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 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

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.

The NEX cameras were a sort of a let down, but there are rumours circulating of something else in the Alpha line crawling out of the Sony labs (and not just the NEX based handycam, which has it's own intrigue). If the rumours pan out, might be VERY interesting, if they don't make it overly "auto".

The concept of "camera" is changing - we must begin to consider that we may be looking at "lenses", and "bodies", along with various other components to create a "system" for image acquisition. Certainly we will still have "prepackaged" cameras of all sorts (right down to 8Mpixel cell phones that do video), but it will all come back to CONTENT, whatever the means used to acquire it...

About the only consideration I have is whether I acquire an image with sufficient quality and detail to deliver an end product that looks great, whatever the shooting conditions were...

I've been fascinated by the "dual mode" cameras, but have yet to find one that does both stills and video optimally, not that you can't get impressive results, I just feel like there are some compromises not yet ironed out entirely. Doesn't mean it won't be happening soon enough.

the panasonic GH1 can shoot to the limit of the card - no 12 min limit

Panasonic did a good job with the design of the GH1 in a number of ways that makes it more video friendly compared to the Canon DSLR's. Aside from the no 12-minute limit, it isn't likely to overheat. The electronic eyepiece allows a good 3-point brace when shooting hand held. (2 hands and your forehead). Those shaky 2-handed DSLR shots are hard to look at. Only the shooter can love them.

The GH1 also has an articulated viewfinder which allows a great deal more creative camera positioning when shooting.

It also allows auto focus to be selected if desired for video shooting. There are times when that is very useful such as when shooting flying shots on a stabilizer. This is a MAJOR limitation with Canon DSLR's. If you look closely at flying shots that have been shot with Canon DSLR cameras you will notice that the shooter keeps the same distance from the subject - either that or shoot out of focus shots because they can't adjust focus while they are shooting on a stabilizer. That's quite a creative shooting crimp.

It's clear that the GH1 was designed with video in mind rather than an afterthought. It has a micro 4/3 sensor which gathers a tad less light (2X crop factor) but it is still more than adequate for most applications.

perhaps that's part of the point.
I purchased a t2i only to be better with my Ex1.
I can be lazy with the Ex1 letting auto iris, auto focus and other auto features. Picture is perfect, but i feel the camera is deciding for me.
The t2i does not give the choice, you have to learn and be good.
And it still can be used as B-cam for small shot with DOF effect, or low light shot, or other occasion where a big camera does not fit.
But i would not try to build a perfect video camera from a DSLR (by adding costly equipement), when a simple workaround is to switch on my Ex1.
systematically recommanding a video camera for every problem you got with a DSLR is as silly as wanting to do everything with a DSLR , but as says the common citizen...
"when you got a hammer , you see nails everywhere"

Travis it would help if you read my post a little better next time. You completely missed my point.

Hey Michael,
It's not the first time I heard that statement but with the XL2 instead of the GL1. The XHA1 out of the box is not pleasing at all. In fact I would agree it could look pretty lousy. With a good custom preset and using manual settings the camera really shines. Contact me off the board if you need help with settings. I use one that is rich in color and not the ones that have been graciously shared on the forum. Take Care

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!

A good way around that is have a constant audio source. Mp3 recorders are a must when shooting with DSLR's.

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:

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 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!"

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 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;-)

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;-)

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.

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.

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.

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

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 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

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. ;-)

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.

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.

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.