Looking At Cameras That Shoot Video... (1/09/13)
_____________________________
Recently I've been collecting video and video
frame-grabs (and some stills) from various still
cameras that also shoot video to try to narrow the
choice for my next camera. I also included a few that
were not "serious" possibilities (for price or for
practicality/versatility reasons). I learned a few
things, some of which were surprising... Included in
the informal comparison were my Panasonic TM700 video
camera; a friend's iPhone 4s; the Canon 5D Mk. II and
III; the Nikon D3200, D600, and D800; the Panasonic
GH2, GH3, and LX7; the Sony A77, and the GoPro Hero3
Black.
Not in any particular order, I was looking for the
best balance of VF quality (with an image that makes
video quality easy to judge for focus, color-balance,
and exposure); weight/size/price; video quality;
still-photo quality; ease of control; suitability for
video in terms of camera noise and lens availability
and quality; adaptability to Nikkor F-mount lenses;
presence of microphone and headphone ports (I do
miss having Lanc ports...); video quality; ability
to shoot 1920x1080-60p video (preferably at a higher
than usual data rate); stabilizer effectiveness;
portability; video quality; etc. Oh, and did I
mention that I'm more interested in video quality
than still-photo quality? Many of the cameras were
very different from each other, and some favorites
turned up for particular uses (but often those were
very limited, and sometimes those uses required work
in editing to realize the best outcome...).
After much video downloading, video frame-grabbing,
stills image-grabbing, and the "primping" of some
things to see if I could get what I wanted, here is
what I found:
The Canon 5Ds and high-resolution Nikons produced
excellent to superb still photos and very good video
images, but the video from all was a bit soft, all
were limited to 30p video fps, and most had a touch
of over-sharpening inherent in their video images
that limited the amount of additional sharpening
that could be applied (I am a sharpness nut...). I
didn't like the 60p video I saw from the Sony A77
(white "haloing" of trees against the sky was
excessive, and image sharpness was often not ideal).
Surprising were the stills and video from the iPhone
4s (BUT, only if one doesn't care much about making
settings decisions about anything, and only if the
camera is not moved much during video shooting).
Also surprising was the video from the GoPro Hero3
Black, since many frame-grabs indicated that the
video would look very good, if somewhat obviously
over-sharpened in advance. When viewed on a good TV,
though, while the video did look very good, the
video from a couple of other cameras looked better.
It does have some interesting frame-rate and
resolution choices available, so "feast" for a bit
on these Hero3 Black video choices...:
- 4K (16:9 and 17:9) at 15, 12.5, 12fps
- 2.7K (16:9 and 17:9) at 30, 25, 24fps
- 1440p (4:3) at 48, 30, 25, 24fps
- 1080p (16:9) at 60, 50, 48, 25, 24fps
- 960p (16:9) at 100, 48fps
- 720p (16:9) at 120, 100, 60, 50fps
- WVGA (16:9) at 240fps
Unfortunately, the video can look VERY weird with
motion-artifacts at 4K. I would like to play some
with 1080-60p and 2.7K-30p, but much as I like
fisheyes, I would like to have other lens options -
and, good as the preset control choices appear to
be, I would also like to have other control options
available. The tiny little GoPro is what it is: a
VERY good photo and video "snap-shooter".
The small Panasonic LX7 is convenient to use and it
is good for stills, but it is the worst of the bunch
for video, even with having video specs identical to
the excellent Panasonic TM700 video camera (28Mbps
1920x1080 at 60p - but that doesn't tell the full
story since the TM700 video appears sharper to me
than that from any other similar camcorder with the
same specs that I've seen).
A hacked Panasonic GH2 was very good for stills, but
I very much dislike the look of 24-30p video with
motion that most still cameras are limited to in
progressive video shooting mode.
The Panasonic GH3 results are also very good for
stills, but excellent for video (it was the best for
video of all the cameras compared). The Panasonic
GH3 can shoot 1920x1080-60p video at 50Mbps, which
does appear to pay off in terms of image quality
(although other things may also contribute to this).
The GH3 body-only is now $1300 in the US, making it
far cheaper than high-end Canon and Nikon DSLRs, but
more expensive than many alternatives, not bad for
what one gets - but the one weakness of this and
similar DSLR solutions is the lack of good control
over zooming speed, making successful zooming while
shooting video very difficult. Panasonic has begun
to address this with the offering of two power-zoom
lens models and with having three zoom speed ranges
selectable with the GH3 body. The tiny zoom levers
on those lenses, though, are rather "fussy" and very
limited in zoom speed control (I prefer having a set
slow-creep zoom rate). Also, the two "PZ" lenses
offered (the 14-42mm f3.5-5.6 and the 45-175mm) are
rather slow, but more important, the shorter one
appears to have a very high defect rate (I hope
Panasonic solves this soon!). It appears with the
GH3 that I may need to give up a favorite shooting
style which incorporates a slow zoom combined with
a pan/tilt motion while shooting. But, all else that
the GH3 offers may convince me that it is worth it...[Since writing this, Panasonic has introduced several
models that can also shoot excellent video, the G5,
G6, and GX7 - and the G5 and G6 have on-body zoom
levers. These are mentioned in my article on lenses
I have tried on the G5 and other Panasonic bodies,
at: www.David-Ruether-Photography.com/MFT-Lenses.htm]
Since I do not like peering at dark rear screens in
sunlight (which is mostly where I prefer to shoot),
or through optical finders (with no hints given
about the resulting images relating to white-balance
or exposure) for shooting video and stills, I prefer
using a high-quality EVF, which the Panasonic GH3
has. It also produces the best-looking video that
I've yet seen that is available at reasonable cost
in size/weight/money. And, some of the Panasonic
lenses appear to be quite good - and other brands of
four-thirds and micro four-thirds lenses also fit
it, as do most lenses made for larger formats (using
cheap adapters, although most features of the lenses
are then lost). So, I guess I now know what I want
to replace my current video camera with, assuming I
am willing to give up easy and smooth lens zooming,
a feature unfortunately not yet perfected in these
still cameras that can also shoot video...
I just bought three lenses for my GH3-to-be camera:
a Rokinon 7.5mm f3.5; a Panasonic 14-45mm f3.5-5.6;
and a Panasonic 45-200mm f4-f5.6 (the last two appear
to be better than their "PZ" replacements, and they
may soon be no longer available new), plus a couple
of adapters: one for a Voightlander 12mm f5.6 and
one for Nikon lenses so I can use these on the GH3's
micro four-thirds body. I have many selected Nikkor
lenses now for sale that I no longer use (both manual
and AF) that can also be used on micro four-thirds
cameras with an inexpensive adapter. For a list and
descriptions, see: www.David-Ruether-Photography.com/fs.htm
There is a VERY interesting article by Philip Bloom
discussing the various available still cameras with
video capability plus some not horribly expensive
video cameras, with high-quality comparison video
footage included, PLUS some nice finished videos!
It is long, but well worth reading the article and
looking at all of the included samples and videos.
Philip Bloom knows what he is talking about, and how
to illustrate it. See "The Philip Bloom Conundrum",
with many camera comparisons in 1080p-HD, including
the Canon 5D Mk. III, 1DX; the Nikon D4, D800; the
Panasonic GH3; the Black Magic; the Red; plus others.
It is well done, and most of the included edited
videos are quite interesting. I HIGHLY recommend
this, at: http://philipbloom.net/2012/12/01/conundrum
--DR
Video Index Articles Index David Ruether Photography Site Map