Q. It appears to me that basic (entry-level) video-camera sometimes have very similar technical aspects to high-level dslr cameras.
(I am not an expert so correct me if I am mistaken).
Where is the line drawn where a video camera takes over DSLR in terms of the quality of the video?
I think I am trying to determine what my realistic needs are. I want to make music videos or perhaps short advertisements for use on the internet. Perhaps, I would like to do something more sophisticated if I gathered up some steam.
My current camera does not have very good video capabilities. (Its the Nikon d7000).
What strikes me is that there are many examples of videos that do not seem to have been taken on state of the art cameras..... and the emphasis seems to be more on the lighting setup.
Concerning the point about overheating .... in my case, there is a limit of 20 minutes when the camera automatically switches off but you can turn it on again instantly .... I did around 60min of this once, however, the battery will just DISAPPEAR following that.
(I am not an expert so correct me if I am mistaken).
Where is the line drawn where a video camera takes over DSLR in terms of the quality of the video?
I think I am trying to determine what my realistic needs are. I want to make music videos or perhaps short advertisements for use on the internet. Perhaps, I would like to do something more sophisticated if I gathered up some steam.
My current camera does not have very good video capabilities. (Its the Nikon d7000).
What strikes me is that there are many examples of videos that do not seem to have been taken on state of the art cameras..... and the emphasis seems to be more on the lighting setup.
Concerning the point about overheating .... in my case, there is a limit of 20 minutes when the camera automatically switches off but you can turn it on again instantly .... I did around 60min of this once, however, the battery will just DISAPPEAR following that.
A. While I agree with Rick, he did not mention that dSLRs have a file size/video length limitation and have known issues that result in the dSLR overheating when used as a video recorder for prolonged periods (and the cool-down takes a LONG time).
dSLRs are designed to capture still images and can do that well. They can capture video - but this is a secondary, "convenience feature". They are not camcorders and should not be treated/used as a camcorder.
Camcorders are designed to capture video (and audio) and can do that well. Many (at the consumer grade level - not so much at the prosumer or pro level) can capture still images, but do not provide the flexibility dSLRs provide - still image capture in those camcorders providing that capability is a secondary, "convenience feature". Camcorders can capture video and audio for as long as there is available memory space and power. There is no internal overheating issue.
If video is the primary concern, use a camcorder. If still images are the primary concern, use a dSLR. But to use equipment primarily because of a specific secondary feature is not recommended as there will be trade-offs in the way the equipment needs to be used in order to achieve a desired result. The trade-offs may not be easy to identify until something bad happens and a work-around needs to be identified and implemented. In this case, this can result in never to be replicated activities - and no video of that activity. More simply: If a dSLR is used to capture a wedding for video and 20 minutes in the camera shuts down because it overheated, what is the back-up (workaround) plan?
dSLRs are designed to capture still images and can do that well. They can capture video - but this is a secondary, "convenience feature". They are not camcorders and should not be treated/used as a camcorder.
Camcorders are designed to capture video (and audio) and can do that well. Many (at the consumer grade level - not so much at the prosumer or pro level) can capture still images, but do not provide the flexibility dSLRs provide - still image capture in those camcorders providing that capability is a secondary, "convenience feature". Camcorders can capture video and audio for as long as there is available memory space and power. There is no internal overheating issue.
If video is the primary concern, use a camcorder. If still images are the primary concern, use a dSLR. But to use equipment primarily because of a specific secondary feature is not recommended as there will be trade-offs in the way the equipment needs to be used in order to achieve a desired result. The trade-offs may not be easy to identify until something bad happens and a work-around needs to be identified and implemented. In this case, this can result in never to be replicated activities - and no video of that activity. More simply: If a dSLR is used to capture a wedding for video and 20 minutes in the camera shuts down because it overheated, what is the back-up (workaround) plan?
How to shoot high-quality video in low light with a DSLR?
Q. I'm making a short film for a cinematography class I'm in at a local art school. A good portion of the film is shot at "magic hour", and looks quite good for something shot on an entry-level DSLR (my old reliable canon rebel t3i, the first and only "real camera" I've owned) However, a portion is shot on top of a hill, late at night abandoned golf course in my town, and for the desired effect, the only visible light will be the small fireworks my subjects are setting off. My other experiences (attempting) shooting in low light yielded grainy, unattractive, and frankly disapointing results. Any tips for a beginner trying to shoot in low light sans professional camcorder?
A. Shoot using the "day for night" lighting technique and make it "night" in editing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4MaC44MU4iw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4MaC44MU4iw
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar