I am looking for a video camera to use to try and teach myself... well how to shoot. I know little to nothing about video production outside of home videos. I am looking for something that is versital meaning I would like it do do just about anything well. It doesnt have to do everything the best but good enough to produce usable video.

I plan to use it like I said to learn, but to learn for the purpose of creating website videos, small town (lower quality) commercials and area tourism videos (waterfalls, people skiing, wildlife, etc.), action sports videos, green screen shoots, and also to use with 3d animations created with 3ds max.

If it helps,

I have the Adobe CS3 production suite to use for production and editing etc.

I have a budget between $2000 - $2500.

If anyone has any good suggestions about which camera is a solid starter camera that will do the things listed above or anything mentioned above, or if you need more info let me know.

Thanks in advance for your advice.

Peter

In the $2k range there are very few cameras to really learn on that are capable of producing "commercial" level footage. The reason why is that there are very few new cameras out on the current market that will give you full manual control. To really capture great footage, it's crucial that a camera operator needs to be able to adjust the major settings and to not let the camera make these decisions in Auto Mode.

The key settings are:

Iris/Aperture
Gain
White Balance
Focus
Shutter Speed

Any "handycam" will help get you a "good" image, however, it's once you begin to understand exposure and how to utilize the camera's controls that you begin to really get great footage...of course, next you'll want to learn about composition, tripods/moving camera, lighting, and audio. The best way to learn is just by doing. So, budget for a tripod too, maybe a light and a good mic.

My recommendation for now in the $2k range would be to go for the Panasonic HMC40.

If anyone has any good suggestions about which camera is a solid starter camera that will do the things listed above or anything mentioned above, or if you need more info let me know.

I'm not sure if CS3 supports AVCHD.

Check with the local TV station for what format's they'll accept. If they'll take standard def, another thought is to get a used Standard Definition camera that shoots DV format like the XL1S or XL2. I learned all about manual audio and video on an XL1S. YMMV.

Speaking of audio, there's more to video than the camera. Knowing lighting and applying it on site is critical and as the saying goes, audio is half the video. Whatever camera you choose, make sure there's an add-on to let you use XLR audio equipment.

Lastly, one of the most overlooked pieces of equipment is the tripod. Unlikely any shaky cam handheld stuff will be too acceptable. A good tripod and head is over $1k and you eventually WILL buy a good one if you stick with it. The issue is how many will you buy and throw away before then.

Les and Guy

I appreciate the advice. As for the TV commercials: That would be down the road considerably. So I guess to aid you in your recommondations to me, I would say heavy towards internet video (advertising) and local tourism videos again likely to be distributed on the net. But I wanted something that isnt limited to that. I have learned just from reading posts that the video is only part of the package. It does seem that the tripod is a major consideration when getting into filming. Those topics will be the very next thing I work on.

As for AVCHD not working with CS3, working with CS3 is a must because I allready have it and will not be able to afford another editing software.

I will research the few cameras that have been suggested, but in the mean time if the above has cleared any questions and someone has anymore suggestions, im all ears.

Thanks, Peter

Peter, if you need to stay with your current software, it probably means you have to work on the computer you already have - and that puts some serious limits. To edit AVCHD you need not only a new editing software, but also a late model computer, at the minimum a quad core with 6GB of RAM, but preferably a hyper threaded quad (i7) with 12Gigs of RAM.

I would say this: decide if you really need HD or not. If you do, than go for a used HDV camcorder like the FX1 or something similar. If SD will do, than you might be able to find a really good used professional camera, that will give you plenty opportunities to learn all about manual settings.

And don't forget, 70% of everything we see is... the sound, so plan on getting a decent mike. You already mentioned the tripod, oh, and did I mention lights? It's an expensive hobby, but if you manage to learn the basics, you will soon be able to make some money and only THEN think about upgrading.

Good luck!

First off I have to say that I really feel like the video community (specifically dvinfo) is a very unified cooperative group. I have had plenty of interests that I have researched online and have dropped because of lack of cooperative forums.

This is not the case here. Everytime that I have a question it is met with great responses in a short period of time. So thanks to everyone for that.

Ervin,

As for the computer, I have recently built a custom computer for myself with an i7 and 8gb of RAM upgradeable to 12gb. So I have the power there. As for the HD vs. SD? Thats one of the questions that I am looking to the pros for. I would imagine that SD would probably be enough for the education process and for the few projects that I would like to do for that process.

What is the resale market in production cameras. If I buy the good used SD to start with, am I going to be able to recoop some money when I go to upgrade or is it like a car, where the price drops like a rock. Or the tech will be out dated and no one will want it a couple years from now.

So the question for this post is:
Assuming I have decided on going SD. what are the recommended cameras for self educating, and projects like web videos, perhaps green screen, and in combination with green screen apply video to 3d projects using 3ds Max.

Thanks again to the entire community for being an active and helpful group.

What is the resale market in production cameras. If I buy the good used SD to start with, am I going to be able to recoop some money when I go to upgrade or is it like a car, where the price drops like a rock. Or the

Hi Peter,

My feeling is that SD is already outdated. I think you could get a decent XL2 or better SD camera for a decent price these days (used or maybe even new). Practice with that, without expecting to re-coop anything in the near future.

Good sound equipment, and lights will maintain their value for ...,well, ever I would guess. Those two things haven't fundamentally evolved since the beginnings of filmmaking.

I hope my opinion is of some use to you.

Cheers,

DK

If I buy the good used SD to start with, am I going to be able to recoop some money when I go to upgrade or is it like a car, where the price drops like a rock. Or the tech will be out dated and no one will want it a couple years from now.

So the question for this post is:
Assuming I have decided on going SD. what are the recommended cameras for self educating, and projects like web videos, perhaps green screen, and in combination with green screen apply video to 3d projects using 3ds Max.

Peter,
You define the Prosumer: Serious hobbyist who will spend gobs of time and effort to produce a professional result in an attempt to pick up a couple small jobs every once in a while or just for the satisfaction of producing a quality production. In this endeavour, you will learn to appreciate the features and functions of professional gear, professional skills, professional behavior and professional technique.

As mentioned, producing professional results is more than the camera. But as far as the camera goes, the idea of going with a 16x9 SD camera such as the XL2, PD170 or similar prosumer models from Panasonic and JVC, was a way (for your budget) move past consumer gear into prosumer where you will start to experience professional camera controls.

Having those controls enables you to learn professional skills and apply professional technique. With a greater budget, there could be HD prosumer cameras but at $2000 for camera, tripod, lights, and audio, you're getting recommendations to go with used SD stuff. That's where you can get your hands on controls like Custom White Balance, Picture Controls, Exposure compensation, shutter speed, iris/zoom/focus rings, gain, phantom power the whole nine yards.

So don't focus on the fact it's SD and can you recoup an investment by selling it. Unlikely. Best case is you can produce some results for the web that people will pay you money for as a way to recover money spent on all your equipment that lets you deliver well edited, properly lit, clean audio, and beautiful images with smooth pans, zooms and tilts.

Thanks again everyone.

I have been thinking about this so much lately the last couple nights I have been dreaming about producing video.

I have decided (about 98% anyways) to go with a used XL2. That is the camera that most have recommended. As stated that way I have some left over cash to start picking up some better quality tripods, lights, and audio gear.

Also it seems like the XL2 is very versitle. Ive seen that people are using it for just about anything, commercials, web, live broadcasts, green sceen, etc.

Is ebay the best / best value place to find a used XL2 or can someone recommend a better place?

Thanks, Peter

I am looking for a video camera to use to try and teach myself... well how to shoot. I know little to nothing about video production outside of home videos. I am looking for something that is versital meaning I would like it do do just about anything well. It doesnt have to do everything the best but good enough to produce usable video.


Peter - I'm one of the lucky ones who actually gets to make a good living out of using my camera. My advice - if you want to be a serious operator one day - is buy a second hand JVC HD110 or similar. You'll find one in your price range.

Main reasons? it sits on your shoulder like a "proper camera". It's got auto functionality, but it has full manual over-ride, and everything - filters, white balance, iris, focus, gain, audio, the whole lot, - is set up like a full professional camera.

I own a JVC, and love it; I also often shoot on Digibeta and HDCam, so I know what I'm talking about.

I'm just back from a doc shoot in Zimbabwe, and a news/doc shoot in Afghanistan, using the JVC. Both clients completely happy with the product.

The JVC shoots SD, and a HDV 720p codec that is very good for teaching yourself some techniques that you'll use if you ever shoot on film.

Hope this helps.

Best wishes

Rob

Was wondering about picking one up, would anyone have any advice on something, around about £200-£300 max?

It would be cool to get one that would allow the expansion onto XLR and decent audio so I could actually use one for work but that depends on what I can get for my money.

Hi,

I wanted to get some advice to help my decision in upgrading my current equipment. I mostly work as a multimedia producer for a newspaper outlet where they own a Panasonic AGHVX200 and does the job well. I use my Canon XLH1a for personal projects like small documentaries, corporate video and occasional weddings.

Overall i have not enjoyed the Canon, I not only disliked the ergonomics but also the issues with HDV. If you ask me the Sony price equivalent did a 10x better job. I made a mistake when I purchased the Canon 2 years ago, and I don't want to do that again.

So after looking at what's coming out and what's available I have thought about doing this:

Getting the GH2 DSLR when it arrives early Novemeber and then late January, after the AF100/101 has been reviewed and tested properly, go for that. Panasonic have agreed to loan me the AF101 camera for a week in the beginning of January so I will get a good feel for it before I commit to anything. I decided on going down this route because that way I can use the lens's from the GH2 in perfect harmony with the AF101 and the GH2 will be a perfect 2nd camera during shoots.

Is this a good way to do it or should I wait and see what Sony bring with their 35mm video camera?

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
Cheers
Tom

I'll second what Robert said about the JVC. I get asked the what camera should I buy and a used JVC is my top recommendation. Oddly enough you can find a JVC GYHD200 for the same price as the 100 series.

OK, making the plunge into HD. My Videoguys based computer is arriving within days. Here's my problem. What would the best Prosumer cam for me to learn the ins and outs of HD work until I move into a pro cam? My choices have narrowed to CX550, TM700 and VG10. I do some events, docs and shorts and rate myself as a serious amateur-enthusiast. In SD have used Vegas. Thanks in advance for helping me along!!

I like the picture on my XL2 but I'm running into a lot of tape issues. Is this common? Does anyone recommend a camera with a similar look that won't run into these problems?

You don't say what your 'tape issues' are John but has your XL2 run a good few hours? Ever had the tape transport serviced? There's a huge number of tightly toleranced moving parts in the deck and things get out of alignment in time.

If you don't want to 'run into these problems' the short answer is to swap the XL for a file-based camera. You can still shoot in 16:9 SD with any one of them and it is the way ahead.

tom.

Sorry Tom,
That's my fault that the info is no longer in this thread. I encouraged John to edit his post as he also posted in the XL2 forum http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/canon-xl-gl-series-dv-camcorders/487519-having-serious-issues-used-xl2.html and it seemed more appropriate there.

You don't say what your 'tape issues' are John but has your XL2 run a good few hours? Ever had the tape transport serviced? There's a huge number of tightly toleranced moving parts in the deck and things get out of alignment in time.

If you don't want to 'run into these problems' the short answer is to swap the XL for a file-based camera. You can still shoot in 16:9 SD with any one of them and it is the way ahead.

tom.

Tom,

I haven't yet had the tape transport serviced but now I'm thinking about having that done. And yes, I've begun to think about going to a file-based camera but I've never used one and I have no idea what I'm looking for. Any suggestions?

You've got to ask yourself what it is about the XL2 that you most love and appreciate. If it's the interchangeable lens then maybe the Sony Z7 is worth a look. You can shoot to CF as well as replay all the tapes you've ever shot and of course you can swap out the tock lens.

If you've never removed the Canon's lens then you should forget spending money on a service and jump straight to the silent reliability of SDHC cards, recording AVCHD files. The Panasonic 150/1 and the Sony NX5 should be in your sights. The Panny's a lot cheaper and you'll see why as soon as you see them side by side, but the on-screen results it gives are wonderful.

If you're feeling rich than the EX1R is another big step up, in price as well as picture quality.

tom.

I read the VideoGuys article and want to expeand on that before I make too much noise.
Thanks a bunch.

Hi guys,

I'm currently looking into upgrading my camera system. Currently I am using a Nikon D90 as my primary video camera, and a flip and gopro cameras as b-cams.

Image wise the D90 is awesome and with my wide selection selection of Nikon glass there wasn't any stationary shot i could make. However I am finding the wobble on the D90 to no longer be acceptable as my camera shooting style gets more mobile (moving rig) to handheld shooting.

I'm hoping to get a RED Scarlet when they come out, but that could still be years down the road. So for now I'd like to see what I can get.

Option for fully manual control.
For audio I have XLR mics and also a H4n, but could also plug into the camera itself.
Editing is on a MacPro with Adobe Suite (also potentially FCP eventually).
I want a good monitor on the camera, something that swivels.
A big bonus would be if I could use my Nikon lenses on the camera, but I understand if that is not possible. Therefore if it's a fixed lens needs to be all encompassing.
1080p or 720p
A nice selection of frame rates, 24, 30, 60, and potentially higher would be great for slow motion.

Budget-$2000 soft cap.

I saw the d7000, the rolling shutter wasn't bad, comparable to most other dslrs, if you're set on a video camera, try the panasonic tm-700. Does 1080p60. honestly, save your money and wait for NAB.

I'm looking for a camcorder to replace my Sony TRV-120 which I got like 10 years ago. Unfortunately, I'm having a lot of trouble finding a camcorder that fits all my requirements.

I'm looking for an HD camcorder that can easily be carried around by me while still filming. In other words, probably a handycam. (basically: If I can walk around while holding it in my hand and recording things, that's good)

However, the specific requirements are...

Required:
1) Cost $1,000 or less.
2) Have battery life of at least 3 hours, and when I say battery life, I mean what I'll actually be experiencing, not what the company advertises. If the included battery doesn't do it but you can order another battery that does fit the bill, that's fine, as long as the camera and the battery together do not go over the maximum price.
3) Be compatible with Final Cut Pro.
4) Have an optical zoom of at least 20x.
5) Have a viewfinder.

Preferred:
1) Cost $500 or less.
2) Have an optical zoom of at least 32x.
3) Have a display that is not touch controlled, or at least not *only* touch controlled; that is, have the option of controlling it or setting menu options via buttons. I really don't like touch controlled displays much because it just causes it to be smudged.
4) Be able to record in 720p, either in addition to 1080 or just 720p, as I doubt I'll really be needing to go as high as 1080 (which takes up way more space).

Any suggestions? It'll primarily (but not only) be used to record things at anime/gaming conventions for putting on YouTube. The TRV-120 still works well, but it's only standard definition and I'm really starting to notice the inadequacies in that format.

Here's some videos (http://www.youtube.com/user/lseths#grid/user/4625F9A6B16212CA) I took at a recent convention if you want to see exactly what I'm going to be using it for.

This should get you started: Camcorders, Video Cameras, Digital Video | B&H Photo Video (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?ci=1871&N=4294548093+4293918093)

You can change search criteria in the nav bar on the left of the page. The product reviews are very helpful as well.

With those price criteria I'd look at the Panasonic SD700 or TM700 or the Canon HFS200, HFS20 or HFS21 or the Sony CX550.

None will tick all your boxes but these are generally regarded as the "best" consumer priced cams around at the moment so that's where I'd suggest you start your research.

The biggest issue I'm having is finding camcorders that both have a viewfinder and an optical zoom of at least 20x (yeah, I know digital zoom can go much farther, but I don't like to use it due to the degraded image quality). I see ones that have viewfinders but a zoom of less than 20x, and ones that have a zoom of 20x or over but no viewfinder. I really like the viewfinder and zoom on my current camcorder, and I'd hate to have to lose the viewfinder or not be able to zoom much on a new one. Even if I can't get one with a zoom as good as my current one (32x), I'd prefer to at least have a 20x.

The frustrating thing is that camcorder searches don't seem to have any kind of check to only search for ones with viewfinders, meaning I have to look at all of them manually (and sometimes it's hard to tell due to the angle whether it does have one or not).

As a note, some camcorders I've seen are advertised as having a "dual range zoom". What does that mean and how does it compare to a "regular" zoom?

EDIT: Okay, having looked at them some, the TM700 looks to be my best bet, but I'm having trouble figuring out its compatibility with Final Cut Pro. It seems that its 1080p60 recording needs third party software to work with Final Cut Pro, but is that true of its "regular" recording also? (and if you don't know, where should I ask?)

EDIT2: Because I have nothing but questions, I do have one more: Some camcorders have the microphone be on the top rather than on the front (like my current one has it). Does this affect the audio recorded in any noticeable way?

Well, for anyone curious, after consideration I've decided to get the TM700. Thanks for the advice!

Hello All!

I got about $600 now after christmas (I'm a very broke University business student) and am interested in getting into video as a hobby and doing some shooting on campus for various organizations. I've done some research and I'm not afraid of tape as I have a Macbook Pro with all the firewire ports and access to all video software needed (Adobe Suite) from campus. I'm also probably leaning towards used as I don't care to much about this for professional career, more as hobby trying to put time and effort in to produce somethign I'd be proud of, also to be used as a learning tool for the future.

My question is, what should I be looking at for about around $500 used, allowing me some room to buy a mic, and tripod as well. Probably will try making home made jib or glider. Would trying to land a Canon HV30 a good option, or try and stay SD card based? I'd very much apreciate the opnion of those who have come before me.

The TM700 is a mighty fine camcorder for the price Michael, but the constantly-whirring, in-built fan gets its noise recorded onto the soundtrack. When used with an external mic all is fine, but the special shoe means you have to use the supplied bracket and it all gets a bit messy.

In-built mics on top or on front are much the same thing - ok for ambient sounds and little use for anything else unless you're filming really close to the noise.

Dual zoom range is invariably brochure-speak for digital zoom - i.e. how much picture degredation can you tolerate?

The 700's 1080/60p mode is indeed outside the AVCHD spec and FCP will (I suspect) not like it at all. Tests show the 50i and 50p modes are almost indistinguishable on screen, yet one is a far higher bit rate than the other (and your cards won't hold as much).

tom.

I realize that this is redundant of my past post but as it has been a while I want to reiterate what I am looking to do, what I have and what I am able to spend. Some of this has changed which is why I didnt follow through on past recommandations.

I am looking for a video camera to use to try and teach myself... well how to shoot. I know little to nothing about video production outside of home videos. I am looking for something that is versital meaning I would like it to do just about anything well. It doesnt have to do everything the best but good enough to produce usable video.

I plan to use it like I said to learn, but to learn for the purpose of creating website videos, area tourism videos (waterfalls, people skiing, wildlife, etc.), action sports videos, green screen shoots, and also to use with 3d animations created with 3ds max. Ill expand this list hopefully as my skill level increases.

Initially will probably be doing more of the area tourism type stuff and next video advertisments for the internet. For the area tourism stuff this to me requires something semi compact as things like the waterfalls requires some work to get to the best shooting spot. Meaning I think that it needs to fit into a back pack so I can hike and climb.

Another thing that was mentioned regularly was having both auto and manual controls seen as I want to use this as an education. They said that learning to use these manual controls is very important and I agree.

In past posts recommandations have been strong towards the XL2. Then it switched to an HD. I think I agree that getting a used HD is better seen as my budget has increased ever so slightly and that keeps me in the now for a while hopefully. Other posts have suggested the other 50% of producing good video, like audio, light, tripods, etc. With this I am gathering that the camera should have XLR inputs for good audio. As I dont know much about tripods or mics, feel free to throw your two cents in about those also, keeping in mind trying to jam all of this into a budget. I think for my current situation those are the 3 most important pieces ( camera, tripod, mic).

Recording media - tape, disk, card, harddrive? I seem to be leaning towards card or harddrive - pros cons?

If it helps,

I have the Adobe CS3 production suite to use for production, editing, sound (also have adobe audition) etc.

I have a budget of about $4000.00 right now. If I find that this is surely something that I am going to go further with this number will increase down the road to purchase more/better equipment.

If anyone has any good suggestions about which camera is a solid starter camera that will do the things listed above or anything mentioned above, or if you need more info let me know.

Thanks in advance for your advice.

Peter

Lots of cameras shout that they have 'full manual control', but some (like the TM700 we were talking about earlier) make menu-digging a required degree-level skill.

I'd suggest a camera like the Sony AX2000 should suit you. It's file-based, bang up to date, has a long zoom and will take proper XLR microphones. But the best thing from a learning pov is that all the controls have buttons on the camera, there's no menu-hunting required.

You can run the camera in full auto to start with and you can slowly introduce the manual disciplines as you progress. So you might start with auto-everything except focus. Then you might want to play with the ND filters, the iris, gain and shutter speed. You can lock down the white balance and set the audio levels manually too.

It's a fine camera because you can make it behave. Remember that cameras in the grip of their automation are being controlled by a fast acting, accurate, intelligent idiot. The auto iris is trying to make snow grey and dark woods lighter. Auto white balance wants to constantly hunt to 'correct' what the lens is seeing. Auto focus is just looking for the most contrasty item in the v'finder - so that'll be the picket fence behind the girl, then.

And so on.

tom.

I as usual appreciate the lightening fast responses from this forum. In doing some quick research on your Sony AX2000 suggestion I see that it is an AVCHD format. I have read that Adobe Preimer CS3 doesnt play well with AVCHD. Is this something that I should worry about or is there an easy conversion.

Thanks,
Peter

AVCHD can be sluggish on older PCs and Software. If you can spend just a bit more, you could get a Z5U ($3700 after rebate at B&H) plus an MRC1k card recorder (5 for sale here at DVInfo in the Classified section, as of yesterday, for a little over $500 each) and have all the benefits of recording to cards in an easier format (HDV/m2t) plus have tape recording available to you as well if you wish. That's what I'd personally recommend, and no, it's not just because I own a bunch of 'em.

I'm guessing a good camera for you is the Canon XF100.

Canon XF100 HD Professional Camcorder 4888B001 B&H Photo Video


If you think you'll be working more professionally the XF105 might be the thing. The main difference is HD-SDI, and I don't think that matters to you. I did want to mention it though so you knew it was out there.

These cameras have a decent codec (8 bit 4:2:2) record to common affordable high performance media.

They make good pictures and have manual operation features.

They are small.

They have XLR

This is a solid beginners camera that will give you good results in all the areas you mentioned.

The big thing though is learning how to focus quickly and effectively, and how to follow and rack focus- and frankly you'll never truly grok that with a prosumer camcorder.

Oddly however you can get it with a crappy DSLR video camera. The DSLR movement eschews a whole pile of important features in video cameras, taking their production techniques back to those of classical film making in many ways.

Sounds like a mess right?

They... well I should say WE are making those trade-offs purely for an affordable large sensor camera. Having a large sensor helps create the look of 35mm film- which is effectively a large sensor.

I don't think you ever truly learn focus until you work as a 1st AC on a Super35mm sized sensor. (or bigger... if you want a challenge! Be wary though, some of the best 1AC's in Hollywood routinely blow focus on IMAX and cameras like the Canon 5D mark 2.)

You put up with all that crap to create a certain look- but frankly I don't think you are there yet. Just know that there is something more to learn and master on this journey.

Get an XF100 I think.

As to XLR... XLR isn't whats so special. Its just an audio connector. The main thing is that it has a neat electronic trick to seriously limit the amount of noise collected by the long antenna known as a cable.

The important thing about XLR isn't the connector, but rather what connects to it.

You just can't find any quality microphones that connect using some other standard. (Well... there is AES, but a single Schoeps with an AES interface would more than wipe out the budget we are talking about.)

OK... so there are the caveats- microphones and wireless systems worth using for professional video connect most commonly via XLR, and that's why you need it.

Another reason to spend a bit under your budget. A $4000 shooting kit should include at least one decent microphone.

Also... get a light, or two. A fresnel and a flourescent softlight (like Cool Lights or Kino Flo)

Best of luck and good shooting!

Yes, that Canon XF100 does look interesting and I've not read up on it before. The blurb reads, 'In contrast to a typical 6-blade iris, the XF100's 8-blade iris captures extraordinarily smooth out-of-focus "bokeh" for a more attractive image effect. The additional blades also reduce diffraction of light passing through the iris, allowing for the use of smaller apertures while maintaining image quality.'

Now the first part - about the bokeh - I can accept, but more iris blades giving less diffraction effects? C'mon Canon, don't feed us this BS or we'll go off you.

tom.

I'm wondering what they really meant re the extra blades reducing diffraction - only thing I can think of is that more blades means a somewhat better approximation to a circular aperture which might reduce the sharp intersection angles between the blades which MIGHT reduce diffraction effects at the intersections of the blades. Maybe!

Hard to tell, but I suspect they were thinking of SOMETHING other than pure BS.

Just comparing the AX2000 and the XF100 considering what I am looking to do,

-

"I am looking for a video camera to use to try and teach myself... well how to shoot. I know little to nothing about video production outside of home videos. I am looking for something that is versital meaning I would like it to do just about anything well. It doesnt have to do everything the best but good enough to produce usable video.

I plan to use it like I said to learn, but to learn for the purpose of creating website videos, area tourism videos (waterfalls, people skiing, wildlife, etc.), action sports videos, green screen shoots, and also to use with 3d animations created with 3ds max. Ill expand this list hopefully as my skill level increases.

Initially will probably be doing more of the area tourism type stuff and next video advertisments for the internet. For the area tourism stuff this to me requires something semi compact as things like the waterfalls requires some work to get to the best shooting spot. Meaning I think that it needs to fit into a back pack so I can hike and climb."

-

Which to you guys think would be the better option?

Thanks,

Peter,

It may be worth seriously considering the new Canon XA10 or something similar: Canon XA10 HD Professional Camcorder 4922B002 B&H Photo Video

(Although it isn't released yet, so if you're in a hurry then it's no good).

Search on this forum and you should find out some more info. It is certainly compact, and has a nice wide angle lens too (30mm, I think). It will allow XLR audio if required, and take SDHC instead of more expensive CF cards. You can remove the handle to go ultra-small.

I'm not sure if it is "man enough" for your needs, but it looks like a great little camera.

Let me throw one in from left field, if I may?

It reads, to me, as if the primary destination of your video output is going to be on the web.

If that is correct, maybe something that does excellent 720p and has all the bells and whistles.

I won't suggest any particular camera as I'm not familiar with any of them, but why not dive into the JVC Forum and have a thorough scrute.

Maybe someone here has JVC experience and can chime in?

Just a thought.


CS

PS: And that was from a hardened Canon shooter, no less!

Well.... let me throw my situation into the pot. I'm planning to buy a camera by the end of March. I travel a lot and have to shoot a lot of guerrilla style stuff, so size and portability are important to me in a cam, but I'm not willing to sacrifice much on image quality to get it. So right now I'm leaning towards the Panny HMC150 and the new Canon XF100. I'm still waiting to see how the Canon is going to hold up image wise with that single sensor though. I'd love to get ahold of an NX5, but I don't think my budget can swing that unless it drops down in price a bit. Anyone have any advice or even other models that I may be overlooking?

Yes, that Canon XF100 does look interesting and I've not read up on it before. The blurb reads, 'In contrast to a typical 6-blade iris, the XF100's 8-blade iris captures extraordinarily smooth out-of-focus "bokeh" for a more attractive image effect. The additional blades also reduce diffraction of light passing through the iris, allowing for the use of smaller apertures while maintaining image quality.'

Now the first part - about the bokeh - I can accept, but more iris blades giving less diffraction effects? C'mon Canon, don't feed us this BS or we'll go off you.

tom.

Uh, Canon is telling you the EXACT truth in their marketing. At least within the limits of marketspeak.

You probably ought to look up diffraction, but I'll explain a bit here.

More blades in the iris give a better approximation of a circle. That gives you a more circular iris, and that gives a more circular smooth appearance to the bokeh.

Diffraction is what happens at the edge of any solid object. Hold your fingers in front of eye as close as you can while keeping it in focus.

Now observe the edge of your finger... it will seem to have a blur. That blur is caused by diffraction.

(This works better if you are in a dark room looking at a lit object.)

OK... so there is an example.

Now what you need to know is that the out of focus area is affected by diffraction as well as the iris shape.

So, if you look at good lenses they will have curved iris blades- to create a more circular lens aperture. They will also have more blades.

Why?

Even with curved blades there is a slight distortion where the blades overlap. Just a few blades, say 5, will have a visible change in the shape of the bokeh. Adding just a few more leaves does two things. First it makes each distortion smaller, and second it makes the distortion more "even" as the various distortions average out.

I hope that explains.

I'm pretty sure we're in agreement that diffraction is caused when light hits a sharply defined edge and the light ray doesn't carry on past that point in the expected straight line. An iris blade (or blades) are exactly that; very sharp edges that cut into the light path. Having 6 blades or 8 does indeed alter the shape of the aperture, but I can't see that it alters the sharp edge that the light hits in any way or form.

tom.

Well, there is more than one "flavor" of diffraction. One is as you mention, the bending effect at the edges of objects. But what I think is at work here (or at least what I think Canon is thinking about) is a form of slit diffraction, where as light passes through a very small aperture relative to wavelength you would get a wavelength dependent spreading effect - in effect as the opening becomes small with respect to the wavelength of the incident light, a new wave is generated originating at the aperture. This is most often seen with a thin slit or a pinhole.but when the leaves of a diaphragm meet at an acute angle you would get this effect at each intersection, and you would see it well before the size of the aperture itself was small enough to cause severe diffraction limiting - the "opening" where the leaves intersect approaches zero, after all. So more leaves -> less acute angles -> less diffraction.

How significant the improvement going from 6 to 8 leaves - hard to say, but certainly non-zero.

I'm pretty sure we're in agreement that diffraction is caused when light hits a sharply defined edge and the light ray doesn't carry on past that point in the expected straight line. An iris blade (or blades) are exactly that; very sharp edges that cut into the light path. Having 6 blades or 8 does indeed alter the shape of the aperture, but I can't see that it alters the sharp edge that the light hits in any way or form.

tom.

Your error is thinking that the edge is the issue. The real issue is what the light does after hitting the edge.

When light diffracts it often does so at right angles to the edge causing the diffraction.

The exact shape of the aperture is an issue. So, anything you think might alter the shape of the aperture affects the diffraction and bokeh, prima facie.

Have a look at the Zeiss Master Prime brochure on the bottom of page 7:

http://www.zeiss.com/C12567A8003B8B6F/EmbedTitelIntern/ARRIMasterPrimesBrochure/$File/ARRI_MasterPrimes_brochure.pdf

The MP lens on the left is compared to an 8 blade iris, with straight edges on the right.

The MP has a very nice round bokeh.

The other lens (probably an old Canon BNCR or OCT19 mount) has a bokeh that is roughly an octagon, but each of the points is slightly "starred" out. What you can't see in that picture is that those defects in the octagon's shape are elliptical.

They are caused by the angle where the blades meet. The sharper (more acute) it is the more the diffracted light will act unexpectedly. Partly due to interference partly to dispersion.

This is what led to circular iris blades, once the technology to design circular blades emerged.

More blades are also important, because the more blades you have, the more open the angle of intersection is.

Just suffice it to say, what Canon is saying makes perfect sense.

You don't have to believe me or Canon though. Go try the camera out and judge the bokeh for yourself. Who cares why it looks the way it does... its really just about whether or not you like the result.

Frankly... I think we've spent entirely too many words discussing what has to be a very very minor part of the total performance picture of this camera. This is not the camera to use if you are looking to use bokeh a lot in your work.

On most set ups You are going to have very deep DoF, and so bokeh will be a minor concern.

What camera would you suggest for shooting strictly white screen, interviews and training videos for web (mainly) and some DVD? It doesn't have to be mobile and everything will be shot indoors. Will be using LED lighting (Cool Lights) as well.

Thanks!

What camera would you suggest for shooting strictly white screen, interviews and training videos for web (mainly) and some DVD? ....

@Michael...this is a little like asking "What car should I use to go to the bakery if it's raining?" Truth is, if you know how to drive, pretty much any car will do but probably not a convertible and you should make sure the wipers work. There isn't a car you can climb into, push a button and arrive (safely) at the bakery.

Don't get a toy camera. There isn't a "White Background Produced for DVD" model camera or mode button. Pretty much any camera with manual exposure will let you dial in a properly lit subject/scene. Frankly, it'll be your skill at lighting, staging, audio and editing that will have the most impact on the result but skill at using lighting to reduce the dynamic range with a nicely lit subject will have significant affect on the visuals and not whether you use camera model ABC versus XYZ.

Perhaps a more productive question would be for you to do some easy research on DVInfo sponsor site with cameras and reviews, pick a camera that fits your budget and workflow, then post on DVInfo to discuss that camera's merits and techniques from those who know that camera.

Thanks for the reply Les... I should of also included:

-Budget of $2000-$4000
-Would prefer no tape, i would like it to have memory card, etc... I don't want to deal with tape (if i can help it)

I have a Canon HFS10 now but feel I need a pro series to truly do it right.

I agree with your statement about lighting. That truly is an art! I am still working on my skills there!

Thanks!

Michael, I think a good way to start is to go to the B&H website and drill down "Professional Video" links until you get to ENG camcorders. Then sort by price. Here, bookmark it:
Camcorders (ENG) (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?ipp=100&ci=1881&Ns=p_PRICE_2%7C0&N=4256818814)

Study the features of each camera as you walk up to your price limit, skip the tape cameras etc. This will give you a good education on what's out there. If you've bought a house, a good agent will do that on the first outing... show you what's out there in your price range.

One of the features that separates the low end of the prosumer market from the next level up is XLR audio built-in. There's some Panasonic solid state cameras in the HMCxx line that are modular and may fit the bill for you. Make a shortlist and research/discuss them here on DVInfo.

guys, would like to invest some money either in to a SD700 or 550D. Which you reckon will be better for video?

After using my Canon XL1s for a year, I'm looking to upgrade to HD. It was used for weddings, sports and other events, and served me well.

My budget is around the £2000 mark, and I'd prefer to stay away from tape. It needs to be decent in low light situations, have at least one XLR without an adaptor, and preferably Canon, as the XL1s done be proud.

I'm very open to suggestions, thanks guys!

I loved my XL1s. I've not been happy with Canon since. If you are on the quest for a low light performer in a traditional 3-chip ENG camera, that sojourn leads directly to a Sony EX1. Period end of discussion. It's now my "best camera ever" hands down.