Just want to see what folks are using for current cams and when they plan to go HD?

Please don't make this a contest of what is better, just a simple poll of what the members here are using, that's all.

Me- 2 Sony PD 150's, 1 JVC DV500, Beaulieu Super 8 Film cams, various Sony single ccd cams. Going HD this year in "07" sometime.

I wrestled with this for almost a year before making my decision as I'm just launching a company this year. I'll be shooting with PD170, VX2100, PdX10 this year. For now, I hope to get 2 years out of these cams and then go HD. Light sensitivity was the key to my choice. I hope that in 2 years there will be a HD cam that's good in low light. I know many have said the FX1 is OK if you crank the gain it's clean etc. For now I decided to go with these. I hope my thinking is right here. :)

-Don Bazley

I do both but I prefer my SD cameras for most event work considering it's usually in low light. Although, if light isn't a problem the HDV cameras are great.

It would be great to have an HDV camera that would work in low light like the pd170.

I use sony's Z1U, FX1's and PD170's

Well I just got a HDV camera but for the time being I shoot with DV as very few have the gear to watch HDV. But at least the possibility is there.

Stelios

staying SD
I have dsr300 and pd170

IF customer wants HDV I can rent any camera here is Phoenix

L Hopper
Phoenix Az

VX2000, FX1 are primary video cameras.

Hi Don -
You're probably better off finding slightly used HDV cams... consumers buy these cause they go into the store and ask for "the best cam you've got" and the salesman shows them a beast they will NEVER learn to use or even take out of the box to shoot Juniors B-Day.... so they can be had if you're patient.

SD cameras are simply going the way of the dinosaur... go look in the local big box electronic store (or Target or KMart...) they are selling "HD" TVs... who would buy a new TV right now that wasn't HD?? It's obsolete in less than 2 years by government intervention...

SO you say you want to stretch your cameras for 2 years... maybe...

I've shot with FX1, have a Z1 currently, still trying to learn all the stuff it can do. Second/third angle (or first if it's a low $$ job) is a pair of HC1's for now. I have some add on lighting for when the going gets dark. Just have to deal with it and learn what you can and can't do. I've even experimented with using an HC3, again for those "low $$" jobs and I've got a underwater/foul weather setup for that cam in the event of... Plus the wife likes the small form factor cam, got to have something she will use!

The new Sony HC7 looks nice, as does the new Canon HV20... and not expensive, but keep in mind you won't have the cred with a smaller cam, even if you can get killer video from it. So depending on your market, you may need to "go big". For 2nd/3rd angle cams and backup, you could probably get away with either of these, just don't plan on using manual focus.

Here's the other side of it, what are you editing on? FWIW, the learning curve with HD is a factor you should consider, as is the amount of horsepower you need to post. Vegas 6 was a slug here, Vegas 7 apparently is streamlined, and works pretty well (with infinicam for 4 camera mixes).

Nevermind delivery for the moment, but I've had decent luck with SD 24P on a regular DVD... looks "better" than any SD footage ever did, at least to me.

That said, my first experimental shoots were pretty rough, while I learned what to expect - there's just stuff you can't get away with with an HD cam - movement is a HUGE problem compared to an SD cam... it just looks awful if you're not pretty stable. So budget for a good tripod and some method (even just a monopod rigged as a counterbalance) to stabilize handheld shots. Budget more if you have to move while shooting <wink>.

So there's some input, FWIW. I have decent cams now, but I've shot a few weddings and events for friends (ULTRA low $$) with stuff I'd be embarrassed to admit using... and it came out good enough to make everyone but me happy!

DB>)

2 pd170's and hope to pick up my first HD cam by the middle of the year...figure we should have affordable hddvd/blueray burners and media by the year's end. Hell, I was reading about the holographic burners and disks (1 gen can store over 300 gigs)--15K for the burner and 300 per blank disk...but I would think that may be the way things are heading for consumer use within a few years.
I'm sure the low light capabilities of the hd cams will improve soon also.

SD but just because of teh bucks.. my primary activity is being an student, so not a lot of money for HD

Went HD this year January. Shooting with a FX1, FX7, and Canon XHA1

Not that this is bad advice, but please do not offer the "you should go HDV vs SD".....there are current threads on this, use them instead. Stay on topic......and just offer what cams you are using or start another thread....thanks. This thread can be a nice way of seeing what we are all using in the wedding world and when we plan to go HDV. So, gear only.



Hi Don -
You're probably better off finding slightly used HDV cams... consumers buy these cause they go into the store and ask for "the best cam you've got" and the salesman shows them a beast they will NEVER learn to use or even take out of the box to shoot Juniors B-Day.... so they can be had if you're patient.

SD cameras are simply going the way of the dinosaur... go look in the local big box electronic store (or Target or KMart...) they are selling "HD" TVs... who would buy a new TV right now that wasn't HD?? It's obsolete in less than 2 years by government intervention...

SO you say you want to stretch your cameras for 2 years... maybe...

I've shot with FX1, have a Z1 currently, still trying to learn all the stuff it can do. Second/third angle (or first if it's a low $$ job) is a pair of HC1's for now. I have some add on lighting for when the going gets dark. Just have to deal with it and learn what you can and can't do. I've even experimented with using an HC3, again for those "low $$" jobs and I've got a underwater/foul weather setup for that cam in the event of... Plus the wife likes the small form factor cam, got to have something she will use!

The new Sony HC7 looks nice, as does the new Canon HV20... and not expensive, but keep in mind you won't have the cred with a smaller cam, even if you can get killer video from it. So depending on your market, you may need to "go big". For 2nd/3rd angle cams and backup, you could probably get away with either of these, just don't plan on using manual focus.

Here's the other side of it, what are you editing on? FWIW, the learning curve with HD is a factor you should consider, as is the amount of horsepower you need to post. Vegas 6 was a slug here, Vegas 7 apparently is streamlined, and works pretty well (with infinicam for 4 camera mixes).

Nevermind delivery for the moment, but I've had decent luck with SD 24P on a regular DVD... looks "better" than any SD footage ever did, at least to me.

That said, my first experimental shoots were pretty rough, while I learned what to expect - there's just stuff you can't get away with with an HD cam - movement is a HUGE problem compared to an SD cam... it just looks awful if you're not pretty stable. So budget for a good tripod and some method (even just a monopod rigged as a counterbalance) to stabilize handheld shots. Budget more if you have to move while shooting <wink>.

So there's some input, FWIW. I have decent cams now, but I've shot a few weddings and events for friends (ULTRA low $$) with stuff I'd be embarrassed to admit using... and it came out good enough to make everyone but me happy!

DB>)

I went with two Sony HDV last September: Z1U and FX1

Z1/FX1 offered the widest angle built-in lens, which no longer required me to use a wide angle converter (on Sony VX2000) in my indoor sports venue. I no longer had to stop down to f/4.8 to get a sharp image with the wide angle lens converter as on the VX2000. Shooting at f/2.8 on the Z1 actually produces a sharper image, regardless of that light sensitivity loss from the HDV sensors.

I only needed one camera with the best audio inputs and features and really wanted to have similar-looking footage. Lower light sensitivity was important, and the Z1/FX1 seem to be rated much higher than the V1.
The V1 wasn't shipping then, and I really wish I had gone the HDV route sooner.

I just bought a new VX 2100 and rent PD150s when needed. Hope to get a couple good years out of it before going HD. Going HD now would require other upgrades too, which I'm not ready for yet.

SD- 3 Sony VX2100's, 1 Sony VX2000. Almost always in 4:3.

I may go HD in a couple years after prices come down for not only cams but also TV's. I will still keep and use my Sonys for many years to come... unless they give up the ghost.

Jeff

We just purchased 2 VX2100's and 2 PD170's 7 months ago and will probably make the jump to hd in a couple of years. I believe the hd cameras will be a totally different camera 2 years from now than it is now.

Bruce

I went for the Z1 and FX1 last year moving from the pd150.

Gary

I went with the HD100 this past winter. Costly to change over but worth the investment for me.

Ben

We use a Pana DVX102B(A-roll) & Canon XL2(B-roll) shooting weddings in 16:9, mixing 50i with 25P on the timeline rendering to 25P for DVD delivery.

Currently just researching HDV/DVCPRO and will choose between either the JVC GY-HD111 or Pana HVX202.

When brides start asking us for HD then we'll look at investing in it - any sooner though and I think I'd only be satisfying a WANT rather than a NEED!!! (Already made that mistake purchasing the XL2 instead of a second DVX.)

ALL HD NOW! We turned in our DR-DV5000's and purchased 6 HD-110's. Couldn't be happier - you really see the difference witht he image detail. They definately don't do as well in low light, but the gain seems to be a bit more forgiving than the SD cameras.

I have FX1 and July my first shooting in HDV format...

Moved from DSR300s to 2 FX1s with Beachtek XLR adaptors and an A1. We did this as much to shoot in true 16:9 as to have HD capability. No regrets.

I'm using two Sony FX1's with an HC1 as a run-around cam. Sold my Canon GL1/GL2 with accessories for enough to almost pay for one of the Sonys.

As others have noted low-light settings can be a challenge for HDV, but I'm learning to work with that plus iron out other kinks dealing with widescreen/HD footage. Glad to be doing that now before more customers decide they want HD.

Only have one camera so far.
It's a JVC GY-HD100.
I like it, but it was way over my budget.
I should have purchased two or three SD cameras
from Sony or Panasonic instead, but I lost my mind.
Don't get me wrong... I love the JVC GY-HD100,
It was just the wrong time for such an expensive camera.
Now I'm totally broke... :(
M

GL-1 and GL-2 for weddings. Mostly because the wedding business in general doesn't support the cost, etc. of HD...for now.

SD all the way here. 1-VX2100, 2-VX2000's.

I figure I've got a least 2 years. And even then, I'll most likely rent first before betting the farm on any particular HD cam right away.

Two FX1s here. Primary reason was for native 16:9. HD is a bonus, but haven't delivered an HD project yet. For a 3rd backup cam, I'm struggling with whether to get a VX2100 (low-light) or an HC3 (can be used as a capture deck).

Im in the process of getting started in the wedding realm. I do some commercial/corporate work as well so I chose a HVX200. I do not regret my decision at all. We will be purchasing 1 more HVX probably in September. with anothe HVX after the first of next year. The color quality is absolutely incredible on this camera. It is realy hard to lay down footage shot on my XL1 beside what this camera shoots. This cam makes my XL1 footage look like it was shot on a handicam.

The reason I chose HD over SD was that I wanted to be on the bleeding edge. I could not see myself spending 3 grand on a DVX, that might only last me a year before I really need to start making a move to HD. My thoughts were that I needed to get the best camera I could afford for what I do. The camera by the way has already paid for itself in the gigs I have done. I bought it in december, and I only do video at the moment part time in the evenings and on weekends.

Sticking with my SD Canon's at least for the remainder of this year. Will keep them for an additional year as back up. HD cameras some time next year, followed by new computers.

It is great to hear so many responses to the gear the users here work with and plan to purchase....keep them coming!

I think HDV or HD cameras are reliable but when software, players & etc get in to the point with a good price! to expensive I have both versions of cameras and to be honest I don't use the features, just still using SD with it/.

I bought the cameras because my JVC GY-GV500 was to old, 7 years, and I was in the need of a new camera so I decided to go with new tech and expect better use in the near future.
I courrently have PDW-F350 form Sony and GY-HD110 from JVC so far no complaints only a little hard time learning new funtions with the Sony.
BTW I don't even have a HD monitor hehehe so I can't tell you yet about quality picture.
I work for a network in the hispanic market here in US and we don't have HD yet, just Panasonic DVC-Pro gear.
cheers!~
William Osorio

I too am using the JVC HD-110, although I am using it mainly to shoot 16:9 SD. My other camera is a Sony PDX 10. I find the full rez 16:9 from the sony and the full rez 16:9 from the JVC work very well together, and although not HD, full rez 16:9 still looks pretty good on an HD tv. I do offer HD to my clients, but no one has wanted it yet. The JVC works great as an SD camera, and I figure when I go HD my cameras are ready.

After 2 years with a Canon XL2, I added an FX1 to my arsenal. A few months back, I was lucky enough to get a GREAT deal on a clean used XLH1. Sold the XL2, sold the unpredictable FS4 firestore drives, and picked up the canon HV10.
So now we have three great hdv cameras, which can also shoot in sd when needed. I try to shoot primarily in hdv, unless the customer won't accept 16:9. For low light situatioons in weddings,etc., I'm having to crank the gain on my H1 to 12. But the image still looks good. I love the look of the Sony, but it's tough to get a real good match with the canons.If our busines gets better, I'd considr selling the FX1 and getting a Canon A1 for easier matching looks. The HV10 is fantastic, as long as you use astabilizer and watch exposure.
Now if I could just get Premier Pro, Cineform and the new Dell hot rod PC to work together editing HDV......
Bruce S. Yarock
www.yarock.com

XH-A1 + HDR-HC1.

Been able to fool almost everyone (surprisingly even some very talented videographers on this forum) that my HC1 is an FX1, provided the footage is carefullly shot & colour corrected.

XH-A1 primary cam
HDR-HC1 2ndary/backup/outdoor steadicam cam.

In this day and age I say 16:9 is a must, regardless if the client has a 16:9 TV or not, same goes for some sorta HDV authoring provided how tech-savvy your clients are.

ive gone through too many to even count..
worst decision was ditchign the DSR570 and getting 2 Z1's ... this was purely an SD 16:9 decision... worked out OK, but i was lucky...
knocked those of recently and now looking at another alternative.. i personally despise HDV... everything about the format is a compromise... fair enough its USABLE, and in controlled environments it can be rather nice, but IMO the compression noise is low ambient environments just cannto be compared to SD..
however as mentioned by someone else, weddings really dont justify certain costs.. so i sold off the Z1's... as most of my corporate stuff is already established, they dont care what camera i use and most of the deliveries arenow web/intranet based.. not DVD, or HD..
More than likely my opinion on the HDV format is stemmed from the sheer lack of tweakbility of this unit.. in addiiton to the noise levels and image quality (or lack of) compared to an SD DVX100/a

Im considering an XLH1 and an A1 as second unit, as i also have a canon5d and throwing one of these lenses on an H1 would be ideal for what i want to do.
720p or 1080p is also the 2 formats i would consider, i wouldnt even bother with interlaced... if i my clients want interlaced, they'd go hire a handycam and shoot their own wedding..

One thing i should point out..
I have shot several weddings with the JVC HD101... i like the camera.. i like the form factor, i like the focus peak.. i HATE the lense (flaring and CA is abysmal) BUT ive used DVX100'''s as B-roll.. when scaling DVX to 720p to match.. i have to say.. youd be VERY hard presed to notice the difference between the 2 save from some sharpness.. what you will notice however is the motion and image smoothness, and more importantly, cleanliness of the scaled footage vs the native HDV footage.
In addition.. many brides prefer the softer look because even though skin detail is visible, its not as "shocking" as native

IMO if you can shoot SD and scale to HD res and STILL make it look good, then theres no point in bothering with cameras unless your clients are demanding a change.

At this time, here in Aus, australian clients hardly understand what Widescreen is about.. let alone what HD topns are available, let alone the differences within these options.. Even with SD, they dont understand the differences of progressive scan, and when you show them.. its only THEN that they realise how important this element can be when theyre tossing up between production houses..

At this time, even though there is a means to deliver what we create in HD, it still a toss up between how much these additions will cost and how much clients are willing to pay..
At this time, i can tell you clients are NOT willing to pay extra for HD.. not here in aus anyway.. whether it be shot or delivered in HD, they dont care.. they just want a DVD that looks good..

keep them coming!

I went from PD150 to Z1 for my corporate event video business.

For me, HDV is about doing SD right, and the Z1 enables me to do a shoot at 16:9 HDV, ingest 4:3 DV for on-site edits, then later re-ingest at 16:9 for versions used on plasma screens.

Corporate events can finish with a candid, wich is usually shown on the same screen as the PowerPoint - hence 4:3. However, I'm seeing more and more use of plasmas at events, causing problems for PPT, but the video looks great.

A 4:3 video on a 16:9 TV or widescreen laptop is really 'don't go there'. OTOH, a 16:9 video on a 4:3 laptop or TV is 'filmic' in the eyes of my clients. I reckon 25% of my work this year will be exclusively 16:9 (last year was 10% - but a lucrative and important 10%).

The Z1 shooting HDV also gives me underscan monitoring, which for projection - where the whole area is considered 'safe' - is really important to me.

However, I really wanted the JVC HD100 as the pictures are gorgeous and the stock lens, whilst flawed, works with the format to create what looks like sharper yet filmic images. It doesn't do in-camera downconvert, and didn't work with FCP at the time, so I had to pass. I also really coveted the HVX200 as an HD camera, but a single 8GB P2 doesn't suit our industry, and I don't need HD yet.

But I DO need HDV so I can downsample it to SD at 4:2:2 to get better than DV at standard definition.

I'll be shopping for another camera next year (this year's toy budget will go on a steadicam flyer). It will probably be an F330 (though I want a F350). I thought about RED, but there's a telecine process - not good on-site. I thought about second hand 570s, but it's still tape and needs realtime ingest.

XDCAM-HD seems to be the best logical step up which will be to true HD - which, may I point out, is a domain that my niche should adopt better than most as almost all outputs are either 1280x720 plasmas or data-rez projectors. Drop a 1280x720 WMV into PowerPoint or 1280x720 PhotoJPEG QT into KeyNote, project, and admire.

I'm using 2 FX1's and a Sony single-chip, smaller camera for the more "portable" shots. I'm currently shooting all SD until I get more fluent with the HDV requirements. I also shoot all 16:9 and really enjoy that wide-screen format. Customers really seem to like it, too.

"But I DO need HDV so I can downsample it to SD at 4:2:2 to get better than DV at standard definition"

Aye? whered u get this number from?
HDV is only 4:2:0... no matter what u do with it it will alwyas remain 4:2:0

"But I DO need HDV so I can downsample it to SD at 4:2:2 to get better than DV at standard definition"

Aye? whered u get this number from?
HDV is only 4:2:0... no matter what u do with it it will alwyas remain 4:2:0

HDV 720p is 720 by 1280 pixels, with 4:2:0 color sampling that means your chromatic resolution for HDV video is 360 by 640. If you transcode this HDV to a SD 4:2:2 condec such as DVCpro 50 you can maintain the higher chromatic resolution. Standard 4:1:1 DV at 480 by 720 has a chomatic resolution of 720 by 180. Converting HDV to 4:2:2 SD you can maintain the chromatic resolution of 360 by 640, which when conformed to 4:2:2 you get a chromatic resolution 360 by 360. Now true, this is not quite as good as 4:2:2 video, true 4:2:2 SD would give you a chromatic resolution of 480 by 360. However you end up with alot more color information that you would if you shot 4:1:1 DV. If you converted your HDV to SD 4:4:4 (which would use alot of bandwidth) you would be able to maintain the full chromatic resolution of HDV.... you would get something that actually has more chromatic resolution than 4:2:2 video, but laid out in a different pattern.

It also should be noted that interlaced HDV brakes up the 4:2:0 chromatic sampling to lend itself towards interlacing.... so you don't get quite the same benifits converting interlaced HDV as you do progressive scan HDV.

"But I DO need HDV so I can downsample it to SD at 4:2:2 to get better than DV at standard definition"

Aye? whered u get this number from?
HDV is only 4:2:0... no matter what u do with it it will alwyas remain 4:2:0


Ah - here be the magic: (edit - with apologies to Adam for his fine answer - his reply beat mine)

It also works for downsampling HDV2 to uncompressed SD (or DV50 for that matter) and the 4:2:0 big blocky chroma pixels become shrunk to that closer to the 4:2:2 pixels of SD - hence you can shoot under strong coloured lighting used in theatrical and pop concert situations without that blocky look that gives away DV.

And interlacing is one thing that really bugs me about the Z1. IMHO, it's unnecessary for HD as almost all consumer HD displays are progressive (if it's Plasma or it's LCD, it's progressive by design - only CRTs of old *needed* interlace). I believe interlace is present on the Z1 as it doesn't have the compute power to do progressve - even the JVC had to split its 1280x720 into two blocks to do it.

Well I'm just starting out with XM1, XL1S and just bought a XL2 (we have some 3 camera shoots coming up) did not go for HDV due to the fact the way I will be delivering the content is just on DVD (for domestic market) and so do not need that quality for a while as yet (I'm in the UK).

Until most of the customers start all having HD TV's and HD players I just don't see the point of the expence, we do all our own burning in house as well so it's just not an investment in cameras but serious spending on Hardware as well.

I'm also doing a few in house projects that I'd like to shoot on HDCAM (was maybe thinking of buying in next year just one camera). But now wondering whether to leave it and jump the format and go for the Red at a later date.

Moved to new thread...

Peter & Andy have both made alot of sense here.

When you're making a living from wedding video you just have to just ask yourself; Is buying 2 x HDV cams & new NLE going to give you a return on your investment or are you satifying a lusty desire for the latest toy?

Simply unjustifyable for us here in Aust. as very few of the couples we visit even know how to setup their TV/DVD to display 16:9 correctly. The wedding video budget for most couples in our district is between $2K to $3K (AUD) and can't see them paying another $500 to $1K to have it all done in HD.

If doing wedding video was a part-time hobby and I had very little financial commitment in it, I would have already gone HD.

No offense Paul, but this thread has absolutely nothing to do with HDV vs SD or whether or not it's a good or bad decision. It is only for the purpose of seeing what people are currently using. Please read the original post by Joe. Thank you

Monday

Thanks Monday.....and yes, LETS ALL STAY ON TOPIC HERE....or start another thread. This thread was started by me but is here for all of us to have a solid way of seeing what folks are using for cams around here, and if it keeps getting side tracked by comments on how HDV is this and SD is that, and this codec works better than this and the color sampling is better than that, the original idea gets lost in the rubble.

Cams ONLY!!!!! or start another thread.
thanks-joe

Thanks Monday.....and yes, LETS ALL STAY ON TOPIC HERE....or start another thread. This thread was started by me but is here for all of us to have a solid way of seeing what folks are using for cams around here, and if it keeps getting side tracked by comments on how HDV is this and SD is that, and this codec works better than this and the color sampling is better than that, the original idea gets lost in the rubble.

Cams ONLY!!!!! or start another thread.
thanks-joe


No offence taken Monday.
He he, like Chinese whispers, this is what happens to threads when they go on for more than a couple of pages. If policing threads was a paying job we'd all be a millionaires today.
Questa La Vita!!

Moved topic to new thread...

I use a JVC HD110U
I shoot my weddings 720P 30, only because 24 frame is pretty new to me, and I get alot od smear.

I like the camera's feel, I hate the lack of an auto focus. I came from a Sony Z1U and truth be told, I only went with the JVC because I wanted progressive, and the ability to change the lens.
Well, 10,000.00 later (for the entire camera kit I purchased) I wish I would have just bought 2 Z1U's and forgot about progressive. Even now I am thinking of either buying a small form factor camera like the Z1U, or buying a glidecam, 6 hors of holding that big camera kills me.

I still have yet to achive the look and feel I wanted with this camera, whivh makes me even more regretive of buying it.

Takes a good picture though.

Last year I used an FX1 and an HC1. This year I'll be using the FX1 and a Canon XHA1.

I bought the FX1 about a year ago because it seemed like the best bang for the buck. I convinced my mother-in-law to buy the HC1 and our church to buy the XHA1. I get to borrow them just about whenever I want. Much cheaper than owning or renting!

I felt that, compared to the PD170, for example, the slightly higher price and slightly lower low-light performance of the FX1 was a small price to pay for all the current and future benefits of HD. I was afraid of buying something that might be obsolete and worthless in a couple of years. I was coming from a 7 lux single chip SD Sony, so the 3 lux rating of the FX1 was a huge improvement to me!

The FX1 is starting to look a little obsolete now, because it doesn't shoot progressive!

to be honest, low light performance isnt the be all and end all

IMO colour saturation and gradation accuracy far exceeds the need to see in the dark

HDV in the sun...ahh...so nice
Sony HC5

I've been using the Z1 since June '05 with an FX1 as a spare. Replaced it with an A1 last year to save weight.

We're currently using a pair of PD-170s for mostly wedding work. I think we'll get introduced to HD by purchasing an HV20 very soon. No plans to upgrade until 2008. BTW, if PD-170s had native 16.9, HD upgrade would be much later.