30p or 24p for documentary?

[Mark Bournes]

Yes, but everything shot with the other camera will have to be rendered when added to the timeline.

[Kevin Defy]

ok, thanks a lot for the response!!!!

[Will Mahoney]

I've been running around with a Canon ZR85 for three years and it never did me wrong. I just upgraded to the A1 and I love it. But the ZR85 is still the backup and "secong angle" cam.

Good luck!

[Jose A. Garcia]

Hi all,

I supose this is the best area to post this question. Anyway if moderators don't mind, I'll start the same thread in another section because the more help I can get, the better.

I just started a new project. I need to shoot a 10-15 min documentary short film with real life situations as well as some interviews inside 4 different hospitals, but the people behind it are looking for an image and motion feeling very close to 35mm film. There will be both handheld and static shots. We have very little time to shoot and the camera setup cannot be a problem. It has to be easy to handle and give very good results.

I have to decide if I want to rent something big (RED One), something a little smaller (Sony EX1) or buy a good HD cam and a 35mm adapter, which is the option I like the most, because after this I can still use it for other projects.

If I choose the last option, what would make a good 24p setup? HV20 + Adapter? Post work would include pulldown removal, CC (Magic Bullet Looks) and editing... First I considered capturing uncompressed via laptop+intensity card, but some shots can be difficult using that setup. Anyway I'm not discarding anything yet.

I know some may even laugh at me but I've seen some shots with a Canon HF100 (AVCHD cam) and it's quite close to the HV20 in terms of image quality. It also gives 17mbps using H264 which I read is more efficient than HDV compression. I know I'm talking about consumer cams, but that's what I can afford now and I've seen some impressive things shot with an HV20 and an adapter... and that camera's just like $1,000.

Anyway I'm open to all possible suggestions.

What do you think?

Thanks.

[Rikki Bruce]

Im no expert but the HV20 / 30 is a good bet. HDV appears to be better at present than AVCHD and its easier on the computer to edit and view too.

A 35mm adapter would work, I have one myself, but the cheaper ones tend to look VERY 35mm adapter. In most of the footage Ive seen owners seem to want to draw attention to the fact that they have a shiny new adapter and blow everything out with it.

Dont forget audio as it makes up 50% of your production and some lighting too.

Going straight through HDMI is a waste of time as A) the 35mm adapter is going to kill your resolution and B) its probably going to be watched on a DVD or the web so 1920x1080 is overkill.

R.

[Dylan Pank]

Jose,

AVCHD is more efficient than HDV but not necessarily better. It's more efficient because it throws away more image information in the compression process.

That might not matter for people shooting home video, but if you want to grade, or apply Magic Bullet looks, it's likely you'll need that picture info back and see problems if you find it's not there.

[Jose A. Garcia]

Yes, I know... I supose I was just trying to get rid of the tape.

I'm placing an order for a Brevis35 plus HV20 with rods and mattebox.

[Liam Hall]

Originally Posted by Jose A. Garcia

Yes, I know... I supose I was just trying to get rid of the tape.

I'm placing an order for a Brevis35 plus HV20 with rods and mattebox.

Better get some lenses too:)

[Jose A. Garcia]

I've got three canon FD lenses. A 28mm F2.8, a 50mm F1.8 and a 100mm F2.8.

[Liam Hall]

Originally Posted by Jose A. Garcia

I've got three canon FD lenses. A 28mm F2.8, a 50mm F1.8 and a 100mm F2.8.

You can get by with that - I shot a 45 min doco last year with three 40 year-olds Nikkors, still check ebay and see if you can pick up a cheap 85mm or 35mm.

Good luck.