DSLR vs Prosumer??

A forum to share ideas and opinions on the equipment and technical aspects of film, video and AV making.
Post Reply
Paddy Duffy
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 4:48 pm

DSLR vs Prosumer??

Post by Paddy Duffy »

Hi everyone.

While finishing my script for next years BIAFF attempt, I always look at my equipment for the new shoot and what I may need to improve on last year.
For my film last year I used a Canon 600d DSLR. While the picture was fantastic the whole experience of filming with the equipment took away the fun that I felt with camcorders in the past. There is the audio issues, the time limitations of the shots and all the additional extras that needed just to name a few. I have been looking at the Canon HF G30 prosumer camera and like what I have seen so far.

Although I'am 29 years of age I'm quite old school in the way I like to film, the DSLR filming era seems nice and flashy but it only seems to personally take the fun away from filming

Does anyone with experience of both cameras have any advice, should I continue and persevere with the DSLR way of filming or is the G30 and prosumer camera just as good and versatile?
User avatar
TimStannard
Posts: 1225
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 5:20 pm
Location: Surrey

Re: DSLR vs Prosumer??

Post by TimStannard »

Paddy Duffy wrote:While the picture was fantastic the whole experience of filming with the equipment took away the fun that I felt with camcorders in the past.
I understand your dilemma, but don't assume that it's the additional work with a DSLR that is taking the fun away.

With most hobbies - certainly those that have a technical aspect - the better we become, the less satisfied we are with what we produce (our ability grows, but not as much as our ability to find flaws in what we've done) and the more care we take over every aspect of what we do. What I'm saying here is that you might find that even with a traditional camcorder, you may well find you don't have as much fun as you used to as you are more aware of composition, lighting, exposure, depth of field, audio etc etc etc.

The other point I'd make is that the time spent filming is usually only a very small amount of time spent working on a film. So if you think you are making any compromises by using a camcorder rather than a DSLR, you will feel those compromises possibly during planning (knowing a camcorder is not capable of certain shots), throughout the edit (where you'll forever be thinking how much "better" such and such a shot would be) and, of course, when showing it.

This is, of course, assuming that you think the DSLR shots genuinely would be better or more suitable.

This is not meant to persuade you one way or the other, I'd just hate you to ditch the DSLR for the wrong reasons.

(BTW I'm a traditional camcorder user, simply because a lot of the stuff I film is events and I need to be able to point and shoot.)
Tim
Proud to be an amateur film maker - I do it for the love of it
ned c
Posts: 910
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 3:39 pm
Location: Dammeron Valley USA

Re: DSLR vs Prosumer??

Post by ned c »

Some thoughts on camcorder v DSLR. Historically I have used camcorders and my experience with 3 Canon camcorders have been excellent, they know how to make lenses and their image processing is excellent. I have an earlier model in the Vixia series and use it regularly and recommend the series as fine cameras. I also use a large sensor camcorder with interchangeable lenses and was recently involved in front of the camera in a production using a Canon 5D DSLR (you can see the results in "Over the Hill" by Shaun Labrecque). Shooting a narrative film is different from shooting a documentary. In narrative shooting there is the preparation, the lighting, the rehearsal, which lens to use, camera position and then the actor forgets his lines, do it again, the sound drops out, if you are using prime lenses change the lens or move the camera and so on. Ideally the director and the cinematographer are two people which shifts the burden of the camerawork to the cinematographer. For a one person shoot then the traditional camcorder is the instrument of choice in my opinion.

What do you think?

ned c
User avatar
Dave Watterson
Posts: 1872
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 11:11 pm
Location: Bath, England
Contact:

Re: DSLR vs Prosumer??

Post by Dave Watterson »

A sideline on this ... at the UNICA festival a member of the jury was a DP and hen casually mentioned that most Hollywood movies are shot at f5.6 ... not the wide-open settings DSLR users often discuss. He pointed out that this meany having a whole lot of light on set.

I am sure most non-commercial film makers who shoot holidays films, reportage and only occasional drama or "studied documentary" films will be far better off with a camcorder design that can be used to run-and-gun. DSLRs are fine for makers of scripted/controlled setting work like drama or many music videos.
User avatar
John Roberts
Posts: 320
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 8:42 am
Contact:

Re: DSLR vs Prosumer??

Post by John Roberts »

I think at the end of the day it's what you're most comfortable with, and if Paddy is not enjoying himself with his current set-up, whatever the reason, then he is in danger of losing interest and moving on to something else.

I dabbled with still photography years before I ventured into making any videos, and camcorders were the only equipment I ever used for the latter. I've now moved onto a GH3 and to be honest I cannot see any reason why I would want to return to a camcorder - there's nothing I can't do on the GH3 that I can do on a camcorder and I can run and gun if I need to - I have an LCD screen or an eyepiece, IS lenses, focus tracking/following, exposure modes from full manual to full auto and almost instant start-up, but with the benefit of being able to use far better quality lenses and a larger (than most prosumer camcorders) sensor. Plus I can open the aperture wide to get fantastic differential focus with some incredibly fast (sub f1.0) lenses - if I want to! I've rattled off a couple of music videos lately, using the GH3 hand held with a stock lens in auto focus and manual exposure modes with manual zooms - the photographer simply switched it on, pressed record, threw it around and the focus and exposure never faltered, and no hint at all of rolling shutter. Plus the MILC system is smaller than a DSLR so weight is less of an issue and it's always to hand because it's slung around my neck like a stills camera, leaving my hands free until I need it.


I'm not surprised that Hollywood doesn't shoot wide open, there have been instances of TV dramas lately going completely overboard with shallow depth of field and pull focus when there is really no need to, and it's hard work to follow a production filmed in this way for any length of time. Our eye might emulate a shallow depth of field but the act of focusing is entirely automatic and overuse in a film presentation just draws attention to it and pulls the viewer out of the illusion of reality. Differential focus is great for isolating the subject(s) you wish the viewer to concentrate on, but it takes great skill as a filmmaker to get the balance right. Very few of us can do it, unfortunately I'm not one of them. :(

John
User avatar
TimStannard
Posts: 1225
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 5:20 pm
Location: Surrey

Re: DSLR vs Prosumer??

Post by TimStannard »

John Roberts wrote: I'm not surprised that Hollywood doesn't shoot wide open, there have been instances of TV dramas lately going completely overboard with shallow depth of field and pull focus when there is really no need to, and it's hard work to follow a production filmed in this way for any length of time.
Amen to that!
Tim
Proud to be an amateur film maker - I do it for the love of it
ned c
Posts: 910
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 3:39 pm
Location: Dammeron Valley USA

Re: DSLR vs Prosumer??

Post by ned c »

John, what system do you use for sound recording? For "Over the Hill" Shaun recorded into the camera as a guide track and then we post dubbed our lines. For my limited attempts with a DSLR i used a Zoom H2N.

I suspect that f5.6 is what feature cinematographers would like to shoot at but in reality many features are shot at much wider settings, one quick reference, "Guardians of the Galaxy" was shot at T2.8. This is why a focus puller is a part of the crew. Shallow depth of field is very effective but I do agree that pulling focus back and forth is distracting.

ned c
Paddy Duffy
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 4:48 pm

Re: DSLR vs Prosumer??

Post by Paddy Duffy »

Thank you all for taking the time to reply.

A lot of good points made for and against the DSLR. Some good points to think about. Ned I loved Over the hill, brilliant film.
User avatar
John Roberts
Posts: 320
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 8:42 am
Contact:

Re: DSLR vs Prosumer??

Post by John Roberts »

Hi Ned, I generally use a Tascam DR-05 (which I think is probably quite similar to the Zoom H2N) and borne out of necessity because the budget HDC-SD10 camcorder I used previously had no facility for external microphones or headphones. The GH3, as is the case with most DSLR's, can also be used with an external microphone, but the audio options are limited and the DR-05 gives me more flexibility.

John
col lamb
Posts: 680
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2007 9:51 pm
Location: Preston, Lancashire

Re: DSLR vs Prosumer??

Post by col lamb »

The GH4 is a great camera and has 4k capabilities, if you do not want to spend that much look at the G6.

I have one and it has manual audio level controls if you wish, a socket for an external mike and best of all in automatic mode iA it is point and shoot.

I also have a 7D and that is not a point and shoot camera so I would think that the 600D is similar. Great results but you have to work at it.
Col Lamb
Preston, Lancashire.
FCPX, Edius6.02, and Premiere CS 5.5 user.
Find me on Facebook, Colin Lamb
User avatar
Dave Watterson
Posts: 1872
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 11:11 pm
Location: Bath, England
Contact:

Re: DSLR vs Prosumer??

Post by Dave Watterson »

As always in our hobby, detailed discussion of kit may be overtaken by events as a slew of new cameras is currently being announced. It would be foolish of the manufacturers not to cater for the needs of movie makers in the ergonomics of their systems. I see the new Canon 7D mark II camera includes autofocus in its movie mode.
User avatar
John Roberts
Posts: 320
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 8:42 am
Contact:

Re: DSLR vs Prosumer??

Post by John Roberts »

+1 Col for the G6 / GH3 / GH4 line up - for the first time in a long time I actually enjoy taking a camera out with me everywhere, without having to trouble myself with the dilemma of whether to take the stills camera OR the camcorder, which has always been the case in the past. I visited a museum at the weekend, and spotted a few 'enthusiasts' with full frame DSLR slung around their necks along with camcorder gripped in right hand. At least they had a hand free for a mug of coffee :-)

I think the audio capabilities of almost all DSLR and MILC systems are on a par with camcorders - as you rightly pointed out we have access to external microphone and headphone sockets and also manual level controls, but not much else. An external sound recorder will give you further tools such as a compressor or limiter (not the dreaded 'Auto Gain Control') so that a decent audio level can be recorded without fear of overload or 'pumping' of the audio level. These features are not generally available in prosumer kit. A separate recorder also has the advantage of recording uncompressed audio at a high sample rate, or if it is compressed then codecs used are more specialised and not an 'afterthought' as can be the case with some video codecs. The 'transparency' and clarity of budget sound recorders coupled to a half decent microphone can be stunning. But, it's extra kit to carry around!

John
Post Reply