What are the downsides of using a DSLR for video?

superdon

Prominent Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2003
Messages
1,859
Reaction score
74
Points
472
I am still spending hours researching our upcoming purchase.

I was pretty much all set on a Panasonic V700 but I keep reading that its foolish to buy camcorders these days.

My budget is around £400 max and the camera will be used for general family and holiday. But, I also would like to get creative. Low light and indoor is also needed. Main use will be video, but it would be nice to have the option of good stills.

So, for example, how does the V700 compare to the FZ200? Why would I be losing if I went for the FZ200? And what would I be gaining?
 
It's difficult one this! --- features that are important to some people are not to others!

The main advantages of the FZ200 are the much better stills options (naturally!) and the inclusion of a 600mm F2.8 lens.

(I need to clarify that the '600mm' label refers to a '35mm equivalent' way of labelling the lens.
Although that's a pretty conventional way of measuring these days, as there are so many different sensor sizes -but it can cause confusion.)

Suffice to say, it's pretty impressive lens on a camera for that price.

This latest model also includes the ability to shoot video as full 50p HD, which is also impressive.

Downsides? ---well the ergonomics obviously. It's a much bigger lump to carry around than a modern consumer camcorder, and some people find the format more difficult to use for video.

I use the earlier FZ48 model, which is a similar style, and I have to say I prefer it to my Panasonic SD5, when it comes to shooting video. That is primarily because I prefer a viewfinder to an LCD screen.....I certainly haven't found the shape 'awkward' for video myself....

The other thing to consider is the EU restriction on video length. Because the FZ200 will be classed as camera, rather than a camcorder, there is quite price saving because of the way the EU tax camcorders.
This means that each video 'take' is limited to 29 minutes and 59 seconds (to beat the 30 minute EU limit!).
As soon as you stop the camera, you can of course start again immediately with another 30 minute 'take'.......Stupid of course, but then this is the EU we're talking about!

I'm sure others may have different views, but if it were me, I'd go for the FZ200.....
 
Last edited:
Cheers. Just on my way out to have a feel of the FZ200.

I guess my main question is, how will video quality compare between the two?
 
Personaly i have an FZ150,video wise i dont think there is much difference in it and the FZ200,the newer model has an f2.8 fixed throughout its zoom which the 150 does not,i have tested my 150 and 50P and 50i have identical resolution,the video resolution on this camera is two thirds what my GH2 has[of note GH2s are selling cheap now the GH3 is here]the fixed lens cameras are good for stills and not bad for video to sum up.
 
The OP's title is "What are the downsides of using a DSLR for video?" as long as superdon realises that the FZ200 is not a DSLR the rest is good advice.

I've not tried one myself but the FZ200 sounds a great tool for what it is. Being a 'camera' it would be great for the more 'candid' type of video. As well as the lens, the eye piece, the mic in, the 1080p50, it can do 720p100 if you ever wanted slow mo (slow it down in the editor by 4x without losing anything).

IMHO a DSLR is not the greatest tool for being able to record an event (general family and holiday) fast.
If you have time to compose your shot and the subject will not move to much so as to go out of focus then that's the realm of the DSLR and yes it will give you more creative control.
 
Chelters, why does the subject have to stay "put" - surely not all DSLRs are manual-focus?
My NEX5 does a super job AF (in movie-mode) and has a silent motor. Whilst it not strictly a DSLR - it is a "mirrorless DSLR" - so there is no mirror clunk/time when in stills mode (and an optical viewfinder doesn't do Video, although the Sony DSLR's do have a pelicule . . . but suffer some "low-light" as a result.

The more-expensive Canons I'm sure are AF in movie mode, but that's costly.....
OP's budget won't go anywhere near these.
 
The Canon DSLR models prior to the 650D would focus at the start of recording video shoot but not during the take. The newer 650D does now feature continuous autofocus I believe.

It's all to do with the way autofocus works on a DSLRs - the autofocus mechanism works off the light fed to the viewfinder which is only present when the shutter is closed. As soon as the shutter is opened then the autofocus mechanism is effectively disabled by design. Not a problem when shooting a single still image but an issue for video.

The more recent Sony DSLTs feature continuous autofocus as they don't have a mirror shutter but instead use a translucent shutter which constantly directs a small amount of light to the autofocus mechanism.

The Sony A37 is within budget (C£300) but has a max video resolution of 1080/50i. The Sony A57 is available for around £500 but Sony are currently running a £50 cashback deal bringing it to £450 (only slightly over budget). It offers 1080/50p and gets good reviews as a still camera as well.

The Canon 600D is around £460 with a £40 cashback promo from Canon taking it down to £420 (close to budget) but has the lack of autofocus issues discussed above.

Having said all that if you want a camcorder that's easy to use for family videos personally I'd recommend you go for a camcorder rather than a DSLR.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for that info, pete66, that explains a lot.

+My own NEX5 doesn't have that silly pelicule arrangement (nor a EVF), so I'm guessing my AF is done "on the sensor" (contrast??), but it seems to work reasonably well. Certainly it's not been an issue when following the action - indeed I've used it filming through somewhat open trees/hedge and surprisingly it appears to stay with the "subject" rather than switching to the closer trees. The effect is very cinematic.

I've not used a domestic camcorder, but am at a loss to understand how this can be easier than (say) my NEX5.
1) Open leather case
2) Switch on, point at scene, etc.
3) press red button, "movie mode"
4) press " " " " to conclude.
5) review as req'd
6) switch off, close case.


.
 
Harry does your NEX5 autofocus with older lenses using an adapter?
If so can you still manually focus?
Genuinely interested as I'm toying with the idea of getting something like the NEX5 (probably 'n' but that seems to have a rattle problem when panned).
 
Last edited:
— As an Amazon Associate, AVForums earns from qualifying purchases —
Chelters the newer model has touch screen I understand . . no use to me as I fitted a tough protective screen to the LCD (protection), so that would need to come off . . . I read that touch-screen will allow follow focus of a chosen subject (esp Faces)......DYOR.
Now yr Q.
The secondary market adaptors are manual only - they provide infinity focus as per the lens-setting (nice to have a real scale) and you set the aperture. It's really not a problem as you use small apertures when it's sunny and . . . The sensor seems to cope well, but I usually set it to (EV=minus 0.7) as I want detail in highlights.

Sony does a fancy (£100+) auto adaptor, but I understand this is to fit existing Sony DSLR lenses . . . why Sony changed the fitting I don't know. Seems like they think their existing customers were fools.

I have a decent 50mm Nikon f/1.8 which works a treat and I bought one of those "Faders" (crossed polaroids) so I could work at full aperture in sunlight for near-zero DoF . . . but since buying it, the weather's changed and . . .
You'll understand that at f/1.8 the DoF is likely to be quite small - - - and I have made a screen-lupe so it is quite easy to get the focus spot-on . . . The same adaptor also works (with Lupe) using a Nikon-fit 200mm f/3.5 that is pretty good for distant shots . . . but it is Manual Only. . . . and needs a heavy tripod to hold it and fluid head for smooth pans. It's surprising how a FH can make shots look just "right". If you plan to fit a long SLR zoom, you may need to hold the lens to the tripod and let the camera hang on the back - that's what I did for a 35-200 Tokina, but the internals failed and it now awaiting repair. I made the lens clamp..... if you do, then have the focus-mark on the left, not on the top -

Don't understand rattle - is this in the lens, perhaps? My 18-55 is completely silent on or off camera (ie when rattled), also the AF is silent even in video-mode.


Let us know what you Buy.
H.

Good luck -
 
Last edited:
@chrishull3 if your note about the GH2 are aimed at me I have to say I'd love one but even at £850 that's way over my means.

@12harry thanks for that. Re: the NEX5n rattle, take a look at this Sony NEX 5N - Clicking Sound Torture Test - YouTube

I'm sort of torn, the FZ200 is tempting for it's ease of use, super zoom, EVF and OIS etc.
Whereas a compact sys camera offers a lot of flexibility but usually no EVF and more hassle.
Anyway I'll be waiting for the new year before I make my choice.
 
I'm sort of torn, the FZ200 is tempting for it's ease of use, super zoom, EVF and OIS etc.
Whereas a compact sys camera offers a lot of flexibility but usually no EVF and more hassle.

In the end, it was the EVF that was the clincher for me....my Panasonic SD5 has been a fine camera, but I never got used to not having a viewfinder...especially in sunlight!
Superzooms are not perfect, but a reasonably decent lens (even if it's fixed!), full HD video, and an EVF make it an obvious choice, IMHO.
Having decided on going for a superzoom myself, I was actually quite surprised how good the ergonomics were for shooting video...especially when using the EVF.....
Now I'm only using an FZ48. Add the new F2.8 lens of the FZ200, and I reckon it's real winner......
As always, IMHO of course....:)
 
Chelters, that YT rattle is so excessive I cannot even believe it's real. However, the subsequent link to Sony suggests there is an issue when filming with some of the NEX5N produced. The way I read Sony reply is that it's a minor noise and they have a firmware fix (or is that a glue-gun), if customers return the noisy cameras.

What was odd is that the YT clips just repeated the pose, there was no showing the others side, or the closed hand. Indeed it the guy was hiding a bracelet, we'd not know. For a "fault" such as this to be understood the clip needs to allay concerns that it's rigged.

The significant benefit of the NEX5 series . . . is the interchangable lens arrangement.
e.g. Attaching my Nikon 50mm f/1.8 creates an amazing low-light camera..... at a cost of £23 for the manual adaptor. The exposure is very forgiving . . . with a bright-day tolerance of several stops, IMHO.

The FZ200 just reads like a fantastic bargain, to the extent that Pana would appear to be killing GH-range Sales. . . yet, they wouldn't do this . . . so we need an Independent Report from Forum-Users of both, to establish the truth. I suspect low-light will be the first difference.

I wonder that others Forum owners of NEX5n won't report their experience . . . for it seems your "find" is somewhat rare, (er like the only one?).

Please note I'm not blaming you, Chelters, rather I'd have preferred the YT poster to do a far more competant job, with some words, explaing what they have found as the camera is rotated . . . this might give a more-scientific viewing.

My own NEX5 is now 2years old and has performed with no problems (other than incompetance on my part, etc.) and the only reason I haven't bought another (as second camera), is because the price has gone up (Mine from Best-Buy, now closed)..... and at over £500 I'm quite a long way towards the CX730 (Sony) camcorder which sports min-in, phone-out and is supposed to have an awesome OIS. I'm still waiting for CX730-owners on this Forum to Report back Good, Bad, or Ugly. I believe I'm ready for a real camcorder, but cannot justify the models which are almost double the £800 (Amazon) . . . . once Az pays its due taxes.
(wash my mouth).

EDIT: (Sorry missed rogs Post#13,),
rogs, I would like to know how you find the FZ(model?) you have, performs in low-light, as you say it's looking like a good deal..... I agree, a fixed zoom is no bar to a movie-camera making good shots, IMHO.
 
Last edited:
rogs, I would like to know how you find the FZ(model?) you have, performs in low-light, as you say it's looking like a good deal..... I agree, a fixed zoom is no bar to a movie-camera making good shots, IMHO.

I got the FZ48, which was the last consumer camera/camcorder on the market that still used a CCD.
You may remember from some of my earlier posts that I'm not a fan of CMOS rolling shutters, so I decided that, as I was looking to buy a new stills/ video camera anyway - (and wasn't looking to spend too much!:)) I'd go for the last CCD model available.

It's only a 1/2.33" sensor, so the low light is 'OK'... it's better than my SD5 (not difficult!), but nowhere near as good as the low light performance you get from the massive sensors in real DSLRs.
I think the FZ200 has the same size sensor, but it's CMOS of course.....so the low light should be OK....
 
Rogs: "....It's only a 1/2.33" sensor..." - are you saying this is the size of your FZ48?

A 1/2.33" sensor doesn't strike me a acceptable for good "low-light" although it is significantly larger than many camcorders.... this may be due to its primeary purpose in stills.

If the FZ200 is similar-size (as you suggest), then that points to the likely down-side.

However, camcorders like the X900 (now discontinued?) are likely to the somewhat smaller, even though they have three of them.
 
@chrishull3 if your note about the GH2 are aimed at me I have to say I'd love one but even at £850 that's way over my means.

@12harry thanks for that. Re: the NEX5n rattle, take a look at this Sony NEX 5N - Clicking Sound Torture Test - YouTube

I'm sort of torn, the FZ200 is tempting for it's ease of use, super zoom, EVF and OIS etc.
Whereas a compact sys camera offers a lot of flexibility but usually no EVF and more hassle.
Anyway I'll be waiting for the new year before I make my choice.

Yes it is but you post was about DSLRs for video and for the price you want there are not any realy,possibly an early canon model,
 
I'm sort of torn, the FZ200 is tempting for it's ease of use, super zoom, EVF and OIS etc.
Whereas a compact sys camera offers a lot of flexibility but usually no EVF and more hassle.
Anyway I'll be waiting for the new year before I make my choice.

There are compact system cameras with EVF that should be in your budget, the Panasonic G3 I think has been at some decent prices recently and it has a good viewfinder and a decent sensor. You'd lose a lot of range compared to a superzoom/bridge camera though.

John
 
As these are made by the same company (Pana), it seems to me that the difference is the (or rather "probably") the video quality - so the more expensive camera has a shorter Zoom (having a better image). . . . If the better (more expensive) camera had the longer zoom, then the lack of optical quality would be noticed....

Has anyone owned both and can confirm?
 
A year ago I was asking myself and others the same question. I am a keen still photographer and a keen videographer. Could I get a DSLR that would do both?

In the end I kept my trusty Canon 1Ds2 and bought a Panasonic SD900. My only option at the time was a 1Ds4 or a 5D2 but from what I shoot video wise, neither of these would fit the bill. My thoughts on DSLR for video is they can be amazing in the right hands with the right subjects. The crazy shallow DOF that can be achieved with DSLR's and the right lenses is incredible. The PQ is also fantastic. But this shallow DOF can be the bane of your life. The AF on DSLR video is slow and clunky. My research found out that MF is the only practical DSLR way.

If you have kids like me who run around, you want to get the video cam out of the bag and shoot with little setup and get decent footage most of the time then a dedicated video camera is the only practical option. The DSLR in my view is suited to an inde film maker who has a bit of time to think about the shot, set it up and then shoot......

I'm sure some can get good results with a bit of practice but in my view and for my use it's a camera for stills and a camcorder for video
 
Useful insight Pilsburypie, but not the route I went . . . FWIW I wanted to use my old SLR lenses so I bought the Sony NEX5, which allows manual use of my lenses. However, I read comments about DoF and wonder how this is achieved? If you have a sunny day the lens cannot be used at full aperture, so DoF is similar to a camcorder, since all sensors have the nominally similar tech constraints. (Er, IMHO).
-my 75mm (equiv) is f/1.8 and has a "real" focus-ring with ft/m engraved!

To achieve shallow DoF you need a ND filter - and then the fun starts. I've bought a "variable" ND filter which covers from about x2 to x100 (not sure about that, it's almost zero light ). However, this was bought as 2012 Summer faded, so I've not had a proper chance to use it . . . and normally I want a decent DoF. The NEX5 LCD screen is not very "focus-friendly" in bright sun, so a shade/loupe is needed and I always forget to pack one . . . . Huh!
What I have no commplaint about is the NEX5's AF in movie mode . It is surprisingly good at following the subject and will ignore dark intrusions (eg like filming subject which goes behind a thin hedge). Add that to silent AF and it's a very good way of learning the craft, IMHO. However, my lenses don't have OIS so a sturdy tripod is essential and I have to be carful when using an f/3.5 long lens (300mm equiv). Filming aircraft landing at an airport was OK since there were plenty of clips to choose from..... and no-one knows which flight the "Story" was traveling on.
 
Last edited:

The latest video from AVForums

Is 4K Blu-ray Worth It?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom