As someone who shoots insects using macro lenses this will add another whole level to the story I'm trying to tell.

Even if the quality of the video is only slightly beyond what a point-and-shoot can deliver, it can still work through my 1:1 lens and that will deliver footage that not many can capture, but a great many can appreciate.

I'm a niche market for sure, but a camera like the 5D MKII is really aimed at people who exist in that kind of pocket.

Honestly, a spider's chelicerae at 21.1MP, full sensor! I'm talking about 40x60 inch prints!

I'm in... all the way.

jhcovert

@Eugenia: "Canon should have done the right thing: selectable frame rates at EXACTLY 29.97, 25.00, 24.00 and 23.976."

Yep. 30fps alone is useless. It makes the HD video a gimmick, rather than useful for anything real.

commentotron

All of you guys are right, Canon sucks, they have no idea what they're talking about, they'll be bankrupt in 2 years.

Now for all the real photographers, did all of your friends have a collective orgasm when you forwarded this story to everyone like mine did?

Chester_Copperpot

A friend of mine has had a dSLR that shoots video for several (5+) years; all I remember is it wasn't a main brand (Canon, Olympus, Sony). Can't speak fot the video quality, because of course I was watching the video on a 1.5 inch screen, this being a camera from 2001 or so. When everybody started freaking about the d90, I was kind of thinking "wait, since when is this new tech?"

bjacobel

@Eugenia: Ahh. I was just wondering about variable frame rates and that answers my question.

ripfire

@Ike_Skelton: A Canon HF10 at 1920x1080 gets about 1 hour per 8 GBs of video. The HF11 coming out next month gets about 45 minutes per 8GBs.

RacecarBoobTat

Good post, thanks. Still doesn't alter the fact I can't afford a 5D Mk2.

citizensmith

@LoganAdams: It shouldn't. In fact many SLRs have mirror locks to cut down on vibration and noise.

fallenturtle

i know i'll be going to some length to avoid video in my dslr.

Titus_Andronicus

How much video will a normal HD cam hold? Seems like the 30 minutes/4gig is small, but I don't know much about camcorder storage these days.

Ike_Skelton

@FlashSandbox: Well, this one time, I was shooting an event in California, and I had my D70s. Well, I looked out my hotel window across the courtyard around midnight, and there's two people totally going at it with their window open. Well, I tried to snap a shot to show my boss the next day, but all I got was blur. If I'd had video, I could have captured the action to show off around the table at breakfast.

So yes, on my next DSLR, I want video.

RacecarBoobTat

I wonder if the mirror might affect anything as well. SLRs' mirror's have just about always designed to pop up and down quickly. I wonder if there will be any consequences for making it stick for a long period of time.

LoganAdams

DPReview has some info about the format the 5D-MII shoots: h.264 at 38mbps, full 1080/30p, PCM uncompressed audio, in the MOV container. Unfortunately, that 30p is either 30.00 fps or a variable of 30.xxx fps, instead of NTSC's standard 29.97. This means that an editor like Sony Vegas will resample by default, and this creates extreme ghosting in the finale export (unless you manually disable resampling in all your clips in the timeline -- something that not all video editors support).

Canon should have done the right thing: selectable frame rates at EXACTLY 29.97, 25.00, 24.00 and 23.976.

To me, as an final step editor (rather than a shooter), this is my main complain. It makes editing and final quality much harder than it should be.

Eugenia

@FlashSandbox: It's totally different technology, actually. There's a note in this piece that addresses what you're talking about--a second sensor to record crappy low-rez video. So it's actually a very new, very different thing going on now, trust us.

Wilson Rothman

Good article. On the lower end, digital cameras have replaced any camcorder I have ever owned and then some. Only natural that DSLR's will start taking care of the high end, at some point.

Kaiser-Machead on the Edge

its nice cameras can do this now, but the industry is staying with 3 CCD cameras and film for a while.

ford4life

I'm gonna bet the audio sounds better then Oasis. Not, you know, a lot.

gordeaoux

I been waiting for this for years. The only problem is how expensive it is. at least the race has started...

VakeroRokero

Do people really want video in their DSLRs? I mean the Konica-Minolta A2 had this a few years ago (before Sony grabbed them up).

Kinda late to the party with this feature, even if these have removable lenses.

I guess HD is cool, but you can't say that they're the first to be shooting video or that this is brand new tech.

FlashSandbox

DSLRs... Just like the one Carmen use to have... Waaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!

takashimiike 7

very interesting

i also like how original it is, nice job!

tenio

I am disappointed that they have added the HD video capability to the 5D mkII, I cannot think of a single situation where I would want to use it. Yet another expensive feature that I do not really need combined with some I really, really want.

I feel that shooting video compared to stills require a vastly different skills set and know very few people that can make the transition easily. I am therefore not sure I get the target for this camera. For me, it is a great upgrade over my current cameras (20/40/5Ds) and it will have a home in my camera bag (replace the current 5D along with a new 50D to replace the 20D), full frame is extremely useful in tight situations and for nice wide angle shots.

Neither of which lend themselves to movie making.

For sports and action work, the crop-frame 20/30/40/50 is king - way faster to operate, higher FPS and the crop has an advantage with big lenses and distant action. In my view much more likely to benefit from a video mode (though I still cannot see myself using it).

So I am kind of confused as to the target audience here, full frame and relatively slow FPS (3.9) does not make a great action photography body.

21MP and full frame is screaming 'landscapes' and architectural work.

HD Movie mode is saying sports / action.

I hope that they bring out a 5D mk 1.9, that skips the expensive HD movie stuff and retails below $2K. I'd buy two of them......

Max.N

Hey, this was pretty handy. Good job John!

nachobel

Thanks Giz! I been wondering this for a few years now when my wife's little dinky POS could and our big 20D couldn't.

GIZisGOD

TonyRockyHorror @ "hold off completely until RED and Jim Jannard have their say!"

I agree that RED could change the game, but for some who've been shooting for awhile the investment in lenses alone could make the choice. And with RED promising a delivery in 2010 (I may not have that quite right), the wait is significant for those that can put the Canon/Nikon products to good use immediately.

jhcovert

@jhcovert: good point.

jcrockerman

Outstanding job. Nice read.

dkokin

hold off completely until RED and Jim Jannard have their say!

TonyRockyHorror

its been announced that AF in HD-movie will be available on the Panasonic micro-4/3rds(m43) camera.

The m43 is an EVIL camera (electronic viewfinder, interchangeable lens), and has been just announced at Photokina. It can do focus in contrast-detection live-view in 0.3 seconds, which is around the speed of phase-detection AF (live-view focus has been historically horrid and slow), but these new EVIL cameras seem to address the sluggish-ness of it.

They even announced a "cinema-lens" that will be required to get AF during movies. "140mmF4.0〜5.6 OIS HD"

[www.imaging-resource.com]

Scaramanga

@Eugenia:

Honestly, who gives a shit about NTSC nowadays? The future is rounded frame rates of the producer's choice for online media...

peacefulpony

I believe the nMOS sensor (Live-MOS) that Olympus and Panasonic are going to be releasing has the most potential from a video stand-point.

The main reason is that it avoids the rolling-shutter artifact that plagues CMOS video (even the Red One that has fast reset still has artifacts on fast pans, though dramatically less then the jello-vision D90).

nMOS has the potential to be designed with global-shutter since its closer to a FIT-CCD photosite, something that CMOS would require a 5T/6T photosite for (and not be fit for stillphotography since it reduces the photosites light capturing abilities). Beyond that, Panasonic has the video background to make it work right.

Scaramanga

ok, now what?
the digital camcorders will take better and larger photos?

not likely...

why not a 2MP senzor without scaling? yeah a camcorder with the photoOptics/changeable lens...

shpe11

Nice article. I've been asking myself those same questions and I only managed to partly work it out.

lsim001

I always wondered about this question, why DSLRs didn't offer lower res movie modes, actually.

Great article.

dcartist

@peacefulpony:

Spoken like someone who knows exactly jack about HD and the post-production process.

Mr. Kite

@peacefulpony

I care, and I know a lot of videographers and editors do. DVDs and PS3/XBox TV compatibility are as important.

Eugenia

@Max.N:

i realy think that the movie function is just a bonus

i think that the DIGIC IV is fast for photos, maybe takes 10 continuous shots per second or other things that's important for a photographer

because i don't think that put a movie function for about 500E... like u said, the real photographers don't want that function... and I who maybe I'm a filmer, I don't want all that ISO and timeExposures and optics from this canon

shpe11

@fallenturtle: True, but those are often done through the normal mechanism (at least in the DSLRs I've seen) and only meant to operate for a little while. I can't imagine a time in the past when a person would have cause to lock the mirror for long (except for this one crazy-wide Nikon lens I saw once that had ridiculous backfocus).

Could it be that the engineers had to do a lot of work to make sure the mirrors don't stick in place after a long video? And if not, could there be a whole bunch of problems with people who buy these for lots of video recording?

LoganAdams

@ImJustRestless:

I think that people do want it, but my problem is that if I am dropping $2600 for an upgraded 5D it tends to mean that I am either an advanced amateur, semi-pro or maybe a pro that needs a backup full-frame DSLR.

None of those roles are especially prone to wanting to shoot video and the higher up that line you get, the less prone you would to give it a whirl.

If Canon had introduced this facility on a Rebel, I think it would be way more relevant, but on the 5D ????

Max.N

@FlashSandbox: YES People really do want it - This is the camera I didn't know could exist and it is the "best of both worlds" as a semi-pro DSLR while still providing quality HD video that feels like it does with that tight control over the range of focus

ImJustRestless

@shpe11: Exactly. Plenty of hype in here. Sure, it's a useful feature, but for professional video work, there's a lot that's missing.

For one, H.264 is the wrong kind of compression for anything that needs to stand up to heavy post-processing. If these cameras could output a stream that only has spatial compression, and not temporal, it would be great, but we're not there yet.

SMPTE time code is also essential, as are XLR inputs for balanced microphone cables. And, as mentioned, standard film and video frame rates (23.97 / 24 / 29.97)

Also, they need a port for a sync generator, so you can really start to take advantage of the multi-camera coverage options that a really tight package like this offers.

Basically, the only thing they get right is that pairing of high-end optics with a full size CMOS sensor, but even here there's trouble, as you loose control over all the manual rack focus an iris control that forms an essential part of the cinematic language. Waiting for the processed image to show up on the monitor is a non-starter.

In short, I suppose it's cool for location scouting, rough previz work, or single-camera on-the-fly stuff where audio doesn't matter, but in terms of the "clock's ticking gramps" thing, the answer is "slowly, punk, very slowly."

HoHummer

@Max.N: excellent point mate.
The sort of people who will have been waiting for this body are not the sort of people who want it for it's video-recording capabilities.

That said, if there are people out there so desperate to have an all-in-one D-SLR/HD video recorder, why not force them to buy a semi-pro model?
Given that professionals and knowledgeable amateurs would almost certainly look to get separate devices instead of a convergence one, it's a feature that's really only appealing to a small niche, sort of the 'more money than sense' demographic.

Step666

>this feature isn't aimed at anyone looking to do any serious work.

I agree with you, but this is BASIC engineering that could be made to do the right thing very easily. I mean, even if you just want to shoot something for fun, when you get that footage on the editor and you end up with gross ghosting, I can tell you, it's not cool. Even if this it was not meant for "serious work".

Eugenia

@Eugenia: why on earth would Canon want to do that?
They produce a range of semi-pro/pro camcorders as well, there's no point taking too much business away from that.

Plus, you know as well as I do that if you want to take a picture, you don't buy a camcorder and if you want to record video, you don't buy a D-SLR.
If you want to do the job properly, you buy equipment designed for the purpose - this feature isn't aimed at anyone looking to do any serious work.


@HoHummer: nothing about the video mode is aimed at professional use - it's just a gimmick to allow them to keep up with Nikon.
If you're going to go out and spend thousands of pounds/dollars/kwatcha/whatever on high-end photographic equipment, then video is the least of your concerns. Equally, anyone looking to produce professional-quality video will not go out and buy a D-SLR.

As I said to Eugenia, Canon have a range of high-end video equipment as well, so it's far from being in their best interests to render that useless.


@Scaramanga: ok, so it has a better video mode but there are two words that all on their own will stop anyone with any real interest in photography from buying it - 'electronic viewfinder'.
Not to mention, it's a Micro-4/3 unit, meaning it has a comparatively poor and limited selection of lenses available for it.

Olympus haven't been able to pull serious numbers of D-SLR customers away from Canon or Nikon yet, adding video to their bodies ain't gonna change that, especially not since they've committed the cardinal sin and sacrificed the optical viewfinder.

Step666

The Sony A900 brings more resolution, a much better viewfinder with a built-in shutter, more frames per second, a higher flash sync speed, built in IS, more AF points, and an AF assist lamp, and the 5D ii brings....video?? Nice going, Canon. Spending the money developing video should have been spent on STILL photo features. A900, I'm yours.

Ghung

@Step666:

Well, the micro-4/3rds are going to have video as a priority rather then a auxiliary function, the mirror element and optical viewfinder get in the way of video anyway and are useless during LV mode.

Also, Panasonic plan on announcing real cinema lenses for their camera. Which has video a priority.

The thing is, Oly and Panny know they can't compete with Canikon when it comes to dSLRs, they have to build their own niche. Video on the D90 and 5DII are still severely flawed due to the rolling shutter effect (you can see samples of 5DII wobble on the Akihabara News site).

It is a smaller sensor compared to an D90/5DII but its still massive compared to the 2/3" sensors that are still thousands of dollars (if not tens of thousand). Beyond that these nMOS videos should have no rolling shutter effects (look at the sample on the Panasonic G1 official site marked "surprise").

I'm hoping we'll see OM, Leica M adapters for the micro-4/3rds cameras like we did for the 4/3rds. Also, I would love to take video in a compact Leica M-style black metal body which the m43 is suited for.

Scaramanga

Uh, you left out the biggie:
Storage capacity and data write rates.
Might want to circle around on that one. It is a bigger issue than most of your reasons listed.

And you got wrong: CPU. You obviously don't understand the pixel flow. There is no CPU in the way of that video data. Probably an ASIC/FPGA and hardware encoder.

You also got wrong: Continuous sensor use. 30 FPS is far, far, from the sensor "capturing light continuously". Maybe you forgot that digital video is a sequence of digital data, and not some continuous analog signal?

svnt

Tony C, you, nor anyone else on here, has any idea what the final production RAW looks like for the A900. I know of one RAW converter developer that is testing the files, and he is very impressed. Ultimately, the A900 will probably have the slightly better low ISO resolution, and the 5Dii will have the slightly better high ISO IQ. Please don't spew out lame talking points. So, if you want to make movies or shoot at ISO 6400+, the 5Dii is for you. The A900 is better in every other way, more or less, for only a bit more money.

Ghung

@Ghung: All the A900's paper specifications mean NOTHING if it comes with a hideous amount of high ISO NOISE.

[www.google.com]

Tony C

@Ghung:
any religious views aside, for me it comes down to the system. most of us have invested quite a bit into a system that we looked at and felt served our needs best. the bodies and the finer details of them aren't as important since we might buy a new body every year or two, but our lenses, speed lights, etal will stay with us for a long long time.

ryusen

@Ghung: I call it as I see it. I did not insult *you*, I ask that you give me the same consideration in return.

DPReview and Imaging Resource, both well very respected industry review sources, used PRODUCTION A900 cameras, not pre-release. Same goes for CNET and DCResource, although DCR has opted to wait to post a complete review and full sample gallery until after they receive a final production model. In the meantime, the amount of noise in the 800 ISO shot of a church interior is far more than I'd expect from a $3000 DSLR.

[www.dcresource.com]

DPReview does disclaim that some of the photos in their gallery were from an early pre-production camera, but every shot of ISO 800 or higher shows notable noise, pre-production or no.

[www.dpreview.com]

[www.imaging-resource.com]

Tony C

Tony C. you are referring to camera jpegs, which give little indication of the A900's performance. The 5Dii shots at ISO 100 look mushy and bad on the Canon site, too. IR shot their test with a 100-300 zoom lens, and underexposed the shots, as well as didn't disable RAW NR. You'll see soon enough that there will not be much difference between the 5Dii and A900 IQ, and it's the features of the A900 that stand out...except for movie taking. You're swiftboating a little too early.

ryusen, valid point, although I will say that one doesn't lose much money selling lenses. I'm a professional, and I only shoot with 3 lenses 95% of the time, and switching/adding another system is no big deal, ultimately.

Ghung

@Ghung: Let's see... multiple sets of actual shots taken with the actual camera in question versus "I heard from a friend" and "Just you wait and see."

Its good to know that Sony has employees monitoring the Gizmodo boards, but it would be nice if you could tone down the defensiveness a bit. It comes off as slightly pushy.

mrweatherbee

Honestly? The technology "restrictions" are just a sub category of the real answer.

Really it comes down to money. Supply and demand. The companies know what they're doing and "trickle" out the tech to us one drop at a time.

The capabilities of this have been around a while now, but why would they make a end-all-be-all camera NOW when you're willing to pay for upgrade after upgrade? There'd be no point..it would throw everything off balance.

I love how everyone freaks out about the specs and terms and measurebate over each other. Its not about that. These companies stay 10 years ahead of the game...while your wallet is stuck in the present.

Screen Name

Stereo audio inputs with selectable phantom power please.

EricIvar

@mrweatherbee:

I'm not talking just about "I heard from a friend." Go do a little research over at dpreview. There are plenty of examples from RAW. BTW, the samples that Canon has up is creating a stir over there too, because they look worse than the A900. There is no reason to judge the IQ of either the 5Dii or the A900, yet. However, the features I mentioned above are relevant.

Trust me, I don't work for Sony or any other camera company, but I do know lots of Canon users are disappointed that they chose HD video over standard DSLR features.

Ghung

@Screen Name: MY wallet, unfortunately, is stuck in the past... which lends even more credence to your argument: On top of the fact that the companies stay behind the curve in terms of what they bring to market, I stay even further behind the curve in terms of what I purchase. That's fine by me, as I'm always happy when I upgrade to something that's new to me, and don't _need_ the latest and greatest. I'm quite content discovering LAST years tech for the first time. Reading about it in the Giz/DPReview etc. just adds spice to the anticipation that I feel before I actually get around to experiencing it for myself....

Mandatory_Field

@peacefulpony: Heresy!

Mandatory_Field

good job John!

Crescent

Wondering if anybody knows what kind of effect this will have on sensor life/longevity. I know that with long exposure shots, the problem of sensor noise comes into the equation as well, will this also start to happen with videos approaching 30 minutes?

15sunrises

If you start using this mode a lot in DSLR's, I imagine the contouring of the device would have to change. They still use the brick style of yore because it works and feels natural to shoot a still, but to take a video not so much. You need more support for video, just try and hold your DSLR for an extended period of time with a descent lens on it. It would just be a whole lotta shake rattle and roll

Tylas

I don't give the manufacturers as much credit as you do... I think this feature is LONG, LONG overdue. When I saw the news starting to trickle in that DSLRs were coming with video, my reaction was 'well it's about f'in time!' rather than 'oh wow, that's a smart idea'. This is a feature which should have been completely universal on all brands like 2-3 years ago.

It will be great to be able to shoot clips with good lenses--ability to do depth of field effects, fisheye, etc. And using manual focus is going to be (in my eyes) one of the biggest plusses! Being able to manipulate the focus in real time with a focus ring on the lens will lead to lots of cool shots/effects, and it's something no (affordable) camcorder offers.

Yeah. BOUT TIME!

gloveofpower

@gloveofpower:
The Sony Camcorder that I bought back in 2001 allows you to switch to manual modes for focus and aperture - the focus being controlled by a ring on the lens and the aperture via one of the multitude of buttons on the left hand side. I have a lot of creative control on that device and although it does not shoot HD, the 16:9 that it will shoot looks about as good as DVD on my HD TV.

The camcorder is a much more natural shape for shooting video than any DSLR, even if you start loading up the DSLR with battery grips and wrist straps, the camcorder wins the ergonomics battle. It also wins almost any other battle with built in mics, active AF, a fold-out view screen and inputs for lights, power packs, microphones, firewire and many other things. The 'glass' is not bad either, but on the model I have obviously not interchangeable.

As I said before, I do not need/want to be able to capture movies with my DSLRs, I personally would prefer to not even have the facility on the cameras that I buy as it adds to the 'things that I am paying for but do not want/need'. I want the 5Dmkii for many, many reasons, but may just skip it and get an (ab)used 1D to replace my current 5D.

The HD movie feature, on this particular camera is absolutely senseless in my view - had it appeared on an up-market rebel, it would make great sense, I considered that the 5D was a 1D for the masses, for those of us not ready, or able, to drop 1D money, but want/need/prefer full-frame over cropped sensors and as such see no place for the facility.

Max.N

The Arri 435 isn't an HD camera! It shoots 35mm film. Obviously this graphic was made by somebody who doesn't know any better :-0

pmodernme

Does anyone know of a nice video camera I could buy that's affordable and still shoots really nice at night or during the day? I have been searching high and low and have been getting all kinds of answers saying that tape is better then hard drive video cameras, and some say that if tape and hard drive have the same mbps then its the same quality. And recently I have been told that Flash drive video cameras don't have any moving parts therefore the raw video file is better quality. Also, I don't know if the CMOS is better or the 3CCD? I will be editing the video in Final Cut so I would need nice raw video quality. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

liddil101

Does anyone know of a really nice Digital Video Camera that doesn't use tape? Either a hard drive or flash instead. I have been searching high and low and have been getting all kinds of answers saying tape is better, hard drive is now just as good as tape if they both have the same mbps....and since flash drives have no moving parts some have said that they are even better. I need an affordable video camera that still takes very nice high quality video at night and during day....I don't care if it's tape or not or if it's CMOS or 3CCD. Please help!

liddil101