Team-BHP (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/)

-   Gadgets, Computers & Software (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/gadgets-computers-software/)

-   -   The DSLR Thread (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/gadgets-computers-software/11582-dslr-thread-567.html)

Not 100% sure, but I think it has to do with the image-sensor getting heated up.
Also one single mov file may have a file-size limit on the file-system of the current sd-card formats.

Anyway a DSLR is optimized for stills and video is an optional extra, refer:
Canon 5D Mark II video

I am too unaware of the reason of this limitation. I guess manim has correctly described the cause.

@Bluevolt
@Habanero City
Yes it is due to over heating of the sensor as manim stated.
Cheers,
TG.

Whatever the reason is, I wouldn't worry about it. 10 minutes is more than what you need to make quality videos or movies if you are so inclined. In how many movies do we see single shots lasting more than 10 minutes? Even those shots that appear to be very lengthy would last only a minute or two at most. The rest is all about editing and mixing.

But this 10 minutes would become a limitation if you are less into creative film/video making and more into documenting real life - say if you want to record someone's speech or a stage show or things like that.

@pjay_in
Exactly...i couldnt agree with you any more!

And we have handy-cams for this job with several GBs of Hard disk.

Guys, need help choosing a cam.

Choosing between Canon EOS-550D and Nikon D5100.

I'm also thinking of dumping the default 18-55mm kit lens and gettin a 18-135mm, plus a 35 or 50mm prime lens.

Suggestions please (both for cameras and lenses), even outside the ones I've mentioned, if in the same price range.

If you want to click really colorful pics, hit it off with the Nikon, unless you are to click people & that too close up as in 3/4 portaits etc, then Canon may just of preference. I have used both reasonably and Canon extensively, so am not really being partial here.

If you are starting off with Canon 550 is a power packed camera with all that you would need - can go on a blind purchase with it, i'd recommend some budget but really effective glasses with it :

1) 50mm 1.8 / 35mm 1.8 , as you intended
2) 55-250mm - quite a cracker of a lens at about 11k ish price. We have had many friends in the circuit who had clicked shots which can be well compared to the likes of the big whites.
3) stock lens is not all that bad, if you dont want to spend more on something liek 10-22mm from Canon or that you would want to stick with canon lenses and not look at wide-zoom lenses from Tokina/Sigma, which are a good value for money. You may want to google up for sample pics.

Merry clicking.

The craze for DSLRs is changing its trend with the micro 4/3rds taking more of the market share as months pass. If your purpose is hobby, compactness and light weight : consider them before making the final decision. If I am in your place for a new cam, I would give Panasonic GF3 or G3 a serious consideration. Couple of links for your reading:
Four Thirds | Four Thirds | Standard
Camera feature search: Digital Photography Review

Thats an interesting suggestion never heard before. Could you elaborate how 'colorful' is related to Nikon and 'People & close up' related to Canon ? I do both with my mobile cam without any issues, so no idea how a DSLR is categorized in those areas.

Tell me how sharper or colorful these images can be clicked better with a compact/ DSLR. Its from a Mobile cam.

As it appears you already have a thorough know how of what the mobile fone can do, so i may just rest my case there & concur to your findings.

Yet, on the contrary that you asked, in my years with photography I have had Canon EOS 1v, Canon 5Dmkii & Nikon D700 with assorted whites, prime lenses and have been limited myself to street shots and primarily portraiture, where in most of the shots were needed to have the tonal gradation which was more pronounce with the Canon gear that i carried than Nikon.

If you would have shot on .raw format from both cameras you would know is being hinted at and if not not then i dont really have the tech figures to assist you with an explanation.


The "on-hand" experience of having clicked with both sensors on Canon & Nikon can make one gather an understanding better than me trying to prove a point here which is not the case, anyone is free to choose whatever they want & that includes a mobile with a cam.


Not at all an argument but as i close if i may share, the "on-hand" experience of having clicked with both sensors on Canon & Nikon can make one gather an understanding better than me trying to prove a point here which is not the case, anyone is free to choose whatever they want & that includes a mobile with a cam.


Its been a few years that i have left clicking for it was taking much of my time than i could offer, i moved back to Music & Stereo Systems with qualitative reproduction which remains a hobby till date. On a lighter note, its the Blackberry for me that now offers me a wide range of colors that i need. Hence i have left being bothered about either Nikon or Canon and/or how they represent colors. :)

Good to hv hear from you.

Any sample photos? Examples would help us understand a bit better. Thanks.

A few weeks ago I was confused as you are right now. Both are very good cameras, 550D would give you more direct control over some functions compared 5100 (you can assign a Fn to the Fn button, Canon also has it) and also is more feature packed (DOF, bracketing remembering off my head). 5100 has better low light sensitivity and its AF illuminator can be useful in certain situations and also has tilt LCD. Then the Nik has 11 point AF, Can got only 9.

You just can't go wrong with any of these two. Both have their Pros and Cons. Both are established systems.

I finally chose the 550D, i have owned the Canon 40D before and that's one reason i stuck with Canon. I also have a affinity towards Made in Japan products and the 550D is is solely made in Japan where as the entry Nikons like 3100 and 5100 is Thailand made. The nation of manufacture may not matter if the quality is adhered to, but thats just my personal preference.

Also if you're into hobby movie making using DSLRs, or would like to experiment in the future you should check this out:

Magic Lantern Firmware Wiki
http://magiclantern.wikia.com/wiki/Unified
Unified - Magic Lantern Firmware Wiki

Mine was not an argument nor a statement but a simple question on your first statement of Nikon + color and Canon + people and you have not answered my question too. I always have friends who own and use both brand high end cams for their professional assignments and never heard such a comment from anyone and wanted to know how you came that conclusion. Please share some secrets as it might help a lot of members here.

Btw, I use a full frame with couple of primes and 100% RAW, its always serious hobby for me too. Hope to hear a proper answer from you and few examples if you can. :thumbs up

Foremost, please note that my words be taken as mere observations and you can always come up with your own findings like i did, they may differ and that doesnt put either of on higher or lower grounds than the other.

What i was comparing was Nikon & Canon andn by no means any mobile and neither i have any idea on them and nor there are any secrets that you or me or any of our friends would have. What we all learn is from experience, if i may say so.

If you use .raw, you wont need me quote any sample pics as being asked here, nor it would bring in any clarity to the point shared. What possibly you can do is to click a few shots which have tonal gradation, be it skin, cloth or anything that follows the league and then compare the shots taken on Nikon dslr viz-a-viz Canon.

There shall still be a lot of factors that shall matter primarily being the choice of glass that you pic. For me while clicking people, important was to get the tonality of the skin correct than making them presentable for web sharing. For that i could only trust Canon - thats very personal opinion and if you dont agree and that any other brand works well for you, thats perfectly fine. Thats the way it usually goes.

Now, while i clicked with both 5D (with 50/1.8, 24-105 & 135) and D700 with 50/1.8, i could somehow never get the needed results from Nikon. (Mind you i picked Nikon only cause of its glasses quality of whose i loved and also the saturation they brought in).

Now with both the machines in hand, i took various shots on street, colored, b/w and it was clear that Nikon was pushing in more saturation & contrasty pictures. If you shall zoom the .raw files from Canon & Nikon for the same shot taken, you shall clearly know the reason why. Canon's presentation at 100% zoom has more tonality & color range with gradual shift onto the next value than Nikon's presentation of pixels, which portrays a rather more sudden shift of color values with well defined pixels edges, that you wont see with .raw files of Canon. Hence thats what i would want you to verify at your end, for there shall be so many factors effecting the display on your screen, even if i would have wanted to attempt and elucidate my stance with picture examples.

Nikon has always appealed me to clicked scenes where color is of more relevance e.g. doors/walls/textured color rich clothes etc etc. but somehow for people i had to turn to Canon always. Skin to me was already the toughest to capture with all the components it had and i hated using sharpness to boost the texture out of the screen, mild usage was fine but tonality & gradual tonal shift was where Canon had an edge for me over Nikon, not that i hate Nikon for a reason, not at all. I have never been an extremist with technology.

I dont know if sharing links shall be approved, but here are some just to share some of what i still have online from what i used to click -

Flickr: .windowshopper.'s Photostream
https://www.facebook.com/media/albums/?id=524332805

Best wishes

In Nikon, D90 was the first in the range besides the D3x that i quite liked for personal taste, for straight shots that these cameras could take, strictly without editing/.raw files.

Perhaps you could take CMOS/CCD as a reason here, with their pixel handling capabilities and algorithms. All the camera's i could like in Nikon were CMOS, barring the D700 which i had bought. D90 was much pleasing.

Perhaps the only reason that there has been a paradigm shift in Nikon from the CCD to CMOS completely from mid to high segment.