I'm in the market for a camera at the moment and was looking at the Sony EX3 or the Panasonic HVX200, but then I saw the video results from the Canon 5DmkII and was stunned. The question I want to ask is why would I buy a video camera when I can get the same if not better results from a cheaper Digital SLR?
With a lens is the Canon 5D MKII cheaper than the Sony EX3
or the Panasonic HVX200?
Since the Canon 5D MKII is a still camera with a video feature it
presents several problems. It shoots at an unusual frame rate
(30fps). The sensor isn’t able to handle the frame rate which
gives is a “jello” effect sometimes. It records only 12 minutes
but the Quicktime file is compatible with most NLE’s.
The overall design is standard for a still camera which makes it
very awkward as a video camera especially when used handheld.
Shooting and focusing is very difficult. And it doesn’t have a
mic input so you must have an audio recorder when making movies.
The main advantage is the lens. When you add a top of the line
lens you get an amazing picture.
All the professional video cameras have that option, too.
Another huge Problem with the 5D right now is that it doesn't give you manual controls when shooting video. This will probably be adressed in one of the upcomming firmware updates but until then, I wouldn't buy one if your're really serious about filmmaking. The hvx200 and ex3 give you a lot more control over your image.
Guys, you're right. I was blown away by the stuff I saw from it and not thinking about it practically. Couldn't see the wood from the trees, you might say.
Linear Mode
