To IS or not to IS? That IS the question...

To IS or not to IS? That IS the question...

Super lame title for this one but sorry, couldn't resist ;)

Actually, after doing a few tests it's not much of a question at all in my opinion. I set up shop at B&H today and tried various Canon lenses on my 7D and I now feel confident that, yes, if you want to shoot handheld with HDSLR's, having a lens with Image Stabilization (IS) is tremendously helpful. I have the 24-70 2.8L zoom and it's quite a nice piece of glass but the more video I've been shooting, the more I find the inevitable camera shake with this lens to be unbearable. The Zacuto setup helps take the curse off but really, if you don't want to feel your body's every little twitch and tremble on the video, you need to be on sticks or you need to go with an IS lens. I've heard that an IS version of the 24-70 2.8L is on the horizon but that's just message board chatter so who knows really. For now, if you want a fast Canon multi-purpose zoom, it seems were stuck with this one. The obvious alternative is the Canon 24-105 IS which is a wonderful lens but at f/4, it's a little slow for most of us doing video. Part of the reason I got the 7D is I want to be able to pull it out of my bag and shoot a little HD whenever I feel like it. Spontaneous filmmaking. Shaky video is nauseating to me and completely unacceptable for the kinds of images I'm hoping to create with this camera. If I have to shoot at f/4 to use this camera the way I want to, then that's just how it goes.

This video was shot with the 7D at 1/50" shutter, 1080 24p, f/4 on both lenses - EF 24-105 f/4L IS and EF 24-70 f/2.8L (no IS). Shots were done hand held with no additional support or aids - just the camera in front of my face.

Canon Lens Tests on 7D from Ben Cain / Negative Spaces on Vimeo.

Addendum 01/20/10:
I exchanged the 24-70 for the 24-105 IS. I now have the video camera that I can whip out of my bag at a moment's notice and roll with. I shot a bunch of long lens stuff handheld in Midtown today and I was very relieved to find that I can "pretty much" operate this camera the way I want to. Close enough anyways. I'll post some footage from that in the next few days. The IS function of the lens combined with the Zacuto Rapid Fire is a great "low impact" solution for spontaneous filmmaking and image capture. I can deal with the f/4, just need to keep the lens open and the Genus Fader Variable ND is the way to do it. I'm sure I'll be needing faster lenses but for now they can be rented easy enough at one of the many photo houses in the city for 40 or 50 bucks a day. Not that I have any intention of using this gear professionally. This is purely for my own amusement and desire to independently make images.

Hopefully Canon will wise up and realize that you need IS to shoot handheld video with these cameras. When they put out the 16-35 and 24-70 in an IS version, I'll go back to B&H and pick them up. I'm surprised more people aren't talking about this because this is huge issue in my mind. The camera shake on the non-IS lenses is truly hideous unless you're on sticks or a very heavy, weighted down shoulder rig.

Canon 7D, 24-105 f/4L IS, and Zacuto Rapid Fire with Z-Finder. A video/stills solution that shoots excellent photos and acceptable video that you can carry around in a small backpack for just under 4 grand. I've got to say, I'm pretty happy with it.

Addendum 01/21/10:
I'm quite certain these IS lenses were not designed to have their IS feature permanently turned on for hours on end. The lens emits a distinct "grinding" sound that I'm sure is normal but indicates some strain on the motors. Because this nice but mass produced lens is designed to be used for short bursts of fractions of a second as opposed to being constantly activated, I'm assuming I'm going to wear the lens out far sooner shooting video than I would just shooting stills. Anyone know anything about this?

Tiny Cam

Tiny Cam

This is nothing new, people have been shooting with this setup for ages but I never had a chance to play with one until recently. Sorry I'm behind the curve. A buddy of mine has a Canon HV30 with the Letus Mini and some old Canon FD zooms. I was playing around with it and I must say, I was pretty surprised by the quality and loved the tinyness. This really is a camera you can throw in a backpack. I wouldn't do commercial work with it but it's great for covertly shooting in the city or if you're traveling somewhere remote and don't want to haul around a big video camera. Seems like it would ALMOST be a great tool for run and gun documentary work. Which got me thinking.. What else is out there with a 43mm filter thread that could take the Letus Mini? How about the Panasonic AG-HMC40? This thing weighs 2 lbs. and is a fully functional camcorder.

It doesn't come with a Mic Mount or XLR inputs but there is an add-on module available. Check it out, it's a little guy and even with the adapter and a lens on, it's still going to be quite small. Bigger than an SLR yes but probably requiring less external stabilization (ie Zacuto, Red Rock, etc) and the audio can be single system. I'm definitely not saying this is a better solution than an SLR. I've never used this. In fact never even seen it. This just seems like an intriguing solution to what seems to be the obsession of the film and video community - tiny cameras with shallow depth of field. Let's say I wanted to shoot an independent documentary in somewhere very remote like.. the Russian Far East. I want to take only the following with me - 1 small camera, a few lenses, on-board shotgun mic, a wireless lav, and my laptop - at a glance, this Panasonic/Letus setup seems like a realistic solution. It shoots a full raster 1080p native 24 frame and has the basic paint controls you find in any small Panasonic camcorder. The AVCCAM codec isn't great at 24 mbps, 4:2:0, 8 bit but there are a lot of ways to electronically control the dynamic range in the camera. That said, could the image be any worse than an SLR? I'd love to do some side by side tests and find out. To be clear, I have no interest in using this camera without a lens adapter. 1/4" chips? No thank you. No shallow depth of field and nice 3-dimensional images = no dice.

Here's the basic cost breakdown (B&H prices):

Panasonic AG-HMC40 AVCCAM HD Camcorder $1,849.00

XLR Module  $ 258.95

2x Batteries $ 137.99 x2 = $275.98

2x Class 10 32GB SDHC cards $298.95 = $597.90

Letus Mini $799

BASIC USED LENS SET (Adorama)

Nikkor 28mm 2.8 $220

Nikkor 50mm 1.2 $550

Nikkor 85mm 1.8 $425

BASIC TOTAL: $4975.83 (pretty cheap if I do say so myself.)

PRO's: Single System Sound, camcorder form factor and functionality, ability to smoothly ride the iris, Image Controls / Paintable, does use a Rolling Shutter but is probably closer to an EX1 than an SLR in terms of Skew

CONS: No RAW Stills!, have never actually used (ha.), 1/4" chips = hideous low light performance, with other Letus adapters you really need Rods and a Bridge Plate to hold it all together or else the adapter moves around. That's a huge pain in the ass and if you have to do that to this, suddenly your Tiny Cam isn't so tiny after all..

Truth is, I may be doing something soon that requires a very small footprint and I'm weighing my options. I love the 5D Mark II but I need to make sure the workflow doesn't bury me.

Just thinking out loud really.

Canon 1D Mk IV Low Light Capabilities

Canon 1D Mk IV Low Light Capabilities

I've been reading a lot about the amazing low light abilities of the Canon 1D Mk IV with it's extended ISO settings that apparently can "see what our eyes can't even see". Intriguing. Our ASC charts for Incident Key Light don't go beyond ASA/EI 3200 where you'll find that to expose for 18% Reflectance Gray with a T Stop of 1.4 you'll need 1 foot candle. These charts don't even account for <1 foot candle readings despite the fact that light meters can measure them down to 1/10. This makes sense from a film point of view where the fastest motion picture stocks readily available are 500 ASA. Rating them as such and shooting with a stop of T1.4, you still need 5 foot candles for optimum exposure. Up until recently, with the advent of digital cameras that can see in the dark, there has been no real need to expand upon these tried and true charts.

Open moon light is about .1 foot candle and the 1D Mk IV's expanded ISO of 102400 is 4 2/3 stops faster than ASA/EI 3200. Using the ASC charts as a guide, with a T Stop of 1.4 if my math is correct (4 2/3 stops faster than 1 is .048) that should be enough light to actually expose, albeit a noisy exposure no doubt, in available moon light. Has anyone out there had the opportunity to try this camera out in only available night time "light"?

Please someone weigh in. I'd love to hear from you guys more often :)