I'll get the obvious statement out of the way. The visuals (ie colors) are gorgeous. Like, really breath taking. However, the quality resembles a glorified home movie. Why?
Because it only offers 30 frames per second. Not a good choice if you want the gorgeous visuals with a film look. If you want that, you need to look elsewhere that offers 24fps. No matter how well this camera handles lighting at night, or any visuals for that matter, it is not the best choice to make your short films or videos. But, it does pave the way for better video cameras down the road. If Canon chooses to put this tech in their video cameras, it'll give Canon the boost it needs to jump ahead of Panasonic.
I really thought this camera would be the all encompassing perfect missing link for me. Why Canon chose 30fps is beyond me. It should know by now that lacking 24fps was a main reason it fell behind Panasonic in the first place. Same with Sony...
Here's a little history lesson and lesser known fact:
24 frames per second is the least amount of frames in a second before the video looks like a still picture slideshow. Filmmakers chose 24fps for their films because it was the most cost effective way to make a movie. You're using less film stock shooting at 24fps compared to 30, 60 or higher.
After all these years, it remains standard to use 24fps because we've been conditioned to think it's the "professional" quality. It looks better than say 30 or 60fps. If you get a chance, you can watch the video shot by the 5D Mark II via the link above and also open an HD movie preview from here. You'll notice a slight difference with motion.
Anyway, the point is this: If you want a professional movie quality look for your videos, you need to make sure the camera can shoot 24 frames per second. Anything higher starts to look like a homemade soccer mom movie.
No comments:
Post a Comment