DSLR conundrum: Canon 6D or Nikon D600 or ???

[Steven L. Gotz]

I want the best, least compressed, 1080p HD video available from a DSLR camera at the under $3000 price point (including one lens).

How do I get it? Is Canon the best way to get HD video, or the Nikon even better?

Or is the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH3 Mirrorless worth waiting for?

I am so confused. There are too many choices and I am tired of reading camera specs when what I really want to know is which one produces the highest quality HD video? I can't seem to find that comparison. Are they all storing at about the same compressed rate, or is the advertising about 72Mb/s and/or I-Frame only what I should be looking at?

Is it important to have a high number of focus points like the Nikon? It sounds like it to my untrained brain.

Comparing the three leads me to the Nikon except for the videography notes on the Canon make it seem like I can store less compressed video. But even totally uncompressed video is useless if the focus isn't perfect. Right?

http://www.dpreview.com/products/compare/side-by-side?products=canon_eos6d&products=nikon_d600&produ...

I want really, really nice video. Otherwise it isn't worth buying any of these.  I can stick with HDV for a while longer if I must.

Perhaps if I spell out what I want to do with it you might be able to provide better answers. I want to shoot pictures in a hurry at Disney World, in Hawaii, in Mexico and all the other places we go on vacation. I want to take video in those same places. Generally with a tripod or a Monopod, but sometimes not. I want to focus automatically, and quickly. But I want to be able to easily set up a rack focus when I feel like it.  I want to eventually buy a lens that will allow me to shoot extreme closeups of snails, and bugs and icky crawly things in motion as well as at the full frame size of a still. And I eventually want the biggest baddest telephoto lens I can get past my wife. I am going to want to do some greenscreen work and product shots in a lightbox.

I want a flash if I am not giving up higher quality, I don't think I need a built in GPS but it couldn't hurt. Wireless? Really? OK, I guess that could be handy. HDMI output is nice. I might be inclined to shoot 720p now and then if it means twice the frames to use for slow motion in post. A headphone jack is not always necessary but it could be important now and then. I would give it up for higher quality video if I really had to. Good in low light would be nice too.

Mono or not, I would like a decent microphone built in. My old Canon ZR-10 has a much better internal mic than my much more expensive Sony HDR-FX1. Carrying external mics on vacation isn't always something I want to do.

Am I missing a brand that makes more sense for me? 

I learned a lot from the last thread I opened about DSLR cameras in general and have researched the different lenses enough to know what kind of trouble I am walking into. But all is for nothing if I can't shoot some truly stunning video given the right lighting and subject.

[the_wine_snob]

The Canon TS-E lenses are Tilt-Shift, so they can act a bit like a 4x5 with tilts and shifts. Used correctly, the tilt WILL increase the DOF.

My guess is that the photographer (is that Miranda?) choose f/8, as it is likely to be the sharpest f/stop on that lens. Though a smaller aperture will yield greater DOF, a lens' sharpest aperture is often in about the mid-range. It differs, lens to lens.

Nice shot, BTW,

Hunt

[Steven L. Gotz]

Rod,

The .3s is actually three tenths of a second. It would take at least that long to get the milky water. My shots used anywhere from a full second to five seconds, or more.

Since he was shooting in daylight, even though almost sunset he says, and even though he was using ISO 100, with the shutter being open that long, letting in a LOT of light, my guess is that he stepped it down with ND filters. Not just one or two stops, but quite a few.  That would have allowed him to use a f/8 and the polarizing filter and take one heck of a picture.

[Steven L. Gotz]

This isn't a great picture, but it was such a nice day and you can't beat the subject matter.

This was a long way away and it was a hand held shot. I am not making excuses, I just wish I could have taken the time to do it right, and put on a longer lens on a tripod.

[able123]

Thanks for all the cool info..

question.... you mean digital cameras dont have normal shutter speeds like this ???

* 1/1000 s

    * 1/500 s

    * 1/250 s

    * 1/125 s

    * 1/60 s

    * 1/30 s

    * 1/15 s

    * 1/8 s

    * 1/4 s

    * 1/2 s

    * 1 s

????  3 tenths of a sec ???  Yikes...how weird is THAT ??

[Steven L. Gotz]

OK Rod, i wouldn't do this for just anybody but for you I will pull out my camera and list them out. Although giving it some thought, it is possible that he really meant 1/3.2 and got a bit lazy or perhaps his camera actually has a 1/3, or even really has a .3 sec.

From fastest to Bulb, my Panasonic DMC-GH3 has the following shutter speeds:

1/4000, 1/3200, 1/2500, 1/2000, 1/1600, 1/1300, 1/1000

1/800, 1/640, 1/500, 1/400, 1/320, 1/250, 1/200, 1/160

1/125, 1/100, 1/80, 1/60, 1/50, 1/40, 1/30, 1/25, 1/20

1/15, 1/13, 1/10, 1/8, 1/6, 1/5, 1/4, 1/3.2, 1/2.5, 1/2

1/1.6, 1/1.3, 1" (seconds are often shown using the double quote mark.

At this point if you want a longer exposure you have to turn off the electronic shutter and go old school, so to speak. With a mechanical shutter it continues on in seconds as follows

1.3, 1.6, 2, 2.5, 3.2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 13, 15, 20, 25, 30, 40, 50, 60, B (bulb)

For anyone else who might be playing along at home, Bulb is the setting for opening the shutter and leaving it open until you shut it. That is done with a remote using a cable, or in my case, using an App on my phone. Touching the camera would pretty much ruin the shot in most cases.

For my longer exposure shots look on my web page in the Hawaii section. Select the picture of the rock and click on the links in the comments.

Steven

http://www.stevengotz.com/my-photographs.html

[able123]

Steve, thanks so much for doing that... taking the time to list them all.  My gawd, I had no idea it was so different from film camera....

It makes it more complicated in a way, to just use shutter speed and F stop adjustments of an equivocal nature...

For example on film camera if I went from 1/250 to 1/125 ( which is one shutter speed difference or twice the amount of time ) that would equal for example going from F 5.6 to F 8 ( which is half the light...and one F stop difference on lens ).

In other words YOU have wayyy more settings and increments than I have ever seen before... yikes...

I wonder if the Nikon I want has those too.. I have to look at manual and check... never even thought that would be an issue before...

hmmmm.... the plot thickens...

thanks again !

[able123]

Bill,

===========

My guess is that the photographer (is that Miranda?) choose f/8, as it is likely to be the sharpest f/stop on that lens. Though a smaller aperture will yield greater DOF, a lens' sharpest aperture is often in about the mid-range. It differs, lens to lens.

===========

I think the zeiss lenses I want with Nikon ( cine ) are Okay with F stops thru range, more or less...although I'm aware of the basics re: stops sorta... more or less...but sometimes I have no choice... like this example...

You probably remember when I described somewhere ( at length ) how dumb I was to build bay lights of my own ( using photo flood bulbs like strip lights inside 'boxes' using speedrail fittings etc to make them vertical as well as horizontal ? ).

This was back when I had a 'basement' space and low ceilings to do tests with Mamiya that I had just bought...few years ago...

Anyway, I built 3 units and when I plugged them in and put someone in front of camera the fuse box was humming like nuts...and I threw a breaker right away..had to re-route extension cords etc to different breakers...and finally had some light.. and this sample shot below is WIDE OPEN at about 400 ISO film in camera.. I mean I literally had just enough light to get an exposure with the lens wide open !  Yikes !

Homer, my 'subject' and a friend ( artist from texas originally ) had to NOT MOVE during shot...which was probably around 1/15 sec shutter...I'm not kidding...I was eeeking out a shot ...even with all my new 'bay light' genius ...( which cost me time money and so on to build the stupid things ! ).

It was after this that I bought the strobes from KEH... and wow, what a difference.. !  Yanna the dog no longer looked like she was freaking out due to humming fuse box ( some high freq stuff dogs can only hear ).. and I wasn't worried anymore about using F 2 only.. Now I had about F 22 with strobes and waaaay more light !

Unfortunately Homer ( subject in shot ) had enough of my nonsense when this first test was finished with the bay lights...and swore he would NEVER come to any " shoot " of mine, no matter how much pizza I ordered for lunch...so I didn't get a shot of him with the strobes....

[able123]

PS.... At some point during the " shoot " Homer was looking at his WATCH.. like he had to catch a train back to Manhattan and so on, and he was sorta bothering the heck out of me with his impatience ( as I ran around plugging extention cords into the neighbors homes etc and Yanna was barking like mad )....

So THAT'S  why I suggested he " look at your watch or I will kill you ! "

This is why our relationship afterwards was a bit strained ( for the strobe tests later on )

[the_wine_snob]

Looking at that image of Homer, I think that you would have done better offering foie gras, than pizza.

Shooting living, breathing people with hot-lights, even big, bright ones, can be a challenge. At lest with some animals, you can put them in the freezer for a bit, then cart them out, and shoot like heck, before they thaw out. That does not work for all critters though. Strobes are the way to go.

Back in the days, I had done several architectural shoots for a client, using HDR. I would bracket each shot, with a locked-down camera, at about 1/3 stop increments, and then merge into a great HDR image. No big deal. Then, the client wanted to add people to the mix. Well, by the time that I figured in all of the supplemental strobes, and the time to rig them, he nearly spit coffee on me. Since he did shcools, I suggested that with kids, we could pop them into the freezer, maybe 45 mins. before each shot, and they would not be moving too quickly - that did not play well...

Hunt

[able123]

hehe.. that's a good idea...freezer and then shoot, and then back to the freezer for wardrobe change etc.. then shoot some more...

Yeah, those bay light things ( whatever they should be called.. I guess " light boxes " ).. took days and days to construct, wire, etc.. and in the end were totally worthless really....  the strobes were so much better it was like a whole new world. I had never used strobes before so I was sorta amazed how cool they were.

I ended up just saving the bulbs and sockets and threw out the light boxes.. and then when I moved here I didn't even take the bulbs and sockets...threw them out... geez...what a waste of money !  LOL...

[Steven L. Gotz]

I imagine that if you had an f stop calculator in your head the way that some photographers do, it might be a problem. Personally, I find that I set the shutter speed and then just turn the wheel to control the aperture until the exposure meter is dead center. Or the other way around, depending on what I am trying to do.

If I had that calculator, I might be better at planning the shot, but so far, knock on wood, it hasn't been a probem.

[able123]

Yeah, Steve, for me it sorta depends on a few variables how I deal with photos ( exposures and compositions etc ). Sometimes I light shots myself and have control. Sometimes I'm just shooting with available light. Sometimes with available light augmented with lights / bounces, etc..

Sometimes I need to do something an art director said they want ( like a full bleed ad for some product where 'text' will be put in the frame somewhere )...

Sometimes I'm shooting for just fun... sometimes for something to put on wall...

It all depends.

You are light years ahead of me already cause you have the digital camera and I don't. So when I get mine I can maybe ask you some questions if I have any ...Thanks for sharing all this stuff with me, it's very helpful !

[able123]

I should probably drop this subject ( tangent ).. or start new thread or something.. but doubt there would be any interest in still photo stuff and lighting etc ?? Who knows.  But just to follow through on this " homemade light box vs strobes " issue.. for me at least... this sample below is from my first test with the 'strobes' I bought ( drop shipped from KEH in Atlanta area ).

First off, the strobes are 1000watts / sec.... so that was weird for me to deal with...as shutter speed didn't matter as much as the actual " light" ( like, I was used to shooting with continuous light, not a " flash" of light that had a spec of ' x number of sec at such and such intensity '... hard for me to describe this weirdness.  So part of test was to see what my shutter speed would be with these new lights. Next ( since the tungsten modeling lights are stupid IMO ) I pre-lit the thing before anyone showed up to get photographed, using my light meter ( stops for key, fill, back, etc ) in the space they were gonna stand.

That space happened to be my parents HOUSE ( LOL ). Boy, were they THRILLED !  " Okay, mom and dad, I need you to leave the house from 8am until around 4pm so I can take all the furniture out of your living room, put it on the front lawn, and build a photo studio ! "....

So I put up some seamless ( GREY !!!! WITH WRINKLES !!! ) .. A roll of 10 foot by X feet... and then lit the thing using grip equip and the strobes....( rented grip stuff from friend for the day ).

Sooo, using polaroid with mamiya and film backs.. I shot a bunch of tests..

The grey seamless was so wrinkled I had to blast it with light to blow it out totally..make it white...no problem, cause the strobes were really powerful ( compared to my home made light boxes this was a whole new deal ! )

Regardless, I screwed up with my estimate of what was 'in focus' in my 'area' where people would be standing..and once lit I couldn't change it once I saw the results... it was a done deal at that point. Live by your decisions was my motto at that point... The only thing REALLY in focus in this sample of that test series is the woman's shirt collar !   OMG !

Live and Learn...

I hope I'm better next time !

[able123]

Good Lord, what a day THAT was.. now that I think about it...

Go get rented equip from warehouse, bring to house and drop on lawn and return truck owner let me drive stuff to house with ( his truck )... chase parents out of house, get furniture out of living room to lawn, pre light the thing, discover seamless is useless, walk dog ( yanna the barking dog ), set up basement for makeup girl and hair guy, go meet talent ( woman ) at LIRR and bring to house, Start shooting, change F stops to blow out background ( LOL, now it gets interesting ), makeup girl has to pick up kids from pre school and comes back ( I make light cosey conversation with talent and offer pizza ? ), shoot some more, get kids ( now playing with dog in back yard ) to get in the picture ....and back off camera for wider shot....and lose focus... parents come home early.. call " wrap" , get all equip out of living room to garage, get furniture back into living room, am now DYING FOR A BEER !!!! and drop talent off at LIRR to go back to NYC.. and GO DIRECTLY TO BAR !

And for what ???? To TEST STUFF ?? !!!  What sort of maniac am I ???

[able123]

Same chic, same test of strobes...

..... Run to bedroom and get polaroid back, shoot polaroid, run to bedroom and get film back, find out where talent went ( in kitchen playing with dog and kids ), drag talent back, put in place on tape mark, talk to talent about " look on face " ( " lets try Sultry okay ?? " )... focus, pull slide that I forgot to pull, focus again, shoot, tell dog to go back into the kitchen.... yell to kids to call the dog who is not listening to me...

[Steven L. Gotz]

Hairdresser was a little busy in between? Looks like a completely different person.

After 118 posts and quite a few different topics, why bother to start a new thread? Although I'll bet there aren't many people reading this stuff anyway. Possibly just the three of us and an occasional moderator to make sure we aren't using bad words.

[Stan Jones]

Although I'll bet there aren't many people reading this stuff anyway. Possibly just the three of us and an occasional moderator to make sure we aren't using bad words.

What am I? Chopped liver?

[able123]

STAN !  YIPEE..... hehe..

Your old doggy and Yanna woulda had fun playing together in back yard with kids during that shoot...

Now they are both in dog heaven playing...probably Yanna still barks at the mailmen ?

Yeah, Steve, did a few clothing changes and hair changes...

Had to screw around with seamless after backing off with camera ( went down the hallway from living room , toward bedrooms, with camera to get back...and then for shot with kids put on longer lens ( just have primes for the mamiya )... About 1 more inch at top of frame you could see the living room ceiling... I was like really cramped for space...

[Steven L. Gotz]

Oops - sorry Stan. There are probably a few more also, so my apologies to all.

I swear that model has multiple personalities. I liked the first shot even without a proper focus. Seems like the girl next store. The second was sultry as suggested. The third one looks like we are dealing with a potential bad girl.

Possibly a combination of good model and good direction?

I have never worked with a model. I imagine that doing that isn't too far down the path of my photographer's education. I wish I lived closer to some of my nieces. Pretty girls all. And I am not just saying that as a proud uncle.  They all have matured into attractive women. Looking at my brothers, it is obviously because they married attractive women with dominant genes.

[able123]

==========

Possibly a combination of good model and good direction

==========

Negative...nope...good model sorta , she is even better than she knows....

But good director ? nope...

I was terrible. Am terrible.. I know that for a fact. I get into the photography so much and the " imagined image " I want ( my imagination of pre- conceived image ) that I spend NO TIME with model or subject at all.. and am probably horrible to them... like aloof and self absorbed and distracted and so on.. really horrible.

This is why , for me at least, it is REALLY important to have hair and makeup people at a shoot , for me the more the merrier...really.. wardrobe, props, bring it on.. I need them to HELP me make it happen, as they all have good relationships with the talent and they make the talent feel special and pampered etc. Cause, honestly, I am a total IDIOT with this weird stuff in my head that I want and just focus on that stuff mostly.  Just like my good friend Homer ( in previous photo sample lookin at watch ) THIS girl ended up HATING me at the end of the shoot. I sent her a bunch of prints and never heard from her for a few weeks... so I called her and she YELLED at me on the phone " YOU KNOW MY EYES ARE GREEN ! ??? " 

So, my only defense is she is right, I am an idiot, but having those two nice people there with me on the day ( makeup and hair ) made it happen ..

So that was another couple hundred bucks.

The " trick" with that pose ( above image ) is she is turned away from camera and relaxed, and I say " action" and she whips around to look directly into lens like that lens is her best friend in the world...and I shoot ... and we do a few takes like that... and pray something works out okay... as it's a fast shutter speed...

She was really good, but hates me so I'll go eat some worms...

[able123]

Like I said earlier... I was so hyper and crazed with that whole deal... moving furniture out, moving rented equip in, pre light, pray everyone showed up on time, start shooting with this brand new ( used ) camera.. that was the test..mostly.. 2 mamiya bodies and 3 lenses and new strobes...used film backs... I was totally freaked trying to see if the lenses had good shutters ( mamiya has shutter in lens not the body ).. film backs okay, all that stuff ...plus I hadn't shot film in like 20 years at that time ( due to working on movies etc as a 'grip' )... so I was totally freaked ....

But in the end I ran to the local pub and drank about 12 beers as fast as humanly possible and took cab back to parents house and sat with Yanna the dog , who still loved me no matter what...how cool is THAT ?? !

( I did give her some left over pizza so that helped her to like me probably ? )

[able123]

There was a couple other " looks " I tried for...one of them being ' the business woman '...so I came up with the brilliant idea of a prop ( eyeglasses )... which makes everyone look more intelligent IMO... more 'studious' ??? Anyway, I tried it...and Dani Marco looked like some kinda exec while Yanna the dog sniffed around the kitchen for more pizza leftovers....

I would probably crop it like above...I tend to shoot slightly loose for some still images due to uses of the photos...for my 'own' stuff ( for the walls ) I don't do that, I use the full frame then...

Hopefully anyway... with motion pic stuff it is ALL full frame, or you're a dead duck..

[Steven L. Gotz]

Motion pictures, films, television, theaters, sure. Full frame.

The web provides a different environment.  Not YouTube or Vimeo anymore because everyone watches those videos full screen, I imageine (I do if it is HD), but on my own site I could post a cropped video with no way to increase the frame size, maybe using Flash, and I can direct the attention to a small part of a much larger frame. Birds in flight come to mind as an example, or dangerous animals.

Of course now that I have interchangeable lenses, the world is a different place than it used to be.

My biggest problem now? I will be driving down the freeway (it happened again yesterday) and see a perfect shot in my head and not be able to just pull over to the side of the road. By the time I come back the same way later in the day, the light has changed and the shot is essentially gone. I have to hope that it is that way on any clear morning and maybe get a weekend morning available to try again now that I know what I want to do.

[the_wine_snob]

Birds in flight come to mind as an example, or dangerous animals.

Yeah, the Honey Badger comes immediately to mind - like shoot with a 1200mm lens, from behind a ballistic shield.

Hunt

[the_wine_snob]

My biggest problem now? I will be driving down the freeway (it happened again yesterday) and see a perfect shot in my head and not be able to just pull over to the side of the road. By the time I come back the same way later in the day, the light has changed and the shot is essentially gone.

Steven,

Many years ago, when it was brand new, one of my clients was the Louisiana Superdome's Marketing Department. I had an assignment to do a time-lapse shot of them transforming the football field into some sort of motor-cross, or similar event. Lots of stuff moved (football field covered with very heavy tarps, etc.), and a mountian of dirt being brought in, and sculpted into the shapes for the upcoming event. Neat stuff, but sort of dry, and lacking artistic content, beyond some skip-loaders buzzing about and the dirt taking shape. A few days later, I dropped off that assignment, and the Marketing Director held up an 11 x 14 of a perfect rainbow right over the exterior of the Dome. He asked why I had not gotten such a shot. Well, one reason was that I was inside shooting the dirt! The other was that the photo was shot by a Canadian tourist, on the Expressway, where he stopped at just the right spot, and right moment to get the shot. Unfortunately, he caused a 12-car accident (no fatalities), in so doing. Right place - right time, and a safe parking space!

Some years later, I was heading out on I-55, over Lakes Marupas and Pontchartrain. The sun was setting, and there were cypress trees with copious amounts of Spanish moss hanging down. I wanted to stop, and actually had the cameras on the back seat. No place to pull over. I finally exited at Pass Manchac, and sped back along old highway 51 for that spot. I arrived as all light faded and the world was pitch f'ing black!

Hunt