1 on a tripod, for wide cutaway if needed, and shoot the DSLR for detail/artistic shots.

I for one can't say I've got a DSLR-V, but I have no doubt there will be one in the equipment locker in the future... it has a place, I just hope Sony finally decides to get to the party so I can use my vintage Minolta glass, maybe they will also leave off the file size cap, although their consumer cams didn't.

I have only had a brief few moments with a buddy's D90, but I could quickly see where I would use a DSLR-V. Only reason I haven't jumped is I don't want to rebuy all the dang accessories/lenses!

After the shoot:

The FX1 was still the mainstay in this shoot. Given this was a party type event, and because the shallow depth of field was just too much to deal with in a lot of situations, to get most coverage, I had to stick with the deeper depth of field provided by the FX1. Now if I had two shooters, I would have no problem with shooting two DSLR, properly equiped with LCD magnifiers, and perhaps even one steady rig like the Blackbird....