consumer Video camera

[Fred588]

In my opinion only, the advise about using a video camera for video and a still camera for stills is very well taken. In the past few years I have purchased two Nikon DSLRs that can take video and immediately decided to use them for stills only. On a similar note, I have five vieo cameras that can take stills concurrently with video, BUT I note that the one I have lined up to acquire next, a clear upgrade from the ones I have, can NOT do that.

[dlodoski]

On a side note, see all those tiny gaps between clips? That's what happens when you try to use a DSLR on a real project. Don't be awed by the idea of full-frame sensors and insane color depth. Buy a camera that's MADE to record video.

I respectfully disagree.

If you're willing to put up with the inconvenience of having to toggle the start/stop occasionally (the only significant drawback to the Canon 5D MkII I have found), shooting video on a DSLR can be very rewarding - compared to the cost of video rigs that can provide the same flexibility and results. The Canon I mentioned is the only one I have experience with btw, so take this for what it's worth.

You have to pay attention to what is required and take the time to learn it. If you don't take the time, you will never really know if it's worth it or not.

The irony for me is that I finally got a high quality mid zoom (perfect for this application), and then failed to use it even once this season because I also beefed up on 4k video cameras. Maybe next season.

[Chimerix]

I respectfully disagree.

If you're willing to put up with the inconvenience of having to toggle the start/stop occasionally (the only significant drawback to the Canon 5D MkII I have found), shooting video on a DSLR can be very rewarding - compared to the cost of video rigs that can provide the same flexibility and results. The Canon I mentioned is the only one I have experience with btw, so take this for what it's worth.

You have to pay attention to what is required and take the time to learn it. If you don't take the time, you will never really know if it's worth it or not.

I work/play with a lot of indie filmmakers. Nearly all of them use DSLR cameras, because it is what they can afford. And nearly all of them talk like this, mixing praise with caveats.

Look, a monster sensor with quality glass produces great footage, sure. And the low light performance is unparalleled. But go look at that timeline again. Five cameras, which included 3 different models of upper-midrange DSLR. The only camera which recorded without gaps between clips was the BlackMagic, which is a made-for-video camera. And this isn't an anomaly: he recorded six of those interviews. All of the timelines look the same, and the DLSRs used varied from shoot to shoot. So, I have to ask, just how many frames of lost, irreplaceable footage is that gorgeous image worth? If all you're doing is short form, and you rarely hit the single-file size limit of your camera, you'll die never knowing that anguish. But if you get into long form stuff, and find you have a dozen gaps in your concert footage, well...

It wasn't just gaps, either. Some of the cameras had issues naming files, giving the same name to two or more clips. Every now and again, they would name them out of sequence! Overheating apparently is a problem common to a certain make/model.

YMMV, and clearly it has. For my own part, I will stick to cameras that are purpose-built. DSLR for still, cine for film, video for video, infrared for game.

The irony for me is that I finally got a high quality mid zoom (perfect for this application), and then failed to use it even once this season because I also beefed up on 4k video cameras. Maybe next season.

Yeah, I've got a couple of new toys still sitting in their boxes, waiting for me to use them for what I bought them for. It's a sad feeling.

[dlodoski]

....Five cameras, which included 3 different models of upper-midrange DSLR. The only camera which recorded without gaps between clips was the BlackMagic, which is a made-for-video camera. And this isn't an anomaly: he recorded six of those interviews. All of the timelines look the same, and the DLSRs used varied from shoot to shoot. So, I have to ask, just how many frames of lost, irreplaceable footage is that gorgeous image worth? ...

Well, like Dirty Harry said - "A man's got to know his cameras limitations" (Or something like that).

I know that when I get up to about 10 minutes of continuous recording, I need to toggle the start-stop at an opportune moment. So I do. This is the last device I would try to pull audio from, so it's not really a problem.

And honestly, that gorgeous image doesn't really fit what we are doing most of the time. But I am satisfied that I can get it if I need it. It took me nearly an entire season to really master it.

[Fred588]

Having to start a new data file at about 10 minutes would be about what one would expect in a device formatted with FAT32. There is no practical limit with NTFS. You might try reformatting the memory device to NTFS.

[Chimerix]

Having to start a new data file at about 10 minutes would be about what one would expect in a device formatted with FAT32. There is no practical limit with NTFS. You might try reformatting the memory device to NTFS.

It's a camera design thing more so than a formatting issue. Even top-end cameras, using proprietary codecs, proprietary hardware, and proprietary OS, break continuous video into multiple files. The difference is that, on a camera made to do this, it will do the process reliably and seamlessly. On a camera for which video is a secondary function, the process seems to be less reliable.

[Fred588]

You are probably right. From the point of view of the user, on my cameras, I get one file each time I turn the camera on. Some of the files I have crated are more than 8G in size. How it works internally is of no practical concern to me.