[Sareesh Sudhakaran]

The video uses the full size of the sensor with line skipping to lower the resolution to 1080p. While if you shoot a full Rez still photograph and crop, the depth of field and field of view is bound to be different because you are not using the full size of the sensor.

Also consider the possibility of lens distortions. These are easy to correct on stills but tough on video.

It’s tough to say what the problem is without images and details of your setup, incl lens choices and distance to subject.

Hope this helps.

https://www.wolfcrow.com – Workflow information and support for filmmakers, photographers, audiographers and videographers.

[Sareesh Sudhakaran]

Does the original footage have metadata carried over that is being misinterpreted by AE?

https://www.wolfcrow.com – Workflow information and support for filmmakers, photographers, audiographers and videographers.

[Sareesh Sudhakaran]

Both the Canon T4i or the Panasonic GH2 are excellent alternatives.

Based on your lighting requirements, I think the Canon would be slightly better in low light, however the GH2 has sharper images.

I would go with the GH2 and a good lens. If you can stretch your budget a bit further, the GH3 is an even better choice.

https://www.wolfcrow.com – Workflow information and support for filmmakers, photographers, audiographers and videographers.

[Sareesh Sudhakaran]

FS100 with an external recorder, VG900 with an external recorder, BMCC with an external recorder, etc. I like the FS100 because it can shoot 60p.

All these small form factor cameras need to be rigged, which I’m sure is no fun when you’re not in a controlled environment.

CCD broadcast cameras are out of your budget. 1/3″ CCD cameras don’t qualify.

https://www.wolfcrow.com – Workflow information and support for filmmakers, photographers, audiographers and videographers.

[Sareesh Sudhakaran]

I have no experience in wildlife. I’ve shot a few lions on a safari once but I don’t think that counts.

I suggest you find a refurbished or like-new C300. It shoots directly to broadcast quality and will take your existing lenses. It also has excellent low light ability. You will spend more time shooting and less time working on post.

If you absolutely cannot afford it, then take a look at the new Panasonic GH3 or the GH2.

Hope this helps.

https://www.wolfcrow.com – Workflow information and support for filmmakers, photographers, audiographers and videographers.

[Sareesh Sudhakaran]

You might have thought of this already but try lowering the resolution on the monitor you are shooting or trying to record.

The DSLRs line skip, and only resolve about 700 lines vertically with the best lenses. Try lowering the monitor resolution to 720 or 768 lines vertically and see if that fixes the problem.

If lowering the resolution is not possible, the you might want to try a screen recording software instead, or use a diffusion on the monitor, etc.

Hope this helps.

https://www.wolfcrow.com – Workflow information and support for filmmakers, photographers, audiographers and videographers.

[Sareesh Sudhakaran]

Short answer: Not worth the trouble. Here’s a quick test I did last year: https://wolfcrow.com/blog/technicolor-cinestyle-vs-neutral/

https://www.wolfcrow.com – Workflow information and support for filmmakers, photographers, audiographers and videographers.

[Sareesh Sudhakaran]

Resolve offers the best workflow in your case, simply because there is documentation on the internet that’ll make your life easier.

Working in RAW will always have the extra debayering step, whether you do it beforehand or after locking the edit.

You could use other programs like Lightroom for debayering, but round tripping can quickly become complicated. It’s much easier to lock the edit, render a master TIFF image sequence of it, and then continue to AE and beyond with that.

It’s easier to start with what you’re getting for free anyway with the BMCC, and then see where that takes you.

https://www.wolfcrow.com – Workflow information and support for filmmakers, photographers, audiographers and videographers.

[Sareesh Sudhakaran]

What are your project settings typically? Do you transcode prior to editing or render to DV PAL after editing (while mixing resolutions and codecs?).

Do you apply de-interlacing? Are you mixing NTSC and PAL videos? Is Premiere Pro conforming your footage or are you interpreting footage in custom ways?

One option to try:

[Sareesh Sudhakaran]

Intraframe or I-frame compresses each image/frame without considering the images that precede or follow it. E.g. If a video has a frame rate of 24 fps, then each frame is compressed separately.

On the other hand interframe codecs choose a certain ‘set’ of frames and uses ‘similar’ information from subsequent frames to further compress data. Examples are MPEG-2/DVD, h.264, etc. Simply put, the main frame in each set is the key frame.

If every frame is a key frame, then you have an intraframe codec!

All things being equal, intraframe is better than interframe. On the other hand, interframe codecs are smaller in size, hence are used almost exclusively in consumer video channels like DVDs, blu-ray, Internet, broadcast tv, etc.

For more detailed info, try my explanation Here. Hope this helps.

https://www.wolfcrow.com – Workflow information and support for filmmakers, photographers, audiographers and videographers.