jnorman34 Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 My first post here - I am currently shooting urban documentary material (lots of buildings, construction sites, bridges, street views, etc) with a D5300 w/12-24mm Nikon, which is giving me nice footage. however, for this type of work, the extra resolution offered by 4K seems like it would greatly enhance the results. I am considering the two almost-available 4k units - the sony FDR-AX100 (camcorder form factor) and the Panasonic GH4 (DSLR form factor). I will be keeping the D5300 for still images, and in case I need a B cam for some shots. I am NOT trying to get a "cinema" of "filmic" look - I need super sharp renditions of buildings with no moire or aliasing with minimum post processing. shallow DOF is a disadvantage for my work. I also need a good wide angle solution (my favorite focal length is 18mm equivalent), which I can get with a 9-18mm on the GH4, but would have to use a WA adapter on the sony). I also understand the panny GH series has broad industry acceptance while camcorders seem somewhat passe in this newish world of DSLR videography. however, dedicated camcorders are totally optimized for video work, with excellent AF, no overheating sensors, etc. I have been a professional photographer for many years, shooting architecture with a 4x5 for the library of congress, but am still very new to video, so I truly need some advice from you guys who have much more experience in video than I do. I would really appreciate your opinions/recommendations on which unit to go with for my video purposes. thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Andrew Reid Posted February 5, 2014 Administrators Share Posted February 5, 2014 If you want cinema or filmic then stay away from AF. The AX100 also has a fixed lens with slow aperture and a relatively small sensor. That won't help it look cinematic though I'm sure it's capable of some nice results. With the GH cameras you just need the right glass and bam - cinematic image, providing the nut behind the camera is also cinematic :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Rzazewski Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 I've been shooting buildings for the past couple years. I can tell you that a 5D mark ii with a vaf-5db2 filter + the magiclanter raw video mode is a very solid budget conscious option. PM if you have q's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nikkor Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 Forget about that camcorder, go for the GH4 (you can use your 12-24 nikkor with a speedbooster and have the same fov as on the d5300, although you should check for experiences of people using that particular lens with a speedbooster). The best for arquitecture would be to dump the d5300, 12-24, and buy a 5d mkiii with the TS 24 mkii, and TS 17. It's the only lens I really envy of the canon guys (maybe nikon decides to come up with a revision of the 24 PC-E but probably not). That particular setup of corrected perspective+raw video could make some serious good looking shots, it's also great to record in 3:2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quirky Posted February 6, 2014 Share Posted February 6, 2014 Some posters have not read the OP correctly: he does NOT want filmlook or cinematic looks. In my opinion, the AX100 is an amazing little camera and it is future proof. I have seen some footage online and even in low light, it is pretty amazing! If one is after recording architecture in 4k with minimal work in post, buying the AX100 and Sony Vegas Pro (it may come with the camera, I don't kno), is by far the cheapest path. Plus, none of the posters, the OP included, seem not to be bothered by the fact that neither of those two cameras are even available yet. Nobody has actual first hand shooting experience with both of them. The GH4K, or whatever it will be called, hasn't even been officially released yet. So all the commentary is opinions and speculation. Just how good, how practical or how comfortable they really are in real life and in any given task, we don't really know yet. People are just guessing, based on released and assumed specs. Speculbating on spec sheets and a few promo pictures. Kind of like oogling the silicon bits in the trailer for the soon to be released gadget p0rn film. Nothing wrong with speculating and expressing educated guesses per se, we all do it time to time. But in this case, isn't it a bit too early to make judgements about their usefulness, let alone their performance? Until none of us have actually had the chance to handle and shoot with those two, it's all just meaningless nerdy-nam-nam, isn't it. That is, other than choosing between the form factor of the camera. Whether one wishes to shoot with a camcorder-style camera or a dSLR-style camera. So what's the hurry? Life's too boring? ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 89e2bdf5797fbbdc17c2cc6da1413fa0 Posted February 6, 2014 Share Posted February 6, 2014 Yes if you go for a Panasonic, a Speed Booster will let you use the Nikon 12-24 as about an 18-36mm full-frame equivalent (same as it is on your 5300). The Speed Booster tends to make the centre sharper, but the edges a bit softer - which might be a problem for architecture. We don't know yet what the GH4K's moire/aliasing levels will be like but I imagine they'll be minimal. If you have the budget and can be bothered with the workflow, shooting RAW with the 5D MkIII and Canon T/S glass sounds like a very solid option to me. Non-RAW video from the 5D will be as soft or softer than your D5300, so you'd have to be happy to take on the Magic Lantern RAW workflow. I imagine the dynamic range benefits of shooting RAW would be handy for architecture too ... This is much more cinematic/stylised than what you're talking about doing, but you might get a feel for sharpness and dynamic range from the buildings in this video shot with 5D MkIII RAW (download the original .MOV file for best quality): Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bzpop Posted February 6, 2014 Share Posted February 6, 2014 I am NOT trying to get a "cinema" of "filmic" look - I need super sharp renditions of buildings with no moire or aliasing with minimum post processing. shallow DOF is a disadvantage for my work. Great if you can wait till NAB, because i'm sure there will be more 4K capable cameras and camcorders, but looking at your requirements for your work camcorder like AX100, or similar, will be much better tool than any DSLR. People telling you to get GH4 either just can't read, or have a very little knowledge about basic principals of photography. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nikkor Posted February 6, 2014 Share Posted February 6, 2014 Great if you can wait till NAB, because i'm sure there will be more 4K capable cameras and camcorders, but looking at your requirements for your work camcorder like AX100, or similar, will be much better tool than any DSLR. People telling you to get GH4 either just can't read, or have a very little knowledge about basic principals of photography. worst advice ever, camcorder for architecture? Are you kidding? Distorsion and no lens choices, ridiculous advice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abortabort Posted February 7, 2014 Share Posted February 7, 2014 AX100 won't give you the wide you desire. GH4 will struggle to give you the wide you desire, but still possible. Something like the Sigma 8-16mm should take you down there. Also the Panasonic 7-14mm as the other option. Nothing else is really wide enough. Speedbooster will need to take whatever lens down to around 7.5mm to give you 18mm on the GH3, so that's another option. Maybe a Samyang 10mm? Some of the 10-whatevers will as well. 9mm of the Olympus will be 21mm - About 14mm on your current 12-24. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jnorman34 Posted February 24, 2014 Author Share Posted February 24, 2014 now that we have had a chance to see the specs for both the GH4 and the AX100, we see that the GH4 has 4k at 100Mbps while the sony only offers 60Mbps (though using the XAVC-S codec, which may be better codec?). Do you consider the lower bitrate on the sony to be a deal killer? After working with a DSLR in the field, I find that I would really appreciate the fast AF, power zoom and overall simplicity of the AX100 as opposed to manually zooming a DSLR lens. A GH4 system would cost a couple thousand more after I buy a couple of lenses and a couple of the ridiculously expensive UHS1-U3 memory cards, plus another couple thousand for a whole new computer to process the 4K footage, but I am still learning and would like to hear some more experienced opinions before I make my choice between the AX100 and the GH4. Thanks for your thoughts and advice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdeyemedia Posted June 30, 2016 Share Posted June 30, 2016 I already had a Canon 5D mark II which got me into shooting video. However, i do not like a DSLR for shooting video the format is all wrong and did not want to spend an extra $1000 building a rig to fix all the shortcomings of shooting video with a DSLR. So I purchased the Sony FDR-AX100. I really don't agree that you need a wide angle lens with this camera. I would recommend spending your money on the Benro S8 fluid head and use it to do really smooth pans and tilts. When shooting 4K the image looks better zoomed in more to really show that beautiful 4K detail. Then slowly move the video camera to capture the full scene. Wide angle to me is more of a still camera issue where you want to capture everything in one shot. This does not work well for video. I have a 55" 4K TV and when you look at a wide angle 4K scene it shows too much detail. Your eye wanders from foreground deep into the background which is still super clear on 4K. I think the Sony FDR-AX100 is a great easy to use 4K camera which outperforms any DSLR not in a rig. I think the only upgrade would be a Black Magic Cinema 4.6K. Which has the interchangeable lenses. PS - after buying a real video camera. I absolutely never shoot video on the DSLR. Yes, at 1080P it has a different look but not nicer than the Sony. As state shallow DOF can work against you in video work. Focusing on even a slightly moving object will mean you will have a lot of unusable footage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidzrevil Posted July 3, 2016 Share Posted July 3, 2016 On February 5, 2014 at 2:38 PM, Nikkor said: Great if you can wait till NAB, because i'm sure there will be more 4K capable cameras and camcorders, but looking at your requirements for your work camcorder like AX100, or similar, will be much better tool than any DSLR. People telling you to get GH4 either just can't read, or have a very little knowledge about basic principals of photography. worst advice ever, camcorder for architecture? Are you kidding? Distorsion and no lens choices, ridiculous advice. Damn, you're cold LOL ? I think the GH4 is the better option. Pretty much your lens options will give you more versatility out of the camera Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.