Interesting Picture: I am out of business...
 

I picked up my TV Guide today and this is on page 2. So after spending over $14,000.00 for a EX3 package and other stuff...IS this what the production world is coming too?????

GOD Help US all.......

For a larger view, click on the picture or look at the current TV Guide......

Yes the future is DSLR's (he he) He giggles as he looks fondly at his 7D....

For real though, I can't imagine why they have HIM running/carrying that rig???? I know budgets are tight, but L.L. is a pretty big star....

Not too hard to figure out. Previously, this would have required Steadicam or handheld off the back of an ATV to be able to achieve the necessary speed to keep up with LL (or Todd, as he is known on set), which takes a certain amount of setup time plus the additional hardware from what the show carries=added cost. That's assuming that he is only running in a straight line over terrain that an ATV can traverse. Another way to achieve this is with the Doggiecam style harness that straps to the actors body and cantilevers a camera in front of them--it's a cool looking shot but it is slightly disorienting as their body is fixed to the camera while the background jerks around. Mounting the 1DMKIV on an Actiontracker is a really clever alternative: the shot will be somewhat stabilized but should retain a certain amount of roughness appropriate to the energy of the scene, and the distance to subject will stay fixed, with the intimacy of the camera being less than 18" away from his face.

Thanks to the bantamweight DSLR's, solutions like this are now possible. There is for some reason a perception that the lower-end cameras have no place on sets that can afford the high-end; nothing could be farther from the truth. I've done a few days on NCIS:LA and saw that DP Victor Hammer (like many other TV DP's including Rodney Charters) is quite enamored of the possibilities of alternative imaging systems like the DSLRS and Flip-type cameras for multiple angles and specialty rigging where you couldn't get the primary cameras, on that show the Arri D21.

And there you have it from the man himself!!!

Too bad they had to put the phony LCD image on the shot.

My 15mm Canon Fisheye wouldn't have gotten than wide 1' from the guys face.

I would be interested to see how sharp the footage was, what lens they used, and what was the real shot composition. Had to be tight on the face, so I guess a lot was unusable, but you just need a couple good quick clips I suppose.

I wouldn't pitch the EX3 yet brother. The SLR's cant hold a candle to even the EX3, especially with the Nanoflash. The 5D/7D/1DsMK4 can't tolerate grading nearly as well and are not close in terms of real resolution to the EX1/EX3.

The cheap HD cameras like the ContourHD, FlipHD, and Sony Webbie are all rock bottom garbage. I have used them all (we have about 14 of these crappy things in our offices, 2 Contour, 2 Flip, 10 Webbie), the Contour is probably the best of the bunch and still horrible noisy exposure all over the place video.

I will say this, for the internet, the SLR's and cheapie HD cameras are probably a fine matchup. You are aquiring heavily compressed HD and going to send it out even more heavily compressed for net distribution.


Now the SLRs are neat,it sure is nice to have a digital camera that can shoot some nice video, especially for scouting. I shot a 7D for an afternoon at the surf in Ventura when I was out in California about 2 weeks ago. I brought a 100-400mm L (f5.6 its a little pokey for sure), the new 100mm L prime, the 16-35 Series II, and 70-200 f2.8, and the 17mm Tilt Shift which I haven't used much yet since it is a new lens. The big rains had brought huge waves. I had a lot of fun, and I am cutting together a short of the footage for fun. But make no mistake, the 7D codec fell apart terribly in a lot of shots, it was actually funny to watch on the computer. I did not have my EX or I would have absolutely positively used that instead, even without the Nanoflash the stock 35mbps LongGOP would never have crapped out like that.

Im not trying to talk down the SLRs, but for me the honeymoon was over long ago, I use them when I need to. And I would rather destroy my 7D getting a risky shot than to ruin an EX.

For extra wide angle work, the 7D, 5D etc are a far cheaper alternative than buying a dedicated WA lens for the EX3 or othe HD camera. I wouldn't want to shoot an entire production on a DSLR, but for the odd drop in shots it is a good alternative.

Not sure why people see the DSLR as a threat, there are many posts slamming this new system, just as there were people slamming the 35mm format (still camera) when it was introduced by Lieca (not that I can remember that far back). We need to accept the HDSLR and use it as a creative tool as and when needed. Of course over the next two or more years we are going to see big changes and who knows maybe bulky camcorders will join the ranks of the plate camera on a shelf.

Change is inevitable, embrace it don't fight it.

I am not slamming DSLR's, I use them all the time. But these things are really lacking compared to real video cameras. And most of the glorious stories I hear about these DSLR's are by people that are either from the still world, or it is their first foray into DSLR video. Hence the endless Vimeo videos about the great f1.4 lenses where you can see a third of someones face in focus, and the entire rest of the frame is completely blurred out. For some reason this super tiny DOF has become the internet litmus test, evidentially it overshadows any kind of decent story.

Then again it is human nature for people to defend their investments, so that is a large reason why people are so apt to defend what they already bought. Hence the forums on the net about how a Canon 5D is as good or better than the RED One, which is preposterous and stunningly ignorant.

The 7D wide, that is a tough one. I have run the 10-22 (makes the 7D 16mm on the wide end) EF-S Canon Lens on mine and it has very bad distortion when put up against any decent cinema lens. If Nikon comes out with a true 1080p full frame DSLR, their 14-24mm is a sweetheart, better than anything from Canon.

The long term problem I see with the DSLR's is that I think that the consumers are going to be the victim of the various marketing departments within each company. I fear that at places like Canon as an example, there is no way that certain video features will see the SLR's, the video division will see to that. Peaking, zebras, decent audio, go buy a video camera. So this is why I don't see the DSLR's gaining the kind of ground necessary. BUT, I think it is clear that the DSLR sales are forcing the hand of the video camera builders to provide more flexibility and quality at a lower price point.


If anything I hope that Canon releases a full frame video camera under 10k, and keep the 5D/7D for other shots. As an example I never shoot time lapse with my EX's, always the 5D, 7D, or 1DsMK3 with the TC-80N3 or Time Machine controller. This way I can recompose or pan and scan on the timelapse sequence in post, and the 14-bit RAW files are amazingly flexible. Or I shoot the 7D, lock the exposure and focus, kick down to small JPEGS (which is still over the size of a 2K frame) and shoot 8FPS stills converting them to movies in After Effects. Ususally I shoot about 200 frames in a row, dont let off the button. With a good CF card you can record at least 200+ frames without filling the buffer so you get a nice steady rate upon playback when intercut amongst true video.

But replace the EX1 or EX3, I think not....

I often use the 17-40 f4 L Canon lens on a 5DmkII on interior shots that need to be really wide.

I also often use the 50mm f1.4 for killer lowlight capability as well as the 70-200 f2.8, both of these have very nice SDOF if you are looking for that.

Having said that 95% of my shooting these days is with EX1R and EX3's. But the 5D is a fantastic tool. Like any other tool I use. Steadicam, jib, dolly's and sliders to name a few.

It is also a fantastic still camera and that is very handy.

And one thing that is really great, is you can shoot anywhere w/o attracting attention. Even on sticks or with a monopod,in my experience. And that can be very handy.

Just my nickel.

Almost EXACTLY my $.02 I was going to add. Yes, small DOF can look great, but only if it's helping ADD to the story and it called for. Otherwise, having a crushed DOF all the time for the sake of a crushed DOF is completely stupid. And I'm not just bashing DSLRs here either, this goes for anyone using 35mm lens adaptors just to crush the DOF as well.

I love the 'filmic' look as much as any other person, but shallow DOF =/= 'filmic' and story is always way more important.

DSLRs are great tools and have their place along with all the other tools we all use, but like those tools they are only great when used properly.

what DSLR has a 3 chip system for color?

does RED have 3 chips?

A DSLR is a tool that could be useful. Just like if I go out and buy a £500 Canon domestic camera as a "crashcam". You are not going to shoot an entire video production with it, but you would place it in an environment where you wouldn't risk your EX1.

Have a friend just back from two weeks in Madagascar with a 5d. He's a career still photographer and was very happy with the camera in general. But came back hating the shallow depth of field for video work. Looks great, then the lemur, er, moves.....

The shallow DOF effect looks great when you first see it, but then like everything else it gets overdone and then becomes a distraction. When the subject moves the focus doesn't move with it. High Definition video is memorable when it's in focus, but out of focus HD is best forgoten.

The RED has a single full frame sensor.