200mm without IS

[Bruno]

3) Jello +image stabilisation+200mm lens = TOTAL GARBAGE.

 

First of all, you spent an entire thread claiming that no one notices rolling shutter at all, and that it's not an important factor on a camera... now it suddenly makes the images total garbage. Get it together man.

And for your information, IS on a lens stabilizes the images before it gets to the sensor, so it helps reducing rolling shutter artifacts, it's not the same as shooting and stabilizing in post.

HANDHELD

Holding the camera in your hands with no other means of support. Resting the camera on a wall a road or on a body mount is not hand held.

 

You might not be aware of this, but using a shoulder rig is also considered handheld style, don't take my word for it though, ask anyone who knows what they're talking about, since for you I don't.

 

The thing is, you made up your mind on how you think the industry and cameras work with your own delusional ideas, and you won't listen to anyone else, you just accuse everyone who disagrees with you of not knowing anything about cameras, having no idea what they do for a living. Good luck with that.

[Jon de Zwaan]

Well, let me say this, I agree with the fact that it's not ideal (impossible?) to use a 200mm on a crop sensor without any support besides your hands only. But I think you're taking the term handheld way too literally. When we're doing a live event multicam or even a movie, we lable all the shoulder mounted camera's as handheld. It's up to the operator and director how to use it, as long as we're getting mobility and handheld like footage.

 

Using a EX-3 or a PDW-700 is really hard in the way you describe handheld. So I consider shoulder and chestmounted cam's as handheld footage.

 

In other words, you wouldn't recommend using a 200mm on crop handheld, I agree, but using 'silly' as an argument is rather silly.

 

Edit: Bruno nailed it as well.

[markm]

Well, let me say this, I agree with the fact that it's not ideal (impossible?) to use a 200mm on a crop sensor without any support besides your hands only. But I think you're taking the term handheld way too literally. When we're doing a live event multicam or even a movie, we lable all the shoulder mounted camera's as handheld. It's up to the operator and director how to use it, as long as we're getting mobility and handheld like footage.

 

Using a EX-3 or a PDW-700 is really hard in the way you describe handheld. So I consider shoulder and chestmounted cam's as handheld footage.

 

In other words, you wouldn't recommend using a 200mm on crop handheld, I agree, but using 'silly' as an argument is rather silly.

 

Edit: Bruno nailed it as well.

 

A shoulder mounted camera mounted on a shoulder is not handheld  It is shoulder mounted.

This should be pretty obvious .

Handheld for a professional crew is a professional term  the camera operator is actually quite skilled in achieving this effect.

 

Hand held by amatuers is usually thought of a as a way to make amatuer films.

 

Your thoughts and some others seem based on something that doesn't exist except as a concept made up as you go along and therefore anything you want to attribute to your view of what handheld should and could be will be acceptable within your reference framework.

 

Handheld is therefore whatever tripod you wish to attach it to.

[Jon de Zwaan]

 

A shoulder mounted camera mounted on a shoulder is not handheld  It is shoulder mounted.

This should be pretty obvious .

Handheld for a professional crew is a professional term  the camera operator is actually quite skilled in achieving this effect.

 

Hand held by amatuers is usually thought of a as a way to make amatuer films.

 

Your thoughts and some others seem based on something that doesn't exist except as a concept made up as you go along and therefore anything you want to attribute to your view of what handheld should and could be will be acceptable within your reference framework.

 

Handheld is therefore whatever tripod you wish to attach it to.

 

Great, thanks! You got it right at last, we're talking about the difference between the look of 'handheld' footage and the way you're holding a cam. Don't mess those things up. When you're shooting shoulder or chestmounted you get (most of the times) the look of handheld footage, so that's why it's called handheld.

 

Handheld in the way you describe as holding the camera with just two hands only is only 'doable' with smaller cams for a short period of time. With the larger cams, like the pdw-700, holding it like that means you can't pull focus or zoom at the same time, even pulling focus alone will mean you have to support a 10/15 kilograms beast with just one hand, good luck in getting usable footage for longer than let's say 20 seconds. In my experience you're always looking for a third point of support, it might be a part of your body, a wall or the floor, it's just for keeping the cam steady, the motion in control and getting the shot right.

 

But let's end this discussion and agree that 200mm on crop and handheld isn't recommended to say the least.

[markm]

Jon

 

1) The look of handheld which means any means possible to achieve a professional hand held look

2) Handheld which is literally handheld That is the way the meaning has been used in this thread.

 

The same scenario could apply to Film and a Film look One is artificial the other is real.

 

Te way the term handheld was used in this thread was certainly not in its professional context.

 

However I think we can agree shooting handheld with your hands with a 200mm lens is not a good idea.

[jgharding]

I tried it once on super-35 sensor totally handheld with no IS and couldn't get to be stable enough, it just looked too jibbery. Maybe with global/CCD you may get away with it though, or perhaps amazingly steady hands.

[markm]

First of all, you spent an entire thread claiming that no one notices rolling shutter at all, and that it's not an important factor on a camera... now it suddenly makes the images total garbage. Get it together man.

And for your information, IS on a lens stabilizes the images before it gets to the sensor, so it helps reducing rolling shutter artifacts, it's not the same as shooting and stabilizing in post.

 

You might not be aware of this, but using a shoulder rig is also considered handheld style, don't take my word for it though, ask anyone who knows what they're talking about, since for you I don't.

 

The thing is, you made up your mind on how you think the industry and cameras work with your own delusional ideas, and you won't listen to anyone else, you just accuse everyone who disagrees with you of not knowing anything about cameras, having no idea what they do for a living. Good luck with that.

1)Riolling shutter is not an issue on the vast majority of shots and only becomes one if you pan the camera hard.

2)Image stabisation will not work hand held on a 200mm lens.

3)Using a shoulder mount camera or a tripod or any other stable platform to create a handheld look is not the same as handholding a camera which was your original statement. You cannot get a handheld look with a 200mm lens holding it in your hands.

4)Its not about how the industry works. Its about the fact you cannot hold a camera with a 200mm lens and get a handheld look.

5)I have no idea what you do for a living although I do hope its not as a cameraman as you yourself stated you have never used a 200mm lens on a camera before.

[Ernesto Mantaras]

I guess we all assumed stuff. The OP was talking about a non-IS lens being usable even on a tripod. We respond supporting ourselves in personal experience, I believe. Then the thread starts drifting and we end up discussing whatever it is drove our attention away. For the last 20 posts I was thinking the OP wanted to shoot handheld with the 200mm! haha

But to summarize, I'll add my list of 2 cents.

1. It's hard to discuss stuff when we don't share the same language, and I'm talking about mere technical terms (or not so technical). I assumed "handheld" was about literally holding a camera with your bare hands, no support whatsoever. IS does help, using a non-IS lens is jittery as hell. And that's talking about a 200mm on a full frame camera. 'Cause it becomes around 300 on a super35 sensor or an APS-C sensor. Then 400mm on a MFT sensor! So unless we agree on the camera, it's hard to say how bad or good it will look.
There's definitely a "handheld look" as opposed to using a camera "handheld" or shooting with a "handycam". If I shoot with a shoulder support I wouldn't say I'm shooting handheld, but I'm definitely getting a handheld shot. So there's that, if it means anything to you.

2. I shot a documentary last monday with just my 28mm, 50mm and 135mm (and sadly, my 14-42mm kit) on my GH2. 50mm is as far as I'd go when shooting handheld (that is, using my bare hands). I like to think I've pretty steady hands. But 135mm (270mm on 35mm equivalent) is crappy footage altoghether, of course. But when I put on my shoulder rig, things start to look sweeter (although I really really miss IS). In other instances, some kind of support like a monopod or a tripod acting as one (of course, the ultimate weapon is a proper tripod, with which I've managed to get awesome pictures using EX Tele on the 135mm). I could put together a private popurri if you want to see those shots.

3. About IS not working handheld on a 200mm lens, markm... I used the HV series (HV20, 30 and 40) for a couple of years almost daily. I loved it, and still do. They all have image stabilization AND rolling shutter and shooting at their maximum 10x zoom was the equivalent to 430mm in 35mm terms. I'm not gonna say it was the best footage out there, but it was certainly useable. So I can say tele shots with IS do work. And of course, on the other hand, I would've never achieved them without it.

Here's a promo video I made to sell my cam with many shots I made through the years, and there you can see many long tele shots (like the little Beagle's ass, the two Jehova Witnesses on the building, the road/plane shot which reads "CON MUCHO ZOOM...", the crowd shot of Fito Paez's scenario...)

[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DmgWXuQLQgM"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DmgWXuQLQgM[/url]