Whatcha think?

[X o Zelig o X]

Okay... I have a decision to make. This summer, a friend and I are going to be working out behinds off to raise money for a camera. We've concluded that with our combined forces, we can make enough for a canon GL2 halfway through summer. If we did that, we could slow down our hours for the other half of the summer and buy lighting and mics and such stuff and still have time to film. OOOOR we can work straight through the summer and get the canon XL2. Its a hard choice because the XL2 is the camera i REAAAAAAAAAAAAAALY want but we wouldnt be able to get it until the very end of the summer, and there'd be no extra money for accesories.

Opinions?

[Yammeryammeryammer]

Sounds like you are virtually exactly where I was a year ago. A friend, money to get a GL, but if we worked we could get an XL1... So what we ended up doing was borrowing the money to get the camera at the beginning of the summer, and paid it off as we worked and used it for videography and creative stuff all summer. I don't know if this is really an option for you but I am a fan of the XL1, and the XL2 looks fine as well. The GL2 has got nothing really wrong with it, nice camera and you would get a few extras too. You may want to consiver a Panasonic DVX1000 because it can shoot 24P and a tad cheaper than the XL2. Regardless, I would recommend you figure out what you really want, and remember that this time next year it won't really have made a whole lot of difference... in hindsight I probably shouldn't have been so wooed by the interchangable XL1 lenses and gone for the DVX1000...

And does anyone know anything about that HDV cam sony put out a few months ago, it is in this price range too, and I was wondering if anyone has had a chance to figure out if this option would be worth exploring?

[sn-films]

Unproven hardware... first generation software... there's always the price to pay with "bleeding-egde" technology.

Sony actually has two HDV (HiDef Video) cameras: the HDR-FX1 and the HVR-Z1 that came out this month. As a filmmaking tool, you would probably want to skip the FX1 and get the Z1, since the Z1 has the XLR mic inputs in addition to a host of other high-end goodies.

Of course, there's always the question of content delivery. I've read a few reviews on the cameras, and I saw one in particular that was very interesting. They were comparing the picture quality of the FX1 to the PD-170. At standard DV resolution, there was almost no discernable difference in picture quality between the footage from the PD-170 and the HD footage from the FX1 crunched down to SD. What I took away from that was that unless you are going to deliver the final product in HD or film resolution, there's no reason to get either of these HDV cameras.

Now, bear with me a moment. I had videotaped a band's performance a few years back. It was a 2-camera shoot with one camera at the back of the venue on a tripod, and I was shooting hand-held with a second camera at the foot of the stage. I was reaching critical-mass on storage on my computer, so I took advantage of a little feature in MediaStudio Pro. Instead of capturing the footage as AVI files, I captured the footage as full MPEG2 files. Seemed like a great plan. However, when I was editing the performance the instant playback was always preceeded by a 5 to 10 second delay each time I clicked the preview button. This doesn't sound like much, but it really becomes frustrating very quickly.

This is pure conjecture, but I would imagine that you would experience the same thing editing HDV on a high-end computer, since the HD files are really just glorified MPEG's with the same bitrate as a standard DV1 AVI file.

[miker]

Opinions?

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Unless you have a business plan to make some money back by purchasing a prosumer camcorder, why not settle for a much cheaper single-CCD camcorder and a sennheiser MKE300?

I'd just step back a moment and question what you intend to get out of it other than unwanted attention in public places.

[assyrix]

Originally posted by sn-films:
Sony actually has two HDV (HiDef Video) cameras: the HDR-FX1 and the HVR-Z1 that came out this month. As a filmmaking tool, you would probably want to skip the FX1 and get the Z1, since the Z1 has the XLR mic inputs in addition to a host of other high-end goodies.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Skip Sony and go for the JVC JY-HD10. Same shit but cheaper and got XLR as well. I have used JVC kit before and their pro stuff holds up remarkably well.

http://www.jvcpro.co.uk/prod/item/in...l?item=JY-HD10

[TJ_the_director]

I was wondering if anyone has had a chance to figure out if this option would be worth exploring?

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">for one thing, you'll have to find editing software that will handle it, not to mention a more robust computer. A lot of equipment can't handle/run that format yet. I'd say let others with cash to burn work all the bugs out.

[X o Zelig o X]

Unless you have a business plan to make some money back by purchasing a prosumer camcorder, why not settle for a much cheaper single-CCD camcorder and a sennheiser MKE300?

I'd just step back a moment and question what you intend to get out of it other than unwanted attention in public places.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Well, really i want the picture quality, manual controls, better lenses, larger weight, and the XLR ports. Its the best camera im going to be able to get for a while. Dont think that i want to get it because i have cash to burn and want a new toy. Actually im quite broke, and I want to get serious with filmmaking.

[richard.fisher]

Remember that for the people reading this board, an extra 5-10% picture quality is a massive difference, however I imagine that the majority of people who will see your work will not make films themselves. They will be used to seeing films shot on film with a budget of $60m to $200m. For them, as good as your camera is, the extra couple of percent you get with higher end MiniDV cameras matters very little. There response will broadly fall into one of two catergories, those who think what you have done looks shit compared to 'I, Robot' and those who are impressed just by the fact they are in a cinema watching a movie one of their mates/family made. Luckily most people will fall into the latter catergory.

Also remember that anything you produce will be as bad as the weakest link (no, not the BBC2 quiz show) and not as good as the strongest link. If you have amazing equipment, cast, crew, and production values but a crap script, this will be what makes your movie crap. Applying this logic (which you are welcome to disagree with) to the equipment. If it looks great and sounds shit, it will be shit. If it looks good (but not great) and sounds good, then it will be good. Whatever you do (again, what the fuck do i know, feel free to disagree) don't sacrifice getting a boom microphone (there is another active thread about mics elsewhere on the board). A boom mic is essential. Not only will it give you better sound than the onboard mic, but you can move the mic away from the camera (where it picks up all kinds of unwanted sounds) and to the actors, which is where you want it. Again, as before, with sound, the principal of the weakest link applies. You have to consider the journey of the sound all the way from the actors larynx (not all, but most of the sound you record will be dialogue) onto the tape. Therefore you need a good mic, positioned well, in an environment as controlled as possible to cut out environmental sounds such as wind and traffic (if you want traffic sounds, add a wild track later). You also need good cables, as a great mic attatched to a great sound recording device (camera, DAT etc.) by a shitty cable, will sound shitty. Cables are relatively inexpensive when considering your total equipment expenditure, and from bitter experience I can recomend having two of each cable you will need, as they can and will brake.

[Nigel]

Here is an idea....

You and your friend work your asses off all summer long. Whilst doing so you write a script that is tight and has no flaws.

Then at the end of the summer you form a production company using the money you saved then the LLC rents--Read that again rents. The best gear you can afford to shoot the script with be it a CineAlta, HDW-750 or Varicam along with lights and grip equipment.

That way you are using money toward the project and not throwing it into a camera that will lose value as soon as you leave the store with it. If you can get together the cash to buy an XL2 then you could rent a HDW-750 for a couple weeks.

Good Luck

<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ February 18, 2005 11:46 AM: Message edited by: Nigel ]</font>

[peter_g]

At standard DV resolution, there was almost no discernable difference in picture quality between the footage from the PD-170 and the HD footage from the FX1 crunched down to SD. What I took away from that was that unless you are going to deliver the final product in HD or film resolution, there's no reason to get either of these HDV cameras.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I made that same observation myself, sn-films. You?re absolutely right.

Nigel, I?m surprised that you of all people would recommend renting a high definition camera. Huh? Aren?t you always talking about shooting high definition in favour of film being a false economy?