Bill, I am not saying that one is better than the other. I am just saying that I am using both in the same productions.

I have 2 EXcams and 2 Canon DSLRs that shoot video, as well as some older video cams as well. I have been using them now for over a year together. Not on every job. I use each for what it is good at.

It is only lately that I have started to shoot the same scene with both types. I really did not think it would work, but in my opinion it does. With some planning and setup.

Interviews with 2 XDcams and a third and or fourth DSLRs can be really cool. Think of the XDs as great cams for 2 medium shots and the DSLRs as fantastic wide establishing shots (so many great wide lenses availible) and then intimate SDOF shots (I love my 70-200 f2.8 for this).

So I can shoot an interview by myself, setting the 2 XDcams and rolling full time (medium shots) have a 5D with a 16mm lens shoot the whole scene. And then play around with a second DSLR on a track or dolly with a 70-200. I like this, it uses each type of camera for what it is great at. The XDs can shoot for hrs without stopping. And it really does not matter that the DSLRs need tending. Of course with 2 shooters running 4 cameras it is easier. But you really can do this by yourself.

I totally agree with you Olof, and think it's always useful to post such comparisons as a frame of reference - thanks.

I don't think anyone was arguing on this thread, just healthy discussion. Any time a member posts clips comparing two cameras someone will turn up and suggest the comparison is invalid for one reason or another, but personally I enjoy seeing such clips, scientific or otherwise.

And of course you are right, there are many instances when the same scene / job could be effectively shot with either or both cameras, and it's nice to see the interplay.

Cheers,

Josh

Thanks Olof,

I will play around with the settings and see how it feels like from my end.

Cheers

I agree, it is interesting, and I don't think it's pointless at all. I also don't think that some of the differences of minor - ie depth of field, it's hugely different and very observable no matter how much you downsize etc.

Also the EX3 is 1/2" chips, not 1/3".

I'm not pro either camp, don't own or use either, nor intend to buy either, but it's interesting to know what each can do. There may well be someone reading this who needs a camera to film wildlife, something light, inexpensive and with good lens choice available - both of these cameras are theoretically contenders, a comparison could be really useful for that person.

Steve

Thanks, will try them when I have time.

It's not so much about comparing them, but to check how good they can complement each other in real world situations.
I don't think that a $8000 camera is a prosumer product. I would definitely label them "professional". Btw., they (ex1/ex3) have 1/2" sensors, which is still absolutely unique in this price class.

The problem is that the effective resolution of 5Ds video is way lower than 1080p. Its electronics are not capable of doing a good downconversion to 1080p. As far as I can tell every two of three rows and columns of the sensor even don't get read out (before doing the demosaicing of the Bayer-pixels!). This leads to heavy aliasing, which doesn't only look bad on edges and high frequency patterns (moire-effect) but also leads to more noise, because the high spatial frequencies (including the noise in there) get "mirrored" respectively added to the base frequency band (which should solely be visible in the result). In some years the available electronics will possibly have enough performance to do a clean downconversion or even record video in the native resolution of these sensors, but right now the effective resolution (MTF) of true full-hd cameras is higher than that of HDSLRs.

Actually every true full-hd monitor does it. ;)

Re: EX3 5dmkII Very different looks, but compatible
 

Dominik has it exactly - it's not a comparison but a guide to see how closely we can make the two very different pictures work together. Last year I had to shoot several projects with an EX1 and a pair of 5Ds, and I wish I had been able to use the settings in this thread to reduce my post-processing difficulties when I had to intercut the footage.

Re: EX3 5dmkII Very different looks, but compatible
 

Never mind all the "look" and "DOF" stuff, Olof - what about those lovely BIRDS??

Gill and I were pondering where you must be (we never see those lovely colours here in the UK) but judging by the vertical alignment of the feeder, she suggested it must be somewhere near Pisa?

Re: EX3 5dmkII Very different looks, but compatible
 

The bird feeder is in Bartlett NH, USA. About 100 miles north of Boston.

The birds are gold finches in their mating attire, the males are the most colorful. There is also a Nuthatch and a Chickadee that snuck in, they are more polite than the GF's, they take one seed at a time and then let the next in line have a go, but the pretty GF's stay on the feeder and fight for each seed.

The tilt of feeder is thanks to many visits by Black Bears, they have to eat as well. This is the only feeder that has survived more than a year. It is made of steel and has survived dozens of maulings.

Here is the same feeder getting a work out from a yearling.

Re: EX3 5dmkII Very different looks, but compatible
 

I love the bear - we don't get those here . . . maybe just as well we don't.

These are our Goldfinches. Pretty, but nowhere near as vivid as yours.
This was shot with one of our Sony EX1s

Re: EX3 5dmkII Very different looks, but compatible
 

Not to change the subject but, to change the subject. I did some experiments recently and tweaked the 5DM2 color profile to use 0 contrast and 0 saturation. The front shot is the EX1R while the low side shot is the 5DM2. YMMV

Re: EX3 5dmkII Very different looks, but compatible
 

Very interesting. I think with colour correction the two can be brought into line, except that the shadows of the 5D/2 image demonstrate the inherent crushed blacks that the 5D/2 suffers from.

With contrast and saturation turned down, I have been unable to eliminate this problem satisfactorily. Fine if you like heavy contrast but not so if you prefer subtlety.

The EX1 image looks much sharper - what lens did you use with the 5D/2?

If you can supply the iris / aperture settings you used on both cameras, that would be useful too.

Thanks for posting the pictures - (I hope your model learns to relax a little more for the next shoot)!

Re: EX3 5dmkII Very different looks, but compatible
 

Yes, it was as close as I could get it in camera. Any more saturation and the skin tones are too warm, yet the blue shirts are not quite the same.

The EX1R is spot on color wise to my eye. The POV of course is different between the cameras and I don't know how much that plays into it.

Your point about contrast is well taken, I think I'll drop the 5DM2 back to Olof's recommended -4

EX1R: f1.9 with Sony VCL-EX0877 Wide Angle Adapter
5DM2: Shutter 50, ISO 400, f2.8 with Sigma 50mm f1.8 lens

I'm still getting used to the 5DM2 camera in the studio. The depth of field is quite shallow for getting the entire head in focus at this range. I focussed on the lips and the left shoulder was in focus while the right side of the head was a bit soft. Next time, I'll focus on the right eye. Then there's the moire in the hair......

Re: EX3 5dmkII Very different looks, but compatible
 

Thanks so much for this post Les.
I can't believe how good the EX1-R image is with the W/A Adapter.
Andy