Well explained, Johnathan.
The answer is always experience, but ideally we want you to have that in HD :)
How much time can you realistically spend in the field during the next year?

One other possibility if you are going SD would be to get a full-size camera like a DSR500.

I like this idea Steve, and I will definitely keep this in mind as I continue to search for cameras. After a little searching online I was unable to find any of these currently for sale, but I'll keep looking. At least it's another option to consider.

How much time can you realistically spend in the field during the next year?

Obviously this is a concern, and of course without a camera I can continue to spend as much time outdoors as possible, observing nature without filming and practicing skills like tracking, but a year is a long time (assuming I can even save up for a camera within a year). I love being outside and get out of the house as often as I can, and as I am sure is the case with most of us pursuing wildlife film in some degree, I also have a love for cameras and forming images of the places I enjoy. Given this, I don't see working on my fieldcraft as something that will fall to the bottom of my list of priorities once I do acquire a camera. So I expect to be able to spend long hours in the field pretty much every weekend, plus additional hours when I can during the week. Again, it's easier said than done, but all I can do is try my best.

Try BB List (http://www.bblist.com) and ebay of course. And here's one froma dealer Mitcorp > Sony Specialist Dealers > USED EQUIPMENT BARGAINS > Camcorders > Used Sony DSR-500WSPL DVCAM Camcorder body, approx 1300 drum hours, good condition Used Sony DSR-500WSPL DVCAM Camcorder body, approx 1300 drum hours, good condition (http://www.mitcorp.com/public/view_item_cat.php?catalogue_number=used_sony_dsr-500wsp_40003&product_name=Used-Sony-DSR-500WSPL-DVCAM-Camcorder-body--approx-1300-drum-hours--good-condition)
One thing to be careful of though is not to buy a camera that you'll need a separate tape player/recorder for. This is one of the good things about the solid state cameras, that you can just hook them up to your computer and drag in the files. A lot of the later tape cameras do have firewire outputs though, but things like Digibetas don't.
Steve

And here's another Mitcorp > Panasonic Broadcast Dealers > USED EQUIPMENT BARGAINS > Camcorders > USED Panasonic AJ-D410AE DVCPRO Camcorder (PAL) c/w Fujinon 14x lens + raincover + 3 batteries USED Panasonic AJ-D410AE DVCPRO Camcorder (PAL) c/w Fujinon 14x lens + rai (http://www.mitcorp.com/public/view_item_cat.php?catalogue_number=used_panasonic_aj-d410ae&product_name=USED-Panasonic-AJ-D410AE-DVCPRO-Camcorder-(PAL)-c/w-Fujinon-14x-lens-+-raincover-+-3-batteries)

Just might be worth thinking outside the box a bit, especially if it's to be used as a learning tool.
Steve

Jonathan,

I definitely agree with you that fieldcraft is something that every good wildlife filmmaker should have. Coming from a nature photography background, I was pretty much at ease when the transition came along.

If you are not that familiar with wildlife filmmaking yet, perhaps a good choice will be to get into nature stills and learn your fieldcraft while saving up for a H1? I would really hate the fact that if you have got some superb footage coming along, only for it to be shot on SD. HD will basically future-proof that footage and going the still photography way will allow you to learn the fieldcraft and yet save the hassle of getting the SD camera and selling it off later. It will also definitely be cheaper to get than the XL2. The lenses you get for the stills will still be usable later on.

Cheers

Weehan

Thanks for the links Steve, much appreciated. And Weehan, I will definitely continue to consider purchasing a still camera. You make a good point that I could learn a lot (and potentially make some money) taking still pictures alone. And these days the added bonus is that with a DSLR you often also get HD video functionality, even if it is somewhat limited.

I'm of the the mind that for all the work serious wildlife filming takes, that you want to record in HD. That being said, The nano flash or Flash XDR from Convergent Design offers a great companion to the XLH1. As some others are moving to DSLR, you can probably pick up a good used H1 for a decent price. You can then pick up an EOS adapter and throw on a 70-200 L-series or bigger lens. The crop factor is huge (7.2x) so a 200mm lens stretches out to over 1400mm. Of course the challeng becomes locating the subject in the viewfinder (even at the wide end, a 70-200 is over 500mm). The Flash recorder via the HD-SDI port allows for a by-pass of HDV. Though IMHO HDV is still pretty good, but the bypass to the XDR or Nano Flash will be far better.

You should also consider that if you choose to buy SD equipment - it would be worth nothing in a couple of years - just like 4:3 is it now. HD equipment will fall in price as it is used - only.

One other possibility if you are going SD would be to get a full-size camera like a DSR500.

I am wondering what the possibilities are for full-size HD cameras, and whether any of these would be recommended for wildlife work. I saw a used JVC GY HD101 with few hours of usage online for about $5000. Are there others that I should consider that might be available used at an affordable price (something around $4000 or $5000)?

Johnathan

I shoot with the JVC HD110 (very similar) - Its not a 'full sized' camera. Only XL/EX3 sized. I think its a great camera for wildlife. Works very well with Nikon stills, is true progressive CCD based and produces can produce very filmic images. Layout is also very nice IMO. It also shoots 50p/60p at SD which is a useful feature. - Its not a great low light performer and power can be a pain....but its a good peice of kit that I've used for 18months now.

Mat

Thanks Mat. I'll definitely keep these camcorders in mind.

Are there any HD camcorders that record 60fps at 1080p? I know they are probably quite expensive, but this seems like it would be so useful for wildlife work.

The JVC HD200 series will run 720p at 60fps + the EX3 of course. If you get into full size Sonys and the Varicams you'll get 1080p60 but everything starts to get very expensive!

I am surprised that no-one has mentiond the Sony V1 (or the cheaper consumer version, the FX7, in all this.

The V1 comes with a 20x zoom lens (focal length 37.4 - 748 mm in 35 mm equivalence), shoots 140x1080 including progressive, and has a built in (very limited) slow motion capability. There are excellent tele-converters available from Century at 1.6x, and 2.0x. The latter is a magificent lens, but is very heavy (1 kg+) and requires a rail system to support it. Both these converters use the bayonet mount for the lens-hood for attachment, so they are easily connected/removed.

You're into very different quality leagues with the V1 though. It's HDV for a start, and putting teleconverters on the front of the lens is always disastrous. OK for home movies but for serious work they're out of the question.
Steve

Hardly disasterous! The superb Optex 0.7 X wide adapter and Red Eye FX 0.7X HD are both superb quality for the price and well up to professional standards. Original wide lenses such as the incredible Canon HD 6x Zoom XL 3.4-20.4mm L are in a different league of course, but so is the price.

I guess everyone has different ideas about "superb quality". You're using a cheap converter, on the front of what's already a cheap lens and you're expecting to get top quality results? Never in a million years. But again, it depends on what you define as acceptable I suppose.
I was really referring to teleconverters though, which is what Alan mentioned.
Steve

Yes, I missed the fact that Alan was referring to the Century telephoto converter instead of wide converter, and in that respect, I would have to partially agree with you Steve.

A Century 2X telephoto converter would degrade image quality far too much for my liking. Even Canon's own 1.6X converter isn't good enough for my work.

Although for stills shots or hybrid DSLR work, I would certainly use the Nikon 1.4X matched with ED Nikkors, but still steer clear of the Nikon 2X converter due to image degradation.

But even Tony, you're talking about teleconverters that go between camera and lens, which can work fine. Screwing chunks of glass to the front of a lens is another matter entirely as I'm sure you know.
Steve

I know that this topic has been discussed before, but I haven't found any recent discussions and since the market and industry have changed drastically since those previous threads I thought it was time for an updated report.

What cameras do people use to film wildlife?

Is the XL2 still a good camera to buy or is HD necessary?

And what about cheaper HD cameras like the XHA1 with teleconverters? Anyone have experience here?

What about DSLRs? 5D Mark II? 7D? (I know it's not out yet, but any thoughts?)

(I myself am looking to buy a camera to improve my filming skills and build up some sequences to add to my reel so that I can send these to producers. I am not trying to sell the footage so again, is HD necessary? Should I save up to buy a XLH1 even though it will mean I won't be spending time shooting for some time? Is an SD camera still good for reels or anything else?)

Steve, and Tony, we have come a long way from the original post!

My suggestion is entirely relevant to that post. I am not sure that all the posts on the five pages are relevant.

Alan, I know these posts can often diverge to unacceptable degrees! But I think this one is still on track. Johnathan was asking about the XL-2, and it's a quality camera for shooting wildlife, and the suggestion of the V1, while interesting, is really a very different beast, especially when talking about sticking front of lens teleconverters on it. This is why the XL-2 was popular for wildlife, the fact that you didn't need to do such an undesirable thing as you had interchangeable lenses and so access to the finest 35mm stills optics ever made.
Steve

I just went through all the posts and everything is still on track for this thread!!

I have a century 2x teleconverter and for what it is it is a good piece of glass. these always soften an image, the further out the more it does so. Unhappy with that I went to the xl2 with lens selection available.

I have sense gone to an xlh1, an amazing camera in its own ways.

Considering you can get a used xl2 for slightly over a couple thousand dollars you would be learning piles of skills that would make the transition to an xlh1 later very easy.

An xha1 used is not much more than an xl2. while it does not allow for lens change, you would be learning even more important skills, field Craft!! All footage then you could move forward with if you get subjects of high value.

Long lenses are great, but quite often are highly over rated compared to getting close up shots!!!

Of course if you are dead serious you could take out a Loan and get your required kit, then start doing some work (non wildlife) to actually pay for it.

One could bash this around forever.

It may or may not be relevant, but can anyone tell me what the contestants were using in the BBC series "Wildest Dreams" (I think that's what it was called)? I didn't see all of the episodes, but I think it was a Sony camera, and it definitely had interchangeable lenses.

The 'Wildest Dreams' series received a lot of bad press. A good idea, but not very well done.

Camaras used for this and other series were I think mainly Panasonic Varicam and Sony. The Sony HD750 and even Z1s have been used on some BBC series. The Sony HDC-1500 and HDC-950 were used on quite a lot of BBC work, including the aerial IS filming using the HD Cineflex V14. I think almost all the six-part 'Natures Great Events' was filmed using mainly the HDC-1500.
Other cameras have been used for filming BBC wildlife programmes, including the Sony HD 730, 900r Cini Alta, 2700 P2 and H-series Varicams, Iconix HD-RH1F, Digibeta 790, beta SX90, Canon XL-H1 and a lot of others.

David Spears did a test of various film and digital cameras for the BSC (British Society of Cinematographers), including Arri, 16mm, Red, and even the Canon DSLR for review. Here are his thoughts on some of the cameras:

The International Association of Wildlife Film-Makers (http://www.iawf.org.uk/index.aspx?page=2)

As a small footnote, I notice that a few BBC wildlife filmmakers are now carrying DSLRs with them. Mark Macewen even uses the Canon 7D for some work:
http://www.iawf.org.uk/members_details.aspx?membersid=1071

I was particularly interested in what the contestants were using because it looked a similar size to my Canon AH1, and I have been asked about it - one of those things where people assume that because you know something about a subject, you must know the answer to their questions too! In fact, they assumed the people on the series were using the same model as I had because it looked similar - ie something they were unfamiliar with - something between big broadcast cameras, and small consumer cameras.

Hi Annie,

The contestents were shown useing Sony z7 with compact flash readers. When watching the editing sequences it was shown they were recording in DVcam mode.

Regards

Mick.

PS Annie is it possilble for you to e-mail me a contact number for you as I would like to discuss with you your experiences with the HVR- MRC1K card reader with a canon.

Thanks Mick. I've just looked that up, and can see that it wasn't available at the time I bought the Canon A1 or it would have been given serious consideration (if I could have afforded it).

I did note the Sony Z7s... mounted on, er, Manfrotto 503 tripods. There's a good combination.

And yes... "The Apprentice in the Wilderness" theme didn't really work in my opinion. I never knew Nick Knowles was a wildlife expert. A man of many talents, it seems.

I think almost all the six-part 'Natures Great Events' was filmed using mainly the HDC-1500.url]

Almost all of Nature;s Great Events was shot on tape Varicam. This is the case for most BBC nature output for the last few years. Last major thing on not on Varicam was "Nature of Britain" which we did on Super 16 (ah, those were the days!)

Steve

As I mentioned earlier, the main cameras used by the ACS camermen in Nature’s Great Events were the HDC-1500 and HDC-950 HD cameras.

Here is a short review of equipment used:

Sony : HDC-1500 captures Nature?s Great Events : United Kingdom (http://www.sony.co.uk/biz/view/ShowContent.action?site=biz_en_GB&contentId=1237382103406&parentFlexibleHub=1170434902908)

With reference to the Sony z7 and the BBC you might find the following interesting.
Note the lens used.
Sony : Simon King films with HVR-Z7E : United Kingdom (http://www.sony.co.uk/biz/view/ShowContent.action?site=biz_en_GB&contentId=1230553146016&sectiontype=BC+CaseStudies+HDV)

Regards

Mick

Yes, Simon can often be seen using the Sony HVR-Z7E plus Canon HJ40 lens on the Springwatch and now on the Autumnwatch series.

Sorry Tony, when you said "I think almost all the six-part 'Natures Great Events' was filmed using mainly the HDC-1500" it implied the whole thing rather than just aerials.

Steve

No problem at all, Steve, we were both correct. :)

Not that it matters of course, because I'm sure that both the Sony and Panosonic cameras mentioned could be used to film all the series from air & ground level and produce stunning footage that would be hard to tell apart on a HD screen.

Crazy when you think of it though, that the majority of people worldwide who watched that series and the latest 'Live' series, actually watched it in SD and not HD. Each of those HD cameras cost around £50,000 or more each, not including all the extras.

Well actually the Sonys couldn't do it really, as they don't have slomo, that's why we use Varicams.
I think most viewers would be amazed at just how much off-speed material is shot, even if it's just 30-40fps to take the edge of the movement of camera and subject. It's only when shooting ultra highspeed with Phantoms and the like that people even realise it's happening. Flying birds for example are almost always shot in slomo (virtually 100%) usually at 60fps or so, even though it looks "normal" speed to the viewer.
Steve

Jonathan,

I have both the Canon XL2 and the Canon 7D. The XL2 I have used for years and is permanently fixed to a Canon 300 mm f 2.8 FD lens. I have mainly used it for bird photography and as one of the other posters has mentioned you are always looking for more focal length. The main problem with such extreme focal lengths is Heat Haze and vibration, I use it with a Satchler studio 7+7 tripod head and if there are any "older gentlemen" on this thread they will know that this tripod head weights a ton but is excellent in following action.

I have just come back from a camping trip this weekend and was using the Canon 7D, like you I am wanting to cheaply upgrade my personal stock-footage library to include some HD shots. The first and most serious problem I encountered with the 7D was Viewfinder. The LCD is extremely difficult to see in bright sun conditions, so you would need to factor in the cost of an external LCD finder. The camera is excellent in doing time-lapse (by taking a series of stills), I tested it with a time-lapse of a rock formations and moon/stars and was shooting the time-lapse with a 60 sec exposure.

You have a very difficult decision to make, mainly do you go SD or HD. I think if it was just for my reel I would go SD 16:9 using the Canon XL2. The HD market is changing so rapidly I think you could buy one of the many HD cameras already mentioned, at half their price in a year or so time.

Bob

Never thought of myself as an "older gentleman" Bob, but I suppose I must be as I know the Studio 7+7 well and you're right, it's an excellent head, old-school tough, about 10kg but worth carrying!
Steve

For those that have not reached the "gentlemanly" age, the satchler will take a load of up to 110lbs and has a 150mm bowl

Bob

Jonathon,

This link will give you an idea of what you could capture using a 7D in stills and video mode.

This video was shot on a 5D Mark 2 by Sandesh Kadur and in my opinion is an excellent example of combining both stills & video.

YouTube - Canon 5D Mark 2 - Wildlife - stills and HD 1080P (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C12a-wdGLXM)

Bob

Not bad, but the content of Sandesh Kadur's clip didn't impress me much. The quality of the video sections were very low to my eyes, even disregarding the jagged edges and ghosting during movements, with subdued colours and very soft - with a lack of impact in the footage. Obviously this was partly due to the webstream. I also feel that even the still images were OK, but nothing special.

Tony,

I agree with your comments on the quality but it does show that you can structure a video using stills & video with just one camera. I feel Jonathan is looking for a low cost approach and this may give him some thoughts.

By using a cheap Canon 400mm f5.6 lens and shooting in raw you can obtain huge crops which are acceptable when edited with the video

I completely agree with you on that note, Bob, and that is why I'll be looking very closely at the Nikon D3s, Canon D1 Mk IV during the winter (and Nikon D4 next year). At some destinations I have to cut down on weight and bulk of my equipment. I hope to be able to carry a couple of DSLR bodies with me during a few of my future expeditions instead of the need to carry one complete system for video and another for stills images on the same trip.

Although I have yet to be convinced that any of the DSLRs so far released offer enough in terms of handling and sound options to make me give up my camcorder systems.

I have been photographing with the Mark IV and trying to record clips whenever there is a fine natural history moment. In the past, I have regretted not having the ability to record video, as I have seen many rare behaviour that has not been seen before.

This camera is certainly promising with shallow depth of field, and high quality HD. It is easier with one system to record clips as well as stills. However, if I suddenly need to change to slow motion, it won't be possible. I have to stop, delve into the menu and change it and then shoot. Sound is a major issue I am grappling with at the moment. Refinements will come with time, however, I must say that this is promising and exciting.

Actually I am suprised that nobody has mentioned the Panasonic GH1, it has a 2x crop and there are plenty of adaptors for most available lenses. The downside is the codec / data rate is not up with the Canon 7D & 5D Mark 2.

Are there any members of the forum using this camera?

The excitement is due to the bigger sensors in DSLRs. The smaller sensors of the Pansonic with their higher depth of fields completely negate the shallow dof excitement. My 2 cents.

Hi Bob
I have been using the GH1. It was the cheapest way for me to get into to HD at the time and have the ability to change lens. So far I have been fairly happy with it. I don't have anything to really compare it to. I came from the original XL1.

Gordon

The excitement is due to the bigger sensors in DSLRs. The smaller sensors of the Pansonic with their higher depth of fields completely negate the shallow dof excitement. My 2 cents.

I'm using a Canon D7 but I wonder: how much depth of field do you get on a GH1 with a 300mm lens? Isn't the DOF still really shallow?

They don't have interchangeable lenses but the new Sony NXCAMs do come with a 20x Sony G lens, lots of manual controls and a range of HD record settings in AVCHD at up to 24mbps. They're also quite a bit cheaper than the EX1.

For portability the Canon HF S100 has excellent HD image quality, and what they describe as a built-in 1.7x teleconverter - sampling full HD 1920x1080 image resolution from the middle of the sensor without digital enlargement. That gets you 17x from the 10x lens - very useful for wildlife subjects. They claim image qualty isn't reduced but I'm not entirely convinced. No viewfinder on this model but later variants have one.

I'm using a Canon D7 but I wonder: how much depth of field do you get on a GH1 with a 300mm lens? Isn't the DOF still really shallow?

You get the same dof on every camera with a 300mm lens. It's just that with a 4/3 sensor it has the same field of view as a 5DII with a 600mm lens.
For wildlife a 4/3 sensor camera will provide dof control. I like the size from 4/3 to APS-C. Even 2/3 Scarlet with very long glass will blur the background.
IMO Canon and Nikon "full frame" sensors, as well as the 1D sensor size, are at a disadvantage with wildlife.

Good evening,

The sony 20x g lens is nice. There is no substitute for being able to change lenses!!!

Any form of multiplier willalways damage the images, glass or otherwise.

If you ahve a fixed lens you are going to have to become an outstanding hunter, Should work on that anyway.


Dale Guthormsen