This video from Vincent Laforet.com essentially turns the value proposition of an HD video camera on its head. If a DSLR can do this amazing work, why bother picking up a camcorder?
Know something we should know? E-mail us your tips! We respect anonymity. »
Comments
by
John Biggs
on
September 25, 2008
Responses
Comments 
Leave Comment
Commenting Options
Enter your personal information to the left, or sign in with your Facebook account by clicking the button below.
Alternatively, you can create an avatar that will appear whenever you leave a comment on a Gravatar-enabled blog.
Trackback URL
- Actively Discussed Posts
- Contest: HP MediaSmart Server EX495
594 comments - Hasn't Infinity Ward earned your trust for Modern Warfare 2?
61 comments - Exclusive video of the Litl Webbook
43 comments - Siren.gif: Microsoft COFEE law enforcement tool leaks all over the Internet~!
33 comments - You are not worthy of the 18-button OpenOfficeMouse (and it has an analog stick)
22 comments
- There are no posts to display.
maybe because of the 11 lenses he had to use to do it ;)
Real HD cams are better for a lot of reasons, but that’s no reason not to appreciate this capability on the 5d.
Yeah right, get a clue. Footage this beautiful has up til now only been possible with cameras costing from $14k upwards (red one). Every indie filmer will want this baby. Who on earth would want that guesome video look if he can have cinematic photography? ENG will be the only place left for traditional HD-Cams, i suppose. And the cat is out of the bag, people will no longer accept tiny 1/2″ sensors on cameras costing $10k from now on…, the days of DoF-adapters are numbered.
Beautiful yes but I suspect the glass used (costing probably more than the camera!!) made most of the difference. Vincent is definitely a pro and his ability as a photographer truly transferred over to film making. Another hindrance would definitely be the CF card capacity, short record times.
I suspect the Tech involved in making the camera will trickle up to video cameras, then things will get interesting indeed!!
Actually, the quality of the glass will be way less apparent when shooting meager 1080p frames than when acquiring full resolution (21MP) Stills. The discussions about the glassy requirements are mostly centered about reaching the resolution ceiling. What problems do you expect from not so great lenses? Chromatic Aberration and insufficient sharpness? I’ve never seen those kind of problems from the usual entry level lenses that people get with those dsl kits. But then again, I am not an expert.
What the undoubtedly expensive glass did, was add some spectacular perspective to the imagery, but the beautiful colour was mostly due to the camera and the ability to leverage low but spectacular available light due to the new and super-sensitive sensor.
Anyway, a photographer friend of mine has already ordered his MkII and will be borrowing it to see for myself…
>Vincent is definitely a pro and his ability as a photographer truly transferred over to film making.
can’t be sure about that. He worked with a film maker to create this video. read the credits.
Videopia.org just coordinated a Q & A session with Vincent and was able to get an interview about his project.
Very interesting, you will definitely enjoy!!
The color interpolation via the CCDs/chips gets its information from the lens, thus if you have bad glass, you get bad images. Look at all the “Major” players and I dare say you will not find any who uses a stock lens. Why is this, why upgrade to such an “expensive” component? Image quality, whether its photographic or moving images that’s your answer.
With that said yes, this is just one component in a series of high dollar parts. I agree that the low light sensitivity and the capabilities of the chip makes a huge difference. But it all starts a the front of the lens.
I’m just saying that: Take a portrait photo with an el cheapo Nikon D40 with the kit-lens with beautiful evening sun, a beautiful subject, epic surroundings. That still image will come out orders of magnitude better than anything from say, a sony ex1 hd-cam. And this is exactly what we have here. Plus it’s not a D40, it’s Canon’s top notch full format camera. DoF is magic. And it’s a revolution. Or put another way: If the DoF is right, everything else will fall into place. If one piece of glass is not cool, it can be upgraded. Or, put still another way: We’ve had exchangeable lenses for ages (Canon XL1), but it’s the Dof that’s been the final frontier. From now on, the future is wide open and crassly democratic.
Now we are on the same page!! That is what makes the Red so Film like and thus attractive. The chip(s) are much larger, and are comparable to a camera like the Canon 5D. The DOF is much more like a film camera. The bigger the Chip the better the DOF.
OH and agree, the DOF makes the difference!!
30fps will put off pretty much the entire indie film industry…. and before anyone mentions conversion, it’s just not a good enough option, Canon HAVE to deliver 24fps if they want the indie market to get on board (which, prehaps they don’t?)