The Canon 5dmkii for video?

[H2O Photo Pros]

Ron that is a heck of a comparison, I like it. very true too!!

 

[ronscuba]

I am a camera buff, and the difference between something like a g11 and say my t1i or a 7d is not noticeable unless you print pass 8x10. The quality of the bridge camera are remarkable and unless you crop in to 100% on a computer screen you will not see much difference.

I'm a video guy. On the video end, the difference between camcorders is not how they perform in good conditions, but how they perform in tough conditions. Low light, mixed light levels, different shades of color, easy access to manual controls, etc..

My Canon HV10 compared to my Sony FX7. Both look great outdoors with good light. Bring them indoors it's a different story. Underwater it's even a bigger difference. Advanced housings add advanced lenses and easy access to manual controls.

If I could get the same quality of video from my Canon HV10 Ikelite system that I get from my Gates Sony FX7 system, I would save myself a ton of money. You can't.

I think it's very similar for underwater photography.

Speaking of the Canon 7d and 5d, aren't they DSLR's that offer changeable lenses ? In addition, they both offer 1920x1080 HD video. It's the HD video combined with the lens options that have videographers excited. Lenses with apertures 1.8 and lower enable low light video and shallow depth of field no consumer camcorder can touch. Can't do that with a G11.

 

[shoturtle]

yes they are, but I would not get them for those features. They do not perform as well as a camcorder. I use a 1.8 prime lens, it allows me to do allot. But on the video side, the short comings of the system outweigh the the HD capability as I link a review for the OP.

 

[shoturtle]

No the G11 only open to f2.8, and no hd. But you can get a dmc-lx3 that has hd, with f2.8 or a sx20

 

[Gombessa]

Speaking of the Canon 7d and 5d, aren't they DSLR's that offer changeable lenses ? In addition, they both offer 1920x1080 HD video. It's the HD video combined with the lens options that have videographers excited. Lenses with apertures 1.8 and lower enable low light video and shallow depth of field no consumer camcorder can tough. Can't do that with a G11.

Among other features, but you nailed it. The light collection, constant aperture and shallow depth of field simply can't be matched by a p&s or prosumer compact. Current compacts like the G11 are definitely great, but you can only really approach DSLR performance in a narrow band of conditions (deep DOF, high available light).

 

[ronscuba]

yes they are, but I would not get them for those features. They do not perform as well as a camcorder. I use a 1.8 prime lens, it allows me to do allot. But on the video side, the short comings of the system outweigh the the HD capability as I link a review for the OP.

Well I guess we can continue our disagreement

I bought a 7d for it's video performance and love it. It's strengths out weigh it's weaknesses for the type of video I shoot. While not for everyone, DSLR's for video have big advantages and many people, pro's and amateurs are using them for video despite the negatives.

Another point to consider is keeping and using different equipment depending on the situation or shot. It's not uncommon for a finished video to have footage shot from different cameras. I know wedding videographers that use camcorders and DSLR's at the same wedding.

This discussion is proof that people have different needs and values. The camcorder or camera that is a great fit for one person may be a total disaster for another.

 

[shoturtle]

Hyjacked

I uses the 7D, and I think it shoots great photo. But as you stated, there are short coming that is why you yourself said that some project are cut shots form different camera. The HD is good for the surprise moment that pops up when shooting photos. Not saying that it not good to have, but it still has a way to go.

But I am not the one the seems to be pushing the point that the dslr for diving it the best solution for good photos. While I said it may not be the wisest thing for a non underwater pro to use a high end dslr for scuba. I am not disagreeing with the potential of HD in a dslr with the ability of lenses. I was saying that there is more then one way to skin a cat. I am not out to sell anything. For all we know the OP may only use it topside. And the 50dmkii is one of the best dslr out there on the pro level. I just pointed out that there are shot fall of the HD feature, because this it 1st gen. It will most likely get better.

 

[ronscuba]

OK back on point.

Big minus against DSLR's for underwater video is poor auto focus in video mode and how they set manual white balance. It's a multi-step process involving taking a picture, going to the menu, selecting the picture and then setting MWB.

With my Sony FX7 Gates combination, MWB mode can be active at all times and is set with 1 button push while in record mode. Done.

If you are looking for one UW system to do both photo and video just realize you will make a compromise. Underwater, cameras do photos best, camcorders do video best. Topside is debateable. As you can tell I am a big fan of the 7d for topside video.

 

[ryssyr]

PS,

I would not dive with that camera. Even with a great housing, at 2700 for just the body, I would not take a chance with a leak. I do not need a $3500 paper weight with the lens. imho.

I dive with the camera all the time. If i buy something I'm going to use it. Thats what insurance is for.

 

[peterbj7]

I dive with my G10 and I get surprisingly good amateur video with it. My 5D will never see the ocean, for the reasons given. If I want high quality video I use a proper HD video camera, at a cost many times what my 5D + housing would be.

If I were to take a DSLR underwater I'd choose a full frame every time. I don't care how good any reduced sensor camera is, it doesn't come close to a good FF one. In my case it would be Canon or Nikon only.