Wireless lav or Shotgun -Can only afford one right now

[Cliff Etzel]

I'm about ready to make a purchasing choice and I'm hoping I can get some expert advice on which option to go with.

I can only afford to purchase either a Wireless Lav or a pro level shotgun mic and I'm not sure which way to go.

Since I work with compact video cameras - I specialize in web video journalism and short form doc projects, I'm torn between which mic will provide me with the most use for what I do.

My choices based upon my budget are:

Shotgun mic: Ambient Audio TinyMike (B&H & Full version with tiny mixer)

Wireless av: Sennheiser Evolution G2 100 Series

Any advice on which more experienced shooters feel is the best way to go given my circumstances based upon this type of work would sure be appreciated.

[John Stakes]

It seems to me like vocals are what's most important to you at the moment. What kind of camera are you shooting with? You might be able to get by with the on-camera mic and just have good vocals. The lav you have picked out is a good choice.

-JS

[Edward Phillips]

I say the wireless lav. If you're shooting solo you pretty much can only camera mount the shotgun or use a c-stand. With the wirless lav, you can interview, you can do walk and talks, they also work well for doing voice overs later.

The drawback is if you're doing some live event recording and cannot mic multiple speakers or any specific person at all. Then the shotgun would be a better choice.

I've used the G2 100 series and it's a great mic. I've even clipped it onto a mic stand with a pop guard to do quick voice overs.

Another thing to consider is that sometimes it's hard to mic someone with the wireless lav. Suit jackets are great but sometimes it's tricky to mic a woman in a dress and find a spot to hang the transmitter.

[Cliff Etzel]

Yeah - I'm shooting solo 99.9% of the time - I work with a couple of HC7's, trying to keep my kit as compact as possible - backpack video journalism is my thing. I am developing my gear to fit in my backpack so that when covering any project, I can literally carry everything when shooting sans lighting gear.

I have a basic Azden SMX-10 stereo mic that has been ok to work with - the audio it records typically needs little done in post so far so I'm not as concerned about that since I can use that for recording on camera as needed and if I need to put it on a boom, I can do that, but the wireless end of things is what I was most concerned about but wanted to make sure I didn't make a purchasing decision that I would find wasn't the best option for my work currently.

I've considered renting the wireless lav but the city I live in doesn't have much available rental wise and would hate to have a project to shoot and find the only Sennheiser wireless lav in town is rented out for the weekend when I need it.

[Edward Phillips]

You will also have to factor the cost of a XLR to mini converter as well. Search B&H for Beachtek. I've never used it but Sony has a Bluetooth wireless mic with mini jack input. That may be better suited for your camera and portability since the beachtek will add to your backpack space.

[Cliff Etzel]

I've looked at the beachtek adapters, from my perspective currently, the jury is still out on how functional one of these would be for the kinds of work I currently shoot.

You're right, it will add to the amount of gear I need to carry, but the backpack I use has sufficient space to carry an item like that in addition to my other gear (I use a Tenba P263 photo backpack)

[Steve House]

My suggestion is to consider a hard-wired lav before going wireless. Wireless is the option of last resort in most cases - if the interview is sit-down with a locked down camera there's no reason at all to go wireless. If you forgo the wireless transmitter and receiver you might find you can afford BOTH the shotgun and the wired lav mics.

As for an XLR/mini adapter, I've recently had the chance to examine one of the new Juicedlink units and they look like a viable alternative to Beachtek. Haven't used it yet so can't speak directly to performance issues but it's looking promising.

[Cliff Etzel]

Hi Steve - I do already have a wired lav, but much of my work doesn't allow for locked down camera, sit down type shots. Very much hand held, run & gun type shooting.

I wish it were that simple.

[Michael Liebergot]

Originally Posted by Steve House

My suggestion is to consider a hard-wired lav before going wireless. Wireless is the option of last resort in most cases - if the interview is sit-down with a locked down camera there's no reason at all to go wireless. If you forgo the wireless transmitter and receiver you might find you can afford BOTH the shotgun and the wired lav mics.

As for an XLR/mini adapter, I've recently had the chance to examine one of the new Juicedlink units and they look like a viable alternative to Beachtek. Haven't used it yet so can't speak directly to performance issues but it's looking promising.

Steve, just so you know, I ahve tested the Juicedlink boxes against the Beachtek boxes, including the new DXA-6HD with built in pre amp, and the Juicedlink boxes are quieter and seem to perform better.

The internal pre amps seem to really keep the noise floor down and even the channel selection is superior, as instead of only having a stereo or mono to select from you have the choice of selecting L/C/R for each channel. This seems to keep the noise level down as well.

Also for a small camera like the HC7 it will be a better fit for the camera. For a larger camera like a FX1, the box is a little short (I prefer the longer DXA-6HD), and as such might cause some tipping if the camera is placed on the ground.

Basically, for the money the base CX211 (without phantom) or CX231 (with phantom) is by far a better value than a Beachtek box.

[Steve House]

Originally Posted by Michael Liebergot

Steve, just so you know, I ahve tested the Juicedlink boxes against the Beachtek boxes, including the new DXA-6HD with built in pre amp, and the Juicedlink boxes are quieter and seem to perform better.

The internal pre amps seem to really keep the noise floor down and even the channel selection is superior, as instead of only having a stereo or mono to select from you have the choice of selecting L/C/R for each channel. This seems to keep the noise level down as well.

Also for a small camera like the HC7 it will be a better fit for the camera. For a larger camera like a FX1, the box is a little short (I prefer the longer DXA-6HD), and as such might cause some tipping if the camera is placed on the ground.

Basically, for the money the base CX211 (without phantom) or CX231 (with phantom) is by far a better value than a Beachtek box.

At first glance I agree - I have a 431 sitting on my desk awaiting me to find some time to try it out even as we speak.

[Michael Liebergot]

Originally Posted by Steve House

At first glance I agree - I have a 431 sitting on my desk awaiting me to find some time to try it out even as we speak.

I have the CX211 and the CX431 as well.
I am still trying to find a use for the CX431 and using it with one camera.
I tried filming a recital using all 4 channels fed into my FX1. I liked the idea of trying to use it as an onbaord mixer into the camera.

I took one wireless to CH1 (panned left), one wireless to CH2 (panned right), and a shotgun mic fed into CH3/4 (AT822) for ambient audio (panned Center).

It sounded good in practice and worked pretty well, but there seemed to be a few times that I got a little bit of phasing with my audio.

Overall though the unit worked great, and was extremely quiet.

[Ty Ford]

Stephen, Michael,

Did you buy these or were they sent to you?

Regards,

Ty Ford