TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- Let's talk cameras.
Pages (2): « 1 [2]
| quote: |
| Originally posted by RapidFire ah, interesting. would you say its good enough in regards to video? I bought it more for that reason, to shoot some music videos on a slightly above amateur level. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Moral Hazard I would suggest that if video is your primary intention you buy yourself an HD video camera. Certainly, the 60D takes great 1080 video and I suspect the same is true of the t3 as they have the same processor. I like the ability to take video with the same camera I'm using for stills; however, when I really want to video something I have a proper video camera. The problem you'll run into with video on your DSLR is that auto focus sucks compared to a video camera (but at least you have it on the t3i, many don't) and you'll be shooting at a lower fps rate then with a video camera. Now, if you have to choose between having a video camera that takes stills and a still camera that takes video I would go with the later but if you want great video (as opposed to pretty good) you should get a video camera. All in all; however, I'd say you made a good purchase unless you are very demanding in terms of the quality of the finished product. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Moral Hazard I would suggest that if video is your primary intention you buy yourself an HD video camera. Certainly, the 60D takes great 1080 video and I suspect the same is true of the t3 as they have the same processor. I like the ability to take video with the same camera I'm using for stills; however, when I really want to video something I have a proper video camera. The problem you'll run into with video on your DSLR is that auto focus sucks compared to a video camera (but at least you have it on the t3i, many don't) and you'll be shooting at a lower fps rate then with a video camera. Now, if you have to choose between having a video camera that takes stills and a still camera that takes video I would go with the later but if you want great video (as opposed to pretty good) you should get a video camera. All in all; however, I'd say you made a good purchase unless you are very demanding in terms of the quality of the finished product. |
Video is not my thing though, and I barely use it on the 5Dmk2 (and my 50D doesn't even have video as an option).
the 5d MarkIII is pretty nice to be honest..i like it over the D800
| quote: |
| Originally posted by kamil LOL @ 'just what a canon user would say' And why would you say that? To encourage the stupid war between nikon/canon users? Do you feel superior because you use a Nikon eventhough viewers and pros cant tell if the end result was taken by a canon or nikon or other? LOL again at your comment/implication that autofocus lenses are 'new'. AF has been around for quite a while. Go ahead and tell someone whos doing sports photography to use a 30 year old Nikon lens.. which is essentially why there are so many more sports photographers shooting with a Canon. I'd also like to see how accurate someone can get their focusing in manual compared to autofocus under normal circumstances.... equally importantly, i'd like to see someone shoot in manual focus as quickly as with AF, most situations dont allow for that kind of crap to put up with, ie; wedding photography. Sure, in the studio where you have (basically) an infinite amount of time to fuck around with focusing, manual will work. I've been shooting for 8 years and in that time I've rarely had a need to manually focus. I do have a serious question though; where does this 'elitist' crap come from, from owning a nikon camera? Hopefully you'll answer that. I don't see this kind of attitude from Canon users. It reminds me of Apple fanboys with their Mac computer and conceitedness (and yeah, I use a Mac too, but I know its flaws, as well as Canon's). I nearly switched to Nikon when the D90 came out, mainly because of its video capabilities. I didn't care about photo quality because both Canon and Nikon are so close to being on par, it really doesnt matter. User Interface, however, very much *is* a nightmare on Nikons. I'm not talking about the physical button controls on the camera, but the on screen menus and controls; theyre fucking terrible. They'd get shit right if they had anyone that used Apple's mentality of simplicity considering that dSLR's demand a lot of advanced settings which mostly photo-savvy users will understand. Trying to change ISO settings should straight forward, Nikon went ahead and successfully made it a chore, which is one of the things that turned me off about the D90... and I haven't seen any new Nikon improve on that flaw. You won't see me bash/complain about Nikon in any other area because theres nothing that really warrants it, because if it did, Canon would be right there too since both manufacturers are basically the same in every area. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Danny Ocean the 5d MarkIII is pretty nice to be honest..i like it over the D800 |
It is for sure, and the ergonomics and feel is much better in my opinion as well. Coupled with the 85 f/1.2 would be really nice in low light for portraiture...
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.