Depending on where you are, Canon’s new flagship might carry different letters but the the bottom line is the same: this photo is GOOD news for aspiring indie filmmakers.
According to DPreview:
The EOS 550D redefines the boundaries of Canon’s consumer DSLR range, incorporating technologies and features more commonly found in semi-professional DSLRs into the compact, lightweight body favoured by consumers. With a newly-developed 18 Megapixel (MP) APS-C CMOS sensor, coupled with Canon’s advanced DIGIC 4 image processor and the ability to shoot Full HD movies, photography enthusiasts are empowered to explore new levels of creativity.
Yes, full HD and an ISO range of 100 – 6400 (expandable to 12800) means you’ll get a lot mileage from scenes with natural (often poor) lighting.
The camera itself is too new, so the previews have been based on pre-production units but I’m pretty excited!
This camera shootout is a bit old (end of 2008) but it’s quite comprehensive: 35mm motion picture, RED, EX3, HVX200, HPX170, HPX3000, Sony EX3, Nikon D90, Canon 5D Mark II, Letus35 Ultimate and Elite DOF adapters, RedRock Micro and more.
Although I’m not a big fan of “consumer” camcorders like Canon HV20, I’m always tempted to try them and see if they compare well to my preferred segment (that’s $3,000 to $8,000).
First off, the good news. It’s a small camera that you can fit virtually anywhere. It weighs less than a kilo (with battery), so you can CARRY it anywhere.
The sensor is a single CMOS sensor with over 2 million active pixels. That means a native support for 1080i format (1920×1080 pixels).
The bad news is its light sensitivity, mic inputs, and the battery life. Battery life can be extended by purchasing a better battery (BP-2L14) and you should definitely consider it if you’re shooting anything longer than an hour (which is most stuff).
DV.com‘s Chuck Gloman has a more detailed review of the camera. Overall, he was impressed by the outdoors footage and the form factor. I’m still not convinced I’ll trade a small-factor Sony (like Sony HC3).
I’m considering switching from my web cam to this baby. Here’s a short guide on how to select a web cam.
It’s hard to keep up with SONY’s new cams for one very good reason – they are skipping numbers! I thought the successor to the very successful Sony FX1 will be called FX2. Or, perhaps, FX3.
When it comes to the product name, Sony isn’t content with incremental improvements. We’re now straight to number 7. Not so when it comes to the product itself. Maybe, Sony felt that neither Canon XL H1 nor Panasonic HVX200 changed anything in the market, so why bother.
Many reviewers have likened the FX7 release to the release of the VX2100 model, hot on the steps of VX2000 (I’m a proud owner of the latter). The VX2100 offered some minor improvements in light sensitivity and a variety of interface features that made things a bit easier for the prosumer shooter.
Let’s look at Sony FX7 and see what advantages it offers.
On the negative side we’ve got:
If you look at Sony FX1′s advantages from last year, you’ll see the camera has the same things going for it with a few notable differences.
To me, the biggest difference is the sensor. In the last year, SONY has introduced a several of his low-end HD cams with CMOS sensors (e.g. Sony HC1 and Sony HC3). Is CMOS good enough for $3,000 cam though?
Harry Haruna, Manager of Camcorder Product Planning for Sony USA, had this to say:
As for resolution, because you have the CMOS technology the FX7, resolution is much higher than the FX1 in decent light conditions. On the contrary, under low light conditions the FX1 is better than the FX7, since the FX1 has a larger CCD sensor.
Hmm, I thought FX7 was an upgrade. It looks like it’s something of a sidegrade: if you have an FX1, keep it. If you don’t, you can either get the FX1 if you need a cam with a better sensor and bigger lens or go for the new FX7 with its smaller form factor and “full” HD 1080.
Still, if I was into wedding videography or guerrilla filmmaking, the FX7 could be quite tempting.
Then again, Canon has recently introduced more affordable versions of its $9,000 monster, the Canon XL H1. At just $500 more than the FX7, it introduces some much needed competition. If I can get FX1 for less than $2000 (Apple store had an offer like that), I’d be the happiest person … for the next 6 months or so.
I’m considering switching from my web cam to this baby. Here’s a short guide on how to select a web cam.
I love cameras. Recently, I posted about HVX200 winning an award for design. I admit it’s a well-deserved award – HVX200 is a good-looking camera.
I just got word (and a few photos) about the upcoming Canon XH series: XH A1 and XH G1, both are based on Canon XL H1. Man, this camera is at least 10 times sexier than HVX200. Look at the specs as well:
Just compare the 1.485 Gbps throughput to my USB 1.1 vs USB 2.0 discussion. Amazing!
I’m considering switching from my web cam to this baby. Here’s a short guide on how to select a web cam.
Yesterday I reviewed several HD cameras with a specific regard to shooting wedding videos in HD. Thinking about it again, I’m not sure it’s such a good idea… here’s why:
HDV has native support for 16:9 and naturally wedding videographers would want to utilize that. This might lead to the problem once you transfer to SD for those relatives that still don’t have Blu-Ray. I’ll call it:
Dude-where’s-my-Dad-syndrome
The syndrom is most pronounced when guests tend to line up in a way that’s very horizontal (see ancient photo on the right).
I’ve put question marks where all the missing relatives will be… once you transfer your work to SD.
There are two “solution” that are equally unacceptable: use a pan-and-scan transfer or put your picture in a letterbox (black bars above and below).
Fortunately, you won’t have to consider these post-production options, if you’ve done some pre-planning. On shots where the guests have lined horizontally, you can do a pan making sure you got everyone (at 4:3). If you’d like to avoid pans (amateur look), you might do two shots: one at 16:9 and one at 4:3. The 4:3 might be a pan. When you later edit the video, you’ll be able to create a 16:9 and a 4:3 version.
Just for the record, the question mark on the left (see arrow) is her Royal Majesty, the Queen (UK!). If you could go back in time, and you were invited to the wedding, and you had an HDV camera, and you’ve read this post, you might have done a shot that includes the Queen. Voila.
Later, when doing the sound track, you might put Sex Pistols singing “… God save the Queen, she ain’t no human being…” Gotta love punk rock.
If you have any questions or comments about wedding videograhy and HD, post them below!
