Sanyo's little HD1 looks like a decent cam for this kind of operation...and at $700, it's not a terrible loss in comparison if something happens to it. it's HD sith some obvious noise on contrast lines, but good color and decent picture. There's a thread around with a bunch of footage from it.

<edit>fixed model number</edit>

Hello,

I just joined and I'm looking for advice.
I would like to get serious about being in the film industry, but in order to get to the pro 35mm, I have to start with what I can afford... :( I currently have an analog Samsung Hi8 SCL901, that I am trying to sell (its my first camcorder and it's still like new). Once I sell that I plan on getting a Digital Video camera with a budget of $400. I would like to know what would be the best thing to get with the budget I have. Please suggest what you think would be best for me. I want a bit of manual control such as; focus, white balance, and shutter-speed (oh and a mic port would be good too, but not as necessary as the other stuff).
I was looking at the Panasonic PV-GS39. It has almost every thing I want, but is it a good enough camera? I don't know. If you have tried this camera please tell me what you thought about it. Thanks!

~ Amateur in the making, Gabriel.

This summer I'm going to be interviewing my grandmother on film discussing her holocaust experiences. This is intended to become a family heirloom for many generations, so I need SUPERB video and audio, as well as miniDV, which I've heard records more and at higher quality than DVD camcorders. (However, I do not care about the still picture quality)
The camcorders I'm considering are
1. Canon DC40- 4.3 megapixels recording capacity, but reviews say only decent audio. Does that mean it's only decent when recording at a distance, but if I put a mic right next to my grandmother, the quality will be as good as any other camera?
2. PV GS500- 3 CCD, which I hear makes great video. I'm not sure about audio quality though.
3. Sony DVD505, which I think is out b/c of the DVD recording thing.
Can you guys advise on the proper camcorder for this project? These 3 are the only ones I have researched and none seems perfect. Are there any others in this price range (or a little higher) that would be preferable?
Thanks!
Danny..... by the way, which is preferable- the 3CCD or the 4.3 megapixel single CCD? Keep in mind we can always adjust the light in the room to match the camera's strongest performance.

eBay! and/or Craigslist.com

You can find some great deals for digital cams!

But don't expect too many manual controls for $400!


Good Luck!

and let us know what you end up with!

I've used a GS400, got pretty good quality from it, for that price. 3CCD gives you a beautiful color quality, although I've heard the canon optura's with their RGB filter give great color quality too. Pixel qount isn't that important for video.

Maybe a used Canon GM2 or used Panasonic DVC30 or something?

I will. And I have been looking. I have seen a 3ccd camera on craigslist for only $275! But it did not have ANY manual control.

Hey guys,
What's the best CONSUMER camcorder available that's perfect for interviews? I'm kind of new to the digital camcorder world, but I know I want 3ccd and a jack so that I can hook up a mic onto my subject for the best audio quality.
Any help? Thanks!

Whatever camera is paid off and working is my answer. Seriously. Unless you plan on doing spots for broadcast, it really won't matter as much as skill and experience. And accesories. You need the filters, mics, bounce cards, a back up audio recorder, backgrounds are a nice touch... The camera model is really kind of insignificant really.

If you can raise anywhere from $600-800, you could possibly get a Canon GL1 off of eBay. It's worth checking out. ;)

Welcome to the world of video and filmmaking!

With your budget of $400 it is going to be tough to find a camera that offers manual controls, mic and/or headphone jacks and good picture quality. $400 is the heart of the consumer price range and most manufacturers remove manual controls and mic inputs on the consumer cams.

If you purchase new, stick with one of the Panasonic, Canon and Sony consumer cams. These are good first cams for beginners. Look at the CCD size, bigger is better. Check what manual controls it offers and how easy they are to access. Sony puts a lot of the control onto touch screen LCDs which many users do not like.

Make sure you get a MiniDV camcorder. Not DVD or solid state. MiniDV is the way to go.

If you want to get a better camera you are going to have to go to the used market. Try to find one from a seller you can trust. Craigslist would be great because you can go check out the cam in person. If you do use eBay, check the seller's feedback. And ask every question you can think of.

Some of the older entry-level prosumer cams to look for used are: Sony TRV900, Sony TRV950, Panny DV953, Canon GL1. These are all 3CCD cams with manual controls and would be excellent choices.

You can also consider the Panny GS120, GS200, and some of the Canon Opturas. The Pannys are 3CCD, the Opturas are one CCD with RGB filter. They get very good reviews.

Welcome to the world of video and filmmaking!

With your budget of $400 it is going to be tough to find a camera that offers manual controls, mic and/or headphone jacks and good picture quality. $400 is the heart of the consumer price range and most manufacturers remove manual controls and mic inputs on the consumer cams.

If you purchase new, stick with one of the Panasonic, Canon and Sony consumer cams. These are good first cams for beginners. Look at the CCD size, bigger is better. Check what manual controls it offers and how easy they are to access. Sony puts a lot of the control onto touch screen LCDs which many users do not like.

Make sure you get a MiniDV camcorder. Not DVD or solid state. MiniDV is the way to go.

If you want to get a better camera you are going to have to go to the used market. Try to find one from a seller you can trust. Craigslist would be great because you can go check out the cam in person. If you do use eBay, check the seller's feedback. And ask every question you can think of.

Some of the older entry-level prosumer cams to look for used are: Sony TRV900, Sony TRV950, Panny DV953, Canon GL1. These are all 3CCD cams with manual controls and would be excellent choices.

You can also consider the Panny GS120, GS200, and some of the Canon Opturas. The Pannys are 3CCD, the Opturas are one CCD with RGB filter. They get very good reviews.
Ok. Thank you for your help! I'll check these out and see if I can find a way to raise more money...

If you can raise anywhere from $600-800, you could possibly get a Canon GL1 off of eBay. It's worth checking out. ;)

Wow! Thats really cheep! I did not think that was passable to get a GL1 for that price! Thanks for the help! I'll keep an eye out. oh! And something I forgot to ad to the first post was that I plan on doing almost always outdoor shoots. I like to get most of my shoots in forest like areas. I will be doing indoors too, just not as much.

Whatever you do, do not shoot against a blank wall, or with the subject in front of the sun. Pick a nice spot with a interesting but non-distracting background. I see mistakes too often with interviews on TV and it really looks bad. You might want to zoom in a bit for depth of field and make sure the subject is focused. Use a tripod if possible.

I don't really think it matters on which camera is better, but it is more of how you use it.

Since you're going to be doing a lot of outdoor shooting, *make sure* you get a circular polarizer for your camera. A polarizer filter will cut down nearly 100% of the glare you recieve from the sun when shooting outdoors. The filter has the same effect as if you were to wear polarized sunglasses. It is always best to have at least a UV filter on your camera to protect the lens glass (a filter is always easier and cheaper to replace than a lens); but if you're going to be doing most of your shooting outdoors, aside from the camera, a polarizer is the single most valuable tool you could have with you.

There are many companies out there that make polarizers, and their quality varies. For starting out, Tiffen makes a decent polarizer for a very affordable price. What makes the price vary? For one, it's the quality of the glass (as with any lens), and secondly, it's the multi-layer coated layers that are installed in the filters which prevent lens flares, distortion, etc. I was lucky and got a KSM MRC B&W Circular Polarizer on eBay at a very affordable price -- typically, the B&W polarizers range from anywhere from $200-400+.

If you're unsure as to why you'd need a polarizer, go to Google Images and type in 'polarizer' and see how they affect images.

Wow! Thats a big difference! Now that I've seen what it does, I think I'll be buying me one of those! Thanks for the info. I'll start looking for good deals on them.

Hey guys, I know its a newb question so I apologize. I have only done a little research but I am leaving for vacation in about two weeks so I don't have the time to commit to the extensive research I usually do.

I need a camcorder for under or around 2k, maybe even 2500 if I had to stretch it. I really like the size of the HDR-HC3 and the fact that its high def like I have always wanted.

I was just checking some stores out and it seems the cannon gl2 can be had for about 2k and I am pretty sure thats a great camera and I love canon.

I currently have the black panasonic (i forget the model I know some site called it like the black mamba or something). Which I love. I used it maybe three times though and its recording fuzz like intermittently, I have tried head cleaners etc to no avail. So I need to upgrade.

I use this only for family vacations and just usual around the house stuff.

Any information is very much appreciated!

Thanks for everything guys!

I was just checking some stores out and it seems the cannon gl2 can be had for about 2k and I am pretty sure thats a great camera and I love canon.


GL2 is great, but is only standard definition. You will be disappointed if you see HD in your future. For the most professional and I think best buy a that $2,000 range, you might want to consider the Sony A1U. It gives you a lot of Camera, both HDV and Standard Definition for the money, and still is in a small form factor. It sells for around $2,500 but has a $500 rebate. Check with BH Photo.

In addition, Sony is coming out with some new consumer HDV cameras, one recording to an on camera hard disk, the other DVD media. IF I understand it corrently, they may be using the latest codecs too.

HC3 will be more consumer oriented, which is fine if that is what you are looking for.

GL2 is great, but is only standard definition. You will be disappointed if you see HD in your future. For the most professional and I think best buy a that $2,000 range, you might want to consider the Sony A1U. It gives you a lot of Camera, both HDV and Standard Definition for the money, and still is in a small form factor. It sells for around $2,500 but has a $500 rebate. Check with BH Photo.

In addition, Sony is coming out with some new consumer HDV cameras, one recording to an on camera hard disk, the other DVD media. IF I understand it corrently, they may be using the latest codecs too.

HC3 will be more consumer oriented, which is fine if that is what you are looking for.

Thanks Chris,

Very insightful post and exactly what I was looking for. I assume that the A1U is still a consumer friendly camera in auto mode so others in the fam can use it?

I would love to get one that records to hdd, but I will not be seeing that before I go away =(.

Thanks!

Thanks Chris,

Very insightful post and exactly what I was looking for. I assume that the A1U is still a consumer friendly camera in auto mode so others in the fam can use it?

I would love to get one that records to hdd, but I will not be seeing that before I go away =(.

Thanks!

Check out Douglas Spotted Eagle Article here:

http://www.sundancemediagroup.com/articles/A1U/HVR-A1U.htm

Check out Douglas Spotted Eagle Article here:

http://www.sundancemediagroup.com/articles/A1U/HVR-A1U.htm

Nice read, thanks for pointing that out! It seems that this may be my best choice!

BTW, do you happen to know how they compare to eachother in size? The HC3 seems a bit smaller?

Was your promo shot with the PD 150/170's cameras?? Did you do any post clean-up of the video or was it all raw and just edited for content??

Thanks

Gene...

The promo for the show on the website was shot with a Sony PD-150, PD-170 and a Canon XL1s. Everything we do is color corrected in post. I don't think there's ever a time when something doesn't get fixed along the way, unless we absolutely run out of time. Two of us edit the show and we're using Final Cut Pro.

And if there's enough time, I even do secondary spot corrections in After Effects to lighten or darken specific areas in a shot.

Thanks for the quick response:) We have access to both the PD150 and PD170. We're going to do some test shots this week. Any suggestions on settings? or do you use full auto mode?

We really appreciate your help on this:)

Gene...

The promo for the show on the website was shot with a Sony PD-150, PD-170 and a Canon XL1s. Everything we do is color corrected in post. I don't think there's ever a time when something doesn't get fixed along the way, unless we absolutely run out of time. Two of us edit the show and we're using Final Cut Pro.

And if there's enough time, I even do secondary spot corrections in After Effects to lighten or darken specific areas in a shot.

Any suggestions on settings? or do you use full auto mode?

We really appreciate your help on this:)

Glad to help.

I usually have the audio controls set to auto.

Everything else is on manual. I can't emphasize enough how important it is to use manual exposure, white balance and focus. There isn't a camera out there that can accurately figure out if it's a light object against a dark background or a dark object against a bright background.

Camera metering systems always try to get everything to an average brightness and the result is dark faces against back-lighted backgrounds or burned out skin tones against dark backgrounds.

And automatic focus systems will often focus on the wrong target or annoyingly hunt focus during a shot.

In 24 years of doing newspaper photography I've always turned off every automatic feature on my cameras, having learned to not trust them with anything critical. When I got into video production, I did the same thing although I do rely on limiters to keep my audio tracks from getting blown out by loud transients.

Speaking of audio: Get a good wireless lav system and replace the on-camera stock mic with something that has better performance and good wind protection. I have a couple of samples of shots online in which I was using an Audio Technica AT-4051a as an on-camera mic. It's worked very well for me on a number of occasions, especially since the talent is often fairly close to the camera and it's usually a two-shot. A shotgun mic's coverage is too tight for this, and it's also easily fouled up by wind noise.

Sample clip of two guys talking about a lure:
http://www.hawaiigoesfishing.com/videos/at4051a_sample.mp4

Audio sample of string quartet from 7 feet away:
http://www.hawaiigoesfishing.com/videos/4051sample.aif

Some nice weather covers for the camera are made by Kata. Easily put on and allows easy access to the controls. I have one for my Panasonic HVX-200 and like it a lot better than the one made by Petrol or PortaBrace.

Having a monopod helps. Especially if you need to be able to move around a lot and can't drag a tripod around all the time.

And be sure to monitor the audio constantly. I use a pair of Etymotics that I got from an Apple Store which are comfortable, easily inserted into the ear, have good fidelity, and isolates me from external noise.

Good luck with your show!

Hi there

I've been using a Z1 to shoot a series of web videos on carp fishing, as well as a couple of longer 1 hour documentary style films again on fishing.

It is a great camera for my needs, lovely quality, excellent audio, light and handles nicely in often fast moving situations...

It will deliver better quality than the PD170 giving you the benefit of 16:9, which to my mind is a far, far nicer format for video, and will be pretty much standard pretty soon, if not already on many channels.

Regards
Gareth

Gareth,

Can you post some examples of your video? I would like to compare the two:)
We only have access to the SOny PD150/170 and the sony HDR-HC1 as well as the lavalier mics. This is all the rental house near us has:( We are hesitant to spend a large amount of $$ until we are satisfied with the results, etc

Thanks

I'm looking to purchase a camera which will get good quality video in a rock concert type atmosphere. I would guess this means great low-light, but also the ability to deal with the stage lights etc. I'm not terribly concerned about the audio it will pick up, as I will be patching an audio recorder directly into the board.

I'm living a bit in the past when it comes to equipment, as I'm just returning to a hobby I had 10 years ago, so please bare with my newb questions!

Thank you,


Evan

Evan,

This is a pretty broad subject. It might help to know what price range you are considering.

The problem is that we (members of DVi) are mostly partial to what we have chosen as our camera. The result is that most would suggest what we own.

Are some cameras better than others for specific tasks? Probably, but once a shooter gets used to a particular camera, they know how to adjust for that task with the tools they have at hand.

Chris Hurd and several others did a "shoot out":
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=64472&highlight=hurd+shootout

The net result was that each camera had advantages and disadvantages and that the creativity of the shooter was more important than the camera.

My advice would be to look at cameras that fall within the price range that you feel comfortable with and come back with a "Which is better" post, listing the two or three that you are considering. Individuals that own the cameras you ask about are likely to give you their opinion about how their camera will or will not fit your need.

I know this didn't help much but maybe it's a starting place.

It's been my experience that most concerts have adequate light even for cameras that aren't real good in low light. If you're in a bar or some other place where it isn't a well known act you might have problems with not enough light but all of the big acts I've shot had plenty of light. The lights are going to be pointed at the band too so you shouldn't have problems from lights that are too bright pointed at the camera as long as you aren't shooting from behind the band. I think people would forgive glare in the video if you did shoot some from behind the band.

Thank you both for the advice, I will do some research. Unfortuantely most of the footage I will be getting will be bar/club/small venue rather than stadium. I'm not worried about small venue concerts, as they typically have descent lighting -- it's the bars and pubs I'm worried about.

The camera comparison thread seems to be more about HD(V?), and I am looking to purchase DV equipment -- unless I can be convinced that HD and HDV cameras provide a significant improvment into the low-light recording situation.

In the meantime, to get more specific, I have been looking into the XL2, but I have heard that it's ability to handle low-light situations isn't the greatest -- I really have no experience to back this up -- does anyone have any advice on this?

...

The camera comparison thread seems to be more about HD(V?), and I am looking to purchase DV equipment -- unless I can be convinced that HD and HDV cameras provide a significant improvment into the low-light recording situation.

...

HD/HDV cameras tend to have poorer low-light abilities versus SD, not better, so they definitely won't offer any improvement in that regard. However the better image clarity and detail, even if the material ultimately is to be downrezzed to SD for final delivery, may make up for the higher light requirements.

Hello folks!

I've been working in professional video for 20 years and have been teaching it for 13 of those years. I've decided to start up a wedding business (full-time... I'll also take on other projects and continue teaching part-time). I have owned a XL1 for 6 years or so. I only use it as a personal cam for mostly shooting live music. I have never been happy with the XL1 in low light. The black level is way too low on that cam but it sure does get beautiful pictures given the right light. Since I'll be doing many weddings I want to have 2 cams that will work well together (in low light). I'm thinking of either the PD170 (does that shoot in 16:9?) or a VX2100 (pretty sure that doesn't shoot 16:9). Or perhaps I should consider a newer Canon to work with my XL1 (wasn't the black level issue fixed on the XL1-S?). I guess I'm thinking I can use whatever low-light cam I choose as the main (wide) shot and use the XL-1 for close ups. Another thing I could consider would be buying 2 low-light cams for weddings. Any thoughts on this are appreciated. I would have posted this to the 'acquisition' board but I figured I'd put it here since people that do weddings have many experiences in poor lighting situations. :)

-Don Bazley
Ithaca, NY

Im not sure I can be any help but i do own a pd170p. You will need a camera that can nearly match its low light capabilities unless you plan to use a light on the camera. The light option is not always apropiate though. Also if you are thinking of spending that amount of cash you should also consider hd format in the future. A year or two down the line it will be all the rage and many will by then have hd dvd's and want hd. I was looking at buying a sony hvr z1 and using its sd capabilities until the market opens up in a year or so time. I know this camera is £1000 more than the pd170p but it may be worth it as you wont have to buy it two years down the line and find the pd170p is next to worthless.

The pd170p does shoot in native 16:9 so does the z1. Sorry I cant help with the cannon cameras as I did not like the look of them.

ps I have to admit I love the pd170p but the z1 out preforms it but not in low light siturations. My thinking is use the pd170p for the low light siturations and the z1 for all other shoots.

Just my two cents worth as they say.

Sorry I just realised you are from america, the prices of cameras there are alot cheaper than here so disrecard the price differance.

Thank you Robert. I appreciate what you are saying about HD. After giving it quite a bit of thought I think I've decided to stay with SD for now and buy a new HD camera (and edit system) about 3 years from now. From what I hear, the HD cams are generally not very good in low light. I will be doing mostly weddings so the low light issue is very important. I am concerned about matching the low-light performance of the PD170 (if that is what I end up getting). Maybe for now I need to buy 2 PD170s and save cash over the next couple of years to go HD. Like I said in my post, I may be able to get one PD170, use that as the main cam and do close-ups with the XL1. (?)

The HD transition issue gets me to thinking about what I would do once I got a HD camera. I'm wondering what it will look like to mix HD with a SD camera. I sure don't want to have to buy 2 HD cams when I do upgrade. Have you heard any thoughts on this issue?

-Don
(an American fan of Irish music and Guiness) :)

In sd mode i think it would be reasonably easy to match the two though i have heard it being said that even in sd mode the z1 gives a slightly better picture in the right light conditions of course. I'm in a better condition to you as i already own a pd170, and am now able to upgrade to a hd knowing that i have a camera that can shoot well in low light when i need too. This will become obsolete of course once hd hits as sd cant match hd quality. I hope when hd hits that i will then be able to buy a camera in hd formate with the same capabilities as the pd170 in low light, that is my game plan any hows. Hoping there is technology out there for that to happen and that sony reconize that we need a camera like the pd170 and it's capabilities. My fear is that sony will sell it as a feature and expect a lot of money for it.

As for buying two hd cameras down the line that is what will probely happen, as like i said hd out preforms sd and is very noticable if you put them side by side or a clip back to back. Don't want to influence your designation but hd is coming, and unless you think you can make a lot of money in the next three years to buy two hd cameras or are able to still sell sd formate to your costumers, then it has to be weighed up.

If you are quick with editing also think of doing commercials in the slack months of the year for extra income and tape transfers to dvd, it all adds up. I offer raw footage to be taken at the wedding then edited down the line when the couple have more money this also helps in the winter time as this is when i will decide to edit such footage.

Any body else got advise as i know there is for more experianced guys and girls out there.

Hello folks!

I've been working in professional video for 20 years and have been teaching it for 13 of those years. I've decided to start up a wedding business (full-time... I'll also take on other projects and continue teaching part-time). I have owned a XL1 for 6 years or so. I only use it as a personal cam for mostly shooting live music. I have never been happy with the XL1 in low light. The black level is way too low on that cam but it sure does get beautiful pictures given the right light. Since I'll be doing many weddings I want to have 2 cams that will work well together (in low light). I'm thinking of either the PD170 (does that shoot in 16:9?) or a VX2100 (pretty sure that doesn't shoot 16:9). Or perhaps I should consider a newer Canon to work with my XL1 (wasn't the black level issue fixed on the XL1-S?). I guess I'm thinking I can use whatever low-light cam I choose as the main (wide) shot and use the XL-1 for close ups. Another thing I could consider would be buying 2 low-light cams for weddings. Any thoughts on this are appreciated. I would have posted this to the 'acquisition' board but I figured I'd put it here since people that do weddings have many experiences in poor lighting situations. :)

-Don Bazley
Ithaca, NY

Don:

First off, I don't think either the PD or the VX can be termed 16:9. The are native 4:3. They have a 16:9 mode, but it will provide a picture with reduced resolution. I have come up with a better picture using a letter box added in camera at the time of the shoot, or in post.

That being said, the VX or PD are still great for your wedding business. They are easier to handle, and seem to me to be easier to set up and shoot. I have to admit I have been Sony oriented, but my original thought had been to buy the XL1s four years ago when I went with the VX2000, and I haven't regretted. My brother was shooting XL1 s at the time, and we shot simultaneously on projects since, and again, I am not dissatisfied.

Mind you, I don't do this for a living, only as an avocation. But this weekend, I had an experience with the VX2000 that shows it is still a workhorse to be counted on. Some friends called me in an emergency about a musical they had going on at a local theater. A videographer had backed out, and they needed someone to shoot in an emergency. I took my FX1 and my VX2000, figuring that I would shoot both with my wife. When we got there, things were such that we could only set up one camera. At rehearsal, it became clear that lighting was going to be a challenge. The spotlight was very dim. I tried the FX1 wide open and with 12 gain at 60fps, and the video just wasn't there. I then tried the VX2000, and got a lot better result. Ultimately, I used the VX2000 exclusively, and it did a great job under trying circumstances. Obviously if I had been called on earlier, I would have suggested changes in lighting to handle the situation better (that may be why the other guy bolted), but this on the fly deal really worked out decently.

First, let me say that I realize there has been much said on the topic of this post. I have searched this site quite a bit and have found lots of great info. Since my question involves different cams and DV vs HD issues, I figured this is the appropriate place to post (?). While I have read many comments, I guess I'm hoping to hear some folks' opinions on my specific situation...

I've been in pro video for 20 years and have been teaching it for 13 of those years. I've decided that I am going to start a wedding video business. I'm trying to get as much input as possible before I buy a new camera (or possibly 2 but I'm hoping to get away with buying one). I've owned a XL1 for about 8 years. I only use it as my personal "play" camera. I love the images it gets given good light but it sure isn't so good in low-light situations (although I have done several weddings with it). The contrast issues of the XL1 have always bugged me, but it sure looks nice if you can control the lighting (which you cant at weddings and club music shows:) My question is, how is the FX1 in lowlight? I was thinking either the FX1 or perhaps getting PD170 and going HDV in 2-3 years. I guess at this point I'd mostly shoot in DV mode since I don't sense a real demand for HDV weddings yet (maybe once HD DVD players come out).

I'm also trying (hoping) I can make do with buying just one cam for now. I'm hoping whatever I get I can use that as the main camera and use my XL1 for close-ups at the ceremony. (?)

Any opinions are appreciated.

-Don Bazley
Ithaca, NY


(Moderator: I posted a *similar* post on the "weddings/special interest" but I only got a few replies. I hope this isn't considered a "cross post". If so, I apologize. I'm just trying to get as much info as possible. Perhaps my original thread can be deleted?)

Hi Don and welcome to DVinfo,

I've merged your other thread with this one and am keeping it in the Open DV forum so you'll get some more exposure. We discourage cross-posting because it leads to parallel threads which cover the same material and fragmented discussions are difficult to follow.

Looks like you already got some good responses in the earlier thread. The FX1 won't be as good as the VX or PD in low light, but it isn't bad. The black stretch feature on the Z1 helps a bit with low light however. For discussion of low light issues with these cameras, see the following:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=54414

I haven't used an XL1 so I'm not sure what the contrast issues are, but all DV cameras have problems with high contrast scenes where there's a big range from light to dark. Shooting live performances is problematic because of this.... you have to decide whether you want to expose for the bright areas and lose the dark parts of the scene, or you can show the dark areas and blow out the bright ones.

If you hang around the wedding/event forum you'll see that the VX and PD series still seem to dominate there, although we're starting to see people shoot HD. I own a VX-2000 and it is a great camera in many ways. A couple days ago I had to dub a tape of a performance that I shot with the VX-2000 four years ago. Watching it I was reminded just how nice an image that camera could deliver. But for me the deal breaker is that I like working in 16:9, and those cameras do a very poor job at that because of their low resolution CCD's. Wide shots will look like they're out of focus.

I like my Z1 a lot, but I don't shoot weddings. Some of our really dark operas are a challenge for the Z1, but a 12 dB gain boost doesn't look so bad. But another issue with the Z1 is that the lens favors the wide end and the telephoto is lacking (about 300mm equivalent in 35mm still camera terms). If you're shooting from very far away you may find this disappointing. I ended up getting a Century 1.6x teleconvertor to help with this, but it's expensive. There really don't seem to be any other decent options for teleconvertors for the FX1 and Z1 unforuntately (unless something new just came along).

Good luck with the new business; let us know what you end up buying.

Thanks for merging and moving the thread Boyd. It does seem that the PDs and VXs are still dominating the wedding scene. I'm really still on the fence. I will be going to the Society of Broadcast Engineers trade show near Syracuse in a few weeks. All the dealers (Sony, Canon, JVC) will be there showing their latest toys (and I will be drooling:). I think I will wait until I see what they have to offer before I make any choice. I'm assuming I'll also be able to compare the cams in terms of lighting.

Many people seem to be saying that it's be stupid (poor word choice:) to buy a SD cam at this point. The consensus seems to be that even when shooting in SD mode cams like the FX-1 gice a better image. I hope to make a choice within the month. I'll keep y'all posted on what I choose.

BTW: I was bidding on a FX1 on e-bay over the weekend. It came with all the toys I'd need (wireless mic, cam light, tripod) and was selling for about $3300. I lost the bidding war but ended up with an e-mail saying I could buy it if I want to because the orginal winner of the bid didn't come through. It all sounded fishy to me so I never responded to the e-mail.

-Don Bazley

I too am in the process of deciding what cameras and other equipment will be needed to produce outdoor video. Specifically, a fishing show like no other on the market at this time. I will need a minimum of two cameras with one being able to do underwater video. My intent is to use HD. Not looking for top of the line equipment to start with but also do not want to get junk that won't get me by until better equipment can be purchased.

I am not a professional but aspire to become one. So get me on the right road to success equipment wise.

Thank You in Advance

I use the Canon XL2 and can fully recommend it, especially as it allows the use of extra lenses, such as telephoto extremes using EOS adapters or Les Bosher adapters for Canon/Nikkor/FD lenses etc, wide angle adapters such as Red Eye .7X, Canon 3X wide angle lens, and the new X6 HD lens etc...and the 16:9 format of the XL2 is a boon, with no loss in quality.

I agree with Dean that the XL1s humidity detector was slightly too sensitive, but the XL2 seems far better in this respect and I've used it now in extreme conditions of rain, fog and mist.

I also use the XL2 with 20X lens + .7X Red Eye lens inside a Scubacam underwater housing for sub-surface filming.

Go to http://www.wilderness-photo.co.uk for pics of some of my setups for filming fishing/wildlife/outdoor subjects

I have filmed with Gareth Watkins in France, and he has also had superb results using his Sony FX1 and Z1.

Another option is the Canon XL-H1, or the new Canon XH A1/G1 cameras that are similar in size to the Z1 but with a few more options. I actually prefer the larger size of the XL2/H1, especially for off-the-shoulder work, and the 20X IS really helps in many situations (except on a tripod or fast pans).

Here is a link to videos made by Gareth on his Z1, with some of the footage also on my XL2:

http://www.anglinglines.co.uk/docs/videozone/maurepaire2/500.html

http://www.anglinglines.co.uk/docs/videonews/webcast1/500.html

Hello,

I need an advice on a video camera. My budget is US$1400-$1500 and I'm looking into the used equipment.

The main use of the video camera woule be some documentaries with some snow or white sand, some indooor shots to do virtual tours of villas.

This is what I have found so far:
Sony DSR-PDX10
Sony DSR-VX2000
Canon XL1, not the S
JVC JY-HD10, although not too many manual settings.

I would really appreciate your feedback on these items, and probably on others for the type of work I will be doing. Plus, will there be any new video camera release before the end of this year to bring some current prices more affordable?

Thank you very much for your help.

Best regards,

Eric Galton.

I have a VX-2000 and PDX-10, so let me offer a few contrasts between these possible choices. The PDX-10 is a much newer design and has some significant upgrades from the VX-2000. It has a much nicer (larger, brighter, higher res) LCD screen. Also has a black and white viewfinder like the PD-150. I find the viewfinder on the VX-2000 pretty terrible, it's very low resolution. It would also give you DVCAM recording, which doesn't improve the quality but it is less susceptible to tape dropouts.

Of course the PDX-10 has XLR inputs and a mono mike which isn't fantastic but is much more useful than the VX-2000's stereo mike. For me the most important factor is the PDX-10's high res CCD's which let it shoot native 16:9 which looks surprisingly good. The VX-2000 just chops off the top and bottom of a 4:3 frame to create 16:9 and it looks very soft. The PDX-10 is part of Sony's professional line, which means you should get faster service turnaround. Not sure how much of a factor this will be in a used camera which is no longer on the market though.

Now the VX-2000 also has its advantages though. The overall image quality in 4:3 mode is more pleasing to me, which I think has to do the the 1/3" chips vs the PDX-10 which has tiny 1/5" chips. The ergonomics are slightly better on the VX-2000 I think, but not a big deal. But I prefer the separate iris wheel on the VX-2000 vs the PDX-10 which uses the menu wheel to adjust everything. However the most important thing the VX-2000 has to offer is it's low light capability. If you need to shoot in a lot of REALLY dark places then it will really come through for you.

We are planning to shoot our first full feature late 2nd quarter next year. Until now, most of our shooting has been on dsr500, z1, dvx100a etc. Admittedly, movie production for big screen is a new territory. But we’ll forge ahead.
I planned to jump to the red camera in the spring and raise the bar for the movie but we need to do some seasonal nature shots for the movie among other things in the coming months. Would our z1 cut it, or should we jump to an xdcam hd for now? Or the 24p of Sony’s new camera's? Are we likly to notice a huge gap from the red on a theatre screen? To the point of "oops"
I know renting is an option but I anticipated regular occasional use that may make it more feasible to buy, then sell upon the red purchase. We also have a doc were working on that could benefit from the lift.
Any suggestions?

" jump to an xdcam hd for now"

if you have the $$ for Xdcam ..

then IMO take a look at the SI camera ...

http://siliconimaging.com/DigitalCinema/

http://indiefilmlive.blogspot.com/

I think Don's choice is good...

But I wouldn't shoot any footage that I would have to inner cut within the same scene with the Red... looking at the 4k image I'd say it'd be hard to match... but scenes between scenes such as nature shots or int. and ext. could work...

The "right" camera is more than just the specs - does it fit into your post workflow, does it shoot in compatible modes, can you intercut on the same timeline without painful renders, does it fit in the spaces you need to shoot, is the light sensitivity close enough, etc. etc. etc. Carefully evaluate ALL your needs for the project - the images generated, the shooting issues, the post issues, etc. This is a good place to discuss those issues, I might humbly suggest hdforindies.com (hey Chris, am I breaking rules here?) for some other issues raised, and I do consulting on these kinds of issues as well.

-mike

...and cool as the SI camera is, I don't think it is shipping yet - AFAIK, still in beta, and they are Working On Stuff right now last I heard before IBC.

Geoff Boyle is shooting with just the mini-head right now on a feature project.

-mike

Mike, the Silicon Image camera is shipping in the "mini" configuration, this unit is teathered a laptop for capture (we used the mini prototype for other short http://www.cineform.com/48hour/index.htm.) Not high volumes yet as the sensors are still "rare", expect news of full production in November. So for filmmakers needing a RAW workflow today, Silicon Imaging is shipping as we are shipping the editing tools to match.

My apologies David, I was not aware. Got a press release or link I can LINK?

-Mike