3 Replies Latest reply: Jul 5, 2013 11:26 AM by Russ H
Michigan One Fly Level 2 Level 2 (240 points)

Help me understand why so many indie film makers go with a DSLR cameras and more recently the Panaconic mirroless Lumix DMC GH3.


Would a camera like the Panasomic GH3 capture better quality video than a camcorder such as the new Canon HF G30?


The Canon captures MP4 video at up to 35Mbps and can also capture in AVCHD ( I don't recall the bit rate ) .  The Panasonic records in h.264 or AVCHD with bit rated up to 72 Mbps.


If the camera is to be primarly for video it would seem that a video camera shoud out preform a still that shoots video.  I realize that the lens selction for the DSLR or micro 4/3rds makes a big difference,  but that asside are these hybreds better than video cameras in the same price range?  I think the preception I am getting is that one would have to spend $10,000 or more on a video camera to get the same quality footage.


I live far to disstant frorm any camera supplier that would have a selection of these cameras to check them out.  I am hoping some on this forum has some experiences with some of these cameras and can lend some insight.

  • 1. Re: Camera selections ?
    Tom Wolsky Level 10 Level 10 (106,220 points)

    Generally the DSLRs have much larger sensors, which allows the camera operator far greater control over the depth of field, which often, especially outdoors, is simply not possible with camcorders. There are other cameras now that combine the camcorder's ergonomics with the DSLRs large sensor.

  • 2. Re: Camera selections ?
    Karsten Schlüter Level 7 Level 7 (29,885 points)

    … 'better' …

    (usually, I don't like to participate in any 'quality' debate)


    The Canon 5D mkII was the famous 'cinematographers' choice, due to its full-size sensor. Tom allready explained, why this is 'better'.- Not made for 'hours' of recording, many of these device were killed by their own heat.-


    Most videoDSLR meanwhile (and micro43s) have sensors of (smaller) APS-C size … for example Canons other famous DSLR, 550, 600, 650, 700 (rebel tx). You get designated video devices with APS-C too....


    You've heard of the 'million pixel lie'? In theory, a sensor with 'just' 1920x1080 pixel is BETTER, than any 20, 30, 40 MioPixel DSLR - due to scaling, moire, Bayer filter, etc.


    Panas GH2 got famous, due to Vitaly's hack - which modified bit-rate, intra-frame encoding, etc etc etc. Most of his features are now incl. in the GH3 ... but is it as handy as a camcorder?


    switching glasses is 'better' - if you want to and can afford these masterpieces, e.g. ≤ f1.2 ... therefore, those expensive DSLR can not compete with any 300$ Sony Camcorder stabilizer ...


    finally: aside all tech-lingo - it's all about photography! A 5.000$ CanonEOS1x doesn't do 'better' pictures in a low light living room, in the hands of drunken GrandPa It's about light, light, light. Many/most DSLR videographer in my neighborhood don't even know what a ND-filter is. Aside owning/using one .........



    It's not the camera, it's the camera-man who does 'better' pictures.




    Spend 3h with this Emmy-awarded documentary:



    don't miss part II




    in ptII, aside Arri Alexa, Red Epic, or Kodak (film), one contestant is an iPhone!

    But plus 80 people crew, a 1Mio$ studio, a DoP with years of experience.-


    Light and the one using it.


    //sorry for venting!//

  • 3. Re: Camera selections ?
    Russ H Level 6 Level 6 (14,255 points)

    Here's an interesting list from Sundance.


    ND? That's no dissolve, right?