Skip navigation
Currently Being Moderated

DSLR cameras in general

Sep 13, 2012 7:31 AM

Tags: #dslr

I have never owned a DSLR but now that they shoot HD video, I have started to think about it.

 

Just one impression stands out over everything else. Am I correct? Is this a huge TRAP? I see the ad from B&H for the Nikon D600 Full-Frame SLR Camera. The body is $2,099.95 and with a lens it is $2,699.95. OK. I get it. The camera costs $2,699.95. I can almost afford that.

 

Or can I ?????

 

If I have one lens, my guess is that it will not be the "right" lens, so I have to go spend $1,000.00 on the "right". Oh no! The next shoot comes along and I need a different lens. This one costs $2,000.00.

 

This keeps going on and on and then I have 10 lenses worth $20,0000 and everything is fine until I buy the next camera body. You say that the lenses fit? Sure they do. But they are not good enough because they are designed for HD and the new body shoots Ultra HD.  Didn't this happen going from SD to HD?

 

AAArrrrrggggg!!!!

 

Or am I wrong?

 

This seems like a horrible trap for a hobbyist to get into. Is it?

 
Replies
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 13, 2012 8:21 AM   in reply to Steven L. Gotz

    >trap for a hobbyist

     

    Ah... how many video hobbyists do you know who are going to spend $2k on a camera body and up to $1k per lens?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 13, 2012 9:42 AM   in reply to Steven L. Gotz

    That depends on the system you get and your shooting needs.  There are cheaper (and better) camera bodies out there.

     

    However, you're right about the lens situation.  It'd be nice if every type of mount had a 14-280 parfocal zoom with constant T2.0, Optical Image Stabilization, auto and manual focus, servo and manual zoom and a smooth, non-stepping iris ring on the lens for under $1000, sort of a One-Lens-To-Shoot-Them-All scenario like we get with real video cameras.  But sadly, DSLR lens makers are still focusing primarily on the photographer and don't make the kind of lenses we videographers really need (at any price).  So, we have to have multiple lenses, all of which require some degree of compromise, and many of which cost a pretty penny.

     

    But, the advantage may be that if the body goes, you only need a new body.  When my video camera died, I needed a whole new camera.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 14, 2012 8:15 AM   in reply to Steven L. Gotz
     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 14, 2012 8:37 AM   in reply to Steven L. Gotz

    >I want something

     

    Oh, well... now we're talking!

     

    There's lots of things I want... but very little that I really need

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 14, 2012 7:30 PM   in reply to Jim Simon

    Jim,

     

    Will your Kodak PlaySport camera take C-Mount lenses?

     

    Hunt

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 14, 2012 7:32 PM   in reply to Steven L. Gotz

    I have been trying to sell my Angenieux 6 - 120 t2.0 C-Mount to Jim for years, but he keeps trying to beat me down on the price.

     

    He's tough!

     

    Hunt

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 15, 2012 6:54 PM   in reply to Steven L. Gotz

    Apparently that assumption is invalid?

     

    Kind of.  Stills from a DSLR are often higher quality than the video because they typically use the full image sensor, whereas most video output has been scaled and processed from the original capture to the HD frame size (and not always well).  Add to that many DSLR makers consider video a second-class citizen for their cameras.

     

    The Panasonic GH3 will likely be announced on Monday.  Check that out before you buy.  If nothing else, you will start to see a lot of GH2 models on sale.  And that little baby can take a far cleaner image than your HDV model.  I recently applied one of the newest firmware hacks and shot some footage of my kids swimming.  I did some pixel peeping on the footage and a close up one one child splashing around feverishly produced not one single artifact, not one smidge of macroblocking, despite gobs of often difficult-to-encode water droplets flying about.  Every frame was pristine and very filmlike.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 16, 2012 9:34 AM   in reply to Steven L. Gotz

    I was just thinking that since I can't afford a truly great full HD camera, maybe a DSLR would be fun.

     

    That's how I ended up with the GH2.  My old camera bit the dust, and I just couldn't scrape up the funds for even a used HMC150 before my next gig.

     

    That timing issue on the money turned out to be a blessing in disguise.  The hacked GH2 produces a superior image to any video camera costing several times the price.  I mean, the Panny 250 would turn out equally nice footage, but with it's 1/3 chip, I'd not get some of the beautiful bokeh I can with the GH2's 4/3 sensor.  And I can put on faster lenses for better low light performance as well.  So overall, that GH2 serves me very well.

     

    I hope to add the GH3 soon as a second camera in the arsenal.  The image sure does look nice in the right hands.

     

    https://vimeo.com/49420579

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 16, 2012 4:28 PM   in reply to Steven L. Gotz

    Link worked for me.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 16, 2012 4:42 PM   in reply to Steven L. Gotz

    Steven,

     

    I have been experiencing some wonky Internet behavior, since Friday, and not just with the Adobe Forums.

     

    Links work one minute, but not the next. Timeouts on pages suddenly, when things were going along well just minutes before. On Friday, when I began observing these little "glitches," I posted this to the Forum Comments Forum: http://forums.adobe.com/thread/1066373?tstart=0

     

    Then, I was ONLY on the Adobe Forums, but now I am seeing it across the Internet. Maybe the whole world is watching that danged movie trailer?

     

    Today, I have have ~ 10 timeouts, when attempting to post to the Adobe Forums, but things usually work the next time, or the next after that.

     

    Hunt

     

    PS - link worked for me first time.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 16, 2012 7:20 PM   in reply to Steven L. Gotz

    How many lenses do you have for your GH2?

     

    My thinking was that I could get all the range I needed for my projects with just two lenses, a 14-140 f4.0 and a faster 12-35 f2.8.  But I guess there will be a whole slew of new options with the release of the GH3, so I'll wait and see what's on the table before I buy.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 16, 2012 10:19 PM   in reply to Jim Simon

    Jim,

     

    Somehow, I thought that you would go for a kit of Cooke primes.

     

    Interesting to know what you are looking at.

     

    Good luck,

     

    Hunt

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 17, 2012 8:32 AM   in reply to Bill Hunt

    I'm not a fan of primes.  They might work well for production work (which I'm starting to get more of) where you have the time to set things up and can do it over if you goof, but primes are too limited for the event work I do, where you often have 2, maybe 3 seconds to frame, focus, expose and start rolling or you lose the shot forever.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 17, 2012 9:26 AM   in reply to Jim Simon

    Yes, I can understand your point well. Not having done many quick moving events, I can see where a kit of good zooms would be a blessing. Being able to quickly frame up the bride falling into the fountain would be helpful.

     

    Hunt

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 17, 2012 8:22 PM   in reply to Bill Hunt

    You see her start to tip, you'd better damn well be rolling.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 18, 2012 9:08 AM   in reply to Jim Simon

    I know a guy who lines up the bride and groom with their backs to fountain...starts rolling''..and then secretly has his assistant throw a snake at them, yelling " SNAKE ! "... He always gets great shots of them flying into the fountain and the look of abject FEAR looks a lot like XTREME HAPPINESS ....

     

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Nov 27, 2012 1:55 PM   in reply to Steven L. Gotz

    I won't be redundant or repetitious. I will say that for those moving from a DX format to full-framed, this is the camera. I received my D600 late yesterday. I took it outside at around 7:45pm. It was dusk and nearly dark. I took 2 photos without flash and immediately noticed that the images looked as if I had taken them at 5pm.  The larger sensor and brighter viewfinder contribute to the camera's excellent light-capturing feature. It's a great step up from the D7000. http://www.squidoo.com/2012-top-10-digital-slr-cameras

     
    |
    Mark as:

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...

Bookmarked By (0)

Answers + Points = Status

  • 10 points awarded for Correct Answers
  • 5 points awarded for Helpful Answers
  • 10,000+ points
  • 1,001-10,000 points
  • 501-1,000 points
  • 5-500 points