So a nice addition? For the smaller freelancers: yes 100% sure.

Very interesting!!

http://videopia.org/content/view/257/229/

We really enjoyed the whole process, was fun hope you enjoy!

No.

“The medium is the message”; multimedia and video communicate differently than static images simply because of the medium used. Not all stories can be told the same way.

I have nikkor lenses from 10.5 to 400 including legends like the 50 1.2 – to replicate that in video would I beleive cost an arm and a leg

The D90 opens up those to me in a video use

I would buy the camera even if it didnt take stills – I have a D3 for that

S

I always found it laughable when one tries to do the other and claim they can do it equally well.

Each has it’s own nuances and I respect each sides skills set. It’s to the point of idiocy to assume as a still photographer, I can shoot video just as well as someone who has been doing video for as long as I’ve been doing still.

Granted, it’s fun to play around and experiment, but I don’t think one or the other will be taking each over’s job anytime soon.

I’ve heard videographers say that they will put still photographers out of business, hasn’t happend yet. And that was at least 10 years ago when I heard that stupid statement.

There is an unwritten law that says everytime a new media with exciting possibilities is invented, somehow a bunch of conservative bussiness people will make it lose those and behave like old media.

I am developing a pet hate against video on the net. I think internet offers a comunication channel particularly well suited for multimedia efforts and find extremely frustrating that newspapers ignore them -save for a few honorable exceptions- and transform it in some sort of third rate tv station with the same footage and programming you can watch on tv only smaller and shorter.

It’s impossible to do video and stills at the same time unless you don’t care about the outcome. Still, if I can find a way to shoot 25 fps video controlling the focus, with good lenses and a large sensor with a device that costs under US$ 3,000, I’l be very hapy.

Yay us who make our living off of print (sarcasism.)

I just breezed over the Luminous Landscape article and that’s the EXACT same mantra I’ve been saying for the last year and I’ve been warning on ePaper for 5 years now.

Print aside, the one thing that I see as a negative to the new still/video cameras is that it continues the tradition of technology making photography “easier.” When the RED cameras first came out I knew it wouldn’t be long until prosumer version did. And what I see is in this “anyone can be a photographer” era that digital has ushured in, is these cameras making it worse.

Sure it take real skill to take a quality photo, BUT just like digital allows you to snap hundreds of photos until you get lucky, so will it be easy to get “the right moment” by shooting 10 seconds of video and pulling the hi-res still that best captured it.

It looks like evolution is upon us once again.

Oliver Peoples (Eyewear) did celebrate it’s 20th anniversary with a cinema advertising campaign. A 30 seconds spot called ‘Mind Games’, featuring legendary film producer Robert Evans and Kate Nauta….

At http://www.oliverpeoples.com/index2.html you can compare both, the stills (slideshow) and the movie itself.

Make your own conclusions, please.

At a website … which one does transfer the message more successful (and faster) ?
How many people will start the movie spot ?
And WHY did Oliver Peoples add still frames in addition and not show the movie only ?

Btw, it’s worth looking at both … enjoy. (loudspeakers on )

Best, Reini

One of my friends is a photojournalist for a local newspaper and he now does it all, write, shoot (film and vid, but he carries a small digicam), edit, produce…that’s the trend as I can see it. For those “reporters” out there, carrying one beast makes more sense than two, I would imagine.

( it isn’t the links: this portion won’t post with only 1 single link.
It isn’t the quotes, I don’t think, capitalization, is there an arithmetic filter? I don’t know what it is, but it isn’t working. )

1/3 inch and 1/2 inch sensor *isn’t* what you think it is!

The “size”, is the *diameter of the Vidicon tube* that contained the sensor!
Therefore 1/2″ = 6.4mm * 4.8mm
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensor_format
( it’s one of those
“why couldn’t they have used standard measures in standard ways?”
things: you know, like “80x” flash-memory, instead of MB/s )

“anything shot from a distance won’t require quality sound” try a good shotgun, dude… Sennheiser makes ‘em ( although I hear Audio-Technica’s shotguns are also quite good, and less than $1k )

Who is saying *everyone* who has this *must* shoot video?
How many of you have cell-cameras that you don’t use?
or cell-video, for that matter?!??
Or cars that can pull trailers?
This is CAPABILITY, not enforcement-of-use.

Sony is @ 24Mpx, right?
Nikon’s got really good low-light, right?
Yes Canon’s pissing off a LOT of 1Ds photogs, but, they had to:
Canon intends that the Jan/Febbish refresh of the 1Ds scare SoNikon sockless.

Film Transfers are GONE, people.
Digital Cinema?
Anyone?
4k? 2k? heard of it?
24p is a *tradition*, a “look”, not a benefit, requirement, or even *worth much*
( some people aren’t getting continuous motion with 24p: I’ve seen the separate frames and the jump-motion between ‘em, sometimes in cinema. It completely destroys your flow. )

lights: These things should equal about 2k of halogen:
http://www.adorama.com/AZV2000WCHR.html
$700 or so, GE makes bulbs you can replace the Daylight balance bulbs with, if you want 4100 kelvins.
Speedring on it, takes 3x 150w HID bulbs, has a switch for each.
( PS, you could use ‘em as a torchiere, lighting up your ceiling, saving DRASTICALLY on electricity, for you home/office — I’ve seen some places that do that with HID. The GE bulbs are rated 20 000 h )

You want something for Run-n-gun?
Get 11 NiMH AAs, and string ‘em, and wire ‘em to this:
http://www.niterider.com/prod_slickrock.shtml
and put some diffusion material around its face.
cheap bright-as-hell ( for battery ) light.

IMAGE QUALITY.
it costs about 50k for a Panasonic 60p camera, *without* lens ( Canon glass costs about $13k ).
This 5D Mk II does some things better
( small dof, low light ),
does some things as well ( good glass ),
and some things more worser ( sound; Transcoding to 24/25/50 only matters for TVs that can’t do all HDTV formats, it’s irrelevant for computermachines & cinema. )

Most “takes” aren’t that long, so the 13min limit isn’t much of a problem, for many many situations.

Magazines can’t do video…
1. who says ground-up trees are viable, nowadays?
2. e-ink: you obviously don’t get out much…
( some magazine did a battery-powered cover, just recently -
- expect all your magazines to be through the 3rd-gen “kindle”, or some equiv, soon )
you don’t need to “read the text” to “get the message”, if you did, then textless TV ads wouldn’t have worked, would they?

Archaism is a religion/culture, not anything else.
It doesn’t matter whether it’s Leica M, or Film archaism,
or whether it’s woodworker’s Imperial Measurement System BS,
it’s the same thing:
the comfort of Glorious Worn&Worshipped Habit.

I remember reading a review, 1Ds Mk II, iirc,
comparing against, iirc, 4×6 & med format.
Not against 35mm film…
It was scored against small large-format, as Getting There…

as for
“Oh, Yes, *technically* digital is much superior,
but with our Golden Eye,
we see the Magical Quality(tm)
that you cannot see…”
MegaBS.
Audio’s “Absolute Sound” is full of that, too.

I loved reading John Carver’s debunktuation of such gunk:
he put 2 identical amps in different cases, one minimalist, one with more cluttered front panel ( graphics only, iirc ), and had some Golden Ears compare the sound.

“Oh, Significant Difference…” after they all agreed & worked themselves into a corner, he unscrewed the fasteners & uncovered ‘em…
showing the identical circuits…
it got real quiet, then…

If someone finds “film-grain” comforting, then fine, they can have it, and be comfortable.
Some find vinyl comforting.
Some, however, find clarity to be keen, dynamic range to be dynamite, & accuracy to be excellent.

Few distractions?
This point is interesting…
Apple, Leica, Bridge City Tool Works, and a few others do that paradigm.
IF one can move the distractions out of one’s mental way, however, then the alternatives give greater flexibility & capability.
Some prefer the 1-button mouse, the damn Menu Lifestyle, etc…
I prefer a very customized version of Linux, where everything I frequently need is 1 click away, either on a different desktop, in a different tab, or in one of my favorite apps, or is in the command-line.

So long as I *use the points-of-leverage that matter*,
then the purism is mine ( in result ).

If I use the points-of-leverage that *don’t* matter, or ignore the ones that do, results’re blown.

It’s got nothing to do with *minimalist-means* creating worth,
it’s got to do with not being distracted.

It’s why I use a text-editor for my writing: the words-stream matters, the formatting isn’t what I need to be working-with.

Turning simplism into a cult, however, seems pointless.

Cheers,

Captain Fairly-Obvious

Cluetrain Manifesto!
Markets are CONVERSATIONS, not broadcast-assert/population-receive.
While “institutional-mentality” WANTS to turn the internet into TV, the reverse is what’s happening
( which is why the rights-cartels are pushing law+gov’t to become their enforcers, to eradicate “fair use” from the law, and to criminalize all nonlicensed content use from *decades* past what the original law dictated -
- fck the community, fck culture! property is law!, and god-given worth must be controlled by it!
.. morons ..
The original law was 14 years.
Someone has published that 14 years is *mathematically* the most effective balance, providing income to the creator ( not to some cartel that took their stuff, like the blues artists we geezers remember — $50 for all rights? real “fair” contract to push on someone you won’t allow to be equal to a white, uh, huhnh ):
There IS some mathematical balance between rolling growing
( producing new content, gaining from it, it becoming “family” property of our race, us producing new content ),
and world being immobilized corporate controlled property
( you produce something, but you don’t own it because you’re an “employee”, so ALL you produce is owned by the corporation that ditches you shortly, you have no right to use YOUR work for the rest of your life, and if you do you’re thrown in jail for it ).
Bizarre, stupid paradigm.
One thing I’ve noticed, though, is that the committee-gangs that rule our laws are *threatened*/*offended* by individual human rights, but push, relentlessly, corporate rights.
I Wonder Why(tm)?
Because they can’t produce any worth themselves?
When the “artificial persons” that “corporations” are are harnessed, so that god given life is recognized to be more valid than them, THEN I’ll consider law to be getting correct, but when bogopersons make the world’s law extract all resources/worth from world/humanity for the bogoperson’s benefit, I don’t see the “validity” there…

“just pull the still from the video” == mediocre
wrong question!
if you are looking at grubbing as much money from as little as possible, then fine, that’s your equation.
IF, however, you’re looking at Doing It Right, then how does the committee-mind quality limit you?
Do the video right, do the still right, with your means, in your hands.
Where’s the problem?

Some have said the Canon puts out interlaced video, but that can’t be, because you CAN’T pull stills from an interlaced stream, yet the reviewer did.
( I could be rong on this: it was pre-production, and I don’t know the details involved, or if they changed themselves since )

Cheap Shoulder/Body Mount Rig:
Monopod Belt Pouch
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/554102-REG/Bogen_Manfrotto_080_080_Monopod_Belt_Pouch.html
belt + suspenders ( or beergut
Monopod
Mini Ballhead with resistance adjustable
“Bino/Cam” harness to steady the camera to your shoulders
( non-elastic version )
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/170290-REG/Op_Tech_USA_5301412_Bino_Cam_Harness_Binocular_or.html
( elastic version )
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/197145-REG/Op_Tech_USA_5301422_Bino_Cam_Harness_Binocular_or.html
== something that gives you some of the benefits of a “steadicam”, but at around $100.
The monopod + belt-cup holds the weight, and the harness holds it to your shoulders, at a distance that lets you “sing” the controls of the thing to make it know the capturing you want known.

As for the “oh, it’s worthless, you’d have to use a tripod to equal the tripod shots of video-cameras”, uh, yeah?
How does that count against it?
You have to use a tripod to get tripod-still shots, right?
Whether it’s this camera or another?
-shaking head- I don’t understand how that argument works…

The reason the RED chip doesn’t wobble at 120fps is because the movement you do in 1/120sec isn’t visible!
( OK, there’s another part of it: CMOS chips don’t come down all the way to 0 so quickly/easily, and if they *aren’t* branged down to 0, then you’re seeing what happened before-this-frame, in-this-frame. *They*, who have Things To Do With Sensors, worked on that problem, and apparently got some results

Many are saying 30fps is unusable?
Digital Cinema is 24p for 2k & 4k, 48k for 2k, BUT because many of the items of content that need to be monetized are 30p, 50p, 60p, damn near any other format, too
( RED Epic = 5k, RED ONE = 4k, Dalsa = 4k, 2k, many others HD, some 120+ with alternating polarization for 3D, … ), many projectors can do those too.

The Nikon has BAAD wobble, from what I’ve read.
According to Luminous Landscape’s pre-production review the Canon hasn’t any.
ah, someone above gave that link.

( fifth attempt at posting, please delete the previous attempts, if they appear later
.. this attempt is split into several parts, because there seems to be a Big Posts Are Thrown Away rule in the blog’s web-code, hm, maybe it’s because I’m direct-linking to things that undo the “problems” this discussion has claimed? )

Someone wanted Shotgun + Lav plugged in, so the audio wouldn’t suck:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/335809-REG/Beachtek_DXA2S_DXA_2S_Dual_XLR.html
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/264990-REG/Sign_Video_XLRPRO_XLRPRO_Universal_Audio_Adapter.html

What are the rules for throwing-away versus displaying postings?

I just tried twice, and both times “disappeared”…

Certainly some photojournalists will use the camera in Dirk Halstead “platypus” mode. But does it even do sound?

No doubt I will make a little movie -or more likely try to make a movie- and in the end return to the power of still images.

If it can be done (in a technical way) our beloved industry does produce it and never cares if we really will need it.

Neither the new Canon 5Dxyz (or whatever cryptic digits they put at the end) nor the Nikon D90 are professional cams. Pro-cams are usually kept very puristic (e.g. still lack of a flash, etc) – guess why? And personally I hope these video-gimmicks will never make it into a pro-cam. But I wouldn’t bet my life on it.

Looking back in history usually the ‘newer’ and more ’sophisticated’ mostly did replace the ‘older’. Horses and coaches have been replaced by motorbikes and automobiles (just for example) simply because the latter did offer more advantages and usability (maybe one day we will be back on horses again *smile). There could be numerous other examples called up.

BUT, there was one exception.

One day photography was born and later the still images learned to move. Well, the latter could be seen as ‘better’, more sophisticated, fancier … Actually, the movie invention should have killed photography – but it didn’t happen.

I know, the discussion isn’t about video vs. stills in general. The discussion is about if it makes sense to put video features into a DSLR.

Well, why didn’t ‘motion picture’ kill photography ? …. Both seem to be similar but they are different – quite different. That’s it.

Btw, there are still good old-fashioned painters out there (for the art stuff) and illustrators (for the ‘other stuff’ *smile) …

“A picture is worth a thousands words” : a photograph is able to transfer a message (let’s assume there is a message in the picture *smile) within a matter of a second. Video can’t do that.

You can’t use video in a printed magazine. Maybe one day a company will run an ad with big bold letters ‘Watch our video attached on the magazine’s back’ (that could even work at the first time, does any company have tried this already ? *smile) …

What are images used for ? … To catches attention, make the viewer to stop by and (hopefully) to read the text (to get the message).

For sure the web is a good platform for videos. But how would you get the attention and the message transfered ? How do you make a user to start the video and to invest his time to watch the video-gig ?

And maybe the most important point :
Mr. James Russel has stated it in his post already. A day consists of 24 ‘frames’ (usually *smile). Especially in the virtual world everyone expects to get informations within seconds.
WHO would ever look at all the videos ???
WHO would ever invest minutes (or some seconds) to watch all the videos ?
People do not even invest time to enlarge thumbnailed images.

Just observe yourself when watching a web-video. How often do you move the slider forward to ’speed up’ the whole thingo ?
What are you actually doing when moving the slider ? – You are cutting down the movie into single (still) frames (again).
………….

Since the digital aera was introduced to photography the manufacturers did overhelm us with a lot of useless stuff and features. Not to mention the stupid megapixel race.

Actually the very first digital DSLR introduced to the market back in 2002 – the Contax N Digital – would have done it . 6 MP, full frame, AF … packed into a full-pro body. Some refinements over the years – and Voila. We all could be very happy and doing pictures instead of reading new manuals. (let’s assume there are people who do read manuals *smile)

A friend of mine is Austria’s largest cell phone dealer. He operates 155 outlets. (that’s a huge number for small Austria *smile). Guess what most customers are asking for when stepping into one of his stores ? Please, please sell me a cell phone that can do only ONE thing – doing phone calls, and phone calls ONLY. Large, readable digits … large buttons … no functions buried in endless menus …
Of course, such a cell phone isn’t available (anymore). He always states ‘Maybe one day a manufacturer will listen to the market and produce one .. it will for sure be my best-seller’

Fortunatelly the cam market offers such a ‘jewel’. It’s called Leica M. And most ‘masterpieces’ are done with such a cam, still not outplayed.
Why ? Because a Leica M is puristic. Few buttons to operate . That fact enables the photographer to concentrate on the sujet. And on the sujet only.

Fondling with 100’s of buttons and menu functions ??? … The lioness has eaten the antelope already and the model has slept away …

Ok, a bit too much cam-philosophy now

( Btw, I’m not related to Leica and in my opinion this cam is excessive overpriced … )

Don’t get me wrong. The industry shall feel free to produce, and fortunately everyone can decide what to buy. (ok, it’s a matter of money as well …)

But maybe you like to think twice before you produce endless videos. Ask yourself if anyone will ever watch it.

And the time you leave your cam-store with the ‘brand-new’ bride it’s matured stuff already. The next innovation is just around the corner. Not to mention the lost value (moneywise)

sorry for mispellings and bumpy english .. . I’m not a native speaker

Best, Reini

- Shooting motion is an entirely different type of operating. (smooth panning, tilting, zooming… ever heard of a focus puller anyone?… thought so!)

- Having said the above, a DSLR-body (and to some extent lenses) are of the least practical design to perform these tasks.

- Lighting with strobes for a single instant and frame is completely different from lighting for motion, where the light is continuous, the camera moves and you’re still not supposed to see the light stands

- 5D Mk II shoots HD at 30 frames/sec. Try bringing that home in Europe where HD runs at 25 or 50 fps. Happy transcoding, dear friends!

- TV on the web (IPTV) is going the you tube way. Amateur users with amateur equipment produce amateur content (at least in terms of production value). And they do it for free. This is not the game professionals want to be in. Be it with a 5D Mk II or some other tool.

These just to name a few concerns. It’s a nice and fun feature. But if you know your stuff and clients hire you to shoot motion, you’ll bring the proper tools. If I was the client and I was told that my motion project was going to be shot on a DSLR I’d hang up the phone, because I’d realize that the guy on the other end doesn’t know what he’s talking about…

Well, I’ve been following the release of the 5D MII though the “lens” of the RED forums and from reading reviews and specs, just like everyone else, except for Vincent

The difference is I am coming to different conclusions as to what all this data means.

Let my first state that I think a PRO camera that can shoot video is a VERY good thing and a game changer, in a good way. I am also going to be buying a 5D MII for stills use at least, once I confirm the Dynamic Range is equal too, or better then the original 5D.

All I am saying is that I don’t think this, or the D90 is the “Video + Stills” camera we are waiting for. The sensors used by Canon and Nikon have a very slow reset/refresh time, this is what causes the wobble. Even if the 5D MII has little or no wobble, it is still locked to 30 fps, which means it is useless for motion picture/Pro TV/ or high-end work.

Also, as much as I respect Vincent as a stills shooter, by his own admission he has shot almost ZERO video in his life. With out a knowledge of the work flow used it is very hard to judge how useful a 5D shooting video is. Since Vince has little Video work flow experience, it would be like asking a cinematographer to review Aperture or Lightroom, having never used a digital stills camera before.

Also, Vince is an amazing shooter. Problems don’t phase this guy, if there are issues with the video that make it nonviable for real-world use, he might not even notice.

Plus the man is under a strict NDA with Canon USA.

On the other hand, I REALLY REALLY hope I am wrong, I can’t wait to shoot stills and clips on the same body, with the same lenses.