Re: [videoblogging] Re: camera advice
On the other hand there is an argument to be made AGAINST shoulder mounted ENG style cameras for handheld use, depending on one's goals. Straight doc and news style shooting, yup, great, stability, relative lack of body pain and otherwise good ergonomics. But once you need to go into a wider range of compositional possiblities, there is a lot to be said for smaller cameras on guerilla shoots, despite the additional wear and tear on the filmmaker/operator's body. I used to miss shoulder mounted cameras, and even thought about those shoulder mount attachments for smaller cams. Not anymore. Last time I had to shoot handheld with a CineAlta my first reaction was how in the hell am I going to move gracefully upside down and under that table and then whip around to catch so and so's face from a low-ish angle right as the come in the door. Brook On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 5:43 AM, Stan Hirson, Sarah Jones < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com , > "josheklow" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I'm shopping around for a new camera for vlogging as well as other > video projects. > > > Will the camera be hand-held? So far the discussion has been about > specs and > image quality somehow devoid from the shooter. > > I would like to see a decent, but inexpensive, shoulder camera brought > into the discussion. The Sony HVR HD1000 is interesting for event and > documentary shooting and the price is right. I have not seen it yet > (live in the stix) but the form factor looks as if one could hold it > for hours and hours and be steady and fluid. Unfortunately it is > often described as a camera to make you look like a "pro", but that > seems to be marketeers hype rather than the experience of someone who > has been shooting for several hours at a time. > > I have found the ergonomics for most cameras very disappointing. They > seem designed for use on sticks or for short takes when they are > hand-held. > > Stan Hirson > http://hestakaup.com > > > -- ___ Brook Hinton film/video/audio art www.brookhinton.com studio vlog/blog: www.brookhinton.com/temporalab [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: camera advice
The IMAGE *is* that good. The CAMERA has serious limitations - the praise for it is primarily based on it packing so much into such a small and cheap camera, and the fact that they found a way to tweak the CMOS chip to give better low light and noise performance than other cameras using the same/similar chip. But manual control, while it can be done, is not at a professional level (again, there are hacks to, for example, get a real f stop reading, but it doesn't natively provide it), and I'll say again that the focusing is such a pain with that little dial that for the first time in my life I actually use auto-focus (which, with the "instant auto focus", is surprisingly good) and then lock it rather than focusing by eye for most shots, unless its a formal shoot with a field monitor. 24P workflow is tricky because it doesn't embed flags for pulldown removal in the datastream (and doesn't have the equivalent of 24PA for lossless pulldown removal which is kind of a moot point with HDV anyway). If you need to edit IN 24P you have to jump through a few hoops. If you have FCP Studio 2 it is much easier, but you still have to put everything through compressor to remove pulldown. (Of course if you don't have to deal with film out, PAL, or a 24P HDcam master, you can just edit the 24P at 29.97 and everything works just fine. And you can always shoot good ol' 60i). But for what is it now, $800? Pretty amazing. Oh, the other drawback is that it is still HDV, which imo is a severely compromised format, but you don't get to move up from that in HD land until you're at the $6000 level. The higher end Canon HDV stuff mentioned here by others is indeed superior on the camera level and more similar to the DVX100 in layout/features (albeit pricey), though it's still HDV and if you need 24P the 24"f" version on those cameras has less resolution than the HV20's true 24P, though that's more than made up for by the lenses and cam features. Brook ___ Brook Hinton film/video/audio art www.brookhinton.com studio vlog/blog: www.brookhinton.com/temporalab [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: camera advice
Brook Hinton wrote: > [...] DVX100B - I love the DVX and HVX cameras. If the old TRV-900s > were the DV > bolexes of their day, the DVX100's are the DV aatons. But they > invite and in > some cases require a pretty deep understanding of cinematography > and the > technical underbelly of digital video to get the most out of them > (though > one can just spend the time to create a couple of default presets > one likes > and use those for quick shooting). I concur with great enthusiasm, I just finished doing several days of shooting with a pair of rented HVX cameras and now I'm back to shooting my personal Sony HVR-A1U and there really is a difference between the "Panasonic + progressive video" look of the HVX and DVX cameras and the "Sony + interlaced video" look. The DVX (100, 100A, or 100B) is just about the best looking standard definition camera out there in its price range. In summary, it offers: * True Progressive scan video at 24 or 30 fps for clean images that look good on computer screens and on the web * Professional "spot meter" for perfect exposure * Scene Setting Controls similar to those found on pro video cameras offers a nice filmic look, worth a little experimentation, check out the may posts on dvinfo.net and dvxuser.com on this topic * Pro-quality XLR audio inputs with very quiet pre-amps, the best of any camera in this price range * A very good lens given the price of the camera Yes, it takes a little time to understand all the settings, but as Brook wrote, come up with a preset you like, and stick with that. Shooting 24 frame per second progressive gives you better looking web video, wether it's 320px wide QVGA or 640px wide VGA as Apple is advocating for to cater to Apple TV users. 24 frames per second means you have a slightly lower bitrate so that your movie is slightly smaller or better looking compared to s 30 frame per second movie. The interlace of standard video creates havoc for compressors and degrades image quality, especially for viewing on naturally progressive computer displays. From this day forward everyone should be shooting progressive, interlace is a thing of the past, a legacy of the television broadcast age, which is coming to a close. We are now in the age of computer based progressive scan video, and the DVX100 is here today. If you need to shoot HD, the many HDV cameras out there offer an economical way to shoot HD, however, the HVX200 is the DVX's big brother and offers the same amazing look with high definition recording, but the camera is much heavier, more expensive, and a whole other ball of wax given you have to record to a hard drive or P2 card. I recently completed a documentary in which I mixed DVX100 24P footage, Sony PD150 (similar to PD170) 60i footage, and Sony HVR-Z1U HDV 60i footage. The footage shot with the Sony PD150 does not inter- cut with the HDV footage anywhere near as well as the DVX footage does. I love the DVX/HVX look! David. David Tames, Filmmaker & Media Technologist 617.216.1096 | http://Kino-Eye.com
Re: [videoblogging] Re: camera advice
So much depends on what kind of vlogging you do and what other uses you'll make of these cameras. I have used all three, and have an extremely strong preference for the Panasonic over the other two, but none of them are ideal for on-the-street quick-shoot purposes. These days when I'm shooting DV and don't need to worry about attracting too much attention, I reach for a DVX. But what I carry around with me is a little Canon Optura 500 (probably soon to be replaced by an HV20 - not for the HDV, which I"m not wild about as a format, but for the 24P). I'm used to lots of manual control and direct access to it, so that aspect drives me nuts, but it's MUCH better for a carry everywhere vlogging camera than the DVX. And it DOES have manual control, just not at the level I prefer. But you mention "as well as other video projects" so here's my summary of the three cameras: PD170 - as Jay says, a workhorse. And you DON'T have to shoot dvcam with it, it also does regular DV. Very easy to use, very clean looking video ( too clean for my tastes ), but difficult to do much with it aesthetically beyond experimenting with slow shutter speeds. If you want a camera that gives you a professional looking image with minimal fuss, it's a good choice. XL2 - Personally I cannot stand the XL form factor. It drives me nuts. When I shoot with an XL1 or XL2 in public people stare at it. The XL2 does have a good range of manual / image control, though, and if you like the form factor, want interchangeable lenses, and have the $$$, it's worth considering. DVX100B - I love the DVX and HVX cameras. If the old TRV-900s were the DV bolexes of their day, the DVX100's are the DV aatons. But they invite and in some cases require a pretty deep understanding of cinematography and the technical underbelly of digital video to get the most out of them (though one can just spend the time to create a couple of default presets one likes and use those for quick shooting). Brook Hinton film/video/audio art www.brookhinton.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
