Anyone else following the 2011 Zacuto Shootout

[cameronchapman]

I loved the 2010 Shootout (where they focused exclusively on DSLRs), and have been following this year's shootout with almost the same level of interest. They're still testing some DSLRs (three Canons and the Nikon D7000), but this year they're also testing the Red One MX, the Arri Alexa, the Sony PMW-F3L, the Sony F35, and some others.

I've been keeping a comparison list of what cameras seem to be performing best in each situation, and it's been interesting.

If anyone's interested, these are what I'm seeing as the standouts:

Low light: F3L, Alexa, and Red
Bright light: F35, Alexa, Red, and Canon 7D
Sensitivity/Signal-to-Noise Ratio: Alexa, F3L, Red, and Panasonic AF-100
Visible Resolution and Sharpness: Alexa, F35, Red, AF-100, and F3L

So it looks like the Alexa and the Red are the two top contenders, and I have to say that I prefer the look of the Alexa. It gives a really stunning image. I realize it doesn't have the raw resolution of the Red, but I think the color quality and the visual sharpness of the image are heads above the others. And it's consistently beautiful regardless of the situation. The F3L is kind of the surprising one, to me at least. It's only about half the price of the Red, and a fifth of the price of the Alexa. And other than in really bright light, it performed really well (and if you properly lit a scene for your highlights, rather than intentionally trying to get blowouts, it would do just fine).

I have to say that the DSLRs, in many of these situations, have NOT performed well. But then again, they're purposely stressing the cameras, trying to make them perform badly. There's a lot less leeway for that with DSLRs than these more expensive cameras. The mud in the visible resolution/sharpness among the Canons especially was just horrible. Glad to see the AF-100 did better (since it's got the same sensor as my GH1).

The shootout has one more episode coming out this month, which I'm really looking forward to. Anyone else following it and want to give their opinion of which cameras are standing out? I'm a complete noob when it comes to cameras, so I'd love to hear opinions about which cameras those with more experience seem to prefer.

 

[Gonzo_Entertainment]

I have been. The main DSLR issue is the compression which results in blocky artifacts in underexposed areas, and it's tendency to blow out highlights. It is what it is, you're comparing a $2500 camera to $25,000 (and up) cameras.

 

[Wombat]

I'd be more interested if they had included a GH2.

I have been. The main DSLR issue is the compression which results in blocky artifacts in underexposed areas, and it's tendency to blow out highlights. It is what it is, you're comparing a $2500 camera to $25,000 (and up) cameras.

I think people often draw the wrong conclusions from these tests. Now of course, my initial response to people comparing DSLRs to dedicated, industry approved cameras is outrage, but the truth is that DSLRs are a fraction of the price of these other cameras and come close to holding their own.

 

[cameronchapman]

I think people often draw the wrong conclusions from these tests. Now of course, my initial response to people comparing DSLRs to dedicated, industry approved cameras is outrage, but the truth is that DSLRs are a fraction of the price of these other cameras and come close to holding their own.

Agreed. Once you know the limitations of a DSLR, you can compensate for it and produce really usable footage. Combine it with a great story, great lighting, and pro sound, and no average viewer is ever going to notice the difference (or complain about it if they do). To me it's a little like shooting on 16mm vs 35mm. Sure, the 35mm looks better, but you can still shoot something entirely watchable and professional on 16mm.

 

[Wombat]

Agreed. Once you know the limitations of a DSLR, you can compensate for it and produce really usable footage. Combine it with a great story, great lighting, and pro sound, and no average viewer is ever going to notice the difference (or complain about it if they do).

Yeah. Honestly, I don't think people naysaying DSLRs for independent filmmakers exist anymore, but it just takes a cursory glance at the various DSLR communities on Vimeo to see that DSLRs are capable of amazingly beautiful images (especially the hacked GH1/2, lordy lord).

It's also easy for videophiles to dissect test footage. In real situations with real audiences, I agree that no one is going to complain about the quality of your images and I sincerely doubt that the average moviegoer could tell the difference.

Can't comment on the film analogy, I've never handled the stuff. Sounds sound, though.

 

[Gonzo_Entertainment]

I'd be more interested if they had included a GH2.


I think people often draw the wrong conclusions from these tests. Now of course, my initial response to people comparing DSLRs to dedicated, industry approved cameras is outrage, but the truth is that DSLRs are a fraction of the price of these other cameras and come close to holding their own.

Indeed, if you really stress them they break down, but show me a $1500 to $2500 camera that looks better (well, ok, maybe the GH2). I would have bought the GH2, it was my first choice, the girlfriend is a still photographer and she was really dead set on full frame. For most normal shooting situations, they look really really good.