Senior Contributing Editors:
Jesus Diaz
| AIM | Twitter
Mark Wilson, Reviews
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Matt Buchanan | AIM | Twitter
Adam Frucci | Twitter
Sean Fallon | Twitter
Jack Loftus | Twitter
John Herrman | Twitter
Dan Nosowitz
Chris Mascari
Danny Allen | Twitter
Rosa Golijan | Twitter
Chris Jacob
This seems like a 15 year old's wet dream. Nothing but drunk girls in bikini's for a minute, then nothing but Navy SEALS hosing down the deck with testosterone for another minute.
You know I actually have noticed the difference, stuff filmed with digital has a unnatural movement. I can get used to it when it is all film or all digital but stuff that is mixed media (like some tv shows I watch) really bug me. I know a lot of people dont notice it but it bugs me. Its like the whole 60/120Hz thing. I loathe 120Hz cause the movement seems unnatural.
@christopherbrosz: Digital on it's own doesn't produce that "soap-opera" effect. 120 Hz is an effect cause by TV's that interpolate frames. #shanehurlbutcontest
Well, I see the point.
There's a good enough gap that experts will be able to tell the difference, but it's getting harder nowadays... which is really exciting!
I don't see pro equipment being replaced anytime soon on big productions, but still it's very nice to know that soon enough short quality pieces could be made with consumer-grade equipment.... #shanehurlbutcontest
@89macrunner: It is not $5k, it's $2.6k. And it's not a "pro" camera, no. Pro cameras, like the newly updated 1D IV, do cost $5k, and are waterproof, among other features. The 5D is not a pro cam though. #shanehurlbutcontest
@89macrunner: It IS a consumer device because someone like you could eventually buy one, even if you had to save money for a couple of years.
As opposed to professional equipment, which can cost 10 times that.
Consumer grade isn't the same as cheap. It's more about the difference between being able to buy it yourself, and needing financial support from a company or business to do so. #shanehurlbutcontest
Oh, this is annoying. EVERY one of my downloading efforts for his HD videos time outs before it finishes downloading the file. His server needs tweaking... #shanehurlbutcontest
Yeah, a lot of the shots are with the 5D. Especially the ones that are a little bit slow-mo (shot in 30p and then slowed down'ed 25% to 24p).
It's great to see these dSLRs making it through to big films. The BEST [prolost.com] big-sensor camera right now is the Canon 7D for $1600 (plus lenses). It has more video-specific features than the 5D, for $1000 less. The 5D is a tiny bit better in low light though (the 7D is still awesomely good in low light too compared to consumer and even many prosumer cameras).
@Eugenia: Isn't that discrepancy being alleviated with the new firmware update promised for the 5D MKII?
Besides the best would undeniably be the 1D MKIV. The 7D is just "merely" the cheapest priced of the bunch ;) #shanehurlbutcontest
@Eugenia: I'm sorry, but the best big sensor camera (considering the cost) right now is the 5D Mark II because it is full frame and has easily usable ISO sensitivity up to 3200 whereas the 7D is an APS-C crop sensor which is clearly not a big-sensor (in physical size). I've worked with both the 5D Mark II and the 7D and the 5D is clearly better in low light. The 7D is a fantastic camera with several features that outperform the 5D, but low light is not one of them. The video feature will be addressed in a FW update that someone here already mentioned.
Incidentally, the 5D Mark II is a pro camera as many professionals trust this camera to earn an income, myself included. The most expensive camera does not a pro-camera make... By the same token, the 7D is a pro camera. #shanehurlbutcontest
@Pressure: No, the 5D can't have all the frame rates that the 7D is capable of, because it uses a single chip instead of two that the 7D/1D uses. The 5D firmware upgrade only adds 24/25p, but not 50/60p (which is useful for good slow-mo).
The 1D is not the best deal for video. It's the best for pics, but not for video. The *only* thing it does better is that it has less rolling shutter effects. But everything else is better overall in the 7D/5D, especially when considering the prices involved. #shanehurlbutcontest
@zer0zen: Read the article I linked. As I explained above, the ONLY thing that the 5D does better than the 7D is about 10% better low light support. The rest, is all in favor of the 7D though: bitrate, frame rates, controls, less rolling shutter, price.
The sensor size is not a big deal considering the added features, especially if you have the right lenses. The $1000 of difference is simply too big to justify the better low light support. #shanehurlbutcontest
@Eugenia: If you shoot pro gigs, you'd know that increased sensitivity, even a single stop, is a wonderful thing which is one of the reasons pros will fork over more money to get a lens that's a stop faster, or a new camera. The full frame also means a pro can work in tighter spaces and still get a wide shot, something an APS-C sensor cannot do.
I'm not knocking the 7D, it's a great tool, but the 5D outpaces it in low light and sensor size which are a couple of very critical parameters that should not be dismissed so easily. You seem to be video focused and that's fine, but disregarding what the 5D offers? That's a bit short-sided.
@Eugenia: LaForet quietly hinted that the 5D MKII would also get 60p as per the press release. So far we do not know if the inclusion of a single Digic IV in the 5D MKII really is the culprit at hand.
Anyway, I am very happy with the 5D MKII but I am also primarily using it for photographing.
The 7D (as far as I have seen) produces less sharp (blurrier) video compared to the 5D MKII. It could, of course, all come down to skill. #shanehurlbutcontest
@zer0zen: Yes, I am only talking about video when I discuss it above. I am not interested in the still pictures ability really. I almost never shoot stills. The few times I do, I just use a cheap digicam. But I am more into video, so... #shanehurlbutcontest
All I need to know is what's the deal with the flower-petal bit on the end of the lens? I've seen them before, but never had a clear explanation for their purpose. Is it so you don't end up cutting the corners off of an otherwise rectangular photo?
Having been through the last Canon Vs. Nikon round. I will remain neutral and say that I'm very pleased to see both companies producing such stellar equipment.
10/28/09
I like it. #shanehurlbutcontest
10/28/09
10/28/09
10/28/09
There's a good enough gap that experts will be able to tell the difference, but it's getting harder nowadays... which is really exciting!
I don't see pro equipment being replaced anytime soon on big productions, but still it's very nice to know that soon enough short quality pieces could be made with consumer-grade equipment.... #shanehurlbutcontest
10/28/09
I mean, either way, if I'm watching this on a computer, it's all been converted to a digital format. #shanehurlbutcontest
10/28/09
10/28/09
10/28/09
10/28/09
As opposed to professional equipment, which can cost 10 times that.
Consumer grade isn't the same as cheap. It's more about the difference between being able to buy it yourself, and needing financial support from a company or business to do so. #shanehurlbutcontest
10/28/09
10/28/09
10/28/09
It's great to see these dSLRs making it through to big films. The BEST [prolost.com] big-sensor camera right now is the Canon 7D for $1600 (plus lenses). It has more video-specific features than the 5D, for $1000 less. The 5D is a tiny bit better in low light though (the 7D is still awesomely good in low light too compared to consumer and even many prosumer cameras).
10/28/09
Besides the best would undeniably be the 1D MKIV. The 7D is just "merely" the cheapest priced of the bunch ;) #shanehurlbutcontest
10/28/09
Incidentally, the 5D Mark II is a pro camera as many professionals trust this camera to earn an income, myself included. The most expensive camera does not a pro-camera make... By the same token, the 7D is a pro camera. #shanehurlbutcontest
10/28/09
The 1D is not the best deal for video. It's the best for pics, but not for video. The *only* thing it does better is that it has less rolling shutter effects. But everything else is better overall in the 7D/5D, especially when considering the prices involved. #shanehurlbutcontest
10/28/09
The sensor size is not a big deal considering the added features, especially if you have the right lenses. The $1000 of difference is simply too big to justify the better low light support. #shanehurlbutcontest
10/28/09
I'm not knocking the 7D, it's a great tool, but the 5D outpaces it in low light and sensor size which are a couple of very critical parameters that should not be dismissed so easily. You seem to be video focused and that's fine, but disregarding what the 5D offers? That's a bit short-sided.
BTW, for some inside info from Canon on the 5D Mark II's quirks and birth (and corrects assumptions people have made about the 5D's video): [www.digitalcinemasociety.com] #shanehurlbutcontest
10/28/09
Anyway, I am very happy with the 5D MKII but I am also primarily using it for photographing.
The 7D (as far as I have seen) produces less sharp (blurrier) video compared to the 5D MKII. It could, of course, all come down to skill. #shanehurlbutcontest
10/28/09
10/28/09
02/26/09
02/26/09
02/26/09
02/26/09
In the picture it looks like the canon 24-105 f4 L, which is a nice lens, but the 24-70 f2.8L is a much better (imo--optically).
The best part about the ISO perf, is with a little post processing noise reduction software, you can get some pretty great shots.
02/26/09
02/26/09
02/26/09
02/26/09
It's great (except to the wallet) that both companies are making each other better.
I have a 5Dm2, it's my 3rd DSLR; and it's phenomenal.