DSLR with 1080 for around $1000?

[Throckmorton]

Originally Posted by LikeLinus

Clueless as usual.

http://philipbloom.net/2012/01/19/lu...inally-online/

http://philipbloom.net/2012/04/13/nab2012a/

So because George Lucas shoots at 1920x1080 and then crops to a much smaller res, which then gets upscaled to a much higher res for a digital projector, that somehow refutes what I said?

[RampantAndroid]

Originally Posted by Throckmorton

Which DSLR shoots at high enough res for cinema? Heck, 1080p isn't enough res for HDTV because you can't crop.

Yeah. I stand behind saying it currently is a toy. I'm sorry, but the AF is clunky at best on most DSLRs, and I don't think many viewers enjoy watching AF hunt in video. I sure as hell don't.

Manual focus could work, but requires a lot more skill/a very good eye.

[Munky]

Originally Posted by Throckmorton

Why would you choose the GH2 over a Sony with phase detect autofocus? Is the video quality better?

Because Sony's translucent mirror phase detect AF works better in theory than in practice, especially when it comes to tracking objects in motion or when using small apertures. Their AF in video only works in P mode, where you have little control over other parameters. Plus for all the other reasons that Sony caters to the clueless consumer while other companies understand what enthusiasts really want. Their noise reduction is atrocious. Their physical controls are a joke on anything but high end bodies. In-body stabilization is inferior to lens-based VR. The mirror robs 2/3 stop of light. The ever-present proprietary hot shoe.

Instead, they keep introducing new dummy gimmicks, like smile shutter, auto portrait framing, and a bunch of other stuff I never cared to remember.

[LikeLinus]

Originally Posted by RampantAndroid

Yeah. I stand behind saying it currently is a toy. I'm sorry, but the AF is clunky at best on most DSLRs, and I don't think many viewers enjoy watching AF hunt in video. I sure as hell don't.

Manual focus could work, but requires a lot more skill/a very good eye.

See, this is exactly what consumer camera users do not understand. Here is a hint, 99.9% of professional filmmakers use manual focus. On high-end productions, there will be a separate person to act as "Focus Puller". How many of you "photographers" here shoot professional video? Yeah, didn't think so. So calling it a toy because you're not able to use it correctly doesn't make it a toy. Did you know the $30,000 C500 doesn't even have an autofocus? So I guess it's a toy too, right? By your ignorant statement, all the professional cameras must be toys. Makes perfect sense.

Throckmorton - What I posted wasn't to "refute" what was said. It's to show your ignorance on what productions are using DSLR. You asked "Which DSLR shoots at high enough res for cinema?" That is an all encompassing term and you're acting like you have to shoot at 4k or film for everything. You're ignorantly making the assumption that a DP or principle cinematographer doesn't want to use the look/DOF that a DSLR can provide. You're flat out wrong and you need to educate yourself before making statements about something you apparently know nothing about.

Really, if you think about it, cameras like the C300/C500 (Super 35mm sensor) and Red cameras coming out are basically a bridge between the traditional film/studio cameras and the DSLR world. To think DSLR and those types of cameras are not a viable option for movie production is silly. It's already happening and getting bigger by the minute.

[Throckmorton]

I'm reading about the C300. It looks like instead of de-mosaicing its quad HD grid, it creates a pixel out of each set of 4 (RGBW). Interesting camera
http://www.gizmag.com/the-new-canon-...-camera/20383/

[Cattykit]

Originally Posted by swanysto

We are talking about $7000+ DSLR's(1Ds) though, when it comes to movies. Even with as far as DSLR's have come, I don't think I would buy a D5100 for mostly video in mind.

There are so many movies shot with DSLRs. I'm not talking about those people who shooot whatever they can only to upload it on Youtube. I'm talking about serious amateurs to respected DPs. DSLRs hold their own merit and it's proven to work by numerous examples. You'd be surprised to find out how even a cheap entry level camera like 550D was used to shoot a high quality cinema that made its way to Sundance Film Festival.

Originally Posted by Throckmorton

Why would you choose the GH2 over a Sony with phase detect autofocus? Is the video quality better?

Munky nailed it in his post. Though phase detect autofocus sounds great, its terrible in actual shooting. Its way-too-fast autofocus only dramatizes lens breating issues. Its occasional AF hunting and miss creates very distracting visual. Mix them with the fact you can't control shutter speed, you get one hell of a distracting (flicker+forward & backward AF hunting+lens breating) visual.

Originally Posted by Throckmorton

So because George Lucas shoots at 1920x1080 and then crops to a much smaller res, which then gets upscaled to a much higher res for a digital projector, that somehow refutes what I said?

Keep it mind cinema standard is currently 2K only which is close to 1080p than 4K. Though camera makers just started pushing 4K, the whole infrastructure is currently at 2k. Hell, even actual films get scanned in 2K when they get mastered. Also, I don't understand why you're so concerned about cropping ability. Though it's nice, it's just not something people in cinema industry actually care about. Where did you even get the idea George Lucas cropped 1080p image?

This is not to say higher resolution like 4K is meaningless. 4K is the future and it'll be the norm in next several years. When you think about longevity side of the issue, shooting 4K even in this 2K era sounds good. But, it's not for the cropping reason you care so much about.

What DPs care about now is Dynamic range and tonal range. Look at RED gears and Arri Alexa. While RED cams offer 4K and other superior specifications, it is 2K Alexa that gets used widely. Ever wonder why?

[Cattykit]

Originally Posted by RampantAndroid

Yeah. I stand behind saying it currently is a toy. I'm sorry, but the AF is clunky at best on most DSLRs, and I don't think many viewers enjoy watching AF hunt in video. I sure as hell don't.

Manual focus could work, but requires a lot more skill/a very good eye.

Are you saying DSLRs are toys because of AF??
Even $100,000 cine cameras do not have any sort of AF functions. While RED cameras offer AF, it's for stills. Are those cameras toys based on your logic?

[xj0hnx]

Originally Posted by IamDavid

Thanks everyone! I ended up going with the D5100. It may not hae the best quaity but it seems perfect for what they'll use it for.

I HIGHLY recommend getting an external mic for video. The built in mic will pic up the lens focusing, your breathing, everything except what you want it to. Ok, it may not be that bad, but it does get annoying listening to the lens in videos.