Death of the DSLR?

[thebman]

So after multiple years of saving, originally for a Canon 5D mark iii, on the eve of being able to order one, I've decided to do some update research and make sure its still the best camera for me...

What I've come to realize, or at least notice, is that the DSLR trend seems to be dying out with the release of more budget friendly options like the 'Black Magic' and some 'Red' offerings...

I've gone back through plenty of posts, but I want an up to date opinion. So was wondering as of September 2013 what, in general, the community is using these days. I shoot everything from music videos, narrative stories, to boring old corporate and event videos.

Is the Mark iii still the "hotness" that it was a couple years ago... is the mark ii for that matter still a no brainier for the cost now?

should I look into something less photo related (i dont shoot photography at all really) and move more towards the new lines of 4k video cameras that seem to be taking the power back?

ALSO a few months back I remember Black Magic releasing pics and specs of a very portable cost effect 4k camera that seems to have dropped off the face of the planet? everyone was all ga ga for it when it dropped and now I rarely hear about it.... is this still in the pipe line?

are there any amazing cameras anyone knows about that have yet to be released but are worth waiting to see before upgrading gear?

...this isn't intended to be another "whats the best camera for low budget filmmaking." ... i understand that choosing a camera is subjective and depends on the use. however there always seems to be one or two that everyone goes crazy for at any given time. I'm just curious what the 2013 version of this is.

 

[ChimpPhobiaFilms]

DSLRs are still big, and they are here to stay. Blackmagic is currently up and rising. RED is aimed at more professional filmmakers.

Each type camera is good, and for a certain type of shooter with a certain budget. But remember "it matters how you shoot, not what you shoot with". It doesn't matter what's "hot", it matters how you use your camera.

 

[cheeseandachallenge]

RED is far too expensive for most of us types.

Blackmagic is potentially paving the way for a competitor for DSLR, but isn't quite there yet. The pocket camera is amazing value for what it is, but you need to spend a fair amount in accessories to really get the best out of it (not to mention a lot in storage and the computer power to handle it all). It might be a while before the DSLR is killed off yet.

As for what the best bang for buck is now? Depends on your budget, but seeing as your mentioning the 5DMIII, you might want to look into Panasonic's GH2 and GH3

 

[8salacious9]

judging by your comment it doesnt sound like you have handled a professional camera, otherwise you would know what your looking for, if DSLR is dead then you would have only been saving for professional cameras.

DSLR is not dying, whats happening is that DSLR was a gateway to budget filmmakers to create films on a low budget, however those filmmakers generally start to feel limited by a DSLR and need something more professional.

you can learn alot on a DSLR infact so much so that it should probably be a starting point for anyone.

*having read through again i see you say that you have shot videos already, but what camera do you have then? whats wrong with it that you need to upgrade? or are you just borrowing and you need your own stuff.*

 

[Yodaman]

DSLR's aren't dying. The Canon Txi series is certainly a more budget-friendly option than even the Blackmagic Design Pocket Cinema Camera (I just bought a T3i for $550 off of Amazon, lens included), and because of that more people who are starting out will probably go the DSLR route.

It's true that there are more options emerging, but I think DSLR's will stick around for a little while longer, at least until "better" cameras become cheaper. But in the meantime, I'm perfectly happy with my choice of the T3i. It will last me a good long while!

 

[filoco]

Actually the iphone 5 already had 8 million megapixels on the 5s they are just bigger..

 

[harmonica44]

The iphone and a lot of camcorders, still don't have interchangeable lenses though so I think DSLRs will still be pretty popular unless a lot of newer cameras have it now, that can beat the price.

 

[neuro]

I'm curious, what do you mean by "isn't quite there yet?" I honestly don't know, but considering it records raw, has an extremely wide range (12 stops or so?) and the 4k version has a global shutter that apparently eliminates rolling shutter, it seems like it surpasses most DSLRs for cinema stuff. Or no?

Blackmagic is potentially paving the way for a competitor for DSLR, but isn't quite there yet.

 

[cheeseandachallenge]

It does, mostly, yeah (though it'd be nice to have higher frame rates, crop factor is pretty bad, and there are a few other things).

but the point is, even though it's kind of 'cheap' for the body, you still need to have a powerful computer, a good storage system, etc, to handle all that higher quality stuff. This is not only really expensive for the indie filmmaker, but it's not the most accessible workflow (and maybe a bit intimidating to someone new). Not to mention the crop factor will make shooting indoors pretty difficult, and getting super wide lenses is pricey.

 

[A.D.]

...8 million megapixels...

That's a lot of pixels.

 

[ItDonnedOnMe]

but the point is, even though it's kind of 'cheap' for the body, you still need to have a powerful computer, a good storage system, etc, to handle all that higher quality stuff. This is not only really expensive for the indie filmmaker, but it's not the most accessible workflow (and maybe a bit intimidating to someone new).

This may be true of raw, but all of the blackmagic cameras shoot ProRes as well, which doesn't require any more powerful of a computer than you're likely to need to edit video from any DSLR. As an acquisition format prores is much better than anything any DSLR is recording so far, and the workflow can actually be simpler than that of working with h.264 - especially on an older/lower performance system. To me that's one of the most compelling arguments for choosing a BM camera over a DSLR. Think of raw as a bonus that'll let the camera grow with you as your skills ( and other equipment) do, rather than as the primary reason to get it.

 

[cheeseandachallenge]

This may be true of raw, but all of the blackmagic cameras shoot ProRes as well, which doesn't require any more powerful of a computer than you're likely to need to edit video from any DSLR. As an acquisition format prores is much better than anything any DSLR is recording so far, and the workflow can actually be simpler than that of working with h.264 - especially on an older/lower performance system. To me that's one of the most compelling arguments for choosing a BM camera over a DSLR. Think of raw as a bonus that'll let the camera grow with you as your skills ( and other equipment) do, rather than as the primary reason to get it.

Oh I stand corrected. When I was doing research into my camera, I was told I'd need something relatively powerful in terms of storage and editing (I don't recall if people were referring to 4K or pro-res - presumably the former, but I don't think I knew much about pro-res). In that case, BM is a lot closer. It is still potentially a bit overwhelming to new filmmakers, though. I ended up getting a GH3 myself, and am really happy with it (and I've made two films, in the time I would've had to wait for the new BMPCC to arrive - will possibly have made another few before everyone who ordered theirs gets it) - the crop factor and frame rate was another drawback for me, though I'm almost certain my next camera will be along the lines of the blackmagic range. I'd also recommend the BMPCC for anyone looking at anything in the price range of the GH3 or 5DMIII (I have a friend buying a camera, trying to convince her to get one so I can play with it), it just wasn't quite right for me with the wait until it would arrive and the other things I mentioned.

 

[A.D.]

Being new to me (yeah yeah, I know...), I just had to google those PCC's.

They look alright... if you don't like being able to produce shallow DoF.

Shame about the pansy sensor size, otherwise they would be a sweet investment. Still, they look good for landscape and documentary work I guess. Nice DR and form factor at least. I wonder what the noise is like on them...?

 

[CraigL]

They look alright... if you don't like being able to produce shallow DoF.

Shame about the pansy sensor size, otherwise they would be a sweet investment. Still, they look good for landscape and documentary work I guess. Nice DR and form factor at least. I wonder what the noise is like on them...?

The Blackmagic Pocket camera is similar sized to a Super 16mm film stock. "The Hurt Locker" was shot on 16mm film stock, didn't seem to slow down or limit Barry Ackroyd when he shot it. Here are some others shot on 16mm:

http://shotonwhat.com/filmwidth/16mm-film-width

Now, having said that, the BMPCC brings it's own series of issues finding decent lenses for it, but there are more and more m43 adapter options from companies like Metabones to help not only improve the 3x crop factor but increase the speed of the lens by a stop.

Camera is a tool, as mentioned over and over here.

When I bought, I had the money to buy a 5D Mk II, but instead I bought a T2i, a great shotgun mic, lenses, audio recorder, lights, stands, scrims and a tripod.

Sure, there are times when I think the camera lets me down a bit compared to a 5D or BMPCC. But more often than not, with the right skill and gear, I can pull it off and I learn more and more every single time.

All that said, I'm looking forward to buying a real video camera relegating the DSLR to BTS stills and clips...

CraigL

 

[sonnyboo]

DSLR's are not dead per se. Professionals using them as their primary camera has switched to the aforementioned Blackmagic, RED, and other "DSLR busters" like the Panasonic AF100, Canon C100-300-500, Sony F3 etc.

But for the sub $1,000 price range, no one is making a camera that has interchangeable lenses, a large sensor, and data recording except the DSLR still cameras. For the hobbyist filmmakers, these are the cameras Du Jour still today and looks to stay that way for a while.

The camera manufacturers are a little slow on the uptake and have completely underestimated the amateur filmmaking trend. That's why it took 5-6 years for the camcorder division at Canon to make a video-friendly large sensor camera, even though it was due to their Canon 5D mark II that started the entire trend of DSLR film shooting.

 

[A.D.]

The Blackmagic Pocket camera is similar sized to a Super 16mm film stock. "The Hurt Locker" was shot on 16mm film stock, didn't seem to slow down or limit Barry Ackroyd when he shot it. Here are some others shot on 16mm:

http://shotonwhat.com/filmwidth/16mm-film-width

My apolgies, I should've been clearer as to avoid any possible confusion regarding my opinion on small sensors. My post was a bit short really. It's not that we can't get shallow DoF from smaller sensors, it's just that it's one of the factors which affects DoF which will limit a users choice of shot composition to achieve a desired outcome.

Anecdotal evidence of course, can always be found to support any opinion, but it remains that the format's size and all it's inherent strengths and weakness will be a factor for any camera selection choice, and the smaller the format, the more that control of shallow DoF is inherently limited.

My GF has a compact digital cam with a sensor the size of a match-head , yet I can wrangle some stunning bokeh out of it, despite most dismissing them as being 'incapable' of doing so. Sensor size is not the only factor of course - aperture, focal length, and distance to subject/background all play a part too. However, just because I can muster pro shots from such a tiny sensor (and crappy max aperture), it's far from my format of choice! No doubt some will love the format still (myself included), for what advatages it offers - size, portability, weight, convenience, discretion, long zoom etc. In fact, most times I go out without a specific shoot in mind, I will grab her compact for those very reasons, with the DSLR seeing action when I know what I will be shooting. We're back to tools for the job again.

I like a lot of 16mm stuff actually, and I've seen some great work shot on 8mm too, but It doesn't mean I want to go out and invest in them either.

Camera is a tool, as mentioned over and over here.

Indeed.

If people only have a hammer, all they see is nails... and various other tool-related metaphors.

But for the sub $1,000 price range, no one is making a camera that has interchangeable lenses, a large sensor, and data recording except the DSLR still cameras. For the hobbyist filmmakers, these are the cameras Du Jour still today and looks to stay that way for a while.

Sums it up nicely.

Though we should probably add that there is a good selection of APSC's in other form factors to choose from now too, though lens selection is pretty thin still.

 

[jax_rox]

Anecdotal evidence of course, can always be found to support any opinion, but it remains that the format's size and all it's inherent strengths and weakness will be a factor for any camera selection choice, and the smaller the format, the more that control of shallow DoF is inherently limited.

It's much more than anecdotal evidence, however. Many films and television shows have been shot on S16 for decades and I'd hardly say the look suffered. You don't get the same DOF on a 16 sensor as you do on a 35mm sensor for the same field of view, but you can still get shallow DoF. Indeed, affording a slightly deeper DoF can often be a saviour for those trying to wrangle everything themselves.
There's more to a look than simply DoF, and S16 DoF is hardly deep, even if it is slightly deeper than 35mm.

I like a lot of 16mm stuff actually, and I've seen some great work shot on 8mm too, but It doesn't mean I want to go out and invest in them either.

Why? I'd take a ProRes/raw 10-12bit S16 image over an 8-bit 36Mbps H.264 any day of the week, even if the H.264 is shot on a 35 sensor. I'd also take dynamic range over resolution and/or sensor size.

But then, I care more about what the image looks like than razor-thin DoF. If the image looks incredible, who cares if it has 3' of depth instead of 1'7"?

 

[ItDonnedOnMe]

Yeah, I wouldn't be too worried about shallow DOF on the pocket cam, it's easy enough to get if you know what you're doing. Wide angle is the real challenge with the smaller sensor - one of my favorite lenses on the 5D is canon's 16-35mm f/2.8 - and there's just not really an easy & affordable way to match that on the pocket cam. I think I can live with it if I can get close to 24mm at least, so I'm hoping that the tokina 11-17 + speedbooster will be a workable combination.

The camera manufacturers are a little slow on the uptake and have completely underestimated the amateur filmmaking trend. That's why it took 5-6 years for the camcorder division at Canon to make a video-friendly large sensor camera, even though it was due to their Canon 5D mark II that started the entire trend of DSLR film shooting.

I don't think they really underestimated it. I do think Canon and the other manufacturers were caught by surprise when the 5D hit like it did, but I think the speed of their follow-up has been due to not wanting to undercut their higher-end video business. They've drawn a fairly clear line in the sand between their 'cinema' cameras that have features pros won't work without, and DSLRs which are fine for amateurs/indies who can live with the workflow compromises as a trade off for the price/performance ratio. And at this point I'd argue the blackmagic cameras still sit on the amateur side of that line, largely due to BM's inability to address issues like quality control, missing basic features, etc. They have different compromises than DSLRs, and different advantages, but the still fall into that space of providing the opportunity to get greater image quality than you paid for if you can learn to live and work within their particular quirks.

 

[A.D.]

Jax - It's OK, I understand equivalency ta.

The fact remains, that if you have a larger sensor you can always stop down to acheive the same DoF as a smaller sensor, and then bump the ISO up to rematch the exposure (thus negating the noise advantage of the larger sensor).

A smaller sensor simply cannot do the same in reverse.

I too would prefer a greater DR, but the two arn't mutually exclusive.

Itdonnedonme - Shallow DoF is indeed easy enough to get (see my post re:compact cams), but the smaller the sensor the more compromises have to be made regarding focal length, distance, and aperture to achieve the same equivalent image, if it can be achieved at all. It's simply the laws of physics.

Sometimes those compromises are acceptable, sometimes not. It's down to the user to make an informed choice, and no decision is the 'wrong' one.

If anyone here hasn't already studied this, then I recommend the following link as some quality light reading before bed tonight...

Equivalency - http://www.josephjamesphotography.com/equivalence/index.htm

And yeah, I totally agree about Canikon's unwillingness to commit to certain product dev. They have a serious investment in FF lenses and high end cine gear, and they have managed to keep thier head in the sand for as long as possible so as not to upset the cash wagon. Drip-feeding consumers products...

Inevitably others will pick up the slack quite nicely in thier absence.

 

[jax_rox]

I think you're putting too much importance on sensor size - as I say, many things have been shot on Super 16 for years, and not simply because they 'couldn't afford' 35mm.

Of course, it would be nice to have S35 sensor + ProRes or raw in 10-12 bit + 14 stops of latitude...

But you're talking about a camera that sits between $30-100k versus one that costs $995.

If you've got the money, and the work to justify the more expensive camera - be my guest and buy it.
But I certainly wouldn't be buying a 5DmkIII or even a 7D over a Blackmagic Pocket Camera (which cost 1/2-1/3 that of the DSLRs) simply because they have 'larger sensors'. I care about the image, and the BMPC gives a 10 times better image than the compressed crap out of DSLRs.

Put some S16 lenses on it if you're that worried about DoF...

You make it seems as if having more DoF is indeed a 'compromise' - many would argue the opposite, especially doco shooters.
As I say, is there really that much difference between 3' and 1'7 of DoF in the grand scheme of things?