@LEXPIX no im not i know each have there advantages but a good $3,000 + prosumer camcorder can still acheive depth of field and good low light performance. your comparing a shit camcorder to a non shit dslr
@MrEnignok A DSLR usually have larger sensors than most camcorders, even at the 3K range, and also the lens option is far greater than a stand alone camcorder. Show me a camcorder that has the low light and shallow depth of field as, say the Nikon D7000 using a 50mm F1.4 lens? Not at that price point. You'd need to spend like 30K or something to approach the setup I just mentioned to achieve the low light, shallow depth of field look.
This is funny I use a Canon Vixia HF S20 and I would say mine has the same features your SLR has. Most people who are watching this video I don’t think would be expecting the same result from their $200 home camcorder. If that camcorder was all you had for this video, it’s all you had and I can respect that.
@BlkJ19 Even your s20 does not compare to the low light capability and shallow depth of field and lens selection you get from an entry level DSLR video.
@BlkJ19 Yeah. Bring it on! Show me your own sample you've taken and I'll show you one of mine. For around $1,200 bucks, My cheap Nikon D5100 with 50mm 1.4 can match or surpass the low light / shallow depth of field of most camcorders in that price range. Even ones costing 2 to 3 times as much.
The 24fps isnt really an advantage of the dslr, seeing as how your d7000 only shoots in 24fps. Canons can go higher, but this doesnt really matter because it can be slowed from 30fps to 24fps in post production.
I went for a Sony A65 and I never touch the HD video camera any-more. Far better image quality and great white balance calibration. And only one camera to take.
Do you have problems contsantly focusing with DSLR's as opposed to a camcorder? Just curious on your opinion. I was looking at a Nikon D7 vs a Canon g10 and the salesman said for roughly the same money the canon would be better.
Dude, i've been shooting events etc using professional video cameras for 8 years. When shooting with DSLR became a trend, (especially for cinematic look) i switched to using DSLR or shooting. (i bought canon 7D). PROS: You get the cinematic look, light weight. CONS: I had to bring my laptop to transfer files. I have to conserve my CF cards (16GB, 2 8GBs and 4GB) CF Cards are expensive, compared to tapes, but ofcourse you can always reuse it. Ihad to limit my shots to 10 min recording time.
You should do a head to head... if comparing advantages and disadvantages you should use similar budget equipment. Compare a dslr with a high end consumer camcorder, which have "the film look" 24fps feature.
@theoriginalelzincho There are plenty of DSLR's capable of shooting video for less than 1k. Take the Canon t2i, for example (you can get one with a lens for like $700). His analysis also holds for consumer camcorders that approach that price. Did you watch the video?
@Nihilism13 you are wrong the cam itself can't work great on low light without a special lens, the magic is the lenses not the cam itself. You can use a canon XA10 with a 35mm adapter with a 1.8f or 1.4f and get a better image than the DSLR.
@TheFruitGuyFilms Being that independant films and now TV shows like HOUSE are being filmed with DSLRs, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that this is wrong.
@WhiteBeltAcademy i know of that, I'm just telling what makes DSLR so good is the CMOS sensor that has the ability to record pretty solid video and with photography lenses. Its more cost effective than buying a camcorder and a 35mm adapter and so on... In the end the DSLR cant compete with professional camcorders like RED Epic or so. Watch a Pro camcorder vs the most expensive DSLR... they wont stand a chance against real pro camcorders not consumer camcorders.
@TheFruitGuyFilms Here's a trailer of a film made by Lucasfilms made with a 5D Mark II and a $6000 budget. If you are a professional and you have a budget of hundreds of thousands of dollars, of course you would go with professional cams, but if you are a prosumer than a 5D mark II is more than enough.
@WhiteBeltAcademy I know, but for me is another story y cant use the because i record a bunch of live events, and the FAT32 system of DSLR can record up to like 12 min in full HD and some of these events keep going for like an hour. For independent filmmaker yeah they work but not for live events.
@WhiteBeltAcademy and BTW you CAN'T shoot high speed movies using DSLR the rolling shutter is a real pain in those cameras, another pain is the FAT32 system they use, you wont be able to film very long shots with this file system. If I'm doing movies i would go with camcorders because wont limit my chances of filming whatever my costumers wants.
@TheFruitGuyFilms For starters, the Red Epic camera is in the neighborhood of 40 thousand dollars. The 5D Mark II is $1999. A $2000 DSLR body paired with a $400 lens vs a $40k camera is a bit of a one sided argument. Having said that, not only do DSLRs compete with professional camcorders, they are used often in place of them. Highspeed cameras are needed anyway, whether you are using a DSLR or a professional stand alone. So that's a moot point.
@WhiteBeltAcademy all im trying to say is what the kid said was wrong, DSLR aren't the best in low lights, they get beaten by camcorders on this thing. Lets just stay in this subject because we will never end talking if we go comparing other stuff.
@TheFruitGuyFilms No, he is comparing a consumer camcorder. The sensor of a DSLR is always better than a camcorder up to thousands of dollars. My D7000 can record up to 20 minutes in one shot. Sure, there are times where a camcorder would have it's benefits but the DSLR camera is wayyyy better than what you give credit for. A few videos on my channel are from a Brazilian Jiu Jitsu tournament using a garbage kit lens on the D7k and it was all on auto.
@WhiteBeltAcademy Yup, just comparing consumer level camcorders to DSLR as mentioned in the vid. I did also mention that higher end prosumer camcorders have better low light performance than the consumer grade ones.
To get the low light performance of the DSLR ina camcorder, ou'd have to spend many times more for it. Still hard to compete wit hte full frame DSLR image sensor though, especially at the price point.
@WhiteBeltAcademy im not talking about the guy on the video... i was talking about the kid that said that "dslr low light cant be beaten". Theres more disadvantages than people realize in DSLR, you cant shoot to much in sun's way... you will burn the camera, you can do it with camcorders. Even Canon knows the potentials of their DSLR but knows they need to keep making camcorders for filmmakers, thats why they created de EOS C300. If DSLR is the way to go Canon will stop doing camcorders...
@TheFruitGuyFilms Burning the sensor by aiming at the sun is a nonsense myth. There are things you can't do with DSLR camera, but there is way more that you can do. There is a place for 50,000 dollars in equipment, but in 99% of all cases, a DSLR can handle the job. So can a $300 camcorder though.Just depends on a persons standards.
@TheFruitGuyFilms That myth came from the fact that the original SLR sensors were made from cloth. Now they are made out of metal. You will not damage your sensor by shooting into the sun.
@WhiteBeltAcademy Is still a problem, you cant shoot for very long periods without getting your camera hot. Imagine in direct sun light? DSLR has its cost effective advantages but aren't perfect.
@TheFruitGuyFilms Depends on the Camera. A D7000 can shoot for 20 minutes straight @ 1080p with out any over heating issues. The Canon T2i does have issues of over heating. No one is claiming that the DSLR is perfect but cost is everything. If you can get the same video quality out of a $2500 DSLR setup that you can with a $5-7000 dollar dedicated video setup, why go stand alone? It also depends on what you are shooting as well.
@TheFruitGuyFilms DSLR's can account for most of the recording that a professional does. The only thing it cant do is shoot for an extended period of time, shoot professional sports, or high speed. For everything else? News, Movies, TV shows, Bday Parties, Kids sports games, etc etc etc... a DSLR is enough. Few more years and DSLRs will replace most conventional camcorders.
@WhiteBeltAcademy Thats what I'm trying to say since the beginning, me as a indy filmmaker with not much money i cant limit my clients by spending my money on a DSLR, i record longer events and sports commercials, as well as short films and music videos.
@TheFruitGuyFilms Sports commercials, Short Films and Music Videos are all shot with DSLR's right now. Nothing is being limited. Nothing you listed requires more than 20 minute takes. Either way, no one is arguing about YOUR needs. The main point, both mine and the videos, is that a DSLR is better than any camcorder near its price range, there is no need for a stand alone camcorder for 95% of the population. You may require something more, but you will be spending thousands and thousands more.
@WhiteBeltAcademy Dude you clearly don't get it... how much time is the basketball game? Its not 20 min, to record LIVE events completely you CANT use a DSLR, since a game can last over an hour. DSLR does limit your options for clients. What I'm gonna do if a client comes and asked me to record their team soccer game and all i have is 2 DSLR? For commercials its Ok but the industry have like 50 DSLR on their hand so they can shoot fast. Not like a indy guy that cant afford more than 2.
@TheFruitGuyFilms Well clearly you can't read. I've established that there are things that DSLR's are not optimal for. As for basketball games, there are a thousand micro breaks, @ 15 minutes after someone scores you hit the button twice and reset the timer with out missing a beat. It doesn't matter how long something is. And you mentioned a play, really? You've had a scene last longer than 20 minutes? Look man, I said that the DSLR isn't for everything, but it's way more than you think.
@WhiteBeltAcademy I've established we're not talking about YOUR needs, but the needs of many. If you have special needs that don't fit in the DSLR criteria, than get a camcorder. I don't understand what the issue is about that. If you need 1 hour continuous broadcasting, get a cam. For everything else, get a DSLR.
@WhiteBeltAcademy @ Basketball u need to have a camera always on to cover what happens on the benches... And yes i have scenes longer than 20 minutes on plays, cuz i record them live. I invite you to go to your local theater or if you have money to Broadway, the plays are long and its rare to have a break to pause and continue. And like i said if you record constantly for the time the play last you may burn your DSLR and that is not good. If your dslr is god, do it and prove it
@TheFruitGuyFilms Once again, I said it's not meant for a straight broadcast. You are grabbing onto what little leverage you have and holding on to it and you keep bringing it up as if saying it over and over will make the other points I have said go away. If you need more than 20 minutes of straight footage obviously you need a camcorder. You keep talking about YOUR needs... you've established that you need something more. We get it. But everything else mentioned - DSLRs are fine.
@WhiteBeltAcademy im not talking just about my needs, im talking about clients need and people needs, a lot of people have kids on sports and in acting. Everything will changes when the RED Scarlet comes out, even the Film Riot team said it, he will change his 5D MkII for it.
@WhiteBeltAcademy and of course more than 50% needs camcorder because have their kids on sports and want to record them. I also record Theater plays that last 1 hour per chapter, and others that last 1 hour and 30 minutes.
I'm not trying to sound like an ass because maybe i'm wrong but i dont think you should call this video filming because you are not using a film camera, instead it should be called video recording.
@jester3454 Yup, for a lack of a better terminology, film / video is used interchangeability to describe the process of capturing moving images. I suppose I could call it motion picture capture.
If a "film" is shot on video, is it not called a film then? I guess there are a lot of independent video makers out there, I mean film.
I love DSLR's, but you forgot to mention that they overheat within 20-30 miuntes of recording. That's my only problem. I have a t2i and man does it get heated :-(
@LEXPIX i'm not into the short depth of field thing, i think it makes the video look cheap...i like everything to be in focus. i currently have a Sony 550v but it is 1080i and i'm thinking of getting a DSLR...GH2 to be specific. Video is my main priority. the vids i've seen look amazing for some of these DSLR's but then i keep hearing that the DSLR's don't focus as good nor have great image stabilization but the vids i've seen are action shots..so how do they do it??
apples to oranges dude... dont compare that DSLR to a cheapo video cam compare it to a quality pro-sumer grade video cam
MrEnignok 2 days ago
@MrEnignok You're missing the point.
LEXPIX 2 days ago
@LEXPIX no im not i know each have there advantages but a good $3,000 + prosumer camcorder can still acheive depth of field and good low light performance. your comparing a shit camcorder to a non shit dslr
MrEnignok 2 days ago
@MrEnignok A DSLR usually have larger sensors than most camcorders, even at the 3K range, and also the lens option is far greater than a stand alone camcorder. Show me a camcorder that has the low light and shallow depth of field as, say the Nikon D7000 using a 50mm F1.4 lens? Not at that price point. You'd need to spend like 30K or something to approach the setup I just mentioned to achieve the low light, shallow depth of field look.
LEXPIX 1 day ago
This is funny I use a Canon Vixia HF S20 and I would say mine has the same features your SLR has. Most people who are watching this video I don’t think would be expecting the same result from their $200 home camcorder. If that camcorder was all you had for this video, it’s all you had and I can respect that.
BlkJ19 1 week ago
@BlkJ19 Even your s20 does not compare to the low light capability and shallow depth of field and lens selection you get from an entry level DSLR video.
LEXPIX 2 days ago
@LEXPIX lol you wanna bet??
BlkJ19 1 day ago
@BlkJ19 Yeah. Bring it on! Show me your own sample you've taken and I'll show you one of mine. For around $1,200 bucks, My cheap Nikon D5100 with 50mm 1.4 can match or surpass the low light / shallow depth of field of most camcorders in that price range. Even ones costing 2 to 3 times as much.
LEXPIX 7 hours ago
The 24fps isnt really an advantage of the dslr, seeing as how your d7000 only shoots in 24fps. Canons can go higher, but this doesnt really matter because it can be slowed from 30fps to 24fps in post production.
7SevenProductions0 3 weeks ago
I went for a Sony A65 and I never touch the HD video camera any-more. Far better image quality and great white balance calibration. And only one camera to take.
obaeyens 1 month ago
This seems likes apples to oranges because the dslr is a way higher grade. What about a more professional video cam vs dslr? The same?
customneonshirts 1 month ago
Do you have problems contsantly focusing with DSLR's as opposed to a camcorder? Just curious on your opinion. I was looking at a Nikon D7 vs a Canon g10 and the salesman said for roughly the same money the canon would be better.
brianremington 1 month ago
Dude, i've been shooting events etc using professional video cameras for 8 years. When shooting with DSLR became a trend, (especially for cinematic look) i switched to using DSLR or shooting. (i bought canon 7D). PROS: You get the cinematic look, light weight. CONS: I had to bring my laptop to transfer files. I have to conserve my CF cards (16GB, 2 8GBs and 4GB) CF Cards are expensive, compared to tapes, but ofcourse you can always reuse it. Ihad to limit my shots to 10 min recording time.
bassnrifle 2 months ago
You should do a head to head... if comparing advantages and disadvantages you should use similar budget equipment. Compare a dslr with a high end consumer camcorder, which have "the film look" 24fps feature.
TheFruitGuyFilms 2 months ago
A lot of this stuff is very untrue.... The HV series by canon is an HD consumer camera that offers 24p, it is also smaller than a dslr...
Nihilism13 3 months ago
bokeh is pronounced bo-kee just s you know. and i have the same watch
darkmyth2 3 months ago
what model is your nikon and what lens is that?
SubaruBBS 3 months ago
@SubaruBBS Nikon D7000 with 105mm F2.8 VR
LEXPIX 3 months ago 2
Why woul. You compair a dslr that's 1-1.5k to a cheap ass camcorder that's like comparing a Atari 2600 to an Xbox 360
theoriginalelzincho 3 months ago 5
@theoriginalelzincho To make the point that a cheap camcorder can hold its own.
LEXPIX 3 months ago 6
@theoriginalelzincho but the atari would win every time :P
TakingHippo 1 month ago
@theoriginalelzincho I was thinkin the same thing..lol....I almost bought that camcorder..
imantrek 1 month ago
@theoriginalelzincho There are plenty of DSLR's capable of shooting video for less than 1k. Take the Canon t2i, for example (you can get one with a lens for like $700). His analysis also holds for consumer camcorders that approach that price. Did you watch the video?
joshmusicbox 1 month ago
@theoriginalelzincho Agin to prove that point that camcorders hold their own in their own respects as do DSLRs.
LEXPIX 7 hours ago
c'mon man atleast compare a dslr to a better camcorder like panasonic tm900 and then tell about low light performance
The3dsGeek 4 months ago 2
@The3dsGeek DSLRs are fucking unbeatable in lowlight. Its incredible.
Nihilism13 3 months ago
@Nihilism13 you are wrong the cam itself can't work great on low light without a special lens, the magic is the lenses not the cam itself. You can use a canon XA10 with a 35mm adapter with a 1.8f or 1.4f and get a better image than the DSLR.
TheFruitGuyFilms 2 months ago
@TheFruitGuyFilms Being that independant films and now TV shows like HOUSE are being filmed with DSLRs, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that this is wrong.
WhiteBeltAcademy 2 months ago
@WhiteBeltAcademy i know of that, I'm just telling what makes DSLR so good is the CMOS sensor that has the ability to record pretty solid video and with photography lenses. Its more cost effective than buying a camcorder and a 35mm adapter and so on... In the end the DSLR cant compete with professional camcorders like RED Epic or so. Watch a Pro camcorder vs the most expensive DSLR... they wont stand a chance against real pro camcorders not consumer camcorders.
TheFruitGuyFilms 2 months ago
@TheFruitGuyFilms Here's a trailer of a film made by Lucasfilms made with a 5D Mark II and a $6000 budget. If you are a professional and you have a budget of hundreds of thousands of dollars, of course you would go with professional cams, but if you are a prosumer than a 5D mark II is more than enough.
WhiteBeltAcademy 2 months ago
@WhiteBeltAcademy I know, but for me is another story y cant use the because i record a bunch of live events, and the FAT32 system of DSLR can record up to like 12 min in full HD and some of these events keep going for like an hour. For independent filmmaker yeah they work but not for live events.
TheFruitGuyFilms 2 months ago
@WhiteBeltAcademy and BTW you CAN'T shoot high speed movies using DSLR the rolling shutter is a real pain in those cameras, another pain is the FAT32 system they use, you wont be able to film very long shots with this file system. If I'm doing movies i would go with camcorders because wont limit my chances of filming whatever my costumers wants.
TheFruitGuyFilms 2 months ago
@TheFruitGuyFilms For starters, the Red Epic camera is in the neighborhood of 40 thousand dollars. The 5D Mark II is $1999. A $2000 DSLR body paired with a $400 lens vs a $40k camera is a bit of a one sided argument. Having said that, not only do DSLRs compete with professional camcorders, they are used often in place of them. Highspeed cameras are needed anyway, whether you are using a DSLR or a professional stand alone. So that's a moot point.
WhiteBeltAcademy 2 months ago
@WhiteBeltAcademy all im trying to say is what the kid said was wrong, DSLR aren't the best in low lights, they get beaten by camcorders on this thing. Lets just stay in this subject because we will never end talking if we go comparing other stuff.
TheFruitGuyFilms 2 months ago
@TheFruitGuyFilms No, he is comparing a consumer camcorder. The sensor of a DSLR is always better than a camcorder up to thousands of dollars. My D7000 can record up to 20 minutes in one shot. Sure, there are times where a camcorder would have it's benefits but the DSLR camera is wayyyy better than what you give credit for. A few videos on my channel are from a Brazilian Jiu Jitsu tournament using a garbage kit lens on the D7k and it was all on auto.
WhiteBeltAcademy 2 months ago
@WhiteBeltAcademy Yup, just comparing consumer level camcorders to DSLR as mentioned in the vid. I did also mention that higher end prosumer camcorders have better low light performance than the consumer grade ones.
To get the low light performance of the DSLR ina camcorder, ou'd have to spend many times more for it. Still hard to compete wit hte full frame DSLR image sensor though, especially at the price point.
LEXPIX 2 months ago
@WhiteBeltAcademy im not talking about the guy on the video... i was talking about the kid that said that "dslr low light cant be beaten". Theres more disadvantages than people realize in DSLR, you cant shoot to much in sun's way... you will burn the camera, you can do it with camcorders. Even Canon knows the potentials of their DSLR but knows they need to keep making camcorders for filmmakers, thats why they created de EOS C300. If DSLR is the way to go Canon will stop doing camcorders...
TheFruitGuyFilms 2 months ago
@TheFruitGuyFilms Burning the sensor by aiming at the sun is a nonsense myth. There are things you can't do with DSLR camera, but there is way more that you can do. There is a place for 50,000 dollars in equipment, but in 99% of all cases, a DSLR can handle the job. So can a $300 camcorder though.Just depends on a persons standards.
WhiteBeltAcademy 2 months ago
@TheFruitGuyFilms That myth came from the fact that the original SLR sensors were made from cloth. Now they are made out of metal. You will not damage your sensor by shooting into the sun.
WhiteBeltAcademy 2 months ago
@WhiteBeltAcademy Is still a problem, you cant shoot for very long periods without getting your camera hot. Imagine in direct sun light? DSLR has its cost effective advantages but aren't perfect.
TheFruitGuyFilms 2 months ago
@TheFruitGuyFilms Depends on the Camera. A D7000 can shoot for 20 minutes straight @ 1080p with out any over heating issues. The Canon T2i does have issues of over heating. No one is claiming that the DSLR is perfect but cost is everything. If you can get the same video quality out of a $2500 DSLR setup that you can with a $5-7000 dollar dedicated video setup, why go stand alone? It also depends on what you are shooting as well.
WhiteBeltAcademy 2 months ago
@TheFruitGuyFilms DSLR's can account for most of the recording that a professional does. The only thing it cant do is shoot for an extended period of time, shoot professional sports, or high speed. For everything else? News, Movies, TV shows, Bday Parties, Kids sports games, etc etc etc... a DSLR is enough. Few more years and DSLRs will replace most conventional camcorders.
WhiteBeltAcademy 2 months ago
@WhiteBeltAcademy Thats what I'm trying to say since the beginning, me as a indy filmmaker with not much money i cant limit my clients by spending my money on a DSLR, i record longer events and sports commercials, as well as short films and music videos.
TheFruitGuyFilms 2 months ago
@TheFruitGuyFilms Sports commercials, Short Films and Music Videos are all shot with DSLR's right now. Nothing is being limited. Nothing you listed requires more than 20 minute takes. Either way, no one is arguing about YOUR needs. The main point, both mine and the videos, is that a DSLR is better than any camcorder near its price range, there is no need for a stand alone camcorder for 95% of the population. You may require something more, but you will be spending thousands and thousands more.
WhiteBeltAcademy 2 months ago
@WhiteBeltAcademy youtube.com/watch?v=aHOMswerO9g this was shot with the 5D Mark II which was included in the $6000 budget.
WhiteBeltAcademy 2 months ago
@WhiteBeltAcademy Dude you clearly don't get it... how much time is the basketball game? Its not 20 min, to record LIVE events completely you CANT use a DSLR, since a game can last over an hour. DSLR does limit your options for clients. What I'm gonna do if a client comes and asked me to record their team soccer game and all i have is 2 DSLR? For commercials its Ok but the industry have like 50 DSLR on their hand so they can shoot fast. Not like a indy guy that cant afford more than 2.
TheFruitGuyFilms 2 months ago
@TheFruitGuyFilms Well clearly you can't read. I've established that there are things that DSLR's are not optimal for. As for basketball games, there are a thousand micro breaks, @ 15 minutes after someone scores you hit the button twice and reset the timer with out missing a beat. It doesn't matter how long something is. And you mentioned a play, really? You've had a scene last longer than 20 minutes? Look man, I said that the DSLR isn't for everything, but it's way more than you think.
WhiteBeltAcademy 2 months ago
@WhiteBeltAcademy I've established we're not talking about YOUR needs, but the needs of many. If you have special needs that don't fit in the DSLR criteria, than get a camcorder. I don't understand what the issue is about that. If you need 1 hour continuous broadcasting, get a cam. For everything else, get a DSLR.
WhiteBeltAcademy 2 months ago
@WhiteBeltAcademy @ Basketball u need to have a camera always on to cover what happens on the benches... And yes i have scenes longer than 20 minutes on plays, cuz i record them live. I invite you to go to your local theater or if you have money to Broadway, the plays are long and its rare to have a break to pause and continue. And like i said if you record constantly for the time the play last you may burn your DSLR and that is not good. If your dslr is god, do it and prove it
TheFruitGuyFilms 2 months ago
@TheFruitGuyFilms Once again, I said it's not meant for a straight broadcast. You are grabbing onto what little leverage you have and holding on to it and you keep bringing it up as if saying it over and over will make the other points I have said go away. If you need more than 20 minutes of straight footage obviously you need a camcorder. You keep talking about YOUR needs... you've established that you need something more. We get it. But everything else mentioned - DSLRs are fine.
WhiteBeltAcademy 2 months ago
@WhiteBeltAcademy im not talking just about my needs, im talking about clients need and people needs, a lot of people have kids on sports and in acting. Everything will changes when the RED Scarlet comes out, even the Film Riot team said it, he will change his 5D MkII for it.
TheFruitGuyFilms 2 months ago
@TheFruitGuyFilms The 5D mark II is at the end of it's lifespan. The 5D Mark III is due out in the next 3 months.
WhiteBeltAcademy 2 months ago
@WhiteBeltAcademy and of course more than 50% needs camcorder because have their kids on sports and want to record them. I also record Theater plays that last 1 hour per chapter, and others that last 1 hour and 30 minutes.
TheFruitGuyFilms 2 months ago
@TheFruitGuyFilms vimeo.com/groups/canon5dmark2/videos/8100091also shot with the 5D Mark II
WhiteBeltAcademy 2 months ago
I'm not trying to sound like an ass because maybe i'm wrong but i dont think you should call this video filming because you are not using a film camera, instead it should be called video recording.
jester3454 4 months ago
@jester3454 Yup, for a lack of a better terminology, film / video is used interchangeability to describe the process of capturing moving images. I suppose I could call it motion picture capture.
If a "film" is shot on video, is it not called a film then? I guess there are a lot of independent video makers out there, I mean film.
I get your point though.
LEXPIX 4 months ago
@LEXPIX Thanks for the reply and yeah, it was just my opinion.
jester3454 4 months ago
3:53 - enough talking.. you get the point
XD
KocaMetallec 4 months ago
I love DSLR's, but you forgot to mention that they overheat within 20-30 miuntes of recording. That's my only problem. I have a t2i and man does it get heated :-(
Lunerversal 5 months ago
what dslr is the one on the table nikon what, and what is the camera you used for the street shot with the van?:) thanks?
WelshyBwoi 5 months ago
@WelshyBwoi I second that question lol!
IIIIIRepoIIIII 5 months ago
no more biking vlogs?
aznwilly211 6 months ago
@aznwilly211 LOL We'll see...
LEXPIX 6 months ago
@LEXPIX Nikon D7000 shown and used for supplemental video clips.
LEXPIX 5 months ago
@LEXPIX i'm not into the short depth of field thing, i think it makes the video look cheap...i like everything to be in focus. i currently have a Sony 550v but it is 1080i and i'm thinking of getting a DSLR...GH2 to be specific. Video is my main priority. the vids i've seen look amazing for some of these DSLR's but then i keep hearing that the DSLR's don't focus as good nor have great image stabilization but the vids i've seen are action shots..so how do they do it??
whole27 4 months ago
@whole27 Use of shallow DOF can look bad or really good depends on how or who uses it.
Action shots done well is more camera technique such as pre-focusing and proper stabilization either through tripod or otherwise.
LEXPIX 4 months ago
Very informative! Thanks!
AtheistSweden 6 months ago
@AtheistSweden Thanks for watching.
LEXPIX 6 months ago