MarkBarbieri
Semi-retired
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2006
- Messages
- 6,172
I basically agree with Groucho on this, but I don't think he sees how important this is to some niches.
I think there are three main ways of looking at these new video cameras - how well do they work as general purpose video cameras (can you replace your video camera with it?), how well will they work for PJs trying to capture video to post on the web, and how well will they work for videographers for special situations.
I assume that most people here want to know whether they can get one and leave their video camera home. My thought is "no." There are just too many limitations and compromises for this to replace dedicated video cameras. The video quality may be worlds better, but you also lose too much. I suppose for someone just wanting video snippets with lousy sound, it would be adequate. I see it as similar to the p&s video cameras except that the video is worlds better.
As for PJs, that appears to have been their target market. That certainly explains the lack of 24 or 25 fps modes. It's really overkill for those applications, but it will get the job done. There is apparently a big demand for journalists to capture video so that it can be included on websites and this should free them from needing to bring along a video camera.
The final use is the part that is getting people excited and that is the use as a supplemental video camera for videographers and indie filmmakers. The tools they have for low light and shallow DOF video capture are horrifically expensive and (on the lower end) complicated and difficult to use. For many situations, they'll be able to use the 5DII to capture video for those purposes. There are still issues. Still, the idea that you can get something that works at all and is under $3,000 is revolutionary to these people.
Can you remote focus it? Probably, but I'm not sure. The 40D and 1DM3 series cameras allow some remote control of focus. I know this because there is software that automates the focus stacking process popular is macro still-life photography. I suspect that it will work, but unless the camera can record video and output HD via HDMI at the same time, it's of limited utility.
As for recording on CF cards, that's a major plus in the industry these days. No one will come out with a serious video camera that uses tape anymore. Hard disk solutions are popular, but everyone prefers solid state. With CF cards of 16 gig readily available for low prices, it would seem to be the format of choice.
The 5DM2 isn't fixed at 1080P. It also has an SD mode (I think it's 640x480, another indication that computers rather than TV's were the target). The frame rate is fixed at 30P and that has everyone scratching their heads. That's great for TV in the US and Japan (except for those needing to mix with film or wanting a classic film look), but it's not great for PAL users. Everyone is curious as to whether this was an oversite (and perhaps fixable with a firmware update), a limitation of some component (seems unlikely), or an attempt to protect the market of their video cameras (which also seems unlikely as they clearly play second fiddle to the dominant Sony).
The lenses aren't really a big problem. Their high end prosumer camcorder also uses EOS lenses. The lack of power zoom hurts from a consumer perspective but isn't a huge deal to the pro video market.
The sensor may be suboptimal compared with what they could design custom for the purpose, but it is also far superior in many ways to the sensors in any sub $100K video camera. There just isn't anything else out there as large, with all that implies (shallow DOF, high sensitivity, low noise).
What would really rock the world is if Canon took this exact same sensor package and put it into an XL-H1 package with it's dedicated video controls and ergonomics. Would it work? Perhaps there are major limitations (jello, anyone?) that aren't obvious at this point. If not, expect the $2,500 to $20,000 video camera world to be revolutionized in the next 24 months.
I think there are three main ways of looking at these new video cameras - how well do they work as general purpose video cameras (can you replace your video camera with it?), how well will they work for PJs trying to capture video to post on the web, and how well will they work for videographers for special situations.
I assume that most people here want to know whether they can get one and leave their video camera home. My thought is "no." There are just too many limitations and compromises for this to replace dedicated video cameras. The video quality may be worlds better, but you also lose too much. I suppose for someone just wanting video snippets with lousy sound, it would be adequate. I see it as similar to the p&s video cameras except that the video is worlds better.
As for PJs, that appears to have been their target market. That certainly explains the lack of 24 or 25 fps modes. It's really overkill for those applications, but it will get the job done. There is apparently a big demand for journalists to capture video so that it can be included on websites and this should free them from needing to bring along a video camera.
The final use is the part that is getting people excited and that is the use as a supplemental video camera for videographers and indie filmmakers. The tools they have for low light and shallow DOF video capture are horrifically expensive and (on the lower end) complicated and difficult to use. For many situations, they'll be able to use the 5DII to capture video for those purposes. There are still issues. Still, the idea that you can get something that works at all and is under $3,000 is revolutionary to these people.
Can you remote focus it? Probably, but I'm not sure. The 40D and 1DM3 series cameras allow some remote control of focus. I know this because there is software that automates the focus stacking process popular is macro still-life photography. I suspect that it will work, but unless the camera can record video and output HD via HDMI at the same time, it's of limited utility.
As for recording on CF cards, that's a major plus in the industry these days. No one will come out with a serious video camera that uses tape anymore. Hard disk solutions are popular, but everyone prefers solid state. With CF cards of 16 gig readily available for low prices, it would seem to be the format of choice.
The 5DM2 isn't fixed at 1080P. It also has an SD mode (I think it's 640x480, another indication that computers rather than TV's were the target). The frame rate is fixed at 30P and that has everyone scratching their heads. That's great for TV in the US and Japan (except for those needing to mix with film or wanting a classic film look), but it's not great for PAL users. Everyone is curious as to whether this was an oversite (and perhaps fixable with a firmware update), a limitation of some component (seems unlikely), or an attempt to protect the market of their video cameras (which also seems unlikely as they clearly play second fiddle to the dominant Sony).
The lenses aren't really a big problem. Their high end prosumer camcorder also uses EOS lenses. The lack of power zoom hurts from a consumer perspective but isn't a huge deal to the pro video market.
The sensor may be suboptimal compared with what they could design custom for the purpose, but it is also far superior in many ways to the sensors in any sub $100K video camera. There just isn't anything else out there as large, with all that implies (shallow DOF, high sensitivity, low noise).
What would really rock the world is if Canon took this exact same sensor package and put it into an XL-H1 package with it's dedicated video controls and ergonomics. Would it work? Perhaps there are major limitations (jello, anyone?) that aren't obvious at this point. If not, expect the $2,500 to $20,000 video camera world to be revolutionized in the next 24 months.
(Sorry, Sigma DP1!)
Congrats!
