Pro's & Con's of switching to SLRs for wedding video.
 

I would like some input on videographers who have switched to using SLRs to capture weddings. Is anybody using only SLRs such as the 7D? Should I sale my video cameras and buy 7Ds?

All advice would be appreciated!

Thanks!

In my somewhat limited experience using these cameras...

Pros:
Smaller equipment makes carrying gear easier.

Same batteries and cards as photographers, so if you know many photographers or also offer photo you have mutually beneficial stash of emergency batteries or cars.

With WB Shift, ability to dial in Kelvin WB, and Picture Style's you can do a good job of tweaking the look in camera which may cut down color correction time. (full disclosure: a lot of camcorders have this as well)

High ISO shots look better than high gain shots.

If one body goes the week of a wedding, VDSLR rentals are easier to find than camcorder rentals (in Southern Ontario, at least). Also, it's cheap to rent lenses and try them out.

Cons:
You really have to watch your focus during "action" portions of the day, like processional, unless you can get f/8 or smaller.

Time syncing in post, though Plural Eyes makes this task quite easy.

Recording limit, though if you record audio separately and shoot two cameras with offset start times this isn't an issue.

Can't use the camera handheld.

No zebras or histogram (bias warning: never tried Magic Lantern)

I have gone all Canon VDSLR cameras and there are a few things I miss about a dedicated camcorder, but I can't say that I would go back. The look of the image, small size, and ability to rent a backup body in almost any mid to large sized city in Ontario are worth it for me to work around the cons.

And that's what it really comes down to. Acknowledging the cons and deciding rather or not it's worth it for you personally to work around them. For example, I don't mind syncing audio afterwards, but if you do, these cameras may not be right for you.

I would also add to this that I miss the flip out LCD for high and low shots. Also, when I need dedicated audio like the ceremony, I always go running back to my old faithful A1. I have to say, though, that I use the 5D and 17-35 2.8L exclusively at receptions. I record audio onto the H2, and that combo does pretty well. I use a shoulder mount or the monopod with the Z-finder and both solutions work to get the camera off of the tripod.
Bill

Thanks Matthew! Great stuff!

Hi Darin,

This is not me in that I've not switched, but I've thought this through incessantly for the last six months. I understand the allure of a shallow depth of field and I as much as anyone look forward to the creative possibilities of clean low light sensitivity that equals or betters my own eyes. From 2003:

Video University: Video University Forums: Wedding & Event Videography: New thread! Re: "Creativity"

A few years ago I wanted to experiment with a camera that has a shallow depth of field, so I got a 35mm lens adapter for my Canon HV-30. It is small enough when I don't use the mic to fit in a belt pack that was meant for a DSLR with a relatively big lens. I don't use it one-time events like weddings, just for family shorts and other situations where I have complete control of what is happening, like photographer promos. The adapter and a used lens was about $275. But 35mm lens adapters aren't going to be around much longer. They are bulky, heavy, don't allow zooming and rob your camera of light. The future is with DSLR's that shoot video, like the Canon 7D. A body and an all-around lens will run you about $2500. For what a Sony EX1 costs you can purchase a great DSLR kit with 2 bodies and two or three quality lenses. The advantages of DSLRs are compelling:

Shallow Depth of Field
A shallow DoF imparts an almost three dimensional attribute to the image, separating the subject or the shot from the foreground and background with an exaggerated blur. This attribute is due to the fact that DSLR's have a much larger sensor area than do standard video cameras.

Unmatched Light Sensitivity
The cameras I am shooting with presently, the Canon XH-A1, has an anecdotal ISO rating of 320 at 0db. The Canon 5d Mark II and Canon 7D have been shown to shoot very usable footage at ISO ratings of 3200 and higher while still retaining strong and accurate color. The fact that you can set the ISO setting, as opposed to setting a 'gain' level as in a standard video camera, is a revelation.

Startling Apparent Sharpness
The visual qualities produced by DSLRs are very flattering, though based on test charts the actual lines of resolution is surprisingly low. More on this later.

Lack of grain
The images are strong and smooth and maintain a very tight, almost unnoticeable grain structure at low to mid ISO settings.

Yet, personally I don't think a DSLR is the right choice for wedding for me, mostly because I work alone with multiple angles and rely on an efficient SDE workflow. I agree with most that a DSLR is the best option right now for independent narratives and documentaries and corporate work - situations where you have complete control and know what to expect. At a wedding though, with its fleeting moments, I can't see how it would work into my workflow. YMMV. The disadvantages or DSLR's, at least for my requirements:

Same-Day Edit
SDE's would be virtually impossible because of the conversion time necessary to change the ultra-high bit rate H.264 into something that you can edit. From my tests on the fastest currently available MacBook Pro, converting the codec the Canon DSLR uses to ProRes 422 (LT) takes roughly 3x's the length of the original content. A four-core laptop may change that situation, but there is no such portable hardware option on the horizon for my editing software, Final Cut Pro.

12 Minute Limit
There is a 12 minute shot limit. (The 12 minute limit is actually a restriction by EU authorities to keep the camera classified as a still camera for tax reasons.)

Zoom Range
Zoom range of a DSLR will not allow you to get close-ups of the bride and groom during vows or close-ups during dances without being within 20 feet of the couple. The XH-A1's 20x lens is the equivalent of a f1.6-3.5 32mm - 650mm on a DSLR, and with an adapter lens I can drop the wide end down to a 16mm wide 35mm equivalent. Its impossible to match that range on a DSLR without carrying around three lenses and even then you still won't have the reach of a true video camera.

Focusing
Focus is so critical for grabbing candid moments. Even with the DSLR's only being available for under a year I'm already becoming annoyed at the videographers that think that a focus pull is something to be done on every shot. Or even worse thinking that going in and out of focus is somewhat arty. For run-and-gun work the too-narrow DoF of a DSLR is a huge hinderance to getting the fleeting, once-in-a-lifetime moments that are constantly happening at a wedding. I love the idea of having a narrow DoF to control, but I don't like the way it has become so vogue without any input from couples. It seems as though all the buzz is from industry insiders rather than clients. I've heard a lot of videographers say they've had comments about why things don't stay in focus from clients. To me focus is an elementary way to separate yourself from amateurs.

Resolution
The moire patterns and actual resolution of DSLR chip are questionably acceptable. The clarity you think you're seeing is the aliasing, which makes the shot seem sharper than a resolution chart says it really is:
ProLost - ProLost Blog - You Didn't BelieveMe
Personally I've never put much importance on resolution. I'd rather trust my eyes, and the DSLR's have a stunning picture quality.

CMOS Sensor and Flashes
CMOS sensors, which many video cameras and all DSLR's utilize, capture flashes in a disturbingly noticeable way compared to CCD sensors. To some the effect isn't as noticeable, to others the artifact is a deal-breaker.

Conclusion
So all that being said I'm holding out. I'm waiting for a system that can record more than 12 minutes, reduces the half-flash effect, has a smaller sensor for a wider depth of field and longer zoom ratios, uses a built in lens, yet keeps the low-light qualities. All of that is available, just not in a single, true video camera. The only time I can see a DSLR working for me right now is at the reception when SDE footage is already in the computer and the low-light sensitivity would really be needed, but I have the luxury of waiting to see if there are announcements of new options during my "off-season" (which really isn't an off-season as I have enough editing to keep me busy until shooting starts in late Spring).

I've shot now 4 weddings with both a 5d2 and my XLH1 and HV30, and 3 of those 4 I shot solo. It is very difficult to do it all - and do it properly.

If I am by myself I use the video cams for the ceremony (with a couple of shots from the 5d2), and then it's mostly 5d2 after that (except for speeches).

As Joel points out very well. The DSLR's are capable of fantastic images, but require extra work and dedication (mostly to focusing & audio) to achieve the looks. It's obvious that he has spent a lot of time researching the topic. If I were you, I wouldn't sell my video camera to go DSLR - but I would look to ADD a DSLR to your toolbox in the future. I couldn't imagine covering a wedding ceremony solo with only a DSLR. You might get a nice highlight reel - but you would need to record audio to something other than the DSLR - if for no other reason than than 12-minute shooting limit.

As a PC'er - Cineforms Neo Scene converts the h.264 to .avi very well and quite quickly - and mixing footage has never been a problem for me.

IMHO - the best of DSLR for weddings are: The shallow DOF beauty shots, and the incredible low light performance (I generally go to a 50mm f1.4, when the lighting gets tough).

The most challenging aspects of the DSLR for weddings are: anything relating to good audio - it can be done via several ways - but we take it for granted with traditional video cams. And the manual focus with a non articulating lcd screen. Again it can be done - it's an easier transition if you're used to manually focusing video cams anyways, but it definitely slows you down for a beat or two. Even with a static target. When the subjects are moving.... it can be tricky (especially at f1.4)!

Joel is right about the Flash photography and the CMOS sensor. It does look bad. It comes out as a wide white band across half the screen. I ask for a flash free shot of the cake-cutting at least, and most often get it. I just live with it during the first dance and bouquet and garter toss.

Thank you for the insight Joel.

Personally, I shoot a great deal of steadicam, mostly as a solo shooter, so I specifically need the wider depth of field and auto-focus of a non-DSLR in order to continue shooting as I am. As for my own deal-breakers. My next cameras will do far better in low-light than my Z1s, whose ergonomics area good fit for me, and have inexpensive media. I'll give up depth-of-field, zoom capability, choice of formats, and a few other things, but if the camera doesn't feel right in my hands and I can't use it in any situation (as a solo shooter), then it's not the best camera for me.

Alec Moreno
http://www.1Day1ShotProductions.com

Joel and Ken, You make a lot of great points. I don't think the word "switch" properly describes the consideration at hand. DSLR cameras add a great deal to a videographer's bag of tricks. Because of that, I believe the operative word is "add", not" switch". I don't see this issue as an argument to be decided (won) in favor of one versus the other. A pro can enhance their production value a great deal with a DSLR provided they develop the necessary proficiency in using it and the good taste in applying its capabilities.

The thing I object to is the wannabee who sees a DSLR as a shortcut to success or others who become obsessed with it and overuse its capabilities such as shallow DOF. When this is done it becomes a distraction instead of a contribution. It then starts to feel more like wowey-zowey zooms and juvenile transitions.

As soon as they break the short recording limitation, I think things will pick up a bit more.

I think a great reason is that they make an inexpensive C or D camera option.

For me, I would place one (or two) in fixed positions on tripods placed to capture the B&G at the ceremony. You could set the focus and F-stop in a manner to keep the limited movement they make in focus. We are going to need a solid hour and 10 minute minimum record time to make this work for most weddings (including battery life & no-overheating).

However, I think there is an awful lot of hype regarding the use of DSLRs. No matter how good the image is, you still need the experience and skill to get good solid shots and exposure, no matter what the equipment is.

And I want equipment that makes my job easier, not harder. I can't see one of the pimped out DSLR rigs with monkey bars making my life easier, or making my equipment bag smaller.

Thanks Joel! That is very helpful. I am a big fan of your work!

No, they definitely don't make your life easier. But I'm a glutton for punishment as the saying goes. The fact is, if your not careful with them, you can make a big mess of things. Sometimes it's just not worth using them as opposed to a dedicated video cam.

I recently shot some other work where I didn't want to drag lights in and needed to shoot good on-camera audio. So I used the 5d2 and a zoom h4 with my wireless lav. And while I didn't have to drag my lights around - I sure missed having the auto-sync'd audio that a video cam provides.

I think there are by far more pros than cons to using a SLR camera for wedding work. Of course it boils down to personal preference. Sure there is a ton of more work to be done when using the camera but I think the pay off is more rewarding. I think the low light capabilities was the big selling point for me and also the fact that it can be used for stills.

I remember when I first switched to shooting with the 5D I found it to be a new kind of experience when shooting a wedding. A good experience. We had a non SLR camera as a third stationary backup, which I soon realized the footage of it started to be used less and less but it's always good to have it as a backup. Something you can think about if you're falling towards the SLR route.

I've seen great work done by many different kinds of cameras and I'm sure whichever route you choose will be just fine. It'll be funny the day some crew decides to shoot a wedding with their camera phones.

I agree with everything in your post, but I wanted to make a note about this comment.

I have been a part of three SDEs that included 5D footage and one that consisted of all 5D/7D footage except for three clips. An all EOS SDE is very possible, albeit a pain to deal with. The trick is simply knowing what you want to convert before you convert it.

I bring clips into Compressor and set in's and out's inside that program. I only convert approximately five to ten seconds from each clip so conversion time isn't an issue. You can imagine that speeds things up considerably when you figure that a six minute grand entrance/first dance clip by itself would take 20 minutes to convert, but different portions totally thirty seconds of footage would take two minutes.

The bottom line is that it is still a con because it takes more time than transferring a full 16gb CF card of footage in a codec that can be edited without transcoding, but an EOS SDE can be done, and in my humble opinion it can be done much more comfortably than the phrase "virtually impossible" suggests.

Again, just my 2 cents :)

Great thread but just to correct one thing. The 12 minute limit is nothing to do with the EU and tax (but it's true they, some time ago, imposed a 30 minute limit on video recording equipment for taxation reasons). The (approx, depending on bit rate) 12 minute limit is in fact a 4GB FAT32 file limitation for a file protocol in, e.g. memory cards such as Compact Flash, and many PC storage systems. It is a limitation found across many different aspects of modern computing/external disc storage devices/camera technology - but nothing to do with the EU! (but in the UK we often try to blame them for everything too!)

Sony overcame this limitation with their XDCAM EX format with SxS cards, for example.

Andy is correct regarding the 12-minute record limitation.

Something I haven't seen mentioned yet is the overheating issue that so many have been having with the 7D. This is a prime example of why I don't generally adopt new technology the moment it hits store shelves. I know of several top shooters who jumped on the 7D and are now selling them off and going back to the 5D.

Anyways, there's a lot of great information here already, so I won't create a list that just goes back over it all. Essentially, for me, I'm waiting to see what Canon comes out with next in terms of a dedicated video camera .. the A1 replacement if you will. I'd rather make money with my A1's now and switch down the road to something that is even more 'video friendly'.

A few comments:
1. For me, the pay off would be by making more money. I don't think that is going to happen in my case. It's a business, if the tool is not worth it, don't use it.

2. The DSLR low light capability is good at the expense of DOF. If you need wide DOF shots in low light, use a real video camera. Also, most DSLR lens are soft (or at least softer) wide open. Still need to shoot a little closed.

3, If you are shooing a wedding, shoot video or stills. Not both, unless you are the paid photographer too, or the paid photog is going to have an issue.

Travis: Andy is not quite right. No AVCHD camcorder stops recording at the 4 GB limit, they just start a new clip that is perfectly spanned if using FAT32 media. If using FAT 64 media (like SDXC or FAT64 formated cards) there is no 4GB clip spanning.

So in essence, the 12 minute limit is a EU limitation or Canons limitation to protect camcorder sales, as it would otherwise span clips like every other SSD camcorder on the market.

I mentioned overheating in my first post, but I doubt the short clips are tied to that issue.

Thanks Jeff - That was my understanding also. If the 5D and 7D was given the ability to stitch files like consumer hdd Canon camcorders (which also use FAT32) it would be classified as a video camera and butt up against the taxation laws. I'm in the US so I don't claim to be an expert - just repeating the information I've read from multiple sources.

As always Joel, you have very keen insight and are excellent at relaying your analytic thoughts effectively.

I mirror your thoughts about this. Don't get me wrong I own both a 7D and a 5DmkII and absolutely love them. However I can't even convince myself to use them at live events. I want to use them so bad I try to find my own "reasons" to do so however when I go back to the pros and cons the cons simply swallow the pros.

I've even shot with/for a videographer colleague of mine whom is looking to switch to full-time DSLR shooting for weddings. We both used 7Ds. By the end of the day, while I was impressed with the aesthetics of a lot of the footage the entire shoot was hampered by technical complications and sub par focusing at the reception.

Let me try to outline my experiences:
1. Handling While it is true, the VDSLR is a much smaller unit and considerably less weight, the other side of the coin is it's intrinsically more difficult to shoot handheld. Sure you can shoot from a tri/monopod all day but that doesn't match my style. While the aforementioned camera supports will a rock solid base it will drain the kinetic, life-like feel good handheld work can provide. OIS is apparently something I long took for granted on my A1s.

I even invested in expensive support options- the RedRock Micro DSLR Field Bundle which you may or may not have noticed is now up for sale in the trading post. I simply couldn't get comfortable shooting with it. Maybe that's because I've effectively turned it into a shoulder mount style camera- a style I'm not used to utilizing.

2. Clip Length The 12 minute limit makes shooting ceremonies much more difficult in production and CONSIDERABLY more so in post. Certainly Pre-Ceremony and Receptions aren't as crippled by this but ceremonies (similar to when I was a novice) have now become difficult....again.

3. Narrow DOF/Focus Focusing for the most part wasn't too difficult- so I thought, until I saw my footage 100% full screen after the shoot. Often times I was a hair out of focus (you know- the kind that looks slightly soft but not 'blurry'). Granted I found most of these focus mistakes in the reception footage where I generously opened up the iris to let as much light in, however simultaneously lowering the effective DOF.

Therein lies the issue- you want to take advantage of the low-light performance fast lenses offer but then you end up working with a knife's edge of DOF. Sure you can stop it down tight to deepen the DOF but then you start running dangerously close to the low-light performance of your existing HDV video cameras.

4. Audio Arguably one of the most challenging aspects of event video is audio. Lets face it the onboard audio of the DSLRs is horrendous. It sounds way to thin and tinny. Of course you can "simply" capture your audio off camera and sync in post.

This is what we did with the wedding shoot. I was able to employ my beautiful new R44 at the reception and felt comfortable knowing it'll match up perfectly (unlike the 5D's 30.0fps) with the 23.97 frame-rate our 7Ds were capturing. Needless to say- that didn't even work as planned. I got word from the lead shooter that the audio we captured drifts out of sync even with our 23.97 footage. Something that shouldn't happen....but unfortunately (now I know) does.

5. Solid State Solid-state is great, I love so many aspects about it. However after experiencing solid-state workflow first-hand for a while I no longer think it's any sort of time saving over traditional tape capture. Combining the time it takes to dump all of your cards and then transcode all of the footage- I feel that tape capture (in some instances) may even be faster.

Then there is the issue of archiving. While the size of CF cards continue to grow and prices fall they still aren't cheap enough to shoot a wedding and store the cards themselves. So you must employ some sort of redundant way to store your footage. A Drobo is a good choice however I STILL feel more comfortable having the intrinsic backup of the tape itself.

Finally tape error vs card error. Like everyone working from Mini-DV tape I've had my fair share of drop-outs however that's nothing compared to an error on a CF card- which, unfortunately, I've experienced as well. When you get a drop-out you lose a few frames of video. When you get a CF card error you lose ENTIRE clips. I had a brand new 16gig Sandisk Extreme IV card take a dump on me. I lost an entire talking-head interview shoot. Thank God it was a corporate shoot. While it was embarrassing, and time consuming to contact the client and reschedule a second shoot it's nowhere near as bad as it would have been if it was the vows at a ceremony that were lost. Something that cannot be "reshot".

Conclusion- When you really boil it down the primary benefit DSLR shooting will award you is aesthetics. It can produce imagery that looks more filmic and pleasing than a standard HDV camera. In the slough of elements that comprise my event work aesthetics is only a (comparably) small piece of the pie.

Just thinking out lout here: there's no argument that shooting a live event like a wedding with DSLRs is more difficult. For that reason one would have to charge more for a DSLR-only package- enough to warrant the extra time, stress, and skill required to facilitate. Does the gain in aesthetic attributes pass the threshold into the client's eyes?

I did a very unscientific test and showed both my wife and my parents (two perfect examples who don't view work as pixels and f-stop/dof). Neither of them could pick out any appreciable difference yet alone one large enough to feel it was a superior/more-expensive product. This, of course, was compared to well shot XH-A1 content but this was a shocking revelation to me. Enough to solidify my feelings on NOT using my DSLRs for wedding/events. However I will continue to use them (joyfully I may add) for my commercial/corporate shoots.

There's no reasonable reason for the 12 minute limit, unless it's the whole EU tax thing or wanting to avoid competing with their other product lines... HMC150 and many consumer cameras don't have that limit...

I haven't made the jump yet, but as with Joel, have thunk much upon it...

The only thing I can add to the already well reasoned posts is that IF you are after the specific "look" (meaning primarily shallow DoF), adding one to your arsenal makes sense. A DSLR-V is an inherently "manned" camera IMO, as opposed to a video camera which can be preset/aimed and pretty much give you usable footage.

I feel that the aesthetic is viable and would be handy to have available, but using it full time just doesn't make sense IMO - too many opportunities for fuzzy focus or missed shots between clips.

Still, I would be willing to shoot the DSLR-V as a "primary" camera, if I knew I had 2-4 cameras running that I could cut away to in case I missed a cue. As an "only" camera, I don't think I'd be brave enough to try it... for the way I shoot multicam, it could work, with a couple other angles covering my tail just in case!

Keep in mind if you are referring to the 5D which shoots 30p (not 29.97) will need to be converted to 23.98 or 29.97 prior to editing/syncing with your other cams. 5D 30p to 24p yields some bizarre motion blur/artifacts. Finally, during a multi cam edit the switch to the "main" cam (DSLR) may be jarring because of the difference in aesthetics when run back to back with other cameras.

Another thing that is a little disconcerting when shooting weddings with DSLR is that with tapes, you can capture and put the masters on a shelf for as long as you want. With the CF cards, you capture, convert, back-up, and then eeeek... reformat the card. This always gives me a bit of a weird feeling.

Jeff, it appears all the info I've heard may be incorrect. Ahh, the wonderful power of the internet, lol.

I don't think the overheating issue is tied to the clip size at all either.

Ken, when I put the SDHC cards back in the HMC-150s and re-format before the next event, I also get a little "hope everything is okay" feeling. And that's after a triple check of the backup and the project on the cards is usually complete. I think after years of tape capture, you just are not comfortable with erasing original material.

However, I have lots of tapes from cameras I no longer have/use, especially the XH-A1, and no way to re-capture them, so it's easy to see tapes were a road to nowhere.


Glen, great DSLR post! Very informative for a one man show event videographer like me. About your solid state paragraph, I think with time you figure out a data backup system that works for you and you are comfortable with. Im ultra careful and redundant, but it's still a worry. Although most of my worry is using a camera system that records to SDHC like the HMC-150. After I get the data off the SDHC card to the hard drive, I breathe a sigh of relief. Also, it is nice to have all the footage I have shot (mainly family related) since going tapeless readily available. With tape, I usually deleted the capture and even the project after it was complete, since I had the tape.

Travis:

On the topic of the A1, I bet the XH-A1 replacement is going to be awesome. I went from the A1 to the HMC-150. I may go back to the Canon depending on what they do.

With all their involvement in VDSLR, it's a little hard to figure how they will go with it, other than a CMOS sensor or three. It's pretty sure to be tapeless, but other than that, it's all speculation.

I think the video market is currently stuck at a sensor resolution/sensitivity/camera size/camera cost technology barrier.

Yeah, we're perfectly fine waiting another year or two to see what Canon comes out with. We like to make sure we get a good ROI on the gear we buy. It is really interesting to speculate what Canon will eventually deliver. There are a lot of directions they could go .. but I'm guessing tape-less HAS to be one of them.

One more point about the short clip length: with the Panasonic DMC-GH1 you can record for hours without a break, depending on the video mode you are using.

The biggest con is that the "look" of the 5D and 7D will be so common that brides might not want it anymore. Sorry to say this, but the "look" is already starting to wear thin, mostly because of the sheer volume of footage being posted online that strangely looks similar, no matter where in the world it's shot.

It's sort of like you love steak and lobster, then eating it for breakfast, lunch and dinner for 365 days in a row....

That's a valid point Warren. It makes words like fad or slick glitz come to mind. No one wants to see a video that looks like a features and capabilities piece for a video aimed at videographers at a camera trade show.

Thank doesn't imply anything negative about DSLR cameras per se. A skilled person can produce stunning work using a DSLR - - as long as they remember they aren't putting on a "DSLR show". If a DSLR is used as a tool to tell a visually compelling story, the result can be very impressive. That is a far cry from a "DSLR show".

I'm sure that promised firmware update for the 5D can't come fast enough for their owners.

I've had to decide whether to change 29.97 to 23.98 or the other way around. I did some tests and saw the problems you get when you're taking frames away in the conversion rather than adding them. I found this article later which explains the results better than I can:

Converting Frame Rates in Compressor

"The Truth about Converting Frame Rates
In a situation where you have two different frame rates and need to convert one to match the other, there are two directions that you can go. One will produce good results, the other not so good. Let's say that we have footage shot at 24P and 30P. If we convert the 24P footage up to 30P, the full 24 frames will be used and an additional 6 frames will be created, for a total of 30. In both FCP and Compressor, the additional 6 frames will be based on the information contained in the original 24 frames. This is the correct way to convert frame rates so they match.

The other way to go would be to take the video shot at 30 frames and reduce it down to 24 frames. This would not be the way to do frame rate conversions because, if you reduce 30 frames down to 24, you have to throw away 6 frames and those 6 frames contain an important amount of information (particularly regarding motion). Doing frame rate conversions in this manner will produce stuttery video. So, when doing frame rate conversions in either FCP or Compressor, always convert the lower frame rate up to match the higher frame rate."

Totally agree - if you're adept at using a DSLR for event videography you're one of a very select few and should be compensated very well for being in that group.

I just started using at DSLR on weddings. I use it as a complement to my A1, not as something to replace it. It's great for details, bridal prep and our formal video session. I like using my A1 to do the heavy lifting during the ceremony, because it's easier to use, has better audio capabilities and I don't have to worry about running time. Also, I'm not crazy about how the DSLRs react to flash photography, so I prefer the A1's for big chunks of the reception and dancing.

Dave, that's the point. HMC150 is a video recorder by definition (a video camera that doesn't record video wouldn't be much use) ;-). There is an extra tarif (in the EU) on equipment that records video over (I don't know for sure if it's exactly 12mins but there is a limit). I believe it's to pay the greedy studios etc. as it could be potentially used to copy their stuff! Lol!

For Stills Cameras (inc. digital) tariff = 4.3%

For Video/Audio recording equipment, tariff = `13.9%

Big difference. That's why the manufacturers limit the capability in those units destined for the EU market (other markets may have similar issues), otherwise they would have to charge more for them.

If you're wondering where I got the figures from, we import goods from all over the world in our business and do all customs declarations online with a secure login, so all the tarifs are on the system to enable us to properly declare the correct tariffs. I just looked them up.

Except in the EU, where the tariff premiums apply per my previous post.

I am working with DSLRs as well and I too agree that the limitations are huge. Off focus is the worst thing to happen and sometimes, the external mic encounters issues as well.

So, our approach is to use the DSLR as complimentary cameras. This is really tough for a one men band. Especially here in Asia where we have to handle the super unpredictable gatecrashing which has no place for shallow DOF shots. With all that said, I still do not regret having the DSLRs because they offer a new dimension to our story telling.

I think as long as one does not forget the primary objective is to tell a story, it doesnt matter what tools are used.

Sean, I couldn't agree more that the tools are the least important part of the equation.

If people are shooing feature film shots with PXL-2000s, you can shoot a wedding with anything. Retro Thing: Pixelvision Mystery - More PXL-2000's Than We Thought? - Sanpix 1000

Hi Matthew,

Just revisiting this because within the last three weeks I've done an about-face and have switched to DSLR's. There are lots of drawbacks compared to true video cameras - there's a shot limit, you have to transcode, you only have manual focus, they might overheat, and the audio recording is limited -but for me the IQ makes up for all of that. Here's the kit I put together:

Canon T2i x 3, Canon 24-105 f/4 L IS, Canon 70-200 f/4 L IS and the Tokina 11-16 f/2.8. I also got grips for two of the cameras, an LCDVF viewfinder and a boatload of class 6 16gb cards.

One DSLR is a back up and I'll run the HV-30's as static angles. Audio will be H4N's and iriver recorders. I know I can make Same-Day Edits work with a workflow that involves transcoding everything through the batch list of MPEG Streamclip. Even with the new Canon plugin for Final Cut Pro this will be faster considering I shoot alone and don't have the time to pick and choose which shots to ingest.

So my reasons not to switch fly out the window. I hope I don't regret it.

Joel, I would have to charge a solid $5K to go through all that hassle. My market is $2 to 3Kish generally.

I raised my prices to $2K minimum package and am looking to simplify the shoots even more. I honestly dont know you do it unless you have all high end clients.

In terms of post-production one thing that I know will speed up the process is the app Pluraleyes. It syncs up all the clips from all the cameras plus the double system sound sources in one step. It was one of the factors that made me think I wouldn't go crazy synching it all together.

Hi Joel

In percentage terms, how much extra have you spent on each Canon T2i to get it "ready for the road"

Cheers

.