Gizmodo 
Enter your username and password.
Tip your editors:
tips@gizmodo.com
Editorial Director:
Brian Lam | Email | Twitter
Editor:
Jason Chen
Email | AIM | Twitter
Features Editor:
Wilson Rothman
Email | Twitter
Senior Contributing Editors:
Jesus Diaz
Email | AIM | Twitter
Mark Wilson, Reviews
Email | AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Matt Buchanan
Email | AIM | Twitter
Adam Frucci
Email | Twitter
Sean Fallon
Email | Twitter
Jack Loftus
Email | Twitter
John Herrman
Email | Twitter
Dan Nosowitz
Email
Chris Mascari
Email
Danny Allen
Email | Twitter
Rosa Golijan
Email | Twitter
Chris Jacob
Email
Columnist:
Brendan I. Koerner
Interns:
Don Nguyen
Email
Kyle VanHemert
Email
Comment Intern:
Nick Ellenoff | Email
Comment Account Questions:
Comments@gizmodo.com
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
11/10/09
11/10/09
The real question here is...does it still have a jello effect? #canoneos7d
11/10/09
09/01/09
[photo.net]
09/01/09
09/01/09
Also, who REALLY wants their DSLR to be a video camera? I agree with Eugenia that this seems to be the best iteration of DSLR video, but why do we keep insisting on trying to cram video into our DSLRs? The only people who can really use this are videographers who are trying to get a large sensor on the cheap, but who would be far better served to save their pennies and get a more professional rig. I would dearly love Canon (and the other camera makers) to focus on making their cameras the best cameras for PHOTOGRAPHERS and not one that is only good for photographers, and kinda good for videographers. If they really want to do video for the semi-pro video guys, perhaps they should work some more on their camcorders.
Oh, and for MrThunderfield, according to rumors, this is going to replace the xxD line. From here on out, they can just do Mk II, III, IV, yadda, yadda, from here on out on the 1, 5, and 7 lines instead of upping the number every time.
09/01/09
But that comparison is bad. There are tons of amateur videographers making use of this, and getting results "saving some pennies to get a more profissional rig" won't help.
Because "some pennies" isn't an accurate description of "double the price or even more".
Also, convergence and convenience. Maybe you didn't notice, but there are several photographers making use of video functions to add to their work.
It's a pretty nice bonus to throw in some short videos of social events when you're hired to compose an album or something.
09/01/09
I do love the 5D, but it could be improved, especially the weather-sealing - I managed to jam my shutter button with a single grain of sand. Also, an option to shoot 720p would be great - sometimes 1080 is just overkill.
09/01/09
See, the point is here that this is first a DSLR and second, a DSLR that can shoot video. And, herein lies the problem:
DSLRs were NEVER originally designed to shoot video. Nikon's advent of LiveView (with tech borrowed from Sony) allowed the prosumer (and professional) to view an image on the lcd screen, which benefits photojournalists greatly.
But, true photogs haven't a need for video through a DSLR. True photogs/videographers would prefer something like the Panasonic AJ-HPX3000, which has true 1080p recording, 50Mbps recordings and selectable codecs.
See where I am going with this? Speaking from a photographer's point of view (I am a photog btw), quality overrules gimmicky features at a price point designated for the amateur/consumer market.
In any case, codiac2600 basically beat me to the punch. Good show.
09/01/09
Except some still cameras, like the GH1, are good enough at video to be used by filmmakers who are not photographers, like myself, because they stepped it up with the video feature and gave us a large aritculating LCD, etc.
09/01/09
09/01/09
At the expense of a sensor that produces more noise than Nikon and Canon cameras in its price range.
No thanks.
09/01/09
I haven't had any problems with noise on my GH1 even in low light, and especially not when using fast glass.
You're also using a sensor that performs better than the sensors on any prosumer video camera in that price range (there aren't any), much better than consumer video cameras, and better than most prosumer video cameras 2-5 times more expensive. The GH1 is really the filmmakers "DSLR."
09/01/09
One thing is what YOU would do to shoot videos, a whole other thing is what people out there are doing right now.
There are several situations and places where video shooting dSLRs are useful, if not the only option.
An equivalent camcorder would not only be more expensive, it'd also be extra luggage and not as convenient as the flip of a button.
The huge success the 5D Mark II is enough to prove that.
09/01/09
But this is a product that video-wise I can only shout from the top of my lungs: BUY IT NOW. I will pre-order asap.
The price is amazing for what you get (again, for video stuff). Real 24p, and 60p, and even real-er 30p at 29.97 fps -- something that I had been shouting about in these forums and I was trolled against for asking this feature! And here we are, Canon finally delivering to us filmmaking junkies the camera we always wanted.
If there's ONE additional feature I would ask, and that's a feature easily fixable by software, that would be official zebra support. There's no zebra support in video mode still, is it Gizmodo? You didn't mention it in the review...
Oh, and before I forget: this camera does 50 mbps in video mode, while the 5D "only" does 42 mbps. Again, this is amazing!
In conclusion, regarding video, this is the camera to get, with closed eyes!
09/01/09
Do we know yet if it's 24p, 60p, etc, or 23.9?
09/01/09
It does 23.976, 25.00, 29.97 at 1080p, and at 720p it does 50.00 and 59.94 fps, which are the correct frame rates.
09/01/09
I thought giz would have the actual numbers in the article so I wouldn't have to read through that again lol ;)
Very cool. That's exciting. I know a lot of 5D users who are jealous. As a GH1 user I'm jealous of the 1080/24pn...I don't even bother shooting 1080p on mine because (aside from enjoying how much easier 720p is to deal with in general and liking having good looking 60p-->24p and instant slow mo when I need it) I hate removing pulldown. Lol.
09/01/09
09/01/09
09/01/09
09/01/09
09/01/09
They included a semi-pro AF system that we can hope is up to snuff with the AF system Nikon has even though it has over less than half the number the D300 has. The ability to use a smaller amount of area does seem interesting, but is it practical during a shoot?
The premium LP-E6 is a great touch and a much needed upgrade over the BP511a. Now the bonus with Nikon is the ability to go with the ENEL4a which gives you aprox. 2000 shutter releases vs. anything else that may even try to compete.
The video doesn't matter and won't unless you can rid it of the jelly effect. Just sat down and watched a full length movie and a 30 minute movie done with the D90 and the 5dMKII and it was awful to watch. Not practical when the vertical sync on such a large surface just makes everything all trippy... Oh, and don't start me with how awful it is to watch a movie when they can't even keep focus on the subject cause f1.4 seems so cool, but impractical.
Now the one thing that may cause the camera to fail is the 18MP sensor... if we haven't already noticed the pixels only make things look amazing at ISO 100 - 200. After 400 those +14MP cameras just blew in low-light, which is how Nikon became king in all low light tests. I shoot alongside a lot of big cameras and the big reason I end up with accounts is how noise free my sports photos are, not how big it'll print.
Honestly after going over each and every feature it looks exactly like a D300 release list. Even has a knock of D-Lighting, uses color to base it's exposure, pop-up flash lighting control, high fps, digital level, 100% VF... the only thing they improved was better (still not worthy) video, more MP (big negative in my opinion) and the wireless grip option is a must have for pro shooters.
Mind you my comments come from someone who shoots Pentax, Nikon and Canon and does so professionally. Each brand has their plus side and minus side. In my whole hearted opinion this is a stab at copying Nikon spec for spec in the camera department, which Canon is fully capable of creating something far superior. In the video end of the spectrum Canon is king, but it's still not worthy of entertaining as I feel a real camcorder is far superior in keeping whats important in focus without the gurgling on the camera innards and expensive add ons needed to make it useable.
09/01/09
09/01/09
09/01/09
08/29/09
08/29/09
08/29/09
08/29/09
08/29/09
1) Sorry man, you're wrong. Studio photogs shooting Medium Format's have killer resolution at their disposal, not to mention the amount of crop you can get from high resolutions.
2) You've not played with the 5D2 then, because it's low light performance makes the baby jesus (diaz) cry.
08/29/09
Again, you're talking about physically larger sensors. On an APS-C, the pixel density is way too high to get decent high ISO performance (Theoretically).
High ISO performance is a non-factor in a studio environment.
Different horses for different courses, sir.
08/30/09
I am aware that the higher the pixel density, the higher the noise (theoretically). However, the 7D hasn't been released yet, and there aren't any images that show off what the camera can do, so it's pointless to whine about pixel to noise issues.
08/30/09
However, Canon screwed up with the 50D's S/N ratio and barring a major miracle, I wouldn't expect a lot better from a sensor with the same physical size and added pixel density.
As for the studio photography comment, the first guy was talking in the context ofDSLR photography. You brought medium formats into the equation. I was just pointing out that it wasn't a relevant comparison.