Has the 5D Mark II changed your opinion on video in SLRs?

olv

olv

Soldato
OP
Joined
12 Jan 2005
Posts
5,295
Location
london
I had a gentleman ask me just today how my Sony Z7 (1080p HDV camcorder, approx. £4.5k) compared to the Mk II. And I have no idea, naturally, having not used the 5D.

Out of interest, what size is the sensor in the Sony? Presumably it's a 3 CCD sensor but is it as large as a 5D sensor (36mm x 19mm?)?
 
Associate
Joined
11 Jan 2006
Posts
53
Location
UK
I think Live View is ace. I use it to focus when doing IR shots. The Live View pumps up the brightness of the scene through the filter, so I can make out high contrast edges. Zoom in to 10x, and use manual focusing to get it just right. Takes all the effort out of focusing for IR.
 
Associate
Joined
29 Feb 2008
Posts
1,173
Location
Nottingham
I think Live View is ace. I use it to focus when doing IR shots. The Live View pumps up the brightness of the scene through the filter, so I can make out high contrast edges. Zoom in to 10x, and use manual focusing to get it just right. Takes all the effort out of focusing for IR.

Cool, sounds really useful for that as I do some IR work but my 400D doesn't have liveview so I have to focus without filter then screw the filter on for the shot
 
Associate
Joined
2 Jan 2004
Posts
1,866
Location
Exeter, Devon
Have to say I was pretty skeptical when the DSLR-with-video first landed, but after seeing some of the 5D footage recently I'd agree that it's definitely an impressive feature. For high-end professionals, particularly photo-journalists, I can see the ability to record video 'on the fly' as a huge bonus.

That said, it's also a feature that really hold no use for me whatsoever, and given the 5D is my next progression in camera body terms, I'd far rather see the option to buy a version without HD video tacked on at a reduced cost - though I have to admit I have no idea how much value is added with HD video, the inflated cost of new bodies (500D being a prime example) would suggest it is a noticable amount.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
28 Sep 2003
Posts
10,369
Location
London
I went to look in Jessops at the 5D mk ii yesterday lunch... its so much bigger than my 400D! Next to the 1000D it looks like it could swallow it whole!

apparantly (i not seen one in the flesh yet) they are the same size as the classic 5D

which is not really that big.
 
Soldato
Joined
15 May 2007
Posts
12,804
Location
Ipswich / Bodham
I'm not sure about the current crop, but the first SLRs with video were limited to around 5 - 7 minutes recording due to sensor over heating.

That may seem limited, but I think most video users would find that they do not often take a shot for that length of time.

For me, it is a useful bonus feature, and one that I'll consider when I come to change my 400D. However, being completely honest, I'm still learning how to properly compose a still image. I take too many photos to find the few that I'm happy with.

If I took film, I would have to work out completely new composition techniques, and take even more gbs of film to then subsequently edit. And then, I'd probably feel I'd have to invest in some decent video editing software and then learn it. And by the time I'd done all that, I'd be ready for retirement or would be looking at a new camera and new software anyway.

In short, the still image is my priority. The facility to shoot off a couple of minutes of HD video should the situation arise is a useful and welcome feature, but not a dealbreaker.
 
Back
Top Bottom