Slashdot Mirror


Which Digital Video Camera for Amateur Video?

Maznafein asks: "I'm about to leave the IT world, after just finishing a degree in audio engineering, and I'd like to start doing some A/V work on the side as I attempt to make the transition to a new career. I want to make a my first short film either in the late fall, or early spring. I want to do everything in the digital domain as I currently use Logic and Ableton Live on my power book. I have all the gear I need to use up to eight microphones and I can easily pick up some shot gun mics. I don't really know which [video camera] to go with. Like every geek I want the best resolution available other than that the only thing I know I'll need is it to be water resistant/proof, or be able to purchase a housing, for up to a 15 minute scene in the short film I am adapting. What should I go with?" "I've always been a firm believer that to make it in any field you have to show that you want to do it. I currently write my own tracks (bangin' german techno) and engineer/mix down local artists (rock, pop and hip hop) on the side already. I just have yet to get into the nitty gritty of doing film production."

27 of 294 comments (clear)

  1. Gotta be... by ResidntGeek · · Score: 4, Funny
    --
    ResidntGeek
  2. Go 24p by 1984 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Panasonic AG-DVX100A

    Not cheap, but 3 CCD and progressive scan. And there's an underwater housing available (which isn't cheap, either). And Final Cut Pro on your Powerbook can edit 24p native.

    1. Re:Go 24p by whyme27 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Hey, let's not forget the Sony DSR-PD170, or for that matter, the new Canon XL2. If there is a need to shoot underwater, it is going to be likely that low-light capability is going to be essential. From what i have read and experienced, the low light capabilities of the Sony cannot be beat by any other camera in the same catrgory (3x 1/3 inch CCD, prosmuer cameras). Of course, underwater housings are also available for the PD170.

    2. Re:Go 24p by asparagus · · Score: 5, Informative

      Yeah, get FCP. The AG-100 is a good cam, as are Canon's GL2 and Sony's PD-150's. All can be had for around $2-3k, and are worth the upgrade over single CCD cams, esp. for short filmmaking. Remember to blow another $500-$1k on some long-life batteries, a car charger, a good fluid-head tripod, plenty of tapes, a boom pole + mike, a set of basic filters, and a sturdy case to carry everything around in.

      Good luck ;-)
      -Brett

    3. Re:Go 24p by sith · · Score: 4, Informative

      I've got a DVX-100 and love it. Have shot about 300 hours with it. For indie film work, it's almost the defacto choice these days. The XL2 is very interesting, though I'd personally not buy it right out of the gate. For indie film work, the PD-170 is kind of "meh" - if anything get the much cheaper PDX-10. It'll give you native 16x9 (anamorphic), good low light, XLR inputs and all that jazz. The image it produces is quite nice - even compares OK with higher end Sony cams like the DXC-D35.

      Head over to 2-pop.com for far more info though...

    4. Re:Go 24p by RobNich · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Agreed. The XL1-S is far better. Having used both, and GL1s, I highly recommend the XL1-S.

      The XL series in particular are very easy to hold, especially with the shoulder pad that has XLR plugs on it. The balance of the camera is superb. I suggest going to a store where you can pick them up and use them.

      The 3CCD cameras all produce a good picture, HD is not necessary at this point in time. Also, audio quality may not be important, but you should look at your needs--perhaps you will always use an external mic, perhaps not. The XL and GL1 do not pick up too much motor noise, but the XL sounds far better than the GL.

      The XL has interchangable lenses, such as a 3X zoom lens, and has focus and zoom rings, which makes it far easier and faster to control.

      Take a look at:

      • Video quality (get a 3CCD)
      • Lens quality
      • Availability of different lenses and adapters
      • Audio quality in built-in mic
      • Ability to connect other audio inputs
      • Tape format! I highly recommend either DVcam (broadcast quality), or MiniDV (not quite, but still very good).

      I don't recommend FCP, having used it. I highly recommend Vegas Video. There are a number of essential tools missing from both, but they are absolutely incompatable--FCP being from Apple, and Vegas only running on Windows.

      --
      Hello little man. I will destroy you!
    5. Re:Go 24p by RobNich · · Score: 4, Informative

      Although the bandwidth may be the same, the tape moves faster around the head, which results in better quality of data on the tape. Fewer errors, artifacts, etc. In addition, for some reason (probably marketing) nearly all MiniDV equipment records the audio "unlocked" from the video, so the two could go out of sync under certain conditions. DVCAM equipment locks the audio by default.

      As far as broadcast, DVCAM is minimum quality needed to hand a tape in. Most stations use DigiBeta, however, which is supposedly far better in quality. I have not yet seen the results in dubbing from DV to DigiBeta, but I will soon.

      --
      Hello little man. I will destroy you!
  3. Which Digital Video Camera for Amateur Video? by pyrrhonist · · Score: 5, Funny
    Which Digital Video Camera for Amateur Video?

    More importantly, where do you get the actresses for the, uh, amateur videos?

    --
    Show me on the doll where his noodly appendage touched you.
    1. Re:Which Digital Video Camera for Amateur Video? by khiitola · · Score: 4, Interesting

      According to "DV museum" it was shot with Sony PD 100 & Sony DXC D30WS. Another source says they used Sony DSR500WS. Yet another one tells they were using Sony DSR-PD150. Many sources seem to agree that there were one hundred Sony DSR-PD100s. I advice you not to make your decision based on what you saw in Dancer In The Dark. I suppose you'll have to ask the film crew to find out what cameras really were used. And the DV to film transfer process that you can't afford, supposedly plays as big role in the image quality.

      Anyway, whatever those cameras were, they seem to produce utterly sad movies. Please avoid all cameras listed in my post at all cost.

      --
      No sig.

  4. Re:Aren't there... by syousef · · Score: 4, Funny

    Ha shows what you know. Slashdoters make amateur porn? They're consumers not producers!

    --
    These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
  5. Budget???? by mikejz84 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Okay, lets start the easy question: What is your budget? You can drop $100,000 on a Sony HDCAM setup, but in all odds you'll be staying in the good 'ol NTSC realm. Again it depends on how much money you have in your pocket. Visit DV.com for some camera ideas. I would try and get a 3-CCD Camera. Visit http://www.saferseas.com/ for some package ideas, also DV.com is a good site.

    1. Re:Budget???? by connorbd · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Panasonic probably has the only cheap 3CCD camera going, if you're on a budget and color is important to you -- you can get one for $7-800, though you're stuck with the limitations of consumer equipment (particularly the obnoxious ergonomic quirks of Panasonic hardware -- too small, and what-were-they-thinking battery design). You can also snag a Sony TRV-950 for as little as $1500 if you buy it refurbished, or a used Canon GL-1 for about the same amount.

      I think the Canon GL-2, with the manual audio controls and the built-in shotgun mike, is the prosumer cam of choice these days though -- I think it's around $3K and it's a very reasonable size for something that loaded. As for the XL-1(S) and XL-2... well, they've got their advantages for pros, but the one time I got to work with an XL-1 I grew to hate the bulk of the thing quite rapidly. For the hardcore pro on an infinite budget, the XL-2 is probably worth the money (especially where being able to swap lenses is a necessity, as in nature documentaries and the like), and the ability to use it off the shoulder instead of having to hold it up is nice, but I would think it's not worth it for nine out of ten video producers. (Hell, I do a cooking show with a two-year-old JVC consumer camcorder... of course JVC does sneak the odd pro feature like manual white balance into even their junkier hardware...)

      One thing to consider: HDTV. The JVC GR-HD1 has a reputation for being kind of balky with color, but it's pretty much your only option if you're shooting for a high-def end result.

  6. Here's an idea by k4_pacific · · Score: 5, Funny

    If artistic black and white is your thing, consider picking up an old security camera and a video input card. Sure, the focus is terrible, there is no sound, the contrast sucks, and it is real grainy, but this just adds to the consuming intensity of your work. No?

    --
    Unknown host pong.
  7. "Not an ask slashdot"? by Rhesus+Piece · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I've made a fairly obvious realization:
    Every Ask Slashdot has a healthy bunch of comments questioning the validity of the ask slashdot, telling the person to google, and whatnot.

    Maybe it's time to just hardcode that into the Ask Slashdot section to save all these folks their precious time?

    Whoa. I actually can't tell if I'm being sarcastic.

    1. Re:"Not an ask slashdot"? by afay · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well, in this case, the ask slashdot question is stupid. How can you recommend a camera without any idea for a budget? It's impossible. Obviously, get the best camera you can with the money you have budgeted for it. If he or she said in particular "i have 3000 to spend", then I'm sure people could make specific recommendations. But as it is now, no one can.

      --
      Best slashdot comment
    2. Re:"Not an ask slashdot"? by connorbd · · Score: 4, Informative

      Normally I'd agree with you, but there are a handful of high-end camcorders that can answer the question. Low-end... well, truth be told I've heard quality is pretty much the same for all the low-end 1CCD consumer cameras, so it comes down to what you need and the general reputation of the brand. A few semi-informed brand opinions:

      Sony: excellent quality but you pay a premium for the name. Probably the only important manufacturer of Digital8 hardware, which might be important if you have a large library of 8mm tapes to be digitized, but they don't make any D8 hardware even close to pro-quality. Sony is also a fan of proprietary formats -- Memory Stick instead of SD/MMC or CompactFlash, MicroMV (which is nothing but a marketing gimmick as far as I'm concerned).

      JVC: I use a JVC myself. JVC tends to hide occasional pro features in their camera menus (particularly manual white balance) but the quality of the product depends on the model year. Mine is 2002 and I've never had a complaint; the 2003 models, though, looked and felt like junk. Their 2004 models are too small and seem to have ergonomic issues. JVC does have the only consumer HDTV camcorder available right now.

      Canon: They seem to keep their designs pretty consistent from year to year, and the GL and XL series pretty much define the high end for consumer/prosumer camera hardware. Their ZR series is a little on the small side for me, though I'd probably buy one of them if I was in the market for a second camcorder.

      Panasonic: The only cheap 3CCD camcorders on the market is one of theirs -- I think the low-end one costs around $800. I can't say much about the quality, though I do find their ergonomics to be awkward -- the cameras are too small, and you have to unplug the battery and put it in a separate charger. To me this is an utterly ridiculous sort of design flaw.

      Samsung: Junk for now, though it's gotten better over the years. Tends to be rather gimmicky, though apparently they can play back PAL-format miniDV on an NTSC TV, which would make for a powerful advantage in certain markets.

      I think that covers most of the major manufacturers, at least those you'll find at Best Buy or Circuit City. My thinking is that Sony and Canon probably offer the best product available for most purposes, with JVC being a decent choice on the high end but dodgy at best on the Best Buy level of things.

  8. Re:Missing equip for amatuer video? by syousef · · Score: 4, Funny

    You need a girlfriend first.

    And if you pay her by the hour, she's not a girlfriend!

    --
    These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
  9. Progressive Scan by EMNDev · · Score: 4, Informative

    Progressive scan is a good feature to look for. Normal video is interlaced, meaning each frame only contains every other line. Progressive scan records a complete frame everytime. Another feature to look for is a CCD capture. One CCD per color. The image quality is generally much higher with a 3 chip capture. This said: The Canon XL-1S is certainly a nice camera, if you've got the budget... around $3500. The Sony VX-2000 is also quite good and a bit cheaper. Both have progressive scan and 3 CCD capture.

  10. Price range? by Dr_Nick_Riveria · · Score: 4, Informative

    It really depends on your price range, but if you're looking for good 'entry-level' pro cameras, I've heard good things about the Panasonic AG-DVX100A, as well as the Canon GL & XL series. I actually believe Steven Soderbergh's "Full Frontal" was shot with a Canon XL1S.

  11. 30fps or 24fps? by lordmoose · · Score: 4, Informative
    Nowadays the main question (if you want to shoot with prosumer cameras) is if you want to shoot at 30 fps interlaced or progressive, or 24fps. For 30fps, I would recommend the Sony PD170 (this is the camera I have). It has 2 XLR inputs, a nice little lcd flip-out screen, and all the manual controls that you would really need. The other 30fps option is the Canon XL1s, which has interchangeable lenses along with a sleek look (hey, it matters!). But, Canon just announced the specs for the XL2 camera, which will record at 24fps and have more of the film-style controls that really helps take the edge out of the "video look". By the time this camera comes out, most NLE will probably support editing on 24fps with a variety of pull-down options (this is the camera I'm waiting on).

    The other major 24fps camera is the Panasonic AG-DVX100A, but I've seen a lot of so-so reviews about it.

    No matter what you buy, you'll have to buy a underwater casing for it.

  12. Easy choice.... by speleo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ...you want the newly announced Canon XL2.

    It has vast third-party support, shoots 4:3 and 16:9 (although it is still a DV-format cam with the limitations that the 720x480 pixel resolution the standard requires), shoots in 60i, 30p and 24p, has XLR connectors, and will even take (with an adapter) Canon EOS lens from the still photography line in case you need something special like a super telephoto or a tilt-shift lens.

    You really couldn't ask for more (except a lower price and native HDTV capabilities).

  13. Keys by anonicon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It depends a lot on what level of post-production you're going to use on the digital film. Most low-end video cameras, digital or not, don't support the three keys of Red, Green and Blue in post-production, where you could otherwise learn to heavily manipulate the RGB values on a frame-by-frame or skein basis in your output.

    That said, check out the Canon XL1 or XL1s cameras (they don't support RGB keys), and if you can go higher, check out the Panasonic DVC200, which does support RGB keys and is a terrific camera. I'm not aware of any cameras that come standard with waterproof enclosures - that will probably be extra unless I'm mistaken.

    One other tip I **strongly** suggest - if there's a film association near you, go to one of their meetings and talk to the people who do this as serious amateurs or paid professionals. You will learn a lot very quickly. If an association isn't an option, find your closest university, politely request an appointment with any filmmaker on staff, and then soak 'em for info for ~2 hours.

    Good luck. FWIW, like HTML, it's easy to do and hard to do well, :-).

  14. Re:Resolution... by Spytap · · Score: 4, Informative

    The above commenter has no idea what they're talking about.

    My advice is this:
    A) Rent a camera, don't buy. You can rent a much better camera than you can ever afford and it'll show.
    B) res does matter. You shoot with a shitty camera, and no amount of color correction or digital post-production is going to change the fact that it looks like you shot it with a shitty camera. You can always subtract information for video, DVD, or HDTV, you can always compress it, but you cannot ADD information that isn't there to begin with. If you're talking about regular tv resolution, than you're a fucking idiot and don't know shit about filmmaking.
    C) If you're shooting indoors, and you're shooting a film, you're lighting a scene. Make sure you whit-balance it to the tungsten filament indoor lights you're using. If you're shooting it outside, likewise to the sun, which has more blue in in.
    D) No camera is water-resistant/proof. You'll need a housing, and you'll need to be willing to run the risk of ruining the camera. If you're going to be shooting legally (i.e. with permits, insurance, etc.) shooting in the water will add about $30,000 in insurance premiums alone (trust me, I've done it before). Save yourself the trouble, the time, and the money: change the scene while it's in the script stage; it's free to change now, it'll cost you to change it later.
    E) If you want more advice/some tips/anything else from someone who's shot more than a few short films (and produced as well) email me and we can chat.

  15. Make it cheap by MurrayTodd · · Score: 4, Informative

    Speaking from someone who sunk thousands of dollars into equipment that still has yet to be used much, I'd suggest for your first foray that you consider renting or borrowing or finding the cheapest used DV camera you can find.

    Don't freak about 3CCD elements and "all that jazz" because your first movie will be the exercise in which you make all your first mistakes. The degradation of substandard video equipment will be ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE less than all sorts of issues you will face.

    If you're really serious and have some money to rub together, check out one of the programs of the New York Film Academy. They offer 4- or 8-week intensive courses that are really good, concentrated, and destined to give you the most bang for your buck. It'll do you a whole lot more good than spending several extra dollars on top-notch equipment.

    Murray Todd Williams
    http://www.murraywilliams.com

    P.S. My projects from the NYFA are on my website. They may seem rough around the edges, but I learned VOLUMES in making them!

    --
    Murray Todd Williams
  16. Spike Lee and DV by bedouin · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Here's an interesting interview with Spike Lee on his usage of prosumer cameras.

  17. As another video geek, I say: by Ralph+Spoilsport · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I'd like to agree with everything the parent said, but completely disagree with his suggestions. not because he's wrong (he's totally correct, esp. about renting - with HD around the courner buying a high end NTSC camera is a waste of money for a beginner.) but because his correct answers don't answer the problem. You're new and you're trying to get something done. You need to make LOTS of mistakes, and you need to make them cheaply. So I would suggest downshifting your aesthetics and go for a more "low-fi" effect. To that end:

    F) depending on the effect you're trying to get, consider alternatives. Think: Pixelvision. Think VHS. Think cheapie DV camera. Process the the bejesus out of it. If it's your first work, don't bother with trying to make it look Hollywood, or even Daytime TV. just get something out the door, that you feel good about. It's better to make some not-so-great art that you find personally fulfilling and was a great learning experience than some primetime dogfood commercial.

    G) Here's another tip: Shoot with a cheap DV camera (like I dunno - a Canon ZR60 - $300 when you can find 'em) and then take all the colour out in post. There is no loss to the luminance signal (DV is 4.1.1), so a cheapie is going to look a lot more like a high end camera in Black and White than it will in colour, due to the loss from using a single chip NTSC camera.

    H) CONCENTRATE ON CONTENT. If the content is compelling, the formal inadequacies are often not as noticeable, or can even be used as a foil to amplify the content. Having something important and insightful to say with your work will trump any HDTV camera and lighting crew and prima donna actors you can find. Life is too short to make stupid crap, but if your budget doesn't permit hiring Walter Murch and a REAL CAMERA then focus on what you're trying to say, and strive to say it well.

    I) there is no point I.

    J) Pracitce your editing chops doing some video smashups. Rent a bunch of DVDs of movies that make you go "THAT WAS FUCKING GREAT", rip them to your drive as QT movies, and then edit the crap out of them. Study the really well edited ones - see how they're put together.

    K) It seems you're going for a "music video" from what I can gather, so look at the masters of the genre, especially Chris Cunningham and Godley and Creme for fancy stuff, and then check out the works of the Emergency Broadcast Network. you don't need fancy cameras and actors and lighting to make an extremely effective video. You just need a vision and the will and some small amount of money to get you going.

    Good luck,

    RS

    --
    Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
  18. how about a slightly used $500,000 camera? by microcars · · Score: 4, Funny
    you could get this one pretty cheap

    you just have to lick all the chocolate off it.

    --
    I like microcars