| Author |
Message |
ThomasDefender
Guest
|
 Posted:
Sun Oct 24, 2004 11:58 pm Post subject:
Still Camera recommendations for video work |
|
|
Has anyone used a high end still camera which they were able to shoot
video with and edit/mix with dv video and get near dv quality ( are even vhs
quality) ?
Is the output of these cameras mpeg2?
Thanks for anyone who replies.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Paul Rubin
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Oct 25, 2004 12:50 am Post subject:
Re: Still Camera recommendations for video work |
|
|
thomasdefender@aol.com (ThomasDefender) writes:
| Quote: | Has anyone used a high end still camera which they were able to
shoot video with and edit/mix with dv video and get near dv quality
( are even vhs quality) ?
|
No. Nobody has, because high end still cameras are built to shoot the
best stills that they can, which means they don't shoot video.
Maybe you're thinking of some consumer cameras that can shoot both stills
and video. Generally, the video they shoot is low resolution and a low
frame rate, but is still nice if you want to put up an internet clip of
Rover jumping over a creek or something. If you want to shoot quality
video, use a video camera.
| Quote: | Is the output of these cameras mpeg2?
|
Generally speaking, no. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PTravel
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Oct 25, 2004 9:17 pm Post subject:
Re: Still Camera recommendations for video work |
|
|
"ThomasDefender" <thomasdefender@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041024155815.01927.00001628@mb-m23.aol.com...
| Quote: | Has anyone used a high end still camera which they were able to shoot
video with and edit/mix with dv video and get near dv quality ( are even
vhs
quality) ?
Is the output of these cameras mpeg2?
Thanks for anyone who replies.
|
There is no such thing as a high-end still camera that shoots video.
I have a Canon 10D, which is a prosumer still camera. I often use digital
stills that it shoots in my videos. I'll "animate" them using either
Imaginate, After Effects or the built-in motion capabilities of Premiere
Pro, and the results are extremely pleasing.
Still cameras are optimized for stills. The consumer point-and-shoots that
can product video clips are, like any still camera, designed to shoot
stills, first and foremost. They are incapable of producing quality video.
> |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Donald Link
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Oct 26, 2004 3:52 am Post subject:
Re: Still Camera recommendations for video work |
|
|
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 10:17:21 -0700, "PTravel" <ptravel@ruyitang.com>
wrote:
| Quote: |
"ThomasDefender" <thomasdefender@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041024155815.01927.00001628@mb-m23.aol.com...
Has anyone used a high end still camera which they were able to shoot
video with and edit/mix with dv video and get near dv quality ( are even
vhs
quality) ?
Is the output of these cameras mpeg2?
Thanks for anyone who replies.
There is no such thing as a high-end still camera that shoots video.
I have a Canon 10D, which is a prosumer still camera. I often use digital
stills that it shoots in my videos. I'll "animate" them using either
Imaginate, After Effects or the built-in motion capabilities of Premiere
Pro, and the results are extremely pleasing.
Still cameras are optimized for stills. The consumer point-and-shoots that
can product video clips are, like any still camera, designed to shoot
stills, first and foremost. They are incapable of producing quality video
|
I will second that! Video taken with a still camera look like crap. I
wonder why any one would even attempt it with the low price of video
cameras. The opposite applies trying to take stills with a video
camera. You can buy a $50 still digital camera that will do a better
job. Stills for still camera and video for video camera. Prices are
so low to anything else. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dimitrios Tzortzakakis
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Nov 05, 2004 11:38 am Post subject:
Re: Still Camera recommendations for video work |
|
|
A friend of mine has a web camera (curiously made in greece) that takes
batteries and can be used as a digital still camera.Of course, the snapshots
are bad, worse than a one-shot film camera (to defend my usual
point-of-view).It is very cheap;less than 30 euro.
--
Tzortzakakis Dimitris
major in electrical engineering, freelance electrician
FH von Iraklion-Kreta, freiberuflicher Elektriker
dimtzort AT otenet DOT gr
? "Donald Link" <linkd@mindspring.com> ?????? ??? ??????
news:a84rn0l3s7le87iur1k4984d3eealpq26s@4ax.com...
| Quote: | On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 10:17:21 -0700, "PTravel" <ptravel@ruyitang.com
wrote:
"ThomasDefender" <thomasdefender@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041024155815.01927.00001628@mb-m23.aol.com...
Has anyone used a high end still camera which they were able to
shoot
video with and edit/mix with dv video and get near dv quality ( are
even
vhs
quality) ?
Is the output of these cameras mpeg2?
Thanks for anyone who replies.
There is no such thing as a high-end still camera that shoots video.
I have a Canon 10D, which is a prosumer still camera. I often use
digital
stills that it shoots in my videos. I'll "animate" them using either
Imaginate, After Effects or the built-in motion capabilities of Premiere
Pro, and the results are extremely pleasing.
Still cameras are optimized for stills. The consumer point-and-shoots
that
can product video clips are, like any still camera, designed to shoot
stills, first and foremost. They are incapable of producing quality
video
I will second that! Video taken with a still camera look like crap. I
wonder why any one would even attempt it with the low price of video
cameras. The opposite applies trying to take stills with a video
camera. You can buy a $50 still digital camera that will do a better
job. Stills for still camera and video for video camera. Prices are
so low to anything else.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in