Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

canon 500d 1080p video

1080p at 20fps is stupid joke!!! Wtf!!!

Its like Sony, one step forward two steps back... :(
 
Maybe I just don't get it, but what could you use 20fps footage for? It seems crazy that they couldn't add at least the option of shooting 24 fps, I mean its only 4 more frames per second. Doesnt the 5d mark ii shoot 30 fps? Why would they go backwards.

Sorry if this makes no sense, I just do not understand what they are doing.
 
Surely if 24fps gives more film effect than 30fps, then 20fps is better still? :-)

Graeme
 
DRappazzo said:
Maybe I just don't get it, but what could you use 20fps footage for? It seems crazy that they couldn't add at least the option of shooting 24 fps, I mean its only 4 more frames per second. Doesnt the 5d mark ii shoot 30 fps? Why would they go backwards.

Sorry if this makes no sense, I just do not understand what they are doing.
Click to expand...

This move really is simple to explain, it's a $1000 camera, they dont want to cut into their $3000 camera sales, or the sales of their video department end of story.

Someone hinted at it a few posts ago, but I really think Nikon is the company that is perfectly positioned to do the DSLR with 1080 video properly. They have no other video camera lines to protect and therefore can go all out with full manual controls, variable frame rates, decent codec and everything else that people are clamoring for. So many of us already have Nikon glass that we bought for our 35mm adapters that they've already got a little bit of a foothold in the market right there. If they don't take a shot at this market they're idiots.
 
Graeme Nattress said:
Surely if 24fps gives more film effect than 30fps, then 20fps is better still? :-)

Graeme
Click to expand...

Well, truth is, if you see silent films projected at their true frame rate, which could be anywhere from 16 to 20+fps (rather than speeded up to 24fps), they're perfectly acceptable. And they still look like fiction, not reality programming or the nightly news -- unlike 30fps. Most viewers wouldn't even notice the difference, at these lower frame rates.

As for the camera -- it may be the goal of everyone here to own a DSLR which produces superb 1080 24p suitable for projection, but Canon apparently doesn't expect or intend to sell this unit based on its ability to shoot a great HD feature film. It's like complaining that the Red One isn't well designed to shoot stills.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top