Over the next year or so, we will be able to have our cake and eat it too. The new video cameras with large sensors and video-centric backs will start to become available.

Sony has an interesting concept with this camera slated for release later this year. Sneak Peek: New Sony Camcorder in Development SONY make.believe (http://bit.ly/92sW71) It shares the lens and mounting system with the NEX-5 and NEX-3 which are being released this month. The New Sony Ponies - Sony's NEX-3 & NEX-5 | Digital Photography insights (http://bit.ly/cU1PqW)

Both cameras use the Sony APS-C sensor which has a crop factor of 1.5. Sony's APS-C is slightly larger than Canon's with its 1.6 crop factor.

Don't like this approach? Stick around; the competition that is heating up between the camera makers will insure that a variety of choices will appear on the market.

When these large sensor video cameras are well represented in the market, DSLR cameras will largely revert to their intended purpose - taking photographs. Those who moved early and invested their heart, soul and hard work to become proficient with shooting video with a DSLR achieved some spectacular results. As a result they fell in love with their cameras and we know that love is blind. This love will only be displaced AFTER the new crop of large sensor video cameras are already on the market. Only then will it become clear that the clunky back on a DSLR camera is intended to serve photographers, not videographers. The video focused functionality and features of these large sensor video cameras will provide the tools that allow more shooting capability for video work.

If you have any friends that are using DSLR cameras now for video work, don't agitate them by mentioning this to them. It's too early for them to realize the benefits of the coming large sensor video cameras. They will only get defensive or even angry. Cut them some slack; they will realize what's going on in due time.

I don't get agitated at all. I've made my money back on my 7D purchase and I am still making more than if I were still shooting with a conventional videcamera. I'm using the best tool on the market NOW. Whatever the future brings, I'll deal with it then.

I am editing my first wedding that I used a DSLR for b and c cam, and its not only myself but also my wife prefer the ex1r footage the best. Not saying its the most vibrant, but we just both like the footage better.

I am glad my next wedding will only be using the DSLR for special shots and my A and B cams will be ex1r, IMO its great footage, can still get some shallow dof and will make editing quicker.

I am sure DSLR's will grow on people and become widely used, but I will work into them slowly, not immediately like I thought.

I am sure DSLR's will grow on people and become widely used, but I will work into them slowly, not immediately like I thought.

I am 100% sure everyone will look back in 5 years and say ... "remember when people were actually trying to use DSLR's as video cameras and buying all these plastic addons worth $1000's which are worthless now! Now video cameras are doing all that - and more!"

I don't get agitated at all. I've made my money back on my 7D purchase and I am still making more than if I were still shooting with a conventional videcamera. I'm using the best tool on the market NOW. Whatever the future brings, I'll deal with it then.

Exactly!!! It's called the cost of doing business. Use the best available gear with the best techniques and when something better comes out you upgrade. I still have no idea why some people on this thread is trying to make dslr's harder than what it is. Geesh.

Personally, I pretty much just care how it's going to look to me and my client. If the video looks sharper, has better color and contrast, and performs like a king in low light ... then to me it's better. I don't really care if a resolution chart proves that the added sharpness is due to aliasing. For me, it's all in how it looks.

Also, I did a side by side test with an XHA1 and a 7D, and I was shocked at the results. The A1 footage literally looked 'dirty' compared to the 7D footage. Again, maybe it's all in the appearance and maybe the A1 does a better job of creating an image without aliasing, but if the final result looks worse .. who cares?

I would also add that Phillip Bloom took a film he shot with the 5D to Skywalker Ranch and they put it up on the big screen in front of George Lucas, Tararntino and others ... and everyone was shocked at how good it looked. So again, if a DSLR can impress those guys, why not the rest of us?

Hey Denny, I share your opinion. I have worked with a lot of EX1 and DSLR footage in the same project. I have come to realize that what you call vibrant is actually attributable to aliasing. If you want to see what I am talking about, get a resolution chart and shoot some well-focused footage with your EX1R and your DSLR camera and compare the footage. It will be a real eye opener. Here's a tip for you as well. A good way to fix moire patterns and and other aliasing attributes with DSLR footage is to add a bit of Gaussian blur to troublesome clips when you edit. It usually helps although it will soften the image a bit.

It's a good idea to use the best attributes of your various tools. If you take advantage of a DSLR's shallow depth of field capability, you can add a dimension to your projects that elevates the caliber of your work a great deal - if you are able to shoot artfully that is. Take a look at some of the footage from pros like Travis Cossel and you will see what I mean. DSLR's add a great deal to a pro's bag of tools. I don't agree with those who categorically criticize them, nor do I agree with the other extreme view that suggests throwing away all of your other cameras.

Philip Bloom, the archbishop of DSLR evangelists, uses standard video cameras more than half the time in his work. See his comment about this in his blog here Video Review of new Panasonic HPX 370/371 | Philip Bloom (http://bit.ly/bPsEIJ) DSLR's are a terrific tool. Just don't throw away everything else in your "tool bag." You will be able to do better work with both your EX1R and your DSLR cameras rather than either one alone.

I'm really looking forward to the release of large sensor video cameras. One key benefit that I hope to see is optimized camera electronics and codecs to output optimal 1920 x 1080 video. The biggest weakness in DSLR cameras is that necessarily they are compromise designs. They have to be capable of shooting photos AND video. The requirements for each are very different. With a large sensor, video only camera the results should be a WOW!


EDIT: Note to Travis. An EX1R instead of an XH-A1 is much more compatible with a DSLR. Actually it's like night and day. Both the EX1R and a DSLR are both CMOS and both can output 1920 x 1080 video. If the comparison is limited to HDV cameras, I agree with your opinion. ;-)

Jim, I was indeed making my comparison to HDV cameras .. the XHA1 specifically. d;-)

I apologize, Monday. Could you help me understand? It appeared to me that you were saying the XHA1's image holds up to the 7D's image. This statement in particular:

The reason I said it looked just as good Travis is because of the color. Again I said that MY xha1 footage looked just as good as MY DSLR footage because of the color. That's why I said both will have there place in my business.

Thanks for clarifying, Monday.

I'd love to see a clip from your XHA1 (straight from the camera) and a clip from your DSLR (straight from the camera) where the image of the XHA1 looks better because of the color. I know this is all subjective, but I've just found the difference between the two cameras to be so great that I can't imagine a custom preset recipe on the XHA1 that puts the it in the same category as a DSLR. Anyways, do what you're happy with, for sure. d;-)

Thanks for clarifying, Monday.

I'd love to see a clip from your XHA1 (straight from the camera) and a clip from your DSLR (straight from the camera) where the image of the XHA1 looks better because of the color. I know this is all subjective, but I've just found the difference between the two cameras to be so great that I can't imagine a custom preset recipe on the XHA1 that puts the it in the same category as a DSLR. Anyways, do what you're happy with, for sure. d;-)
Again Travis I NEVER said better. I have been very careful on this subject. Each has a unique look. Now I will say the XHA1 image is better than the FX1 but I will NEVER say the XHA1 is a better image than the DLSR's. That I know for a fact is not true. The only reason I gave my opinion in this thread is that Denny wanted to know how the DLSR's are working for everyone. I having shot my last 7 jobs with only DLSR's (including yesterday) gave my honest opinion on the subject. I don't own a EX1 which if I did I would mix the two on the jobs. I have an XHA1 and would not mix them on the job. I would use one or the either. As I like the image from both. I love the color from my XHA1 and I love the look from my DSLR. No where did I say one was better than the other.

This has been a great thread, and it is great to get so many opinions and views, thats why this place is so great. Thanks everyone for sharing.

I think most will agree that in the perfect world you would have both. For those who say no, how do you dare to do creative things when the number 1 concern is covering the event.

If you can have both A and B cam running then you are free to do rack focus, and try things with a DSLR for those special effects. Nothing would feel better than syncing two cameras, both with good audio and video and having a 3rd clip with some great effects. Would make editing fun, and not stressful.

As I start adding more and more DSLR, I will pick up a 7D, and leave it set up just for video. I do not like having all that heat on my 1D IV.

I am 100% sure everyone will look back in 5 years and say ... "remember when people were actually trying to use DSLR's as video cameras and buying all these plastic addons worth $1000's which are worthless now! Now video cameras are doing all that - and more!"

Isn't this called progress? I don't know anyone that is still listening to 8-Tracks anymore either. I've been shooting weddings for 18 years and the gear has changed immensely and will continue to do so. Does that mean that I should regret shooting DSLR in the year 2010? No. Again, all the money that I've spent on DSLR and plastic addons (around $8,000) I've already made back by charging the bride more and now the money is all going into my pocket. I will shoot around the same amount of wedding in 2010 that I did in 2009. I will make more money in 2010 shooting DSLR than I did shooting with conventional video camera's in 2009.

Remember when videographer's had to carry a Camera and a portable VCR with shoulder strap? Do I laugh at them now? Of course not. That was the best technology they had at the time.

I am 100% sure everyone will look back in 5 years and say ... "remember when people were actually trying to use DSLR's as video cameras and buying all these plastic addons worth $1000's which are worthless now! Now video cameras are doing all that - and more!"

After shooting a wedding a couple weeks ago with a friend's 7d, I was in love!

But not hooked.

It was a tad awkward shooting with it, but I got past it fairly quick. I did like, however, people seemed to treat you because they thought you were taking PICTURES and not video.

Interesting...

What holds me back:
1) 12 minute record time
2) No XLR inputs

That new camera in production from Sony has me chomping at the bit. Give it XLR inputs and a viewfinder that rivals the 7d (because the HMC-150 viewfinder makes me gag) and I'll be ready to put some money down!

Blake, During which part of the wedding day does the 12 minute clip concern you? There are XLR adapter's that you can plug into the 7D just like you would into a GL2.

Do you rate it based on the science behind it or by how it actually looks

You stated it as a fact that the 7d had a much better resolution and I just wanted to correct that, that's all.

Again Travis I NEVER said better. I have been very careful on this subject. Each has a unique look. Now I will say the XHA1 image is better than the FX1 but I will NEVER say the XHA1 is a better image than the DLSR's. That I know for a fact is not true. The only reason I gave my opinion in this thread is that Denny wanted to know how the DLSR's are working for everyone. I having shot my last 7 jobs with only DLSR's (including yesterday) gave my honest opinion on the subject. I don't own a EX1 which if I did I would mix the two on the jobs. I have an XHA1 and would not mix them on the job. I would use one or the either. As I like the image from both. I love the color from my XHA1 and I love the look from my DSLR. No where did I say one was better than the other.

Again, I apologize. You did say that it looks 'just as good', not better. Sorry about that. d;-)

You stated it as a fact that the 7d had a much better resolution and I just wanted to correct that, that's all.

Well, I guess it still depends on how you measure resolution. The 7D records 1920x1080 HD video. The XHA1 records 1440x1080 HDV video. From that point of view, the 7D does appear to record a higher resolution image, right? But I suppose you can infer that the aliasing on the 7D reduces that resolution, even though to the eye it generally makes it appear even more crisp.

At the end of the day, my litmus test is how the footage looks to my eye. I could really care less about how the two cameras reproduce a test chart. My clients aren't purchasing videos of charts. d;-)

So when you said that the 7d has a much higher resolution you were referring to the fact that it records 1920x1080 compared to the 1440x1080 of the xh-a1?

Pretty much, and the fact that the XHA1 is recording HDV which is compressed 1440x1080 video.

After all is said and done, it's 90% shooter and 10% camera. Last month I had the privilege of listening to Jason Magbanua speak at our videographers association meeting in the SF Bay Area. BAPVA: Meeting Information (http://meetings.bapva.com/) He shared some of his work with us which was truly amazing. If I were getting married, I would ask him to shoot it even if his camera had a crank on the side!

His favorite cameras are the FX-1 and the FX-1000. His "dream camera" is an AX-2000. He shoots with a DSLR sometimes as a third or fourth camera. He pointed out that one of the reasons that he shoots with a DSLR sometimes is that Canon is paying him to be an evangelist. He likes to shoot with three other shooters which frees him up to shoot the special shots. His personal focus is same day edits. He made it clear what he prefers to shoot with however. You can watch his presentation on UStream if you wish BAPVA Monthly Meeting Broadcast on USTREAM: This is the monthly meeting channel for the BAPVA.. Drawing (http://www.ustream.tv/channel/bapva-monthly-meeting-broadcast)

Here is his website which is actually a blog http://jasonmagbanua.com/blog/

As for my relatively irrelevant opinion, I believe that DSLRs definitely add a great deal to event shoots. I shoot with an EX1R as my primary camera. My first choice for a second camera is a good shooter with a DSLR. It's only when some people get a pro or con 'tude that it can stir up a visceral reaction with some folks. ;-)

Pretty much, and the fact that the XHA1 is recording HDV which is compressed 1440x1080 video.

As you said, at the end all that matters is how the viewer perceives it and if it looks real good, even with the technical imperfections (if you know how to bypass them) who cares if it looks bad on a resolution chart. On the other hand, a resolution chart doesn't lie, no matter how many technical specifications you use to compare it with.
There are people that can make footage from a xh-a1 shine and there are people that can make 5d footage look like crap. It's the person behind the tool that can make the difference, you just need to assure that you have the right tool for the right job and that you know how to use it.
Even I am looking now to buy a dslr but just for very specific situations, as I work alone with weddings f.i. I"d rather not depend on a dslr to get my critical shots but for very dark receptions or some fancy shots, if I get the time, I don't see why not. Also for weddings it won't be an investment because no way a couple would pay more here even if they see the end result is visual more pleasing but it would give me a better looking portfolio that might attract more clients, only they won't pay extra for it.
For corporate work where I can control every aspect of a shot I do see more possibilities and in that way it might be a good investment.

[t. Also for weddings it won't be an investment because no way a couple would pay more here even if they see the end result is visual more pleasing but it would give me a better looking portfolio that might attract more clients, only they won't pay extra for it.
For corporate work where I can control every aspect of a shot I do see more possibilities and in that way it might be a good investment.[/QUOTE]

Noa, have the bride watch both samples and charge more for the better image. She'll pay more.

Noa, have the bride watch both samples and charge more for the better image. She'll pay more.

No, she won't. If you would be living in Belgium or the Netherlands you'd understand why :) The wedding market here is not a place you like to be in as a wedding videographer if that was your only source of income.

I'm a little late to this game. Been shooting with two Xh-A1 and HV30 on steadicam. Just like everybody else am impressed with all the wedding footage shot with DSLR. I'm going to do my first DSLR wedding this saturday using 3 T2i. Lens, battery, slider, follow focus, rail, steadicam, memory cards.. .all ready. and I have been practicing too. It'll be an exciting day!

The T2i is a great price value. But FYI, I have a couple of associates who have ditched it in favor of a 7D because the T2i's menu is more awkward to navigate in actual shooting situations. Because of this, the T2i is a PITA to shoot with compared to a 7D.

Jim, thanks for the warning. But I don't have 7D before so I don't have that to compared. So far, the Q menu has everything there I can set easily on the screen without digging through the menu. So I'm happy with it. I was considering 7D but then I can get two T2i for the price of 1 7D. Also have to invest on CF card or SD card.. I went with t2i =)

You guys have fun with those DSLR's for weddings. I love the look, and quality is great but for me not going to happen.

2 EX1r's sync once at start of ceremony and life is good. I just can not spend that kind of time editing, not this time of year.

I do use DSLR video for fun things and jobs other than weddings but for weddings I will stick to my EX1r's

I have the same thought for the past 2 years... keep thinking I won't have that kind of time and mind set (to deal with the stress level) to shoot weddings with DSLR. But after viewing more and more competitors work shooting weddings with DSLR, I just have to move up. Otherwise, I will be extinct in this market.

Besides, I'm not getting rid of my camcorders yet. I can offer tiers of services.. for customers who are willing to pay more, I will hire more shooters and spend more time in editing. Need to stay competitive and ahead... just like back in 2006, I was thinking should I get rid of all my SD cams and get HD camcorders, and offer BluRay. Glad I did that.

But after viewing more and more competitors work shooting weddings with DSLR, I just have to move up. Otherwise, I will be extinct in this market.

That's a weird thought, here I couldn't imagine that a competitor would set me out of business because he uses a dslr and I don't. Is it really that bad?

I have been b-roll shooting with a dslr the past few weddings and they complement my xh-a1 but no more then that, their fun to work with but my impression has always been that a camera does not deliver a quality video, the person using it does.

It isn't really a weird thought. and it also won't happen overnight. =)

Not just because of using DSLR. compare to other wedding videographers doing, I can't achieve the shallow DOF, cinematic look, and aesthetic composition with my XH-A1. I could have invest a 10 to 20 thousand dollars to high end cam with interchangeable lens.. but I can't afford that. So shooting with DSLR give me the result that I adore and a lot cheaper, why not.

You are right that's really the person who shot the event and deliver of quality work that counts.. but we also need the right equipment to do the right job, at the price that we can afford.

Besides, it's just another level of service that delivery wedding film, instead of wedding video that I have been doing.

I have done quite a few weddings recently where I worked with someone else with a DSLR while I shot with my EX1R. Personally, I think they are a great combination for wedding shoots. The DSLR's do a great job with shallow depth of field shots while both cameras shoot well-saturated 1920 x 1080 video so they match well when editing.

As for the superior sharpness with DSLR cameras, I don't believe that is true. Actually an EX1 can resolve more lines per inch than a DSLR. The seeming sharpness of a DSLR is because the sharpness setting in the camera is set higher which gives the illusion of sharpness. This illusion is actually aliasing which is why DSLR cameras are such a PITA when shooting objects with repetitive patterns. There are two other ways to achieve this look. In a camera like an EX1, the sharpness can be turned up in the camera. Alternatively, sharpness can be increased when editing. Just keep in mind that added sharpness wherever it is applied is fake resolution. It may look good but it isn't actually increased resolution.

But the shallow depth of field that can be achieved with a DSLR can add a touch to a production that looks terrific as long as it isn't overused. It it's overused, it makes a production look amateurish as if the shooter is playing. The end result is seasickness, not pleasure when viewed. Every flippin' shot with a DSLR doesn't have to be a rack focus from one eyeball to the other. And keep the shots in focus or use the clips from the other camera. I have seen DSLR footage that takes your breath away because it looks so good. Unfortunately, I have seen more DSLR footage that looks pretty nasty because the camera wasn't handled well especially with respect to controlling focus and holding the camera steady. A DSLR is a challenge to shoot good video with. My hat is off to those who do it well.

I believe before the DSLR becomes the standard, there will be something out that replaces them.
I do not feel that pro videographers will need to go DSLR to survive.

I agree.. I don't think videographer needs DSLR to survive It is also a matter or choice and preference. Some like to drive a Camry and some like a BMW. There is no right or wrong.

There're already many high end tape-less camcorders out there. Before I jumped into T2i, I was thinking to go to The new Cano XF series.. but for $7000 a camcorder that I need 2, it will be too expensive for me.

At the end of the day, it's really your skills, personality, style, the final product, and professionalism that counts...

I do a few weddings a year and I shoot with A1 and H1, I get great footage from my cameras and I never thought that I would trade those two, recently I bought the T2i just to test it out and see how it holds up comparing to my other cameras, well I was very surprised with footage shot inside with lowlight, you just cannot beat DSLR cameras, I see why everybody else switching to DSLR, of course it's not easy to work with but the end result is just amazing.

here is a highlight of that wedding that I just did, 80% of the footage was shot with T2i, all the reception was shot with the T2i.

Eric & Margaret Wedding Highlights (http://dragonflyproduction.net/rossoni/)

Great job Michael! IMHO you are using a DSLR in a way that really works for you. I wish everyone could follow your example!

I do a few weddings a year and I shoot with A1 and H1, I get great footage from my cameras and I never thought that I would trade those two, recently I bought the T2i just to test it out and see how it holds up comparing to my other cameras, well I was very surprised with footage shot inside with lowlight, you just cannot beat DSLR cameras, I see why everybody else switching to DSLR, of course it's not easy to work with but the end result is just amazing.

here is a highlight of that wedding that I just did, 80% of the footage was shot with T2i, all the reception was shot with the T2i.

Eric & Margaret Wedding Highlights (http://dragonflyproduction.net/rossoni/)


Hey Michael, did you code that player by hand or did you use software?

Nice work... a little bit shaky sometimes.. but overall great job. I'm going to do my first DSLR wedding this saturday. It will be stressful =)

Great job Michael! IMHO you are using a DSLR in a way that really works for you. I wish everyone could follow your example!

Thank you Jim for the kind words

Hey Michael, did you code that player by hand or did you use software?

The guy who did my website also build me that player, I'm not sure if he used some kind of software or not !

Nice work... a little bit shaky sometimes.. but overall great job. I'm going to do my first DSLR wedding this saturday. It will be stressful =)

Thanks Taky, I agree with you about the shakiness for some footage, I only used monopod on my T2i, I am looking for light tripod so I can maneuver around as easy as the monopod.

Alison + Chris: August 6, 2010 on Vimeo

I shot this with a Canon 7D and T2i

Hi Taky,

Nice work... a little bit shaky sometimes.. but overall great job. I'm going to do my first DSLR wedding this saturday. It will be stressful =)

You're going to love it, though I don't think I could have made the switch mid-season. I decided to sell of the XHA1's in March and had a few months to get comfortable with the cameras. I predict though that you're going to crave faster lenses very soon. The Sigma 18-250 is a great super-zoom, but at f6.3 at the long end you're really tied to a light, which may not be the way you want to shoot when you see how beautiful naturally lit interiors can be with a very fast lens.

Switching in the off-season would be a really good idea. We switched right at the start of the season; got the cameras and everything else in hand and had a wedding in the Bahamas 2 days later. It was crazy trying to go all DSLR that fast. d;-)

Hey Jim, funny thing.. we thought the exact opposite.. the T2i is much easier to shoot with than the 7d. different strokes...

Hey Scott, I don't know by my own experience. I was just passing on the opinion of a couple of associates who have used both. I have a hunch it has to do with whichever camera one has the most hands-on time with. ;-)

No, the t2i for us was just simpler as far as the wheels and dials and the Q menu. We owned the 7d for a few months prior to switching and the difference was immediate that the t2i was set up simpler and easier to get set for a shot. Like I said though, just our opinion.

haha.. I'm already craving for fast lens. Just boguht a tokina 11-16 f/2.8. Now just need another lens with a better zoom range and low F value. Any suggestion?

I Now just need another lens with a better zoom range and low F value. Any suggestion?

The Canon 24-70 f2.8L is a must have lens, not a big zoom range but in between before you go to the 70-200 lens, that will cover all your range.

The 24-70 is beautiful. So amazingly sharp too. Also keeps colours just as we want them.

Dont forget that if you slap this onto a t2i or 7D the crop factor can help you get a lot tighter.

We often use this lens on the 5D to shoot our timelapses.

Were now all DSLR. 2x 7D and 1x 5DMK2. We phased in the change until we were comfortable with the limitations of the camera and had all the necessary gear needed to work around them.

Switching in the off-season would be a really good idea. We switched right at the start of the season; got the cameras and everything else in hand and had a wedding in the Bahamas 2 days later. It was crazy trying to go all DSLR that fast. d;-)

I switched in the off season (December). I contacted a few photographer friends and asked if they had any upcoming brides that didnt' have video so I could practice on their wedding for cheap.

haha.. I'm already craving for fast lens. Just boguht a tokina 11-16 f/2.8. Now just need another lens with a better zoom range and low F value. Any suggestion?

Nothing is faster than 2.8 with zoom, if you want fast, I get a Sigma 30mm F1.4 and Rokinon 85mm F1.4, those are my two lens I use all the time at reception, you won't even need light anymore with those.

haha.. I'm already craving for fast lens. Just boguht a tokina 11-16 f/2.8. Now just need another lens with a better zoom range and low F value. Any suggestion?

Take a look at the Canon 17-55 2.8. It's my 'go to' lens, and unlike the 24-70 it has IS, which makes it a bit more versatile for us.