# 7d or Mark II for filming?



## FunkyJam (Sep 11, 2011)

Hey, 

Im about to upgrade my camera but I'm not quiet sure which one is the right one for me. Here is the deal, as I study tv and cinema I need a camera for filming but I also enjoy taking pictures(that's why I won't buy a handy cam or something). So my problem comes when I don't know which one to choose. I heard the Mark II better but is the 600â‚¬ worth the difference? Anyone has both or used both? Please help me out Thank you in advance


----------



## NormanBates (Sep 11, 2011)

* 7D, 60D, 600D, 550D have exactly the same sensor and processor, and deliver exactly the same image quality in video mode; 5D2 is slightly better, but lacks 720p50/720p60, which you'd use for overcranking (slow motion) (maybe not too important: 720p has awful aliasing/moire, even worse than 1080p); 1D4 is slightly worse than any of the others (except if you shoot with extremely low light)

* 5D2, 60D, 600D, 550D can be modded with Magic Lantern, which is absolutely awesome: custom cropmarks, zebras, live histogram or waveform while recording, peaking, focus aid (zoom-in) while recording, etc; and also manual gain for audio, and increased bitrate, which I've never used; the 7D can't be modded

* 5D2 and 7D have magnessium body with weather sealing; the 60D and 600D have a great swivel screen (which is really, really great for video, just make sure you get a loupe that supports it)

* 5D2 takes the best stills; 7D has the best focusing system; 60D, 600D, 550D lack autofocus microadjustment, which can be a huge issue for stills if you actually want to use AF (which I don't) (there's no autofocus while recording video anyway, except for some magic lantern hack that I've never used)

and anyway, that's all about the canons; right now, sony seems to be doing a bit better: the first tests I've seen from the tiny nex-5n looks awesome; stuff from the nex-7, A65 and A77 could be even better (as in: even less aliasing/moire)


----------



## akiskev (Sep 11, 2011)

7D has a sensor which is very close to Super 35 cinema format (you may want that). 5D II has a much bigger sensor.
With 7D you can shoot at *60fps*, which means you can have smooth slow motion.
Canon 600D/60D have the same movie recording specs with 7D and also a swivel screen, which is very useful for video (given that you don't want to invest on a seperate screen). 
The 600D is the only camera that has a 3-10x digital zoom available with Full HD recording and does not use interpolation so the quality doesn't drop!

If I were you, I'd buy a 600D (same sensor with 7D, more video friendly though) and invest the extra money to lenses.


----------



## elflord (Sep 11, 2011)

FunkyJam said:


> Im about to upgrade my camera but I'm not quiet sure which one is the right one for me. Here is the deal, as I study tv and cinema I need a camera for filming but I also enjoy taking pictures(that's why I won't buy a handy cam or something). So my problem comes when I don't know which one to choose. I heard the Mark II better but is the 600â‚¬ worth the difference? Anyone has both or used both? Please help me out Thank you in advance



When pricing the two cameras, you need to figure out which lenses you will buy and include that in the price. The price jump to full frame is likely to be steeper than the sticker price alone because you can't use the cheaper EF-S lenses and several consumer lenses which work well with APS-C struggle in the corners of the larger sensor. 

Another reason to consider glass in the price is that it will have a much more profound effect on your picture quality than the choice of body. You're looking at the two top of the line cameras but didn't write anything about your budget. 

As for which is better -- they are very different cameras. The 7D is more modern, and faster (faster burst speed, better autofocus) -- good for shooting sports. The full frame is better for shallow depth of field and high ISO -- excellent for portraits and low light photography. 

Again I don't know what your budget is but unless you have a lot of money left over after the kit lens plus body, or you have a specific reason for choosing the 7D over the 60D (for example), I'd take a long hard look at the 60D and the 600D. Price out a few different setups on a fixed budget and you'll probably find that you can get a better setup (e.g. including lenses, possibly a flash) with a less expensive body.


----------



## RESEARCH_UK (Sep 11, 2011)

Hi FunkyJam,

I have 5D Mark II and 7D as well as a recently acquired 1D Mark IV (though have not yet used the latter for video other than a quick test). If my primary use were video I would choose a 7D as I have found the focussing to be superior for this purpose (and quicker for stills) and have found that most people who have used the two have found success in using the 7D but many lost focus on the 5DII.

I would however say that for overall quality of stills the 5D beats the 7D especially above ISO 400. On like for like settings the 5D with high ISO noise reduction set on low or disabled the 5D provides more detail and on the 7D it is a choice between loss of detail with the filter and noise. This is not bad noise, just more than there is on the 7D. 

I would agree with the comments that articulated screens could be useful and will save you money. However, if you are going to buy non canon lens then it will typically be more important that you have a body with micro focus adjustment (50D (but no video), 7D and 5DII) . All the more if you intend to make use of shallow depth of field. What will give you the greatest improvement will be lens selection. If you are going 7D or any 1.6 crop with that sensor level you will even more need the sharper lenses to get the best out of it. i.e. 70-200 F/4 or 70-200 F/4 IS or 70-200 F/2.8 IS Mk II. 

So I would tend to use the extra 600 euros towards a 70-200 F/4 or better. If you need a wider angle F/2.8 then perhaps get a 7D Body with no kit lens and a Tamron 18-50mm F/2.8 (non VC). Nearly as good as a 17-55mm F/2.8 and a lot cheaper.

Hope this helps.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Sep 11, 2011)

None of the Cannon cameras have autofocus while filming, so its a waste of time to worry about autofocus lenses for video. However, for the stills, autofocus is very useful.

I have a 5D MK II and a 7D. The 5D MK II will let you give images a shallow depth of field that a 7D cannot. The 5D also has some features missing in the 7d.

If you want to take serious videos handheld, a Canon DSLR is probably not the best. Having to twist the focus ring while holding the camera out in front of you is difficult and frustrating.

As much as I dislike Sony as a company, their newest DSLR does seem to be a big step ahead for making videos over the 7D or other Canon DSLR's. It will autofocus as well as do some of the things video makers want. Everything is a compromise, and it is said that Sony has solved the sensor overheating problems with the A55, so I'd look at it. IQ wise, it uses a lot more compression of the video than Canon, so the images may turn out to have a lot of compression artifacts, I haven't seen a analysis of this yet.

Have a look at it, its certainly ahead of the competition in video, at least for now.

Editing .MHT video might be a issue as of right now, but editors will surely be coming soon.


----------



## TexPhoto (Sep 12, 2011)

I'd buy a 60D now, and a 5DIII 6-12 months after they come out. When they are a little off retail price.

My 7D will autofocus while filming btw. You press the little AF-ON button and it focuses. You'd never really want to use it though because it's very loud and hunts a little before finding focus, but it does work.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Sep 12, 2011)

TexPhoto said:


> I'd buy a 60D now, and a 5DIII 6-12 months after they come out. When they are a little off retail price.
> 
> My 7D will autofocus while filming btw. You press the little AF-ON button and it focuses. You'd never really want to use it though because it's very loud and hunts a little before finding focus, but it does work.



My 7D does not autofocus while filming, try filming a soccer player running toward you, and see if the focus follows him / her? You can focus it and mess up the image if it focuses at the new spot, but the moving subject has moved on by then. Of course, if its a static scene and nothing is moving, you do not need autofocus in the first place. That would make a pretty boring video though.


----------



## AG (Sep 12, 2011)

TexPhoto said:


> My 7D will autofocus while filming btw. You press the little AF-ON button and it focuses. You'd never really want to use it though because it's very loud and hunts a little before finding focus, but it does work.



I Think your confusing finding an Auto Focus Point to Auto Focus while filming.

The AF-On button will grab a focus point but its designed to grab the focus of the scene, then once it has been found you start filming and then manually focus from that point on.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Sep 12, 2011)

AG said:


> TexPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > My 7D will autofocus while filming btw. You press the little AF-ON button and it focuses. You'd never really want to use it though because it's very loud and hunts a little before finding focus, but it does work.
> ...


\
I'm quite aware of how my 7d and my 5D MK II work. My original post said autofocus whil filming. When I say autofocus during filming, it is about continuous autofocus during filming, as required for motion, not the 7D focus which, as you say, is done before you film to set the starting point, but is useless during filming. 

The Sony A77 has continuous phase detect autofocus while filming, which may have some faults, but Canon does not do it at all. I recently tried to film a Rodeo with my 7D as well as taking stills. It was totally impossible for me to manually focus the barrel racers as they dashstraight at me, or evern parallel to me as well. I could barely get good focus for stills while one is moving at me at full tilt.


----------



## catz (Sep 12, 2011)

5D2 vs. 60D (same sensor as 7D) - I own both:

- 5D2 Video detail is better (better resolution)
- 5D2 Aliaising is less severe
- 5D2 Video looks cleaner and less "dirty"
- 5D2 Has more latitude on video

Needless to say that as a result of this different, I use 60D for stills and 5D2 for video.
On low light the difference is less pronounced, but the difference is large when the scene is properly lit (and 5D2 starts to look awesome whereas 60D doesn't).

I have also found that 5D2 can be used with Technicolor picture style, but 60D loses too many bits.

If you compare to camcorders: 5D2 is much closer to Panasonic AF100 or Sony FS100 than 60D or other equivalents with the same sensor and chip are. Obviously you can't get 60p like from the Sony though and aliasing is a bit more visible than on Sony where it is not completely absent either. In the 5D2 the aliasing can be pretty much cured with antialiasing filter from Mosaic engineering.

I hereby do not recommend 60D (or maybe not even 7D) for video. 5D2 is superior. Unless the 7D does better video than 60D for some unknown reason.


----------



## NormanBates (Sep 12, 2011)

sony A65 autofocus-during-video-recodring test:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3XsgytiAhEI
no other DSLR will come anywhere close to these new sonys in this area...


----------



## FunkyJam (Sep 12, 2011)

Well, I got around 2100â‚¬ to spend on a body and on lenses. I was thinking in getting a 5DII body and a 50 mm 1.8. My other option is a 7D with the kit lense (18-135 IS if Im not mistaken) and a 50 1.8. The reason Im willing to buy a 50mm 1.8 is because I've heard/seen it gives very nice shallow depth of field on videos and stills. What do you think?


----------



## TexPhoto (Sep 12, 2011)

Hey guys, I did not say my 7d was great at focusing while filming, or that it would track fast moving soccer players, or F-18 fighter jets approaching at mach 2 for that matter. I said it would focus while filming, and it does.

I thought it was interesting that it does this when the AF-ON button is pressed, but my 5DII does not.


----------



## Jedifarce (Sep 17, 2011)

FunkyJam said:


> Hey,
> 
> Im about to upgrade my camera but I'm not quiet sure which one is the right one for me. Here is the deal, as I study tv and cinema I need a camera for filming but I also enjoy taking pictures(that's why I won't buy a handy cam or something). So my problem comes when I don't know which one to choose. I heard the Mark II better but is the 600â‚¬ worth the difference? Anyone has both or used both? Please help me out Thank you in advance



Personally, I prefer a full size sensor over a crop one. You can usually pick out a video that used a crop sized sensor, although the 7D may have a imaging quality similar to the 5D it's window just seems smaller. 

What's going to kill you is not the camera itself but all the items necessary to make the 5D or 7D functional as a 'video' platform. Follow focus, follow focus gears, video rig, lenses, tripod, fluid video head, external monitor, glidecam, etc, all these items end up costing more than the camera.


----------



## Jedifarce (Sep 18, 2011)

NormanBates said:


> sony A65 autofocus-during-video-recodring test:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3XsgytiAhEI
> no other DSLR will come anywhere close to these new sonys in this area...



Why would you want to? That footage looks pretty bad, as soon as the kid leaves the frame the autofocus snaps back like a rubberband to focusing in on the background. 

It's funny when you see other videos of people using autofocus trying to film a street performer, the autofocus becomes confused whenever a pedestrian walks into the foreground. Depth of field while filming becomes simply impossible with autofocus.


----------



## Jedifarce (Sep 18, 2011)

akiskev said:


> Canon 600D/60D have the same movie recording specs with 7D and also a swivel screen, which is very useful for video (given that you don't want to invest on a seperate screen).



I don't see the benefit of a swivel screen. I have a 5D and if I don't utilize an external monitor for filiming, you simply aren't able to pull focus effectively. I start to go cross-eyed trying to focus on that small screen at the back of the camera.


----------



## Jedifarce (Sep 18, 2011)

RESEARCH_UK said:


> I have 5D Mark II and 7D as well as a recently acquired 1D Mark IV (though have not yet used the latter for video other than a quick test).



Holy cow!! LOL.


----------



## Jedifarce (Sep 18, 2011)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> If you want to take serious videos handheld, a Canon DSLR is probably not the best. Having to twist the focus ring while holding the camera out in front of you is difficult and frustrating.



I don't agree with that, you can purchase redrock micro products that will compensate for those focusing issues. The real problem is expense and if you can afford it. 



> As much as I dislike Sony as a company, their newest DSLR does seem to be a big step ahead for making videos over the 7D or other Canon DSLR's. It will autofocus as well as do some of the things video makers want.



I don't know too many videographers that would count 'autofocus' as one of their top concerns, rolling shutter is a bigger problem. If that were the case, you'd just use a prosumer video camcorder.


----------



## Jedifarce (Sep 18, 2011)

FunkyJam said:


> Well, I got around 2100â‚¬ to spend on a body and on lenses. I was thinking in getting a 5DII body and a 50 mm 1.8. My other option is a 7D with the kit lense (18-135 IS if Im not mistaken) and a 50 1.8. The reason Im willing to buy a 50mm 1.8 is because I've heard/seen it gives very nice shallow depth of field on videos and stills. What do you think?



Problem with the 18-135mm is you're going to find that it's a not going to be the sharpest lens in town. It will produce soft images - unless you like that sort of thing - most people eventually move on to an 'L' lens. IS -image stabilization is nice for video which is what you always want, but with f/3.5-5.6 your ISO will constantly have to be adjusted through focal range as you zoom in or out and you really don't want that.

You'll want a lense with a constant aperture of F/2.8 - very expensive or F/4 - reasonable, L lenses for sharpness and don't forget the IS. I use the 70-200mm L F/4 IS USM, the USM or autofocus is usually part of the package but it's not something you need for filming in manual. 

And you don't have to buy new, Adorama is a great site for buying refurbished lenses, that's where I purchased my 70-200mm and I've never regretted it. In addition, you can save more money by buying a refurbished 5D Mark II. Downside with buying refurbished is you don't have a good as warranty as you would with a new product.


----------



## Dave (Sep 18, 2011)

If you don't depend on full frame, I think the 600D is the best video SLR at the moment. The 7D is a superior camera but it lacks a flip screen and the new digital video crop zoom thingie from the 600D. If you are primary filming all the cool features of the 7D carry not much weight.


----------



## FunkyJam (Sep 18, 2011)

Thanks for all the replies. After alot of thinking I'll pick a 5d mark ii and a 50mm 1.8 or even 1.4 if I find a cheap one. Later on, when I have more cash I'll buy more lenses and some other stuff needed. 

So, 5D mark ii + 50 1.8(or 1.4) is a good combo to start, what do you think?


Bye.


----------



## thejoyofsobe (Sep 18, 2011)

i'd go the 50mm f/1.4 route instead of the 50mm f/1.8 if you can afford it and are only looking for one prime lens. it's two-thirds of a stop faster, the bokeh's better with 8 blades vs. 5 blades and the manual focus ring is much more usable.

though i guess for what you're going to pay for the 50mm f/1.4 you could always go for a little more variety and pick up both the 50mm f/1.8 and the 35mm f/2.0.


----------



## Jedifarce (Sep 19, 2011)

FunkyJam said:


> Thanks for all the replies. After alot of thinking I'll pick a 5d mark ii and a 50mm 1.8 or even 1.4 if I find a cheap one. Later on, when I have more cash I'll buy more lenses and some other stuff needed.
> 
> So, 5D mark ii + 50 1.8(or 1.4) is a good combo to start, what do you think?
> 
> ...



I can tell you, although a 5D produces superior image quality and vibrant colors (assuming you're not going for the 'Flat' look) for video, it has a very steep learning curve when compared to a prosumer video camcorder. You might be shocked how terrible your early footage will come out.

These links might help you out ->

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/find/hdslr.jsp

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/indepth/category/tags/hdslr-online-guide?cm_sp=HDSLR-_-HDSLR`Guide-_-HDSLR`Go2Guide

http://philipbloom.net/education/


----------



## leGreve (Sep 19, 2011)

If you can afford it, go prosumer cam corder instead... the MKII and 7D are old tech by now, and their shortcomings are getting noticed. Thus is the game of the late arriver a hard one.

Rolling shutter, jello'ing and the lack of proper sound, makes for nothing more than a hobby camera, and as soon as clients learn that it was fun for a while with all that shallow depth of field crap, what they loose in return when buying projects from dslr videographers outweighs the fun side of it.

If you wanna stick with Canon... wait around for the october announcement and see if it at all competes with what Sony and Pana has put out. Canon still rules the still world imo, but in the video world they are falling behind again.

Did I mention the crappy sound??? Sound is atleast 50% of any video / film project.


----------



## CJRodgers (Sep 19, 2011)

Hi Jedifarce, 

I checked out them links on B&H educational series things. Found it helpful. On epsisode 1 or two he showed a gear that is attatched to the still lens. Do you know how he has done that and where to get them from, or do you need to send you lens somewhere to have it customised?

Thanks, 

Craig


----------



## Chicorob (Sep 19, 2011)

If you can learn the 7D/5DII in and outs and use them in the right way, you will get much better results that a prosumer camcorder. Color and constrast are simply better in the DLSR's. In bright situations you will get acceptable/good results from a prosumer cam but they will not have the "pro" feel. In low light situations, you just cannot compare the 5DII/7D results to a camcorder. We had 2 cameras recently at a wedding and during the first dance under VERY low light we shot a 5DII at ISO 1600/F2.8 with a LED video light which resulted in a clean/bright image. Under the same situation with a Canon HF G10 and the image was noisy, the colors were flat, and it was really unusable footage. There was a small amount of rolling shutter and jello from the 5D but it was minimal.

Use the right tool for the right shot but if I were given a choice between a G10/7D/5D I would go for the 5DII in an instant. That will a 50 f1.4 will get you about anything you need. A cheap shoulder rig and LCD Loupe will help with stabilization and focus.


----------



## Chaos411vm (Sep 19, 2011)

The unfortunate thing now and days is that people all want auto focus which doesn't work with creating movies anyway. If you are filming as you appear to be doing. Auto-focus on any camera would be completely useless. Shoot with the 5D as you would shoot with an actual film camera. Pull focus and purchase manual lenses and build up your experience eying focus. Due to the extreme shallow depth of field it can be quite a challenge at first but the results of a proper pull definitely are worth it.

A kit of old Nikon Primes with adapters work amazingly well on the 5D mark II and is quite cheaper. Plus you can control your F-stops manually and not electronically which is worth the purchase right there.


----------



## beardofzeus (Sep 20, 2011)

I just want to add I've heard about some issues regarding filming with the 7d for extended periods of time. One friend of mine says his sensor overheats after a while and my old roommate had his shutter get stuck open from filming for so long.

Also, that same roommate is a very successful wedding videographer here in hawaii, and he uses a 60d and a 7d ...so there is no point arguing about whether or not a DSLR is suitable for filming. I will add that it takes alot more investment in other rigs to make filming with a DSLR successful, i.e. steady cam, fluid head tripod, cinevate slider, proper sound recording, etc. which can easily add up to the cost of a prosumer video system.
He also loves the swivel screen of the 60d and prefers it over his 7d.


----------



## Jedifarce (Sep 20, 2011)

Chicorob said:


> If you can learn the 7D/5DII in and outs and use them in the right way, you will get much better results that a prosumer camcorder. Color and constrast are simply better in the DLSR's. In bright situations you will get acceptable/good results from a prosumer cam but they will not have the "pro" feel. In low light situations, you just cannot compare the 5DII/7D results to a camcorder. We had 2 cameras recently at a wedding and during the first dance under VERY low light we shot a 5DII at ISO 1600/F2.8 with a LED video light which resulted in a clean/bright image. Under the same situation with a Canon HF G10 and the image was noisy, the colors were flat, and it was really unusable footage. There was a small amount of rolling shutter and jello from the 5D but it was minimal.
> 
> Use the right tool for the right shot but if I were given a choice between a G10/7D/5D I would go for the 5DII in an instant. That will a 50 f1.4 will get you about anything you need. A cheap shoulder rig and LCD Loupe will help with stabilization and focus.



I have to agree. I used to have a JVC GY-HM100 which is considered a "prosumer" camcorder. In terms of image quality, theres no comparison between the JVC and a 5D, the 5D kicks its ass. When you stop to consider that the JVC depreciated by more than a $1000 before I sold it while the 5D hasn't says a lot.

Of course we're talking about image quality, not action. Any fast panning or quick movement, the 5D is your worst enemy.


----------



## Jedifarce (Sep 20, 2011)

leGreve said:


> If you can afford it, go prosumer cam corder instead... the MKII and 7D are old tech by now, and their shortcomings are getting noticed. Thus is the game of the late arriver a hard one.
> 
> Rolling shutter, jello'ing and the lack of proper sound, makes for nothing more than a hobby camera, and as soon as clients learn that it was fun for a while with all that shallow depth of field crap, what they loose in return when buying projects from dslr videographers outweighs the fun side of it.
> 
> ...



Old doesn't necessarily mean bad, I use Nikkor AIS primes that are 20 years old, and they are comparable to Canon L lenses in terms of sharpness and image quality.


----------



## Jedifarce (Sep 20, 2011)

CJRodgers said:


> Hi Jedifarce,
> 
> I checked out them links on B&H educational series things. Found it helpful. On epsisode 1 or two he showed a gear that is attatched to the still lens. Do you know how he has done that and where to get them from, or do you need to send you lens somewhere to have it customised?
> 
> ...



Oh, you mean that gear around the lens. That lens gear attaches to a a follow focus (See link) - basically it allows the camera operator to turn a side knob attached to a gear mechanism that turns the lens gear on the focus part of what ever lens you are using. The follow focus allows for very smooth focusing and to minimize camera movement. 

http://www.redrockmicro.com/static/images/cat/lg/microFF_indie_bundle_lg.jpg

The reason for using the lens gear without the follow focus, is to make it easier to focus by hand if you're a run-an-gun filmer or if you can't afford a follow focus set up. The Redrock micro follow focus costs about $800. 

However, much like the filter size on lenses and how they differ from model to model, you have to make sure you buy the correct lens gear size. (Take a good look at the 3-different gears on that link above, you'll notice they're actually 3-different sized gears)

Too big and it won't attach and lock onto the focus ring of the lens, too small and you won't be able to get it on at all. The lens gear is hard plastic that you can loosen and tighten with a threaded screw and nut at the top of the gear.


----------



## Jedifarce (Sep 20, 2011)

Chaos411vm said:


> The unfortunate thing now and days is that people all want auto focus which doesn't work with creating movies anyway. If you are filming as you appear to be doing. Auto-focus on any camera would be completely useless. Shoot with the 5D as you would shoot with an actual film camera. Pull focus and purchase manual lenses and build up your experience eying focus. Due to the extreme shallow depth of field it can be quite a challenge at first but the results of a proper pull definitely are worth it.
> 
> A kit of old Nikon Primes with adapters work amazingly well on the 5D mark II and is quite cheaper. Plus you can control your F-stops manually and not electronically which is worth the purchase right there.



Nikkor AIS primes with an nikon to eos adapter and you're good to go.


----------



## Jedifarce (Sep 20, 2011)

beardofzeus said:


> I just want to add I've heard about some issues regarding filming with the 7d for extended periods of time. One friend of mine says his sensor overheats after a while and my old roommate had his shutter get stuck open from filming for so long.
> 
> Also, that same roommate is a very successful wedding videographer here in hawaii, and he uses a 60d and a 7d ...so there is no point arguing about whether or not a DSLR is suitable for filming. I will add that it takes alot more investment in other rigs to make filming with a DSLR successful, i.e. steady cam, fluid head tripod, cinevate slider, proper sound recording, etc. which can easily add up to the cost of a prosumer video system.
> He also loves the swivel screen of the 60d and prefers it over his 7d.



I like filming at night or at Hawaii's Ice Palace, no overheating problems in there. Lol. However I did watch a friend shooting portraits at the beach on a sunny day and after being in the sun for an hour or so, her T1i kept overexposing the images and she had to shut down her camera for half an hour before she could use it again. 

I don't know how your roomate films with the camera screen and not an external monitor. He must have eagle eyes.


----------



## CJRodgers (Sep 20, 2011)

Thanks! I am very interestesed in this, after looking at this and phillip blooms website he reviewed a much cheaper one ($139) and says it does the job. Heres the link, let me know what you think. 

http://www.dfocussystem.com/dfocus.php

Craig



Jedifarce said:


> CJRodgers said:
> 
> 
> > Hi Jedifarce,
> ...


----------



## Jedifarce (Sep 21, 2011)

CJRodgers said:


> Thanks! I am very interestesed in this, after looking at this and phillip blooms website he reviewed a much cheaper one ($139) and says it does the job. Heres the link, let me know what you think.
> 
> http://www.dfocussystem.com/dfocus.php
> 
> Craig



It probably works, just remember you always get what you pay for. If you buy a cheaper lens compared to an L lens, while they both have glass and a focus ring, you're going to see the difference in your images when using an L lens over the cheaper model. Same for the cheaper follow focus,

I purchased the Redrock micro follow focus, when you think about it is just as expensive as my external SmallHD monitor. But you know what it's silky smooth and well built. Would you get the same build quality for something $700 cheaper, I sort of doubt it. 

It pretty much comes down to if you're a hardcore filmer or something you do as a hobby occasionally shooting video, if it's the latter the cheaper follow focus would make sense. However, if you plan on taking video to its max, don't waste your money buying the cheaper model then regretting not purchasing the higher end follow focus first.


----------



## allhallowseve (Oct 24, 2011)

FunkyJam said:


> Hey,
> 
> Im about to upgrade my camera but I'm not quiet sure which one is the right one for me. Here is the deal, as I study tv and cinema I need a camera for filming but I also enjoy taking pictures(that's why I won't buy a handy cam or something). So my problem comes when I don't know which one to choose. I heard the Mark II better but is the 600â‚¬ worth the difference? Anyone has both or used both? Please help me out Thank you in advance



Shooting on the 7D is cool... if you love amazing looking footage! I have shot my 2 most recent short films on the 7D and was amazed with the cinematic quality of the footage. That, coupled with the Habbycam HD shoulder brace made my films amazing! http://www.habbycam.com


----------

