Getting Back into the game...need advice

[James Manford]

Wow, some of the advice provided here telling Michael to keep his equipment is down right wrong.

People are going 4K now. He has a budget of 3k and NEEDS to be filming in HD at least. That will last him several years from now before he can consider the jump to 4K.

If you plan on getting business and making your life easier film in HD.

With 3,000 to spend there are plenty of options. I would get a Sony EA50 or two ... it's practically a DSLR in a ENG style body so you have the best of both worlds. Or look in to a pre-owned FS100, they're ridiculously cheap now in the used market. I saw one sell for £1000 on ebay in perfect condition (body only) which is about $1600.

[Noa Put]

Wow, some of the advice provided here telling Michael to keep his equipment is down right wrong.

It doesn't have to be downright wrong, ofcourse he can continue to use this camera and sell anything that comes out of it, but weddingclients are not all that ignorant anymore. Almost everyone knows the difference between SD en HD these days and because they often will visit more then one videographer the difference will become very obvious to them if you show a letterboxed 4:3 SD recording on a big led screen.

[Adrian Tan]

James, you do amazing work. And the thing is -- I'm sure you could shoot an amazing wedding on a smartphone or a GoPro if you had to. The operator matters more than the camera.

Admittedly, both a smartphone and a GoPro are HD! But I think whether HD is necessary depends on your market and your circumstances. If you're only delivering to clients in SD, and they're happy with 4:3 aspect ratio, and you can make it look jaw-dropping, and the price is right, why couldn't you make money that way?

[Mervyn Jack]

I have done 4 weddings in the last 6 months, getting back into the game, 3 for free and finally one paying.
This is what I have learned and used, using minimal budget.
First and second weddings used a Sony HDR-XR260 and a borrowed Sony HDR-XR500 and 2 x Go Pros.
Then I got a Sony a6000 at Christmas for an unbelievable price and added that to the above mix.
I found the Go Pros too unreliable to get running, and the batteries don't last. So I recently bought the baby Sony CX240 as a safety camera as it will run for hours unlike the GoPro's but is a bit noisy in low light, but Neat Video helps.
The a6000 has been great as my main camera, but can overheat and shut down in as little as 12 minutes. But, if I keep the tripod mount on it it lasts the full 30 minutes (usually) it must act as a heat sink.
I had a failure at the last wedding with the a6000 and lost a chunk of the wedding vows. I think it was caused by my choice of sd card, Samsung EVO, It only has a write speed of 19Mb/s gotta watch those specs. So I've just ordered a Lexar 600x that B&H were clearing out, that should do the job.
The important thing is I didn't know when the a6000 had stopped recording and I had swung my safety cam beside me to the congregation and it also missed that part of the ceremony. Luckily the little CX240 up on the balcony got enough to get away with, because I have great sound.

The best think I did was to get (2) Rode SmartLav+ mics and a Zoom H1 recorder. I use a Smartlav+ on the groom into my Sony Xperia Z phone recording with Recforge II and it works brilliantly. I have used the Zoom with a cable to PA systems or pointing to PA speakers the rest of the time.

If I didn't have great audio for the above mentioned CX240 clip, it would not be so good.

Of course I would like much better camera's but that will come it time. Honing my editing skills and upgrading to Adobe Premiere Pro CC was the best thing I have done.

[Mervyn Jack]

I should add that back in the 80's my wedding videos were all single camera jobs and assemble edited on tape.

[Colin Rowe]

Those were the days Mervyn. Skill and nerve

[Gary Huff]

Originally Posted by James Manford

Wow, some of the advice provided here telling Michael to keep his equipment is down right wrong.

Not really. Why spend money when he doesn't have to? He's trying to get back into the game after all, and what about the absolute ton of wedding videos that his DVX shot back in the day? All utter crap now? Is that how that follows? That all those poor people got married at the wrong time because their wedding was shot on a DVX?

People are going 4K now.

Are they asking 4K or are you telling them they should go 4K? I see a lot of pushing to go 4K, but not a lot of asking to go 4K.

He has a budget of 3k and NEEDS to be filming in HD at least.

Needs to be? Or is that simply a "need" that comes about because people have to justify their purchases? Do you know for sure that there would be trouble if you didn't film in HD?

That will last him several years from now before he can consider the jump to 4K.

But you just said people are going 4K now, and yet HD will last for several years? How does that follow?

Let me clarify something here with a question: what exactly does Michael lose by holding onto his 3K for now and trying to book some weddings? What is the terrible consequence going to be of shooting a wedding with his DVX if his clients are aware of his work and are fine with a DVD as the final deliverable? In my opinion, the absolute worst that can happen is that he cannot get any bookings. Fine, if you cannot book any weddings with your DVX, then look at spending some money to get what you are told you need in order to book that business.

But if he's upfront and has samples and a couple books him and loves their DVD, then what's your problem exactly? Remember, there was a time when DVX cameras were everywhere shooting weddings, and couples loved the video. I even shot one of those! And yet now those videos are just crap? Is that what is being said here? The venues don't seem to have changed that much, definitely not as much as the cameras.

[Chris Harding]

As little as 6 years ago I still had my Panny AVC20 cameras ..that's right with 1/6" chips too and shots tons of weddings in 4:3 and brides loved them. Most, if not all DVD players will simply letterbox and the bride won't know the difference. He can use his DVX as long as the heads are still OK.

James?? Exactly what media are you proposing to supply 100 minutes of 4K wedding video on?? I'm all ears ... My brides STILL only want DVD even though they have big 60" flatscreen TV's, they still only have a $29.00 Chinese DVD Player.

I can see an advantage of using 4K like Noa does but I cannot see any practical way to give the bride a 4K video yet.

It's still all about content and a monkey with a 4K camera will get less work than a skilled operator with a 4:3 MiniDV tape camera

Also you buy a 4K camera and what happens when you try to edit the files on your DuoCore computer which worked fine with SD files?? Suddenly you are spending more on computer upgrades than cameras

[Peter Rush]

I wouldn't freak the poor guy talking about 4K if he's actually contemplating still using his DVX100. HD will be more than adequate I'm sure - I filmed nearly 40 weddings last year and only 2 couples asked for blu-ray! 4K is a long long way off for me. I can see why it is handy for crop and zoom during the edit but not for delivery.

I started with a Sony Z1 and a Panasonic GS280 - filming about a dozen weddings in my first year, shooting in SD and delivering on DVD. My other kit was 2 tripods and 2 audio recorders - a damn site easier than all the kit I lug around these days! (having said that the quality of my work has improved because of it)

He could buy a Sony HXR-NX30 E along with a Sony PJ870 for within his budget and film happily for a couple of years at least.

Best option if I were him would be to buy a Sony EA50 used (about £2K) and a sony PJxxx handycam for a second camera - they'll match up nicely

Pete

[Steve Burkett]

I've transferred a lot of Wedding videos to DVD and in nearly all cases the clients have made some comment on how their Wedding video looks quite old fashioned compared to modern Wedding videos. And it is clear from watching them. Even those filmed with good quality cameras reflect the linear editing made to produce them. Of course they were happy with them at the time and still are; it is their Wedding video and valued because of it. Its like when I'm looking at old photos from my childhood. The quality of them is shit, but you kind of overlook it. Doesn't mean I'd accept that quality in photos taken now; same with video. Things move on. I don't begrudge my early Wedding work; I'm quite proud of it, but that doesn't mean I wish to dig out my first Camcorder and film a Wedding with it. Then again I don't pander to nostalgia.

4K is looking more likely as a future format for filming. I don't think its going to become the norm so soon as to need to put 4K as a priority now. It's a priority for me, but then I've just finished editing a 4K Wedding, which I'm delivering to the clients via an external hard drive. I have 2 more 4K jobs this year and expect more for 2016.

Obviously Michael is free to make up his own mind on whether sticking with SD or not is valid. All I can say is that when I got back into Weddings in 2010, the first thing I did was buy an HD camcorder. A decision I never regretted; a wise investment, as I still use the camera regularly as a Guestcam.

[James Manford]

Originally Posted by Gary Huff

Needs to be? Or is that simply a "need" that comes about because people have to justify their purchases? Do you know for sure that there would be trouble if you didn't film in HD?

But you just said people are going 4K now, and yet HD will last for several years? How does that follow?

Let me clarify something here with a question: what exactly does Michael lose by holding onto his 3K for now and trying to book some weddings? What is the terrible consequence going to be of shooting a wedding with his DVX if his clients are aware of his work and are fine with a DVD as the final deliverable? In my opinion, the absolute worst that can happen is that he cannot get any bookings. Fine, if you cannot book any weddings with your DVX, then look at spending some money to get what you are told you need in order to book that business.

But if he's upfront and has samples and a couple books him and loves their DVD, then what's your problem exactly? Remember, there was a time when DVX cameras were everywhere shooting weddings, and couples loved the video. I even shot one of those! And yet now those videos are just crap? Is that what is being said here? The venues don't seem to have changed that much, definitely not as much as the cameras.

I would like to counter your questions by asking how the OP intends to advertise his services. From what I understand, he's shot weddings a long time ago. Now he wants to get back in the game.

So from what I understand he will set up a website, on that website he will talk about delivering services in DVD 4:3 format ? I can almost bet he won't get a single client.

He has told us that he has a reasonable budget of 3,000. Which is enough for 2 good camcorders atleast so I have told him to go HD and scrap the old tech that he is used too.

Originally Posted by Chris Harding

James?? Exactly what media are you proposing to supply 100 minutes of 4K wedding video on?? I'm all ears ... My brides STILL only want DVD even though they have big 60" flatscreen TV's, they still only have a $29.00 Chinese DVD Player.

I understand Chris, i'm in the same boat. But service providers like to stay on top of technology so I simply said people are going 4K now. Suppliers wouldn't be stocking them if they weren't selling !

Originally Posted by Peter Rush

Best option if I were him would be to buy a Sony EA50 used (about £2K) and a sony PJxxx handycam for a second camera - they'll match up nicely

Pete

This is exactly what I would probably buy with that budget. Great recommendation.

[Gary Huff]

Originally Posted by James Manford

So from what I understand he will set up a website, on that website he will talk about delivering services in DVD 4:3 format?

First, you don't need to talk about delivering services on DVD in 4:3 format. That's the kind of technical jargon that I'm sure most potential clients will simply roll their eyes up into the back of their head over. You provide samples and say the deliverable is on DVD. That would be it.

I can almost bet he won't get a single client.

$100 says he can get a client regardless of it being 4:3 on DVD. You in?

[James Manford]

Give it a rest Gary.

The OP has 3 grand to spend. I've made some recommendations. I don't understand why everyone is telling him NOT to spend that money when all you read now is people banging on about 4K.

The least the OP can do is move in to the HD era

[Gary Huff]

Originally Posted by James Manford

I don't understand why everyone is telling him NOT to spend that money when all you read now is people banging on about 4K

Because the people banging on about 4K and the people who will pay him for his services are two different groups of people.

The least the OP can do is move in to the HD era

The least the OP can do is hone his skill set with a few jobs and see if he really wants to get back into it or not before spending $3000 of his own money. Why is the first thing on your and other like minded individuals minds to immediately spend all of it on gear? Are you trying to justify your own sunk costs?

[Jeff Harper]

For crying out loud, the guy wants equipment recommendations because he KNOWS his equipment is outdated and his camera is 13 years old.

Why are we trying to talk him into doing something else?

Why does this need to turn into a debate or argument? I don't get it.