jnorman34 Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 If my main goal is the achieve the sharpest possible image quality (shooting architecture archival footage), what would be the best choice of camera - a DSLR (GH3, A7s, etc) or a semi-pro camcorder (XA20, sony nx30, etc)? ie, will $1500-2000 camcorders with smallish sensors be able to give me as sharp an image as a GH3? or will one of the new 4K cams be a better way to go than any FHD camera? if 4K is the best path, is a DSLR like the GH4 the best tool, or am I better off with a camcorder form factor like the sony AX100? believe it or not, the library archivist does not know what he wants, and is leaving it up to me to make the choice of format and equipment. he says he will be perfectly happy if I choose to go with FHD instead of 4K. I currently have a GH4 on preorder, but can still change my mind. I never use shallow depth of field, because I normally want everything in focus. I generally use very wide angle lenses (I have been using a 12-24mm on a Nikon D5300). generally everything is done on big tripod, with some car-mounted footage, and occasional steadycam type footage. I am not trying to get a "cinema" look. with a DSLR, I can easily get adequate wide angle lenses, whereas with most semi-pro camcorders, I would have to add a WA adapter, which scares me some. however, there are several benefits to the camcorders, such as slow power zoom capability, better built in audio capability, and, with the new cams like the sony NX30 with the balanced optical steadyshot, I could avoid having to fight the stupid fiddly steadycam gizmo I have... any thoughts or recommendations are appreciated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcs Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 Right now, the GH4 shooting 4K (even if delivering 1080p- downsampled in post it's the sharpest/most-detailed currently available in that price range). Julian 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpfilmz Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 If you budget is strictly $1500 - $2000....go with the AX100. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jnorman34 Posted May 13, 2014 Author Share Posted May 13, 2014 Thanks for the responses. My budget is fairly flexible. If it requires a $5000 camcorder to match the sharpness of a GH3, i just want to understand what exactly I should be shopping for (3-chip, single large sensor, etc), and why so many pros find the advantages of camcorders outweigh the better IQ of the much less expensive DSLRs. As far as 4k, i initially thought it would be ideal, but having carefully examined some truly pro-quality 1080 footage I am not really convinced it is worth the cost of a whole new spendy computer system and other attendant time and money investments to go to 4k right now. I would like to hear your opinion on that aspect as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ebrahim Saadawi Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 Answering your question, the GH4 is the sharpest DSLR at the moment. Go with that. Not for the intention of delivering in 4K but for downsampling to 2K. It gives astonishingly similar detail reproduction to the much more expensive Canons C100/300. And the 4K files off the GH4 are not that huge or require a beast of a computer. I have an old i5 & old Nvidia card computer and it works just fine. It's pretty compressed but still maintains good quality with little to no compression artefacts. You will need an ultrawide angle lens though. If you still have the Nikon 12-24, just buy the Nikon speedbooster. It will be just as wide as it was on your d5300. If you don't have it anymore, and dont want to invest in a speedbooster, look at the Sigma 8-16 or the lumix 7-14. But I would suggest going for the speedbooster route, and buying large format lenses, for future compatibility should you upgrade to a larger sensor in the future. -only go with the small-sensor (3-chip) camcorder form factor of you are an event, news, documentary shooter that specifically requires tens of hours of recodring time, days of battery life, internal ND filters, XLR inputs, and if you specificlly are used to working with that form factor. You will lose image quality and interchangeable lenses for convenience. (unless you go the more expensive options that have both large-sensor image quality and camcorder convenience like the Canon C100/300 Sony FS100/700. And those are out of you budget) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nib187 Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 Hi jnorman34, here is great thread (from bloom's forum) explaining why camcorders are more convenient for video work (but it's about more expensive options than XA20, sony nx30). Of course if one wants great quality for cheap, there's no other option, but DSLRs (including mirrorles cameras). Go for GH4 and lenses Ebrahim Saadawi mentioned, you will get the sharpest possible image in that (and higher) price range. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quirky Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 If my main goal is the achieve the sharpest possible image quality (shooting architecture archival footage), what would be the best choice of camera - a DSLR (GH3, A7s, etc) or a semi-pro camcorder (XA20, sony nx30, etc)? ie, will $1500-2000 camcorders with smallish sensors be able to give me as sharp an image as a GH3? or will one of the new 4K cams be a better way to go than any FHD camera? if 4K is the best path, is a DSLR like the GH4 the best tool, or am I better off with a camcorder form factor like the sony AX100? believe it or not, the library archivist does not know what he wants, and is leaving it up to me to make the choice of format and equipment. he says he will be perfectly happy if I choose to go with FHD instead of 4K. I currently have a GH4 on preorder, but can still change my mind. I never use shallow depth of field, because I normally want everything in focus. I generally use very wide angle lenses (I have been using a 12-24mm on a Nikon D5300). generally everything is done on big tripod, with some car-mounted footage, and occasional steadycam type footage. I am not trying to get a "cinema" look. with a DSLR, I can easily get adequate wide angle lenses, whereas with most semi-pro camcorders, I would have to add a WA adapter, which scares me some. however, there are several benefits to the camcorders, such as slow power zoom capability, better built in audio capability, and, with the new cams like the sony NX30 with the balanced optical steadyshot, I could avoid having to fight the stupid fiddly steadycam gizmo I have... any thoughts or recommendations are appreciated. I don't know the answer to the question in the header, and I don' think anyone here does. Nor do I think it really matters. Everyone has an opinion for sure, but you should keep in mind that the concept of "absolute sharpness," whatever that means in each case, and "the best image quality" aren't the one and the same thing. Nor is it the only feasible reason to choose one camera over another, for any kind of task. There's much more to a good camera and good image quality. Image quality is somewhat subjective to begin with. "Absolute" specs are for measurebators and enginerds, not for people who actually shoot something, even buildings. I believe the main task here is to sort out the not knowing what one wants issue. After that things get much easier, and wasting money becomes less likely. Meanwhile, after reading your comment I couldn't help thinking about one interesting hybrid solution, namely the Sony RX10. It has some nice camcorder features like built in ND-filters, zebras and even power zoom, (if you want to use one), and it has both microphone and headphone jack with adjustable audio levels. It also has some nice dSLR features, too, like the dSLR form factor, large-ish sensor (in camcorder terms), ability to shoot good stills, it has a nice Zeiss lens that begins from 24mm (FF equivalent) wideangle, and so on. It does full pixel readout, it doesn't do line skipping, which results to relatively sharp and nice looking video footage. If your needs or your appetite grow, you can attach both an external recorder and an XLR unit, build all sorts of rigs around it and so on. For about $1200 it offers more than meets the eye at the first glance. A reasonably nice combination of versatility, quality and compact size, without a need for a huge budget or camera bag. Or without having to commit to any lens mount system and lenses. I am not saying that the RX10 would be the "absolute best" option. There is no such thing. But I do say in your case it might be worth a look, anyway. Look it up. Not just inside the EOSHD site, but elsewhere, too. Better yet, look it up IRL, too, and try it in your own hands, like any other option you might be interested in. That's as important as ogling the "absolute" specs. Or submitting to the online forum acclamations, ftm. Have fun playing with the cameras. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxotics Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 It would be helpful to know more about what you want to shoot. I'll assume you mean exactly what you say, pointing a camera at buildings and hitting record. Before I get long-winded, have you considered the need for a tilt shift lends, like the Canon 24 TS (or 17mm), which is about $2,200 and would best be used on a 5D3, which you could also use to shoot raw. That would be over a $5,000 setup. Another approach for you to consider is a high (10fps?) camera, where you could simulate moving footage with near future proof high MP images. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonpais Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 @maxotics The OP has already shared some examples of his work here: > @Ebrahim Saadawi I've only heard great things about the Speedbooster, and hope to pick one up myself someday, but in this line of work (architectural archival footage), it seems that edge sharpness might be a problem. Also, I'm not even sure it's necessary since the OP usually shoots at f/8, and a 7-14mm f/4 should be plenty wide and fast enough. Can anyone weigh in here? /edit/ duh... I see, so he doesn't have to invest in a new lens. sorry, I didn't read carefully enough! @Quirky The RX10 sounds like a very interesting option. @jrnorman34 I'm just wondering exactly why it is you want to retire your Nikon... I've watched your videos, and even though it was through the fog of YouTube, I can't see anything horribly wrong... I'm almost inclined to suggest a camcorder solution rather than the GH4 if you're looking for great stabilization, deep DOF and built-in ND filters. Although there have been many wonderful GH4 videos posted, what really blew me away were some of the copter shots, where details in trees and distant buildings was unbelievable, even when viewed at 2.5K. Which is why I thought you had ordered the camera in the first place. /edit 2/ Looking at your videos again, there does seem to be a great deal of aliasing/moire, especially in the brick buildings; and it looks like there is haloing in overhead wires and between the buildings and the sky (the result of in-camera over-sharpening?); and in a few shots, for example, in the one in which there are white cars parked out front, they are completely blown out. In some shots, the colors are so bright, they look radioactive (like the green grass). And I'm wondering if you sometimes shoot with the lens stopped down completely, which could be why nothing is truly sharp... Also, is it a requirement that you always shoot at high noon? I realize you're not after a cinematic image, but I think there is a lot you could do to improve the quality of the videos you are already making with the Nikon. I would definitely turn the in-camera sharpening, saturation and contrast down a bit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quirky Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 @Quirky The RX10 sounds like a very interesting option. Yes, it is an interesting option, as long as 4K is not a must (as suggested). But please note that suggesting it just to join the acclamation choir was NOT the main point of my comment. I don't think that simply listing our favourite camera models is the 'right' answer to the "absolute" questions presented. I think he/people really should ignore the 'absolutes' and get his/their hands dirty -figuratively- with a few of his/their favourite candidates, and then just pick one that feels right in the hand. The end result, the footage from most of the candidates already mentioned, is likely to look good enough, anyway, at least after a little bit of practising. If I'm not mistaken, the existing (Nikon?) footage doesn't look too shabby to begin with, and the Nikon, together with a suitable lens and a tripod/monopod might be quite sufficient, for now. We all could get better simply with some more practise. I know I would, and I will. Just trying to save other people's money here.... ;) jonpais 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nikkor Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 Canon 24TSE + A7s =sharpest 1080p and best possible setup. Only problem, the A7s is not available yet. http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2014/02/03/the-sony-a7r-with-canon-17mm4-ts-e-architecture-dream-team/ If you are only going for 1080p video you could try the samyang which is cheaper. The d5300 you have will look almost the same as any other option in 1080. It might be less sharp to some degree but it will have less moire. I would wait for the setup explained above. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxotics Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 @jonpais. Thanks for the video links. The 5d3, shooting ML RAW, with Canon 24TSE is the setup to have. The a7s won't shoot RAW and it's real benefit, to me, is less moire and low-light shooting. Anyone here shoot video with a TS? I'm going to get one as soon as I get a good price (probably a Rokinon). Then I will be happy to shoot some test footage using the a7. If I stumble across a suitcase of money I'll get a 5d3 too :) Another, option for the OP is a tilt-shift lensbaby to MFT. At least get some good creative looks too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jnorman34 Posted May 13, 2014 Author Share Posted May 13, 2014 Thanks to you all for the excellent responses and information. As you can surely tell, I am still learning video (I spent my career shooting architecture with a 4x5), and this forum has been most helpful and friendly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nikkor Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 ML RAW for an archival setup is total madness. The A7s will come out in June-July and is way better than the 5D mkii for video. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kgv5 Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 ML RAW for an archival setup is total madness. The A7s will come out in June-July and is way better than the 5D mkii for video. You dont need to archive raw files now, you could just keep high quality 10bit DNxHD or prores rendered with excellent cinelog profile for later grading. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nikkor Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 You dont need to archive raw files now, you could just keep high quality 10bit DNxHD or prores rendered with excellent cinelog profile for later grading. This guy wants to shoot thousands of buildings, forget about raw. 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.