| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
Canon's Global Domination Plan
Erik Markov, Photographer
 |
Kokomo | IN | | Posted: 11:53 PM on 10.02.09 |
->> I think Canon is trying to take over the world, or at least the video portion.
I just saw this link to a Frontline piece that was done with the 5DMKII http://gizmodo.com/5373320/high-definition-war-footage-taken-with-canon-5d-...
And I could swear I saw a link earlier that said the opening intro piece for SNL was shot with a 5D or a 7D, but I can't find the link now.
These are Hedley Lamar times we are living in. I say that b/c somebody is going to need to go back and get a *&^% load of dimes so I can afford all this stuff. If you don't get the reference, well I don't know what to say.... |
|
Jeff Mills, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Columbus | OH | USA | Posted: 12:24 AM on 10.03.09 |
->> I think it all will come down to if/when the Red Scarlet system comes into reality
If that system delivers half of what it promises I think its going to change the game for the whole industry |
|
Erik Markov, Photographer
|
Kokomo | IN | | Posted: 12:50 AM on 10.03.09 |
| ->> Speaking of Red, apparently Esquire's cover of Kate Beckinsale was shot with the Mysterium X chip which is a little bigger than the Red One. I don't know how that all works with the capabilities of the cameras and video etc etc. But things are definitely getting much more ridiculous in the digital age, in a good way I guess. Waiting for it all to shake out tho is boring. |
|
PJ Heller, Photographer
|
Santa Barbara | CA | USA | Posted: 1:24 AM on 10.03.09 |
->> Link to info about the SNL opening shot with Canon gear:
http://tinyurl.com/yet7bbn |
|
David A. Cantor, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Toledo | OH | USA | Posted: 1:48 AM on 10.03.09 |
| ->> My experience with Danfung has shown me how respectful and therefore capable a photographer he continues to be. Stunning work like his transcends the tools used to produce it...... |
|
David Harpe, Photographer
|
Louisville | KY | USA | Posted: 5:13 AM on 10.03.09 |
->> It's all about cost and availability. A 5D2 with a nice lens kit will run you $5,000, and you can buy it off the shelf immediately from your local camera store.
A comparable RED system will cost you easily twice that, and you have to make deposits and sprinkle magic pixie dust just to have the honor of getting on a waiting list. For your efforts you will be rewarded with a very capable system that will produce spectacular images and has a lot of flexibility with all of the changeable parts, and with all of that hand machined metal and black paint - an eye catching rig :-).
A RED camera is not exactly an "impulse" kind of product. It's not the kind of camera you're going to just want to go out and screw around with and see what you can get. It's expensive and replacement parts are days away through a dealership. Break something or need another piece and it's expensive and you're going to have to wait awhile. All of this means most people are going to bust out a RED when they really have something they need to shoot, and chances are they're going to do it with a bunch of support equipment to make it worth the effort.
The 5D2 on the other hand really favors the creative impulse. It's cheap, small, readily available and produces top-notch footage. It's the kind of camera that if a director and a couple of people want to just go out and screw around to see what they can get, it's easy to do so. It's cheap and easy. You can toss it in the car and take it with you. It favors the "best camera" mantra.
It doesn't mean the RED is going to be a failure by any stretch. But it'll never be as mainstream as the Canon and Nikon products, which means you'll be seeing a lot more footage produced with 5D2/7D/D700 systems than you will with RED systems. |
|
Jeff Mills, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Columbus | OH | USA | Posted: 11:56 AM on 10.03.09 |
->> I do agree with your points David, but personally just don't feel the 5D2, D300s et al are really an end all solution either. Yes they can produce nice footage, but they also are a bit of a compromise as well and for that reason I can't see them becoming a mainstream cinema product either.
Sure you can rig up a 5D2 with bunch of accessories to make it pretty functional, but ultimately what people are after isn't a DSLR that can shoot video, but rather the ability to shoot video with a large sensor for its motion picture look and high image quality. Or more so those abilities without breaking the bank.
Designing a system around a DSLR body though just isn't the best platform. If/when someone, perhaps even Canon or Sony etc, comes out with a cam thats designed around the larger chips but with the feature set of a dedicated video camera, and for a reasonable price, I think the trend of using a DSLR with video mode will be practically dead overnight because again, its not so much novel that a DSLR can shoot video, but its that its doing it with a larger chip and giving film makers access to a motion picture look that they can't otherwise obtain with the dedicated video cameras on the market. |
|
David Harpe, Photographer
|
Louisville | KY | USA | Posted: 1:36 PM on 10.03.09 |
->> It depends on what you mean by mainstream. If you are talking about every commercial being shot with a DSLR rig, no way. I think more and more you'll see them being used in B-camera situations on major productions. You'll also see them in situations where someone wants that cinema look but doesn't have that cinema budget. DSLRs are also useful in high risk situations where you don't want to risk a $100k CineAlta camera or even a $30k RED - like those guys who hooked a 5D2 up to a radio controlled helicopter.
Everyone is looking for something different, and creative folks love the challenge of a new (and even quirky) platform. Look at all of the still shooters that have developed entire looks around using things like Lensbabies and Lomos and the like.
The folks who can afford and want to deal with a fully tricked out digital cinema rig have had that capability for years now - even before RED came on the scene. It's mostly rental anyway, so cost-of-ownership isn't a big factor at that level. The guys that are doing $30k a day shoots are still going to be doing $30k a day shoots...if for no other reason than they get a percentage :-). But instead of just going with one or two RED setups they might have two or three DSLRs around for B-footage as well.
Something that you're also ignoring is the wide array of existing lenses for DSLR platforms. If you're shooting high end digital video, lenses are psychotically expensive. By comparison 35mm still camera lenses are practically a commodity. A RED prime set costs $19,000 and you have to wait weeks for delivery. An equivalent set for Canon or Nikon DSLRs can be ordered from B&H for a few grand and you can have it tomorrow.
It isn't that people who have budgets for RED shoots won't still do RED shoots - but someone who is experimenting or is working on a shoestring can now afford to get a look that very closely approximates what you can get with a RED for a fraction of the cost.
That's why these new cameras are a game changer and will be around for quite awhile. It allows folks who could not afford that look an easy and cost effective way to get into the game. Just look at all the amazing work that has come out so far - and not just from Vincent and others who are serious pros. A lot of relative unknowns are producing really creative work - because they can afford to play with a rig like this. That's very cool. |
|
Jeff Mills, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Columbus | OH | USA | Posted: 10:24 PM on 10.03.09 |
->> I totally agree with you in terms of content and users David, I just don't think the DSLR is going to be the platform for long.
I think someone is going to put a larger 35mm sized sensor its a camera system like the Canon XL1, and while it could take existing 35mm lens, a new market of dedicated video lens, perhaps with a smooth electronic zoom, silent focus motors etc is going to come out as well.
Sure a 5D2 produces great content but if your not interesting in using it as a still camera, the fact the product you bought for dedicated video work is housing in a silly SLR style body with useless features such as the mirror box aren't required.
If the price points were similar and the chips and imaging ability was the same, I dont think any film maker would choose a 5D2 style body over a X1 HD style body.
I've shot with a number of them from both Canon and Nikon and while they certainly can produce cool results, I much prefered using a dedicated video camera. Its just far easier to use, only thing it can't do is match the overall IQ.
DSLR video is industry leading IQ but with a seriously lacking feature set, in part due to the very design of a DSLR.
Maybe rather than the video camera changing, its the very nature of the DSLR that is going to change
Perhaps in the coming future things like EVF's are going to replace mirror boxes for example.
When you stop and think about it, the current DSLR design is really a bit dated, because the overall form and fucntion was based off of a 35mm film body.
Get rid of the mirror box, put in a high resolution and quickly refreshing EVF, add a 920K 4" flip out LCD etc and as long as it works well, theres really not much reason to stick with the traditional SLR camera design.
I don't know if you've ever used a Panasonic GH1 but its pretty impressive as far as what they can do with EVF's and doing away with the phase based AF system.
Same goes with the if we begin to see RED style sensors that can give us 60 FPS at 6meg RAW files. In 5 years are we even going to be shooting stills for sporting events or is everything going to be video with frame grabs for the last vestiges of print media left ? |
|
Patrick Murphy-Racey, Photographer
|
Powell | TN | USA | Posted: 9:50 PM on 10.07.09 |
| ->> Are you guys just now figuring out that Canon is taking over the world? Hello!!!! |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|