The gigantic "which camera should I buy" thread!

[Arlen Sahakian]

All you need to know is that 60i mode is the best except maybe in low light. ;)

so guys ur saying that interlace is better than progressive in my work anyway i wanted to add that im in a pal country but once i heard that NTSC works on Pal but PAL wont work on NTSC, if thats true i can work NTSC because now Camcorders usually shoot in both modes. but guys isnt 25p less art effects than 50i ? or i got that wrong too ?

[Ervin Farkas]

24p is the "film look" - unless you're after that, just shoot interlaced. The main difference is that 24p has an almost jerky look - depends on the viewer's eye (and how you train your eye), but most of us can see that you have a series of still images; with interlaced, the picture is so smooth, you can't tell it's a series of stills.

While NTSC camcorders are less expensive (if bought in the USA), don't get fooled by the idea that "NTSC works on Pal but PAL wont work on NTSC" - it's not that simple. Not sure exactly what are you referring to here, but if you are talking about DVD players and TV sets, the affirmation is only half true. While *some* DVD players will play both standards, some won't - and the same is true over here in the States, I have 3 DVD players, all play PAL (output NTSC) but not all players will do that.

I think it's safe to advise you to keep shooting 50i/PAL at least until you get a deeper understanding of the different modes/frame rates; then decide what to do. In any case, shooting 60i won't do much good to you, the two modes you might think about are 50i and 24p.

I hope this helps.

P.S. You have a very nice website!

[Arlen Sahakian]

Thanks Ervin it was helpfull

ok for now i will stick with 50i and 24p but why not 25p ?
now on my weddings i use different kind of camcorders like usually my wedding are 4 cameras the one on Jimmy jib is Dsr-400 with 4.8 wide angle on steadycam also
on tripod is dsr-250 and on the floor small camera Dsr-170 thats why im thinking now because its hard to decide which camera to buy i was thinking of buying One EX1 and two Z7's or instead two Z7's one z7 and one S270.
like this i can use the s270 on the jimmy jib with a wide lense and ex1 on the floor and the other on the tripod and when i need one for steady i rent one s270 i think all of these cameras can shoot 50i or 24p
what do u think ?
and one another thing guys i was today one of sony dealer shops he told me that if i wanna put 2/3 lens on z7 it needs converter which wont give us the true quality of 2/3 is that true ?

thanks about the website Ervin in 2 days it will be finalized u can check again

[Josh Bright]

OK so I am brand new to DV and pretty much have no idea what I'm doing but am finally in a position to start learning (the hard way or course). I'm looking to complete at least one short film this year and then hopefully get to work on an (ultra) low budget feature. Anyway, in the market for a camera and after reading several pages of this thread got dizzy and decided to just throw myself on the mercy of the experts. Here are the things that characterize my possible projects

edited on Final Cut Pro 5

some will be shot in Black and White

Looking to get as close to a "film look" as possible (just like everyone, I know)

Low light performance is a big plus

different aspect ratios (depending on project)

intend to do some post production tinkering with the image (don't know if that matters)


I took a long hard look at the GL2 but was unimpressed by a lot of the reviews, recently I've looked at the Panasonic AG-DVX100B and it looked a lot better suited to my needs. I've also taken a glance at the Sony HVR-A1U but since I really don't know exactly what I'm doing I'd like to get some opinions before I drop any cash. I'd love to stay in the $2000 range. Thanks

[Garrett Gibbons]

I would go with an HDV camera-- in this case the A1U --because of a number of issues:

-compositing/special effects/post-processing always works better at higher resolution
-but you can film in HDV and import as DV if you don't need the higher resolution
-the light sensors on those Sony HDV cameras really do excellently in low light. I've shot a lot of footage with a Z1U, which I think has the same basic optical/processing hardware, and it's done excellently in low light. Better than Panasonic, in my humble opinion (though not by much)
-any camera will let you shoot interlaced (60i), but if you deinterlace in Final Cut/After Effects, to emulate a progressive scan image, it looks more film-like. 30p and 24p don't look that different. I personally think that the "film look" is more in progressive, whole frames than it is in framerate. That's my personal belief.
-the Panasonic HVX-200 (now HVX-200a, or the upcoming HPX-170) really wins the versatility battle, allowing you to shoot overcranked, fluid slo-mo footage, DV/HD, 16:9/4:3, etc..., but for over double what you're looking to spend. Plus, P2 cards aren't everyone's favorite. (I work with them just fine, and absolutely love the HVX-200.)
-the Sony A1U, V1U, Z1U cameras will let you shoot in 16:9 or 4:3, but the Panasonic DVX-100/a/b only shoots in 4:3 unless you use an expensive optical matte box, which you may not want to bother with. If you get the A1U and shoot everything in HD 16:9 you can crop and down-compress to DV at any point. And the whole thing is shot on cheaper, easier to archive tapes--less hassle than P2 cards.

A1U is probably your winner, combining a beautiful picture, plenty of options (though not as many as a Pana P2 camera), and a really affordable price. That's my recommendation, though you'll get made fun of in some circles for shooting on HDV-- it's not "true" HD. It'll look great, though. Just deinterlace in post-production.

[Michael Wisniewski]

For your price range the A1U is a good choice, but not great in low light. You could stretch a little upwards and go for the Canon XH A1 / Sony FX7 series. Or maybe go down the chain to the Canon HV30, which might get you closer to the film look, since you could buy the most imporant "film look" tools - decent lighting and sound equipment ... and maybe a good writing, acting, and/or directing class.

Keep in mind editing HDV might add some overhead to your editing workflow: money + time.

[Garrett Gibbons]

"For your price range the A1U is a good choice, but not great in low light."

Again, I haven't worked with the A1U, but the Z1U and V1U take excellent pictures in low lighting, in my opinion. I've seen test results comparing low light footage from the DV generation, and I believe that the Sony did the best. I own a Canon, work with 2 Sony cameras and a few Panasonic, and from my experience the Z1U and V1U take the best footage in low light.

As far as whether or not the A1U and the Z/V1U have the same imaging hardware... I believe they do, but I haven't confirmed that. Those are my two bits!

[Bill Pryor]

The A1U is a single chip camera (1/3"), the Z1U has 1/3" chips and the V1U has 1/4" chips.

[Garrett Gibbons]

So the V1U and Z1U have 3 chips, of their respective sizes?

It says on one site (below) that the Z1U used CCD sensors, whereas the V1U and A1U use the CMOS sensor. CMOS sensors don't do as well in low-light, but also have different properties that are quite desirable. Looks like the A1U isn't going to be quite as good in low light as the Z1U (the Sony I've spent more time with in low light).

http://digitalcontentproducer.com/ca...eo_sony_hvrau/

On CMOS: (there's a section comparing it to CCD sensors)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_pixel_sensor

Get your hands on a few of these, take footage with each, and see what you like. That's really the way to know what will work for you.

[Bill Pryor]

Yes, they are 3-chip cameras. The V1U and A1U have CMOS chips, while the Z1U has CCDs. The Z1U therefore would be the best under low light. However, the differences between all the HDV cameras is small when it comes to that. It takes light to make movies. If you're shooting TV news or something where you may not be able to light, then a larger 2/3" chip camera would be best.

[Mark Hoefflin]

Hello, being new here I have enjoyed reading the many posts; and now I have a few questions-

I wish to transfer many old super 8 and 8mm films via the workprinter xp. In order to use the workprinter I need a Camcorder with a FireWire output ( iLink ) This seems to cut down my options on which camcorder I should use.

The camcorder must have the following: at least a 12x optical lens & Firewire

What I dont know is if using a ' new ' HD Camcorder will be of any help or if I should stay with a ' Good ' SD camcorder.

My budget puts me at $2000.00 -

Any ideas?

[Jonathan Jones]

Originally Posted by Mark Hoefflin

Hello, being new here I have enjoyed reading the many posts; and now I have a few questions-

I wish to transfer many old super 8 and 8mm films via the workprinter xp. In order to use the workprinter I need a Camcorder with a FireWire output ( iLink ) This seems to cut down my options on which camcorder I should use.

The camcorder must have the following: at least a 12x optical lens & Firewire

What I dont know is if using a ' new ' HD Camcorder will be of any help or if I should stay with a ' Good ' SD camcorder.

My budget puts me at $2000.00 -

Any ideas?

Hi Mark,
Welcome to the forums.

As far as needing a camcorder that is equipped with firewire, just about every tape based entry level-to-semi-pro camcorder produced in the last several years will have a firewire port (also called iLink or iEEE1394) Some of the more recent exceptions might include the lousy mini-DVD camcorders as well as some of the hard drive and flash-based units - many of which will have USB 2.0 ports which will not work for your intended purposes.

As far as the firewire port, your selection landscape will be pretty vast.

As far as your HD or SD question, here is a quote from Roger's FAQ page on the Moviestuff site:
---------------

Q: "Will the WorkPrinter units work with my HD camera?

A: Not at this time, though you can use the HD camera in the SD mode. We are working towards an HD solution that is practical but are waiting to see if the market conforms to one delivery standard."
---------------

The FAQ doesn't go into any detail about WHY it won't work with the HD camera, but I can guess on a few points.

The resolution capacities of an average 1080i HDV camcorder more naturally conforms to the theoretical resolve of the 8mm film frame. But in my opinion, from the many many hundreds of home movie reels I've seen and/or restored, I really doubt the increase in pixels is really going to be of much benefit to the quality of the captured image. (Unless the 8mm was exceptionally shot and well preserved.) - (I'm probably going to prove myself wrong with this in due time.) With larger gauge film such as 16mm, the difference in quality between SD and HD would likely be much more evident.

I've been transferring film for a couple of years now with the Workprinter and my Canon XL2 in SD 4:3. I am constantly impressed with the quality of the transfers, which so far has always far exceeded the quality of some of the more traditional consumer level transfer methods, and always looks much better than anyone ever remembers seeing the footage projected against their living room walls in past decades.

In any case, with the Workprinter system, you are not actually recording the captured frames with the camcorder itself. So the HDV issue is irrelevant. But the capture software that is designed to work with the Workprinter captures in SD (.avi on PC, and .mov or .dv on Mac). These applications capture in 4:3 which is also appropriate for 8mm and Super 8.

HDV camcorders I've seen shoot in 16:9, which presents issues with the 4:3 Super 8 and 8mm source content.

I have read about a company that uses a Moviestuff device to capture to true HD via HD-SDI, but they indicated the need for modified gear and I'm not certain of the methods they are using for frame-by-frame capture.

If you are planning on doing some other types of productions and want to be future proof for at least a few years yet, you could still consider a Hi-Rez cam, but you might need to look into one that offers a 4:3 SD option to make sure it will work well with your Workprinter. (Despite regular protestations from recent HDV adopters, SD videography will continue to be around for several years.)

You can always give Roger a call (at Moviestuff ) if you need more accurate and up-to-date info on this topic. He often answers the phone himself and is very generous with his time by answering any questions you may have.

If you opt to buy a Standard Definition camcorder, there are some great older models that are well-loved in the industry - and you could get some great deals within your price range, especially if you get a good 2nd-hand unit.

Some older trusty models to consider might include the Sony PD150 or PD170 as well as the VX2100. There is also the widely popular DVX100 series. A little smaller form factor can be found in the Canon GL2, but it is also a great cam. Any of these will provide great results if properly used in conjunction with the Workprinter.

I've shot with the DVX, the PD170 and the GL2, and I love them all. I really love my XL2, but that model is usually priced above your stated budget range.

What you'll really make sure to look for is a nice quality 3-chip camcorder with a great piece of glass and a good complement of manual controls. There are other camera that I am sure will work well for your purposes and give astounding results, but I can't really comment beyond just the models I've used myself.

Hope this helps.

Have fun.

-Jon

[Tom Hardwick]

Originally Posted by Jonathan Jones

HDV camcorders I've seen shoot in 16:9, which presents issues with the 4:3 Super 8 and 8mm source content. -Jon

Must say I've not found the aspect ratio difference to be a problem when I transfer 3:4 film footage (Standard-8 and Super-8) to HDV. On the timeline I simply add black bars left and right of the 4:3 image, so that on an HD TV the picture will maintain the correct aspect ratio.

Of course modern upscaling DVD players will make an SD transfer of the film look pretty good, but a genuine transfer to HDV is even better.

tom.

[Mark Hoefflin]

Hello -

thank you both for your quick replies.

Jon, I had spoken with Roger about a month ago prior to ordering my workprinter. We covered many topics ( it was a lot of info in a very short amount of time on the phone :-)) I did not ask him specifically about HD Cameras - had been reading up in various Internet Forums and that is why I figured I would ask here in the Forum. There are a lot of workprinter customers out there, but as far as recommended cameras - rather little feedback..

The newer cameras seem to be going away ( from what I have seen ) from firewire to usb ( in the under 2000.- price category,)

I had been leaning towards the GL2 ( canon has a great rebate on it right now ) because it seems to offer the best deal for the money on lens and options- as I said I just wanted to ask some more experienced users for their opinion.

I am really anxious to see how well this whole set up works!

Mark

[Jonathan Jones]

Originally Posted by Tom Hardwick

Of course modern upscaling DVD players will make an SD transfer of the film look pretty good, but a genuine transfer to HDV is even better.

tom.

That makes perfect sense, more pixel data to work well for a better upscaling.

Does the capture software work well with the incoming 16:9? (Cinecap or CaptureMate?) It would be interesting to note why the FAQ indicates incompatibility with HD.

-Jon