The gigantic "which camera should I buy" thread!

[Don Bloom]

in the 1/2 inch chip arena you have a few choices-JVC5100 (doesn't shoot DVCAM) - I've shot a lot of spot news with it and have never had problem with DV over DVCAM- 1/2" a good Canon 19X7 the VP-F116 viewfinder and you're good to go. Otherwise Sony had the DSR300,370 and 390 series which are no longer in production but can be found used-they're great cameras that shot DVCAM-have no LCD and few auto functions but are as solid as they come. You should be able to find a DSR3XX well within the price range you're thinking about. BTW, the JVC5100 also falls in the price range.

The Canon XLXX, JVC HD100 are 1/3" chips and the DSR400 is 2/3" chips as is the 450.
I disagree that SD is dead yet but that's just my opinion-TV stations still use BetaSP for the majority of their stuff.

HTHs
Don

[Ilan Epstein]

Alrighty, so I have talked to some of the people in charge and have some more details about the budget and needs.

The budget is actually $3,000.

Also, the reason for 2 cameras is a bit different. They have 2 cameras so one can be in the field recording, while the other one is in the library creating VHS copies. So essentially, the 2nd camera does not necessarily need to be as good. It just needs to be able to create copies so we can keep the masters separate.

So I am pretty new to HD and have a few more questions about that. If the videos are recorded onto a HDV tape, can those be transfered to a regular tape without an HD camera? Or is an HD camera necessary for that transfer? Also, what format should the HD footage be on for viewing? Can you store HD footage on a VHS tape or a DVD? Or does that need something special(other than an HD TV)?

And finally, would you consider a 1 chip HDV camera or a 3-chip DV camera better suited for this purpose? These would be recording generally in less than ideal conditions (Especially where lighting is concerned) by less than ideal videographers.

I was thinking that buying a high quality either 1-chip HD camera or a 3-chip DV camera along with a cheaper camera to keep in the library for transferring to tapes/DVD's would be the most cost effective as opposed to buying two of the same cameras.

Again, any advice/direction is greatly appreciated.

Thanks very much,
iLan

[Steve House]

Originally Posted by Ilan Epstein

Alrighty, so I have talked to some of the people in charge and have some more details about the budget and needs.

The budget is actually $3,000.

Also, the reason for 2 cameras is a bit different. They have 2 cameras so one can be in the field recording, while the other one is in the library creating VHS copies. So essentially, the 2nd camera does not necessarily need to be as good. It just needs to be able to create copies so we can keep the masters separate.

S...

I was thinking that buying a high quality either 1-chip HD camera or a 3-chip DV camera along with a cheaper camera to keep in the library for transferring to tapes/DVD's would be the most cost effective as opposed to buying two of the same cameras.

Again, any advice/direction is greatly appreciated.

Thanks very much,
iLan

Is the 2nd camera strictly for making copies and will never be used for shooting? If so, why not get one of the JVC combo decks - SR-VS30U - that has both VHS and DV and allows dubbing back and forth between the two. You'll get more flexibility, better quality, and lower overall cost than using a camera and VHS deck. Here's a link ... http://jvc.ca/jvcpro//product-detail...model=SR-VS30U

[David Kennett]

Ilan,

You didn't comment on how much editing is done. If you really want to take a different route, shoot with Sanyo HD1. It records standard definition or high definition directly to SD card in MP4 (H263 variety). Performance is marginal in low light, and HD performance is barely high definition (it's 720p, but not particilarly good 720p).

If you don't do editing, but simply encode to MP4 for server, this might be a much simpler approach. Use 4GB cards over, but copy MP4 files to DVDs for backup. Transfer of files to server could be done much faster than real time with $20 USB2.0 card reader.

This camera is basically a consumer product, and MSRP is $800, but I was intrigued with the idea that MP4 origination could save you considerable work. At least I may have caused you to think in a different arena. The HD1 is thoroughly discussed under HDV acquisition in this forum. There are quite a few sample clips too.

Good luck!

[Ilan Epstein]

Thanks for the input David,
As for editing, it's currently pretty minimal. To the extent that all I'm doing is separating if there are multiple clips on one tape.


You bring up a really good point, and I wish I could make use of that very time-saving process. My only reservations with that, is then the footage will always be mp4 at best. And there is a chance this footage may be used later for some sort of promotional materials. I'd hate to limit the quality and editing capabilities by going direct to mp4, even though that would cut MY time down QUITE considerably - Almost in half!

After looking at a lot of different models and reviews, I've been thinking less along the lines of HD and more along the lines of a good CCD DV camera. I think that the HD cameras would need a slightly higher budget to make them worthwhile.

I've been thinking strongly about the VX2100. I especially like it's ability to film well (relatively speaking) under low-light conditions. I was thinking about buying 1 VX2100 and then one cheaper miniDV camera that could stay in the library for transferring the footage onto VHS tapes. However, it would be nice if all the cameras could have interchangeable batteries. However if the one camera never leaves the library, I suppose it would just be plugged in and not use batteries anyways.

Thanks to everyone for the help and ideas thusfar. You have been very helpful for me.

[Steve House]

Originally Posted by Ilan Epstein

Thanks for the input David,
As for editing, it's currently pretty minimal. To the extent that all I'm doing is separating if there are multiple clips on one tape.


You bring up a really good point, and I wish I could make use of that very time-saving process. My only reservations with that, is then the footage will always be mp4 at best. And there is a chance this footage may be used later for some sort of promotional materials. I'd hate to limit the quality and editing capabilities by going direct to mp4, even though that would cut MY time down QUITE considerably - Almost in half!

After looking at a lot of different models and reviews, I've been thinking less along the lines of HD and more along the lines of a good CCD DV camera. I think that the HD cameras would need a slightly higher budget to make them worthwhile.

I've been thinking strongly about the VX2100. I especially like it's ability to film well (relatively speaking) under low-light conditions. I was thinking about buying 1 VX2100 and then one cheaper miniDV camera that could stay in the library for transferring the footage onto VHS tapes. However, it would be nice if all the cameras could have interchangeable batteries. However if the one camera never leaves the library, I suppose it would just be plugged in and not use batteries anyways.

Thanks to everyone for the help and ideas thusfar. You have been very helpful for me.

When you said you were making VHS copies I thought you were taking an archive of old VHS tapes and updating it by copying them over to miniDV in order to have the safety of storing in a digital format instead of analog. Copies of copies in an analog format like VHS will always show signifigant generational deterioration that you can avoid by archiving in a digital format such as miniDV.

But here you've said you're making VHS tapes. Is there some reason you have to go to VHS? It's both obsolete and so much lower quality than mniDV that it doesn't seem logical to use it for your archival format unless there is some compelling reason to do so. If you're copying for distribution, again, why VHS when a basic consumer DVD player is less than $50 and you can issue either DVD or VCD at a per disk cost far less than the price of a VHS cassette.

The JVC combo deck I mentioned before can dub miniDV to VHS or the reverse without the need for any external equipment and IMHO is likely to be more resistant to the effects of wear-and-tear over extended use than using a cheap consumer camera for that purpose. It can also ingest DV into your editing computer and record the edited program back to DV as well, plus if you have to distribute on VHS you could then use it to dub the edited DV tape over..

HD would need a considerably higher budget. If you record in HDV you need to playback on an HD capable device, either another HD camera or an HD capable VTR. An SD only playback device would not play the HD tapes, so to use one as your library device you would have to downrez in the camera as you shoot and record the original tapes in SD format. Not that I'm opposed to HD - if you're looking for optimum image quality even while distributing in SD, shooting and editing HD and rendering to SD in the final stage of editing gives lovely images. But it does come with a higher price tag.

[Ilan Epstein]

Originally Posted by Steve House

When you said you were making VHS copies I thought you were taking an archive of old VHS tapes and updating it by copying them over to miniDV in order to have the safety of storing in a digital format instead of analog. Copies of copies in an analog format like VHS will always show signifigant generational deterioration that you can avoid by archiving in a digital format such as miniDV.

But here you've said you're making VHS tapes. Is there some reason you have to go to VHS? It's both obsolete and so much lower quality than mniDV that it doesn't seem logical to use it for your archival format unless there is some compelling reason to do so. If you're copying for distribution, again, why VHS when a basic consumer DVD player is less than $50 and you can issue either DVD or VCD at a per disk cost far less than the price of a VHS cassette.

The JVC combo deck I mentioned before can dub miniDV to VHS or the reverse without the need for any external equipment and IMHO is likely to be more resistant to the effects of wear-and-tear over extended use than using a consumer camera for that purpose and can ingest DV into your editing computer and record the edited program back to DV as well.

HD would need a considerably higher budget. If you record in HDV you need to playback on an HD capable device, either another HD camera or an HD capable VTR. An SD only playback device would not play the HD tapes, so to use one as your library device you would have to downrez in the camera as you shoot and record the original tapes in SD format. Not that I'm opposed to HD - if you're looking for optimum image quality even while distributing in SD, shooting and editing HD and rendering to SD in the final stage of editing gives lovely images. But it does come with a higher price tag.

I shall clarify. Let me preface this by saying, "No, it doesn't necessarily make the most sense to do it this way." But unfortunately, this is how they want it done for the time being.

First, the VHS tapes are not for archiving purposes. All the master MiniDV tapes will remain as the masters. They will be stored away in a safe place where they will be minimally played. However, the footage should still be accessible to the students. That's where the VHS tapes come in. The footage all gets transferred to a VHS tape and then that VHS copy gets shelved in the library, while the MiniDV master gets put away in the storage area. One of my reasons for reservations about purchasing the MiniDV-to-VHS combo deck is that I'm hoping they will start burning DVD's of the videos instead of copying to VHS tapes. Mostly for space efficiency, as the tapes take up a lot of room in the library.

I've been doing a lot of reading of reviews and the like on some equipment, and I've come up with what I think seems like the best equipment for the job given the budget.

Let me also preface this by saying the people that are in charge are very very pro-sony, so buying sony equipment will save me a lot of headache. They also almost require buying equipment "new" and with a warranty, which is understandable.

I think the VX2100 is the best camera for the job, given its excellent rating under low-light conditions. It seems to be a pretty strong camera in all aspects.

I also can get a DCR-HC32 camera, which is essentially the cheapest miniDV camera that sony makes to act as the transfer deck.

I can get both cameras with 4 year-warranties on each one along with 2 extra batteries for the VX2100 for just under $3000 from B & H. That seems like it would work the best for us to me...


Do you think that is the best combination of equipment?

iLan

[Ilan Epstein]

So a quick question about using the HC32 as a transfer deck. If I was to shoot footage on a VX2100, and then use the HC32 to transfer that footage to a computer, would I be losing quality in the transfer by using such a low-end model to transfer? As opposed to transferring with the VX2100?

Thanks,
iLan

[David Kennett]

No quality loss - your approach makes good sense to me. Make DVDs for the students. Loan 'em a $29 DVD player if you have to!

One other thought - make sure you use SP mode on DV tape. Interchange becomes less reliable in LP.

[Craig Berlin]

Originally Posted by Pete Cofran

I looked on B&H and found a Sony DSR-400L $7,500

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...goryNavigation

Greg: so ur saying the tape wouldn't make a difference but I'd assume with the bigger chip and better lense DVcam tape wouldn't limit image quality

Keith: I don't want mini-DVcam because the length of the tape is too short in that mode, I've also heard that DV full size tapes are better.

DV full size tapes are not inherently better but the camcorders made to shoot with them (DVC200, JVC DV5000 & 5100) were. Now comes the issue of choosing HDV which I do recommend (either than or P2) so you will have high definition contact now and down convert if necessary.

[Craig Berlin]

Originally Posted by Don Bloom

I disagree that SD is dead yet but that's just my opinion-TV stations still use BetaSP for the majority of their stuff.

HTHs
Don

I don't think it's dead but it's headed that way as far as acquisition. Beta SP is used now primarily for distribution as a common standard all broadcasters still have.

[Gene Timothy]

I have been asked to post this question to this forum for a friend. He is getting ready to purchase a camera for use in the filming of a public access hunting and fishing show. Lets, keep in mind that this is a low budget production, with high quality goals:) Now, I know that this is up in the air, because most of it is based on opinion and personal preference. can we get some opnions-pros, cons, etc.

Thanks,

Gene

[Dean Sensui]

Gene...

Our show uses two Sony PD170's and a PD150. Occasional shots are also done with a PDX10 (underwater). The DVCam format, with its wider track pitch, tolerates outdoor conditions very well.

I was using a Canon XL1s and really liked the manual controls more than the manual controls of the PD170. But I found the tape drive on the XL1s a bit too sensitive to humidity.

For fishing you'll definitely need a wide lens. For hunting you'll need the ability to reach out.

Get a weather cover for the camera. Something that will cover the camera and whatever accessories you have mounted on it. And shop carefully: A cover that's too inconvenient to put on in the field is likely to not be there when you need it.

Also consider microphones to capture people talking. Without production audio and dialogue, it's all pretty boring. I'm using a pair of ATW-101 diversity wireless units which have performed perfectly so far.

And get good wind protection for the lav mics as well as the on-camera mic.

[Billy Mallari]

Hey Mel

Im tempted to sell my DVC30 with XLR adapter..it has less than 50 hrs right now. I have not decided yet. My DVC30 does not match the colors in my DVX100. It is a good camera especially in low light. It has great colors too sometimes even better than my DVX but I would like to shoot my upcoming wedding in 24p so I need the other camera to be capable of shooting 24p as well.

I will send you an email as soon as I decide to sell it.

[Stephen Claus]

Hi Mel:

You can easily "dress-up" a small cam to make it look more professional. Here's a pic of my HC1:

http://i4.tinypic.com/103c10z.jpg%20

You should see it with the Sony 2x teleconverter on the front--even more impressive! When most people see "pro attachments" like lights and mics, even on a small cam, they are impressed--you look so much more serious.

Back when I shot weddings with my little Sony digital 8 cam, I dressed it up with accessories that I didn't even use--just to impress...and it worked!

I love my HC1. I think it's a great cam for the money. I use it for a backup to my FX1. It's a lot like an FX1 in a smaller package.

Good luck