Whenever I see a short film by a DSLR like a canon t2i, I can pretty much tell that it wasn't shot on a professional camera. Something about it makes it look digital. This is why I asked this question. I need to know what that something is. If you compare the 1080p 24p video quality on a canon t2i to the 1080p 24p video on a Red One (or other professional camcorder) camera, what makes the red one look so much better?? It's the same video quality and frame rate. And if the shutter speed/aperture/iso were all exactly the same, what makes them different? And how is it so easy to tell the difference? When I see raw video from the red one compared to raw data from the t2i the red one footage automatically looks more film-like. Why???
Difference between DSLR video and professional camcorder video?
- Thread starter xxbluejay21
- Start date
Just because it's the same resolution does not make it the same video quality. They are worlds apart. The RED obliterates the T2i in color depth and dynamic range. The T2i, and DSLRs in general, are great cameras and the best available in their price range, but they really can't come close to beating a RED. That doesn't mean you can't use a DSLR to shoot a great project, just don't kid yourself to thinking it's on par with a $65,000 camera setup.
These days, cheap and small certainly does not mean bad.
"Crank 2" used cheap Canon XH-A1s and HF10s. Equipment choices are often about how you want to shoot, and the effect you're trying to get. If you and your crew are good, the result will also be good.
But "Crank 2" is no art film, and fast and loose worked for its exploitation material. So greatness might require of bit of investment in somewhat better equipment.
"Crank: High Voltage": http://collider.com/entertainment/news/article.asp/aid/7771/tcid/1
"Crank 2" used cheap Canon XH-A1s and HF10s. Equipment choices are often about how you want to shoot, and the effect you're trying to get. If you and your crew are good, the result will also be good.
But "Crank 2" is no art film, and fast and loose worked for its exploitation material. So greatness might require of bit of investment in somewhat better equipment.
"Crank: High Voltage": http://collider.com/entertainment/news/article.asp/aid/7771/tcid/1
Absolutely. A single lens for a RED camera costs about 5 or 6 T2i/550D kits.
It's all pretty much been hit, but recap...
If you have the money to shoot on a $30,000 camera with lenses that cost $5000 EACH then you probably also have the budget to hire a good DP, a good art director, a good makeup person, a good colorist, etc...
DSLR's compress the crap out of the footage because otherwise the camera would melt. This limits what you can do in color correction and causes you to lose detail in highlights and shadows.
If you have the money to shoot on a $30,000 camera with lenses that cost $5000 EACH then you probably also have the budget to hire a good DP, a good art director, a good makeup person, a good colorist, etc...
DSLR's compress the crap out of the footage because otherwise the camera would melt. This limits what you can do in color correction and causes you to lose detail in highlights and shadows.
Right, Having a good camera isn't the source of a better film, it's one of the many results of the planning that makes a good overall product possible.
My Epic will now be here in a week, it will eat a 128 GB card in 15 minutes flat. Compare that to the Ti's datastream, and you'll start to get a picture of just how much more the red is recording.
If you mean actual wrestling, I'd win. Ever tried wrestling a guy with a stedicam arm? I'm armored and have 3 arms.
If you mean a debate, I'd win. Debates aren't about volume of talk. The Harminator would hit me with a rolling 9 minute soliloquy, and I'd say, "Filmmaking is about filmmaking", and roll a clip.
Not to mention, I can beat him with no camera at all.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTBKXlojg-I
Last edited:
Good thread!
+1 and
I just peed myself and I need a production assistant with my alter underwear.
Last edited:
Woah! Where have u been? Havent caught u around the boards in a while!
I was busy hiring a production assistant that has my alter underwear. Do you think I just make this stuff up?
I was busy hiring a production assistant that has my alter underwear. Do you think I just make this stuff up?
You just made me laugh out loud for real.
Playing the part of Harmonica: So, you're saying that James Cameron never used a T3i? Not even for birthdays?
Playing the part of Nate North: Of course not, James Cameron is a 9 foot tall 600 pound giant, who grinds up million dollar cameras and puts them into his breakfast cereal to gain their power. I've found from experience that TI's are a tastless, chewy food, and can't possibly imagine him using them in any other scenario, considering that they would fail this most basic test.
"DSLR's compress the crap out of the footage because otherwise the camera would melt. This limits what you can do in color correction and causes you to lose detail in highlights and shadows. "
Compression was one of the first things mentioned (and that is what limits color grading).