The gigantic "which camera should I buy" thread!

[Paul Sedillo]

<<<-- Originally posted by elusive_kudo : Or $ 299 for academic version of Final Cut Pro 3, as long as one of your kids is a student of any sort. -->>>

This is the way that I was able to get FCP 3. Thank HCC for the assist with this one.

Thanks a ton for the info on the software. I will check both of those out.

Regarding a camera: If I drop $300ish on software that leaves me only $700 bucks or so. I know it's tight but I need to get a camera. I could wait a few more months but maybe the better question would be to ask what I should look for in a camera.

Thanks for being kind to newbie.

B

[Chris Hurd]

I would seriously consider a solid, reliable 1-chip camcorder. Currently the best-selling DV camcorder in the U.S. is the Canon ZR45MC.

See http://www.canondv.com/zr02/index.html

For what you're doing, I really doubt that you need a three-chip camcorder. The Canon ZR45MC is easy to use, intuitive, feature packed, and relatively inexpensive, making it perfect for student use. Plus, it offers full manual control of exposure, focus, shutter and white balance which is often a requirement in a learning environment.

The ZR45MC can be purchased from our DV Info Net sponsors (see www.dvinfo.net/sponsors) who are authorized Canon dealers, such as Pro-Tape, ZGC and Zotz Digital. At less than $700, you'll have enough left over for editing software. Hope this helps,

[Ken Tanaka]

I have a ZR25 that I use for casual and vacation shooting. I can attest to Chris' remarks on the ZR's general value. I don't know how old the "kids" in your group are. But, if they are small children they will find the ZR's light weight and nice industrial more comfortable in their hands than some heavier cameras. The camera's controls are also designed in a very self-evident manner.

Seriously, my ZR does a fine job with most scenes, particularly considering that it's only a small-chip/single-chip camera. It's really a great value.

[Dylan Couper]

I don't see why you would need FCP, or Premiere. There are lots of $100 firewire cards that come with simple but efficient video editing software. By no means professional, but the learning curve is probably much eaiser.
I don't know much about software at this level, but I'm sure someone here can recommend something on the entry level scale.
This way would probably be much easier on your budget, and make your life simpler too. Do you really want, or have the time, to learn a professional level editing program?

I also agree a 3-chip camera would be overkill for what you seem to need. Stick with a Canon ZR. Good value for the $$.

Most importantly, if you get a ZR and entry level editing software, you should have $200 left over. Then you have a bit of money for other gear, like the #1 most important piece of equiptment you need, a tripod! And maybe an external mic.

Thanks again.

Dylan...I do appreciate your advice. I will have to check out some of the lower end programs. That said, I have used premier before (while back) and I own my own home recording studio which uses high end recording software (Pro tools, Cubase, etc). Audio is different but it will be easier for me anyway to get it. But, it all might be a mute point. I actually was given Vegas Video 2 last year (buddy of mine loves it for audio/video). I will have to check it out and see if it will do the trick.

You all have been a ton of help.

I'll let ya know what route I will go...

B

[Andrew Petrie]

NTSC or PAL

Which of the two did you chose, and why. I know the differences, but why you bought it and what you do with it, I would REALLY like to know.


My projects are personally funded, so keeping things away from film transfer is ideal for me. So, NTSC is much more suited for my needs (and being in North America, it's the standard). I hate American having their own standards that differ from the rest of the world (an engineer's nightmare :D )

[Dylan Couper]

I chose NTSC because I didn't want to have any hassles with transferring from PAL, or any other "issues" creep up on me and kick me in the wallet later.
I'm not transferring to film, so the 25fps doesn't mean much to me. Also, my final format is VHS, so the extra resolution doesn't offer me much either.
ANd as I was buying a used camera, NTSC was much easier to find localy.

[Jeff Donald]

Unless your going to film at some point, it doesn't make sense to use PAL in North America. The slight resolution gain is lost when PAL is converted to NTSC. Most of my work is corporate and even with international sales units, if the company is in NA they want it to play in the boardroom. The other work I do is documentary (North American wildlife, mostly birds) that is intended for either broadcast or sales in NA. Match your format to your market.

Film is an entirely different beast. I think that post house that does the tranfer from DV to film should dictate what video format you use. some prefer PAL, some prefer NTSC.

Jeff

[Nathan Gifford]

For now, NTSC is probably less hassle over all. In the future as HD starts making inroads, I suspect that HD will become the worldwide standard.

Nathan Gifford

P.S. It has been rumored that when Canon introduces this prosumer cam it will be called the XL_1$

[Adrian Douglas]

I'd go with NTSC.

I am currently using my PAL XL1 in Japan(NTSC) and it is more trouble than it is worth.

I'm Australian and bought my camera before even considering I would end up in Japan. I missout on a bit of work as my camera is PAL and it is not woth the cost of conversion.

[Frank Granovski]

Whether you need PAL or NTSC depends where you live and what you want to do with your footage. I own both types of cams and use both, depending which one's best for what I want to do.

hi,


Im new here. I've been researching this site and others for a little while now to try and find a camera for myself. I plan on making a trilogy of shorts next summer, and I was wondering if people could give me thier opinions on good cameras to go for. Im currently looking at the Pd150 , the Canon XL1s, and maybe the GL-2. I know all the pros and cons of each camera . I just would like some opinions on these cameras from people who are experienced. From stills i have seen i probably enjoy the Pd150's the most, but I also like the way the XL1 looks as well. I basically am looking for a camera i could use for awhile and one that could give me the most options and be able to do the most things when i am filming. I plan on testing all these cams out in a couple of weeks. Thanks a lot,

[Jeff Donald]

Hi Splangy,

Welcome. If your looking for flexability and the most options, the XL1s is the winner in my book. But, without knowing the shorts you'll be working on it is really hard to recommend one over the other. Flexability and options come at a price (what doesn't?). Namely, size, weight and cost of support accessories, lights, tripods, cases, additional lenses, adapters, filters, you name it, it costs more for the XL1s. Smaller size and weight may be an advantage in your productions. Interchangable lenses may be an advantage. However, for the things that I do, I'll never consider a camera that does not have interchangable lenses. At times I need ultra wide (1.5mm) to super telephoto (5000mm). The GL2 and the PD150 can't deliver.

Jeff

[Kyle "Doc" Mitchell]

Hello:

Recently, I was in the same boat as you. I finally decided that the Canon was my favorite over the Sony. Still, one thing I had ruled out during my research was using an old XL1. However, logic eventually hit me. I suddenly realized that I could get an old XL1 and save tons of dough. I could use this dough to enhance my projects. In your case, you'll improve your shorts. If you get an old, good XL1, you can take the extra money and get good lights or props or other things (filters, etc). Remember, its all about story and screen composition. Some extra cash to help your screen composition to look better can go a long way. So, I bought an old, used XL1 from someone (not-so-ironically, from someone on this site). And, I certainly DO NOT regret my decision. Oh yeah, I've looked through the PD150 and XL1. They're both great cameras. The XL1 is flexible for my use (I shoot action, kung-fu-like projects with people). The PD150 looks the same. However, I do like the skin-tones with the XL1. But thats all personal-preference. It depends on your subject. What do your shorts contain/require? That will help you make you're decision.

Regards,

Kyle "Doc" Mitchell