Matrox
-
Posts
39 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Articles
Posts posted by Matrox
-
-
There is also a plethora of vintage glass on the market which works great as cine lenses if you were so inclined. With your strobe/evf issues, I'm sure the good people here might be able to give you options/workarounds. If the evf weren't an issue, would you still be looking for a new camera?
Believe me or not, but I spend days trying to figure out a workaround for this, but it simply doesn't exist
It is a known issue and newer models solved that by mentioned extra settings. If I would be doing only stills, no, I wouldn't. But it also do video, and I need something better, something that is not limiting me in basic stuff (such as full manual control of exposure). In terms of cine lenses, there's no doubt that there are plenty of good glass from other manufacturers. Hence, even for stills glass from other companies can be easily used, because focus peaking works quite well from what I read.
-
What are you most wanting to film? There are a lot of great options. Not sure what your requirements are, but maybe a Olympus might be a good fit, depending?
Olympus for video work? Which models do you have in mind?
Talking about things I want to film: that's the tricky part. You see, I'm still developing and I cannot simply say X or Y. I will try to do a short film this year, but I'll also look forward to any opportunities for shooting commercials and maybe some web series.
Just wanted to chime in before you make any big mistakes. The 12MPX A7S will generally wipe the snot out of most cameras on the market because while it's only 12MPX, it's still full frame which means those photosites can receive much more and higher quality light information resulting in much better dynamic range. If you plan on making huge wall splattering size prints than go for something else. If you want super quality then do your homework before you drop cash on a body you're not satisfied with. Lastly, all cameras benefit from the quality of glass you put in front of it. I can show you footage from a GH4 with an SLR Magic lens that could compete with anything that is out there. Please don't rush to buy a body. Do your research first. Don't wanna see us waste money.
You're absolutely right about stunning dynamic range.
Unfortunately, one of my plans in photography area is to try to get some pictures published in magazines. So, this is why this 12mpx sensor worries me. What's more, A7s is completely out of my budget right know. I know you can say "there's no need to hurry" - well, there is. I'm struggling with my current camera, because it has many problems while working with strobes, mainly because this camera wasn't pretened to do any serious job, it was created as a tool for amateurs
The biggest problem is that the camera "doesn't know" that is working with strobes on wireless receivers, so it does not lighten up the EVF/LCD. In newer Sony cameras, there is an option to force camera to brighten the scene, but on my A35 - there isn't. In terms of photography, this why I need to change it. I love the picture quality, it's really sufficient with Sony DT 50mm f/1.8. I know that lenses are really important, I don't even take off my 50mm f/1.8 from body, its that great. However, Sony 28-70mm f/3.5-f/5.6 is not that bad and performance-wise is quite good, not that far away from Zeiss f/4.
-
To be honest, I want to fly away from A-mount. You cannot use any Canon / Nikon / Leica glass with it. Plus, A77 II sensor is not that great.
I checked prices in my country and it costs more than 1100$.
-
Have you considered the Panasonic LX100? Seems a good fit. The stills are better on the A7 though.
I'm not a fan of the idea that I should go backwards and have a camera without interchangeable lens
You will struggle to get a full frame camera in your budget that shoots great video.
Nikon D750 is too much, A7S is too much.
Right? I am between a hammer and an anvil. Currently, there isn't any camera - around 1000$ - that has EVF and it's great for both stills and videos, without big compromises. A7s is great for video, but 12mpx camera for photo is not that great in 2015...
APS-C then Nikon D5300 would be a good choice. Great stills and good 1080p. You can put a loupe on it and you have your EVF shooting style back.
I saw some test videos and image is really good, but no aperture change in video mode (live view) in 2015? No zebras, no focus peaking? Nikon could have done something big, but they failed. In terms of image quality - D5300 is great, but functionality lacks some basics.
If you are looking for good AF you will have to deal with the bulk, the 5d mkiv might have good video, the mkiii should lower it's price a lot then. I wouldn't use the A7 for anything video related.
Nah, you say? I am using Sony SLT-A35, which is 4 years old and AF is okay. I suspect that AF systems in current mirrorless cameras are better. But it also depends on type of work you are doing. I mostly shoot on location or in studio (fashion etc.) and I don't need that fast AF. However, from time to time, it would be great to have it - sometimes I just want to photograph my dog running and you know, it would be nice to capture everything in focus
Why would you not use A7 for video work? My A35 doesn't have full manual controls (I can only control aperture, but shutter and ISO are automatic) and yet, I shot a wedding, documentry and one commercial last year. Was the quality great? No, but it was OK. It's only a camera, a tool.
I really don't know what to do. I'm not a full frame purist - I can easily grab an APS-C camera, because these sensors are great nowadays. However, full frame sensors are also getting better and better and we can all agree that we can't fool physics.
I thought that now I can buy A7 and later on move to A7 II, but it turned out that in terms of video quality, A7 II is not that great, right Andrew?
-
How much is a used 5D Mark II where you live? With Magic Lantern raw that gives the best image for the price and as a stills camera it does the basics right like AF. No EVF though.
Well, I would say it is on the margin of my budget. From what I have just checked, offers below 1100$ are without lens, so it could be a problem. But it is worth considering.
The problem with 5D Mark II is OVF. I'm shooting with EVF for 3 years and I really, really like the way you work with EVF. And what's more, it can be used while recording video. But there also other things that I don't particullary like about 5DM2:
- weigh - its really heavy and bulky - I travel a lot between two cities and weight is really important
- it may sound inmature, but: no WI-Fi and NFC - as a photographer I'm really looking forward for these features in Sony A7/A6000, because you can easily share photos "on the go" while shooting or travelling - and now I'm seeing many photographers around the world who are really liking that feature
- no headphone jack
- not so great AF for today's standards
-
Hi guys,
In February I'm going to buy a new camera. I need something that can be used as a hybrid - for photos and videos. I know it's a hard choice and it would be easier to have one camera for photos and second for video work, but currently, this option is out of my budget.
So, I'm thinking about buying a Sony A7 (used) with 28-70mm Sony stabilized lens. Yeah, this lens is not fast, but current choice of FE lenses is limited and in the beginning, I can live with that (later on I'll buy a decent EF or Leica glass). In terms of stills, its really great camera - nice sensor and tons of features, including great EVF (I prefer to work with EVF). It also have many video features, with peaking and zebras, but there is a one downside: AVCHD codec. And I'm wondering - is it really that bad? A7 is also dust and moisture resistant, which is a good thing.
For a minute, I thought about Panasonic GH3, especially in terms of video, which is better than A7. But I'm really disappointed with low light capabilites, especially for stills. Also, there is a Sony A6000 in game, which has really great autofocus, but with reasonable price of used Sony A7, it doesn't look as attractive.
What are your thoughts? What would you recommend for someone, who is looking for a decent camera for stills and videos? My budget is around 1100$ (with lens included).
-
So last Saturday I shot wedding on Canon 7D and Sony SLT-A35 (stills only).
As pablogrollan said, 7D is a tank. Heavy, but solid. However, it's not as intuitive and easy to use as Sony. Optical viewfinder is tricky and you really need to carefully watch the scene to get that right exposure. Also, black focus confirmation marks are terrible and you can barely see them in low light. In A35, focus marks are green when "nailed", so you can easily check what's in focus and what's not.
What I liked about 7D, apart from build quality? Fast autofocus in low light and, let's call it, "60fps in ovf" ;) Shutter lag with flash on A35 is 0,4 seconds, while on 7D it's only 0,2 sec. Difference is huge.
-
No I doubt the a6000 is worse in low light than Canon APS-C, but it is definitely much worse than the D5300. If the Sony camera is using the same sensor as the Nikon they have really botched their codec.
Is it really worse than Canon APS-C? I know that we shouldn't take DxO ratings for granted, but definitely they are worth considering.
-
The newer generation A6000, Nikon D5300, have much better image quality than the old generation 5D Mk II, 60D, 7D, They are more detailed, no moire and aliasing, better low-light sensitivity and less rolling shutter... The best budget cameras for both video and stills are the Nikon D3300/D5300, and Sony A6000 right now. The Panasonics like the G6 are great too if your main focus is on video
I was playing with G6 in the store and I loved it. Really handy and video quality is great. Unfortunately, for stills it's not so good. If I would be looking for a camera only for videos, then I'll definitely bought G6.
5D Mark II is quite an old camera that has exactly the same advantages/disadvantages than a 60D (well built, good ergonomics, lack of headphone jack, soft video, no peaking or zebras...) The only difference is that it is full frame. It all comes down to your video/still needs and what you want to buy.
If it were me, going to the artic, the desert or a combat zone would be the only reasons to choose it over, say an A7 (1300$ new with kit lens). Specs-wise, both the 7D and the 5D MkII have long been surpassed. They are still around just because they are really well built cameras and the stills world has evolved very little in those years. A raw still from the 5D has only a little less dynamic range than from some other modern cameras because the improvements in stills have been incremental: a few more cross focus points, one or two more frames per second in burst, a few more megapixels, but -for many photogs invested in Canon glass- nothing to justify switching to a new mirrorless system after many years of faithful professional service.
You're absolutely right. I know that we can't fully trust DxOMark with their tests, but this speaks a little:
A7 is a lovely camera, but I can't afford it. Actually, there is a gap on the market. If you want to go beyond A6000/D5300 quality, you're only option are high-end DSLRs (5D Mark III) or high-end mirrorless cameras (GH3/GH4/A7S/A7).
I mean, in the end, camera is just the camera. I still don't believe that I shot this movie
-
Moire and aliasing were also a problem of the Canons (7D, 60D or even 550D were the same) that forced you to avoid brickwalls and wires. Not a problem at all with the a6000.
Rolling shutter was decent on the 7D but it is also much better on the a6000.
Thank you for sharing your opinion, it is really helpful. So it does look that I should give A6000 a try ;) Among APS-C Sony cameras, A6000 seems to have the best video quality.
Speaking about audio, I've checked audio recorders and for 100$ I could buy Zoom H1 and for ~50-100$ an extra microphone and this setup should work great. Audio was my biggest concern, but if I can get decent audio for around 150$, A6000 seems like the better choice.
I was also thinking about used 5D Mark II. Unfortunately, it's way more expensive (typically around 1300$ for camera that shot ~100k images). Would it be better to wait more and buy 5DM2?
-
I knew that if I would ask on EOSHD, the responses will be great :) Thank you guys!
As for the no audio imput in the a6000, well, you can attach the Sony hotshoe mic and possibly some other audio gear too. The other option to bypass the no mic input issue is using an external recorder like the Star or the Ninja 2 and use the audio inputs of the recorder. Or, just settle for the good ol' dual audio with an external audio recorder. Doing it like the big boys.
Yes, you're right. However, Sony audio hardware is not cheap, but still, can be the solution.
As for the SLT a35 not having manual control for ISO, are you absolutely sure about that? I have been under the impression that all Sony interchangeable lens cameras have manual control for ISO. In manual mode you can also control shutter speed when shooting video. It's only the autofocus mode that insists on shutter set to auto. Set the focus to manual, and you're able to set both shutter speed and aperture manually, as well as ISO. At least that's the way it's being done in all the other SLT models.
Newer models have full manual controls, but mine hasn't. To have at least basic settings, I must shoot in Aperture mode, where I can set f-value. In manual, camera completely ignores ISO, shutter and aperture. It is also said in the instruction:
Since you've already got a Sony system with at least one lens, and possibly some other gear, too, the a6000 would be a logical and cheaper choice from those two. Although you could use Sony A-mount lenses with a Canon, too, but not as fluently. I believe there is an adapter for that, at least a manual one. The rest is up to you and your personal preferences.
I had done research and it looks like there aren't any Sony A-Mount to Canon EF adapters.
unless you install ML and use a miniUSB to jack adapter to monitor through the AVout of the 60D. For paid work I personally would never use a hacked camera, and the 60D is not the most recommendable ML camera for raw video, not to mention the hassle of raw file mangement and workflow.
Oh, I don't know that you can use that miniUSB adapter :) That's tricky. Talking about Magic Lantern - is not stable on 60D? I wouldn't shoot in RAW on 60D, but I'll use ML if it's stable.
- Exposure is hard to judge with the good ol' Canon DSLRs. The meter is just a reference that won't tell you if part of the frame is overexposed. Zebras on the a6000 make it easier. The AVCHD is not the best codec, but keep in mind not all implementations of the codec are the same (Sony FS700 vs. Olympus EM-10, for example). The AVCHD footage from the a6000 is at least as gradeable as the quicktime h.264 from the 60D.
Yup, on Sony SLT (and on NEX as well) you can easily see your exposure. It works really great.
I saw some movies on A6000 and they look good. If Sony would put XAVC-S in A6000, it would be outstanding camera and no-brainer for me. Also, flat profiles are more convenient than on mine A35.
- I use legacy Nikon and Tamron glass + Samyang Cine Lenses on the a6000 and they are much easier to adapt to the Sony e-mount via speedbooster than to the EOS mount. I can't speak about AF speed beacuase I hardly use it, but I can tell you that having focus peaking is a must for video (in the Canon you have to either measure exposure and focus distance first or eyeball everything).
As for the a6000 EVF, I like it for stills but for video is not so comfortable and I still prefer to use a kinotehnik loupe (120 €) on the lcd screen (which you would also need on the 60D).
You're right - it's easy to adapt almost any lenses on E-mount. There are plenty of adapters. I have focus peaking on A35 and I don't know how people without it can shoot ;) It makes focusing really easy, even in hard situations. However, on 60D with ML I would have it, too.
What would say about video quality between 7D and A6000? Which one do you prefer?
-
Hi guys,
Since 2012, I'm shooting with Sony SLT-A35. It's a great camera, but it doesn't have manual controls of shutter and ISO. I could live with automatic ISO, but with "jumpy" shutter I can't get that cinematic look.
This year, I'm thinking about buying a new camera. It will be dedicated not only for films, but also for stills.
Probably, it will be Sony A6000 or Canon 60D.
Why A6000?
- great for stills (solid sensor, 24mpx, brilliant autofocus, good low light performance)
- really nice video quality, although with poor AVCHD
- light and compact
- clean HDMI out - I can buy Ninja Star for 300$ and record uncompressed footage
- EVF, which I adore
- 1080p@60fps
Cons:
- no audio input
Why 60D?
- Magic Lantern and tons of options with it
- articulated screen
- audio input
Cons:
- video and photo quality slightly worse than A6000
- less dynamic range
- no EVF
- weak AF for stills (compared to A6000)
So, I would totally buy Sony A6000, but lack of audio input is the one thing that makes me consider 60D. However, Canon has Magic Lantern and tons of customization available, but the overall photo and video quality is not so good as on A6000.
What would you recommend? My budget - only for camera - is around 850$.
What is the best camera for stills & motion right know?
In: Cameras
Posted
Thanks everyone for responses!
No, absolutely not. 1080p will be fine for now.
I would say that functionality is the best thing about A7. From what I see, it was really created as a camera for serious video shooters. Maybe Sony didn't quite deliver the video quality we expected from that sensor, but overall, its OK. Could be better, though.
In my country there aren't any extra deals like in the USA. I will be looking for a used one, because new is out of my budget.
To be honest, everyone - especially on EOSHD - is saying that Canon DSLRs (apart from 5DM3 and 1D C) are obsolete and almost dead in terms of video. I really don't want to take that road, especially considering that I mostly do stills nowadays and stills on Canon APS-C aren't something great right know (sensor is old). Nikon and Sony are way ahead in this area.
70D would be worth considering if it would cost around ~700$, but for 1149$ I would rather go full frame with A7.
One great thing about Canon is Magic Latern, as you mentioned. Although I'm wondering if is it really stable and can be used on serious jobs?
In stills area I know what I'm doing and what type of photography I'm pursuing. Here are some examples:
All done with a camera that now costs ~300$, so I really can push my gear as hard as I can
With film, we'll see. I want to shoot a short story this year, but also try to get into commercials, web series etc.
I would totally buy A5100 if it had EVF! However, if A6000 would have XAVC-S... there is a rumor that we'll see A6100 next year, with XAVC-S.
One thing that I particullary like about A6000 is AF. I played with A6000 twice in the shop and wow, this AF is really great. EVF is ok, slightly better than in my A35. One thing that worries me is 1/160 x-sync. It is always better to have 1/200 or 1/250 (A7).
Talking about "try before you buy" - it is hard. You can check some things in shop, but only few of them. I mean, the camera shows you true inner-self in real life situations, on set etc. When I was playing with A6000 I cannot even record anything to SD, because shop clerks told me that it is prohibited in their shop.
RX10 and FZ1000? I would rather stay with interchangeable lens camera.