The gigantic "which camera should I buy" thread!

[Gale Smith]

Steve-

I have been doing some filming for a hunting show and I use two cameras. I use a sony dsr-pd150 and a canon gl1. The sony has great low-light capabilities, great audio, and excellent video sharpness. Its only downfall is the 12x lens is not big enough for western hunting with shot over 300 yards. This is why I bought the gl1. It comes with a 20x lens and I put a 1.7x lens on top for 34x total zoom. It shoots great video also. The low-light isn't as good and the audio is horrible. If I were you, I would get a canon gl2, get a telecoverter lens and upgrade the audio with a good shot gun mic. The gl2 is compact and with your buget of $6000, you might be able to get two of them. I like using two cameras on a hunt---one for filming the hunter and one for the impact shot. With the teleconvert lens on, you cannot shoot closeups because of vignetting effect (porthole). It takes a little practice using two cameras, but it's worth it with the amount of footage you can get on one hunt.

Which network are you going to be airing on?

[Gale Smith]

One other thing Steve. Chances are, there will be times when you are going to want to film two different hunts and you will need two cameras. Once you get going and people know you are filming hunts, you are going to be busy.

Have you thought about adding a western hunting affiliate to your show?

[Steve Leary]

We already have a few DVCPRO50 cameras and I'm just looking to add another camera, for those times when all of the gear is out, without the expense of a DVCPRO50. My first thought was a smaller camera such as the Sony PD170 or even the canon XL2 (we already have an XL1s), but my thought now is to get a bigger camera such as the DVC200.

I'm not sure what camera would best suit my needs without spending the high end dollar of another DVCPRO50. I hope this helps.

[Bill Pryor]

Probably the closest thing to the DVCPRO50 camera would be a DSR570, but with a decent lens, batteries, etc., you're talking around $25K, and it's still DV25. So, it all depends on what you want to spend. I personally would prefer to stick with DVCPRO50 if at all possible...maybe consider looking for a good used one?
The 1/2" chip Panasonic DVC200 would be better than the 1/3" chip cameras.

[Steve Leary]

What do you think a good used DVCPRO50 would go for and how is it different than a DVC200? Again, I'm not the most technically savvy person, that's why I ask.

[Bill Pryor]

DVCPRO50 is a better quality format than DV25. Most people can barely tell the difference, if any, between DV50 and Digibeta. I don't know what a used camcorder would go for. I believe the SDX900 sells for close to $40K with lens and power, and it's too new for many used ones to be around. I wonder if Panasonic has a B-stock thing for their broadcast line as Sony does. That would be the place to look.

The DVC200 is a 1/2" chip DV25 camera. To my knowledge all the DVCPRO50 cameras are 2/3" chip higher end ones. Don't confuse Panasonic's DVCPRO50 with their DVCPRO, which is a DV25 format. People just say DVCPRO when they mean Panasonic's DVCPRO25. It seems to be the format of choice more for local TV news than for production people who tend to lean toward DVCAM, which is Sony's professional version of DV, but DVCAM and DVCPRO and DV are all DV25 formats. DVCPRO50 is a different animal entirely, and costs a lot more.

[Graham Jones]

I like Adrian's idea of the mini35.

You've stated there is no real reason to buy a shouldermount, and even stated there are real reasons not to - you don't like them.

It's just the image thing, you admit.

If you feel bowing to image is unavoidable that's unfortunate but don't go to the extreme of purchasing a cam you don't feel otherwise inclined to purchase!

Turn a dull act into an exciting one - use the oppurtunity to get a mini35!

Then when you do feel it's time to move from the xl1, you can take your mini35 and lenses with ya...

Just my opinion.

[Gary Szunyog]

I have a sony trv900 which I like but I may upgrade to perhaps an xl2, vdx100a, or the pd170. My usuage is to tape our co. events for self promotion on dvd and the web.

Which camera is an upgrade and most practical for me?

A local camera shop has had the xl2 for 3 days, I ran some footage from it as well as on the trv for comparison last night. I am not familiar with 24p. How can I best compare the output with fcp hd to see the major improvements. I noticed right off that the resolution was better as well as zooming.

gar/ohio

[Shawn Mielke]

I would say that any of these three cameras would be perfectly fine for what you want to do. Perhaps others will chime about 30p as it relates to dvd and web video compatibility. Doing searches here on each of these cams and/or visiting the appropriate forums will help too. I shoot with the PD170 and love it love it love it!

[Les Wilson]

I also have a TRV900 and was ready to upgrade. The cameras you mention may be overkill for what you describe. Unless you need XLR audio in the camera, you may want to consider the Sony VX2100 and Canon GL2. They are both good event cameras. You don't need 24p (DVX100a) or even 30p (XL1, XL2, GL2) for that matter. Also, you can pickup a used XL1s on ebay for about the same $2500 as the VX2100 or GL2. The VX2100 will give you a better image than the GL2.

[Alex Filacchione]

I'm sure that this has been asked a million times...

I am looking to get a pro-sumer camcorder. I have a limited budget, and some specific needs...

I will be filming in a variety of conditions, mostly documantary-style work. I will be working in daylight and many indoor locations (offices, warehouses), which is fine. However, I will also be doing a lot of work inside recording studios, which can often have dim (Mood) lighting. Additionally the other demanding environment (though I will be doing much less of this) will be filming in a night club(s). Not the dance kind, but filming bands on stage, etc.

Obviously these can be somewhat demanding in terms of lighting. I am thinking that even a camera with good low light capabilities might not be enough in some of these situations, so I will have to bring some lighting. The problem here is that the lighting must be unobtrusive (not get in the way of people in cramped spaces like a recording studio control room), and easily moveable in realtime (like filming a band on stage) and not blinding to anyone. Diffused lighting will be what I need I am assuming.

I am VERY new to this field of work, so I have gone online and ordered some books on DV, lighting, etc. I also have a friend that went to film school that I might be able to get to help me with lighting and camera work.

Now, currently my budget is around $1500 max (though I am saving mroe money as time goes by).

Because of this I am looking to buy used. It seems that the best used prices are currently on eBay (and I know how to watch out for scammers on eBay). So, I am basically looking at cameras that sell new for around $2100 or less to get me to a realistic expectation of finding a $1500 deal on a camera.

So far I have narrowed down my choices to the following cameras:

Sony VX2100
Sony VX2000
Sony DSR-PDX10
Pana AG-DVC30
Pana AG-DVC80
JVC GR-HD1

Most of these sell for $1700 - $2200 new from reputable online resellers.

Oddly enough, I see that the VX2000 is selling for about $100 MORE than the VX2100!

I have seen several JVC GR-HD1s go on ebay for $1500 or less. Ditto w/ the DVC80

I would like to be able to use the camera to digitize analog video by inputting the analog video into the camcorder and then converting it to DV. It would be easier than getting an external device to do that, and probably cheaper.

The cheapest of the bunch *seems* to be the JVC GR-HD1. I have heard, however, that it does not have a "wider" angle lens like the Sonys or the Panasonics, and performs poorly in low light. I am wondering if, in the environments that I mentioned, ALL of them would perform poorly enough that I would need external lighting, rendering the arguement about the JVCs poor lighting capability a moot issue? WIth the JVC's single CCD, how does the image quality compare with other miniDV Cams listed when running in 480i (std DV) mode?

Personally I like the idea of "future proofing" with the HD capabilities of the JVC, plus the price. But for right now I really can't see a situation where I would use anything higher than DVD resolution (480p/ 30fps). How are the other cameras at de-interlacing their 480i/60fps footage? Is there any noticable loss of quality? If not, then would I be better off getting something like a Pana or Sony for its better std video capabilities/lens, etc and de-interlacing rather than getting the JVC?

What other applications would I need or want HDV for?

My projects (some of them) will end up being in a presentation/proposal for TV/Cable broadcast. Mind you, that means that my filming will be in the *proposal* to the execs, not in the *ACTUAL* broadcast material (though with luck that could happen in the future). The proposal will most likely be (as far as my filming goes) presented on a DVD.

Thanks for any input! I have researched these cameras a lot, but still can't decide which would be better for me, and at the right price. Over time my budget my grow a little bit, but not too much, and I think I have set somewhat realistic price expectations for the cameras that I have chosen.

Alex F

[Alex Filacchione]

Oh yes, SMPTE time coding is a definite plus as well. It will help address any video/audio syncing problems that may arise. I can borrow a friends external (rack mount) SMTPE box, but I'd rather not deal with that, plus it would be borrwed rather than owned. :-) If filming a band on stage if I can get good enough audio quality and internal SMPTE that would be great. However, with moving the camera around I would get different audio perspectives, which is not good. I will probably bring some external recording equipment, and then sync up the audio and video post.

I would like to present some of the material in 16:9 and some in 4:3 if possible. How much image quality is lost when doing digital squeeze 16:9? How noticable is it?

A little bit about my background...

My experience lies mainly in audio - recording, writing, engineering, etc. I also do graphics work, but that is still graphics ala Photoshop. I do a lot of audio recording, mixing, etc. and have most of the necessary equipment for that (mics, etc.), though I do have to buy a new control surface for NuEndo since my old drummer took mine when he moved (I got other stuff - fair trade when splitting up out stuff!).

Thanks again.

Alex F

[Ray Echevers]

I'd say go for a used Sony VX1000 (the best natural colors, and great picture), used Sony VX2000, or a new Sony 2100.
Don't go for the Canon GL series, unless you like a very grainy picture.

[Dylan Couper]

ALso consider a used Canon Gl1 or GL2. The Gl1 will defintiely be under $1500, and you might be able to get a GL2 for that price if you look for a while.

[Alex Filacchione]

I was looking at the GL2 as well (just forgot to list it). How does the GL2 perform in low light? Will it be an issue in my environments anyway? Why would you reccomend the GL2 over any of the others listed since they are all pretty much in the same price range?

Thanks,

Alex F