Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here


using dslr for video


thatmanbrian 3 342 3 United Kingdom
16 Mar 2012 1:15PM
I have a 7D which like most cameras now has a video mode. However, I am at a loss as to how we are supposed to use it! I mean we have to use the rear LCD screen which means holding the thing at arms length to frame shots. Then we have to use manual focus but it is impossible on the tiny screen held away from the face. Auto focus during filming, where that is possible, is a no-no as the lens will hunt, resulting in a very unprofessional looking film! Putting it on a tripod is best but only suits certain types of filming. Yet I read that the BBC often use Canon DSLRs to make programmes? What am I missing?

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

Steppenwolf 3 971
16 Mar 2012 1:30PM

Quote:I have a 7D which like most cameras now has a video mode. However, I am at a loss as to how we are supposed to use it! I mean we have to use the rear LCD screen which means holding the thing at arms length to frame shots. Then we have to use manual focus but it is impossible on the tiny screen held away from the face.


A phrase comes to mind involving "nail", "head" and "hitting". Conventional DSLRs are virtually useless for movies except in some limited situations. This is where the SLTs show massive superiority as they provide a superb EVF and full phase detection AF - they're better than most dedicated camcorders in some cases.
KevSB 10 1.4k 5 United Kingdom
16 Mar 2012 1:32PM
You can not go wrong watching this and his other short vids

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZJ2_7X4BT0

Explains everything
justin c 10 4.5k 36 England
16 Mar 2012 2:13PM

Quote:Conventional DSLRs are virtually useless for movies except in some limited situations.


What a load of nonsense. Plenty of people seem to manage just fine and create some superb work using them.
As with anything else, it's a tool and is only as good as the person using it.
thatmanbrian 3 342 3 United Kingdom
16 Mar 2012 2:48PM
Looked a Bloom's video and picked up on his comment that when using a DSLR for movie making, as he does, "the number one accessory is a viewfinder..." which agrees with one of my main points, that using a 3" screen a couple of feet in front of you is useless...

Also I noted his interview was shot on a DSLR but it was on a tripod. In a lot of films, you need to be mobile. Well, I didn't buy my 7D for filming, it was just part of the package, but it is dissapointing it is so impractical. Technically the results are great.
duratorque 11 413 United Kingdom
16 Mar 2012 3:25PM
I think you need to think about the type of video you want to make. DSLR are capable of stunning professional results, but you need to use a DSLR rig, viewfinder and lot of accessories. It has the look of film because of DOF control.

If you want to take video casually, then get a video camera. If you want to produce movie like video at a fraction of the cost, then use a DSLR.
thatmanbrian 3 342 3 United Kingdom
16 Mar 2012 3:43PM
Yes, I've looked at the clamp-on focusing jigs and the external viewfinders with lust. But I can't justify the expense. I can see though that they deal with the two main deficiencies I commented on. I used to film with a shoulder mounted Arriflex and a Nagra hanging over on my waist for TV news back in the black&white days. Very non-union.
loweskid 13 2.0k 1 United Kingdom
16 Mar 2012 3:44PM
There are all sorts of DSLR video rigs coming on the market and plenty of DIY jobs on YouTube.

Here's one for instance. Note the 'follow through' focus gearing.

Also search for 'steadycam' on YouTube - like this

You would have to be pretty serious about your video though...Wink

Edit - too slow....Grin
cameracat 10 8.6k 61 Norfolk Island
16 Mar 2012 3:54PM

Quote:Conventional DSLRs are virtually useless for movies except in some limited situations. This is where the SLTs show massive superiority as they provide a superb EVF and full phase detection AF - they're better than most dedicated camcorders in some cases


Complete & Utter Rubbish......Period...!!!

Careful You might let the " Thincat " out of the bag......Tongue
Paul Morgan e2
13 15.7k 6 England
16 Mar 2012 4:27PM

Quote:Conventional DSLRs are virtually useless for movies except in some limited situations. This is where the SLTs show massive superiority as they provide a superb EVF and full phase detection AF - they're better than most dedicated camcorders in some cases


[quote[Complete & Utter Rubbish......Period...!!!


X2 Smile

Here Philip talks about kit and lenses, and recommends using older lenses with adapters, I can`t argue with that.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NjpmHV63050&feature=related
KevSB 10 1.4k 5 United Kingdom
16 Mar 2012 4:27PM

Quote:
Also I noted his interview was shot on a DSLR but it was on a tripod. In a lot of films, you need to be mobile. Well, I didn't buy my 7D for filming, it was just part of the package, but it is dissapointing it is so impractical. Technically the results are great.



In fact it was shot on the reporters knees with his elbows acting as a tripod, Your other Observations could equally apply to serious photography, there are some great videos on utube for making the equipment yourself very cheaply.

Im exsperementing now with video and wished id tried it a long time ago tbh, forcing me to go totally manual on everything would have helped my stills photography much more, ive relied on ap and sp for to long. Dslr video cameras are having a big impact on tv, Film industry but most of all at the ametuer end of the market where a cameras are being used to make thousend of short films some nearly as good anything the big houses could do
Steppenwolf 3 971
16 Mar 2012 5:55PM

Quote:Conventional DSLRs are virtually useless for movies except in some limited situations.

What a load of nonsense. Plenty of people seem to manage just fine and create some superb work using them.
As with anything else, it's a tool and is only as good as the person using it.



They work fine if you can stick the camera on a tripod and video something that doesn't move around too much - as the guy says in the youtube clip. He made another interesting comment to the effect that the manufacturers stuffed movie capability into DSLRs "because they could". They never thought anyone would actually use it because of the limitations (which he describes in a fair amount of technical detail). DSLRs were never designed for this purpose and it shows - which is something else he said.

If people want to make movies with a large sensor (APS-C anyway) camera then the obvious choice is an SLT - you get the full-time AF and you get a good viewfinder all thrown in. You can shoot hand-held and you can shoot moving objects which is exceedingly difficult with an DSLR. You can also stick them on a tripod and shoot a movie set too. Another alternative, of course, is a Micro 4/3 camera.
rogerfry e2
9 509 United Kingdom
16 Mar 2012 7:35PM
I would suggest that Steppenwolf looks at this video before suggesting that you need to "stick the camera on a tripod".

This was shot hand held on a 7D with a Rode videomic for sound. Check out Philip Bloom on the Vimeo site, and you can find many videos shot on Canon DSLR cameras. Also check out Cinema5D.com, which is a site dedicated to people using DSLR cameras for film making.

Saying that DSLRs are useless for video smacks of ignorance.
Steppenwolf 3 971
16 Mar 2012 8:11PM

Quote:
Saying that DSLRs are useless for video smacks of ignorance.



Let's rephrase it then. DSLRs are not the ideal video tool. The only reason that some people use them (rather than a dedicated video cam) is because they have an application where the larger sensor can provide some advantage. It would be interesting to know what that advantage is bearing in mind that video is shot at 2Mp per frame and DSLRs achieve this by throwing away about 3 lines in 4 of their output. I guess the only advantage is the narrow DOF - which is a slightly questionable advantage when you're restricted to manual focus and don't have a proper viewfinder - unless you by an expensive add-on or use a monitor.

I know that there are very clever people who can use the most inappropriate kit and get great results - some people can good photos from a pin-hole camera - but why indulge in such masochism. If you want a big sensor movie camera get an SLT (or a Micro 4/3 - they're pretty big sensors relative to most camcorders). They're designed for the job and they make it easy. But maybe that's the problem - some of you guys don't want things made easy.
justin c 10 4.5k 36 England
16 Mar 2012 8:31PM

Quote:I guess the only advantage is the narrow DOF


What about the fact that you switch, in a split second, from taking stills to taking video. Certainly a godsend as far as I'm concerned.
Being able to use an absolutely huge range of lenses to cover all possible shooting scenario's.

Admittedly, you do need to purchase additional accessories to get the most from shooting video with a DSLR, but that's no different to buying a camera solely for stills. You still need lenses, a tripod, filters, lens hoods, storage media, a computer, a printer, etc. etc. etc.




Quote:The only reason that some people use them


One of the reasons would be a little more accurate.

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.