Recommendations please: Digital cameras with HD.

Hotsauce84

I'd like to start toying around with pics and video. Nothing too in-depth or professional, just beginner hobby style for now. I don't know jack about these new fancy cameras with HD and multiple lens options, so I ask my Strut brethren for assistance. Any suggestions? I see beautiful videos online shot with Canon 5D, 7D, 550D, Rebel T2i, etc. but I don't know much about them. I've read about them online but I don't understand a lot of the technical terms. Plus some of them are $$$. I'm sure some of you can help me with some comparable, less expensive options. Preferably in laymens' terms so my dumm ass can understand.Please and thank you kindly.

Jimster

I copped this bad boy recently and it's nice. Videos are cwisp. Layman enuff?

http://www.sony.co.uk/product/dsc-h-series/dsc-hx5v

Mondeyano

Panasonic Lumix GF1 is pretty damn good. Shoots 720p and you can use Leica lenses with it.

Okem

I just bumped and old thread on the subject (by accident) there's also this one

- http://www.soulstrut.com/ubbthreads/show...ic=&Search=true

Okem

Also, questions; how much do you want to spend, what sort of photography are you thinking of doing, do you want to learn the technical side of it or just stick to point and shoot??


If money were no object I'd like a Canon EOS 5D MkII, it'll even shoot HD video that's pretty breathtakingly beautiful.




But they're hella expensive, and pretty OTT for a beginner/novice. So that's probably the opposite of helpful.

kitchenknight

I just shot a television show on a Canon 7D. For the average consumer, it's expensive, especially when you add lenses.

That said, considering that you can shoot A FUCKING HD TELEVISION SHOW on your "digitial camera," the cost is ridiculously small. Like, I'm still trying to get my head around it. So, if you think quality/cost ratio, it is unreal.

Worth noting, though... Audio isn't great. Basically average camera mic. Yay. Bad when there is ANY background noise...

billbradley

I bought my wife a Nikon D90 that does HD video recently. She loves it. She uses a Nikon Nikkor 18mm - 200mm VR (vibration reduction) lens with it. The lens costs just about as much as the camera body but is well worth it. You don't really need to carry any other lenses with you with that kind of range.

Okem

I just shot a television show on a Canon 7D... Worth noting, though. Audio isn't great. Basically average camera mic. Yay. Bad when there is ANY background noise...

I was going to ask how you captured audio & whether you'd used a separate soundman. Did you consider it? I wouldn't have thought the built in mic was anywhere near good enough quality.

kitchenknight

DEFINITELY used an audio guy- this was someone else's show, they hired me as producer.

We also had a real shooter, as I = NOT A CAMERA MAN (though I did set a few shots with it.)

Basically, they sent us with another cam (XD) that the shooter knew; and the 7D to take it for a test drive, and see if they could use it on future features.

The 7D was tremendous on interviews, set shots, and things where you could take time to set up a shot. It was not good as a run & gun cam, simply because we were using real lenses, and zooming/autofocus was out. Frankly, I haven't explored those options. But, as an interview cam, with audio it was tremendous. Someone with more time on a different shoot could explore that, as I probably will in the future.

As a first test, tho, it was really impressive. For the cost, and the quality of video, and the fact I could log everything in my hotel room that night, it was just mind-blowing.

DOR

Are we talking DSLR's?


If you got money Canon EOS 5D Mark II. They just shot the season finale of House with it. But that doesn't go probably anywhere close to some of the great video it shoots.

Less money... The 7D


Even less money... The new Canon EOS Rebel T2i

Which shoots pretty damn decent HD for the price.



I have a D90. I'd love to buy a 5D if I had the cash. Just always remember, the body is the cheap part. The lenses are what really burns a hole in your pocket.

grandpa_shig

i had a d90 for about 6months before i realized i could shoot video with it. thats how little i know about it. but i'll say this, once i started using it as a video recorder, i never used the camcorder again. the one drawback of the d90 is the "jello-vision" issue. i think the 5d is supposed to be better. i mean, you can get around the issue but it limits what you can shoot.

heres what i like about using the dslrs for video.

1. sd card: it seems just so much more convenient than firewire.
2. lenses. this is the single biggest reason why theyre better than video cameras. the price youd have to pay to get the same variety of optics for a video camera is ridiculous.
3. low light options. there are up to 4 ways to trick a d90 into shooting perfect night shots in video. i have a feeling the 5d might be the same. with a lil thinking and fiddling with the buttons, i was really impressed at the shots you can get at night.
4. the human/camera relationship: people react differently to a video camera as they would to a point and shoot camera. its one of the most interesting things about shooting video with these "still cameras". the subject is expecting that you capture a moment of time as opposed to a continuous event. you can get a more candid reaction from your subject as long as they think youre only taking pictures.

Mondeyano

Also, questions; how much do you want to spend, what sort of photography are you thinking of doing, do you want to learn the technical side of it or just stick to point and shoot??


If money were no object I'd like a Canon EOS 5D MkII, it'll even shoot HD video that's pretty breathtakingly beautiful.




But they're hella expensive, and pretty OTT for a beginner/novice. So that's probably the opposite of helpful.

What I always wonder is if the images are always so breathtakingly beautiful, why is there a need for an overly dramatic/cheesy soundtrack?

Okem

DEFINITELY used an audio guy- this was someone else's show, they hired me as producer.

We also had a real shooter, as I = NOT A CAMERA MAN (though I did set a few shots with it.)

Basically, they sent us with another cam (XD) that the shooter knew; and the 7D to take it for a test drive, and see if they could use it on future features.

The 7D was tremendous on interviews, set shots, and things where you could take time to set up a shot. It was not good as a run & gun cam, simply because we were using real lenses, and zooming/autofocus was out. Frankly, I haven't explored those options. But, as an interview cam, with audio it was tremendous. Someone with more time on a different shoot could explore that, as I probably will in the future.

As a first test, tho, it was really impressive. For the cost, and the quality of video, and the fact I could log everything in my hotel room that night, it was just mind-blowing.

Interesting stuff, thanks for sharing.

You're right the results are pretty amazing. Personally I can't see a huge difference between the 5D and the Red Camera, which is amazing itself for its' price, but costs x10 more than the Canon.
The fact that you could spend a couple of grand and produce broadcast quality HD video is amazing.

Hotsauce84

Are we talking DSLR's?

What is DSLR exactly?

kitchenknight

Also re: Red Cam, from what I've been told by people who DO use it, it is only worth it's weight when you can spend the proper time and money on color correction (which most certainly can't on this project).

If you want something cheaper, and more universal, the 7D was the way to go, according to Trade Magazine Reading types.

Okem

Also, questions; how much do you want to spend, what sort of photography are you thinking of doing, do you want to learn the technical side of it or just stick to point and shoot??


If money were no object I'd like a Canon EOS 5D MkII, it'll even shoot HD video that's pretty breathtakingly beautiful.




But they're hella expensive, and pretty OTT for a beginner/novice. So that's probably the opposite of helpful.

What I always wonder is if the images are always so breathtakingly beautiful, why is there a need for an overly dramatic/cheesy soundtrack?

Possible because the video is about a devastating flood in which several people were killed.

Okem

Are we talking DSLR's?

What is DSLR exactly?

Digital Single Lens Reflex.

grandpa_shig

Are we talking DSLR's?

What is DSLR exactly?

this just means them still cameras where you can switch out the lenses. as opposed to a camera with just that one zoom lens. those are considered "point and shoot" cameras.

with the dslrs you have a lot more control over your camera. a point and shoot camera is mostly automatic. if i were you and i had a lil scratch, id get the 5d.

Tabasko

Peep the Great Camera Shoot Out series:

here

I've shot with 5d's, 7d's and the lumix gh1 and they all have good and bad points.
7d doesn't shoot full frame, gh1 can be a bit 'wooly'.
GH1 does have autofocus with video though and that is something that none of the other cameras have. It also has slightly better sound than the Canons, but I would always use external sound source when you need it to be good.
5d definitely is a kick ass camera..
Beware that these camera's aren't really good for shooting fast paced action or sport, they all have some degree of 'rolling shutter wobble' when you do fast pans.

spelunk

Straight up no one can touch the insane video quality of the Canon 5D. Truly out of control.

The next step down though is the Panasonic GH-1, which I have and love. The way to go is to buy that an the f1.7 pancake lens for anything indoor since the kit lens is great for outdoor video but is f4. It's truly an incredible camera and micro 4/3rds size, so much smaller that a DSLR, but shoots 1080p at 24 or 30 fps.

Make sure to think about polarizers and other filters, plus a 16 GB memory card and a case when factoring in cost. Shit adds up but as someone said, it's crazy that I could shoot an HDTV quality tv show with this thing.

Also, the primary reason that people are using DSLRs for video is that you can shoot video through such an assortment of lenses at low cost, which is revolutionary. All but the most high end video lenses have sucked for years, and so finally being able to get the focus blur off a f1.7 is changing things a lot.

spelunk

I just bumped and old thread on the subject (by accident) there's also this one

- http://www.soulstrut.com/ubbthreads/show...ic=&Search=true

yeah, this is the smaller cousin to the gh1 and it's great, really portable. Make sure to cop the one with the pancake lens at f1.7.

Okem

Are we talking DSLR's?

What is DSLR exactly?

this just means them still cameras where you can switch out the lenses. as opposed to a camera with just that one zoom lens. those are considered "point and shoot" cameras.

with the dslrs you have a lot more control over your camera. a point and shoot camera is mostly automatic. if i were you and i had a lil scratch, id get the 5d.

Also.. Back in the day, you often used to have a choice between cameras with one lens (SLR) or two (TLR).
At an amateur level it was cheaper/easier to produce a TLR with one lens as a view finder and one for exposing the film.
SLRs need complex mechanics, as there is a mirror that sits in between the lens and the film, that allows you to view and shoot through the one lens.

You may remember those long flat cheap cameras people had when we were kids. The photos they produced, often came out with peoples' heads cropped off, because the twin lenses were seeing as slightly offset picture form one another.

But like Shig says, the choice now is more about 'point and shoot' or DSLR.

grandpa_shig

^i love them old rangefinder joints. i got an old leica with the screw on lenses and some of them came with these lil scope mounts to better emulate the optics of certain lenses. there were 2 eyeholes in them. 1 to find the range and the other to focus. they forced you to rely more on improvisation than exacting science.

Okem

Sounds cool, I've never used a decent rangefinder. I have an old medium format Minolta TLR (like a cheap rollei) which takes beautiful photographs, but it's a real labour of love to use, in these days of instant results.

highscheme

when you say HD video do you mean full 1080 or 720?

Since you don't know what a DSLR is, I am going to assume that is a bit too high end.

Panasonic Lumix LX3K is what I am looking at.

Its around $500, fully manual controls, compact body, and shoots 720HD.

It's no DSLR but who wants to lug one of those around unless you go out specifically for shooting.

thursdayalley

Also re: Red Cam, from what I've been told by people who DO use it, it is only worth it's weight when you can spend the proper time and money on color correction (which most certainly can't on this project).

If you want something cheaper, and more universal, the 7D was the way to go, according to Trade Magazine Reading types.

The Red vs. the 5D is apples to oranges. Yeah "It's all about your glass", the Canons' video looks great with the right lenses. For the money it's a great solution. But, It's all about what your deliverable is. If your shooting something to show in theaters on the festival circuit you can't compare a 1080i or p image to uncompressed 4k that the RED delivers.

That being said The 5D is the sh*t . They just upgraded the firmware so it's 1080p and improved the audio. and it doesn't take the post-production massaging that the RED takes .


I know a few DP's that can't wait for Arri Alexa so they don't have to deal with RED's BS.

kitchenknight

Also re: Red Cam, from what I've been told by people who DO use it, it is only worth it's weight when you can spend the proper time and money on color correction (which most certainly can't on this project).

If you want something cheaper, and more universal, the 7D was the way to go, according to Trade Magazine Reading types.

The Red vs. the 5D is apples to oranges. Yeah "It's all about your glass", the Canons' video looks great with the right lenses. For the money it's a great solution. But, It's all about what your deliverable is. If your shooting something to show in theaters on the festival circuit you can't compare a 1080i or p image to uncompressed 4k that the RED delivers.

That being said The 5D is the sh*t . They just upgraded the firmware so it's 1080p and improved the audio. and it doesn't take the post-production massaging that the RED takes .


I know a few DP's that can't wait for Arri Alexa so they don't have to deal with RED's BS.

^^^^^^^^^

KNOWS MORE ABOUT THIS THAN ME.

Nice, thanks (sincerely).

Hotsauce84

I'd love to see more examples of pics & videos you guys have shot (along with the camera you used for it).

grandpa_shig

yo dude, before you get ahead of yourself, have you thought about what software you want to use? the cost could easily eclipse whatever you might pay on a camera.

that being said i dont think theres anything wrong with the low end gear. like a flip camera and imovie. that way you can see what your limitations are, and whether you are willing to go deeper into this.


THIS VIDEO

Also, questions; how much do you want to spend, what sort of photography are you thinking of doing, do you want to learn the technical side of it or just stick to point and shoot??


If money were no object I'd like a Canon EOS 5D MkII, it'll even shoot HD video that's pretty breathtakingly beautiful.




But they're hella expensive, and pretty OTT for a beginner/novice. So that's probably the opposite of helpful.

uses the great optics of the 5d. rack focusing can usually only be done with the more expensive cameras with switchable lenses. everything else you can prolly do with a cheaper point and shoot camera with hd video.

however, a main reason why the video looks so great has to do with the editing software. id guess "curves" with a lil bit of contrast added. im not sure how much of this you can do with the cheaper software.

i actually think the software is more important than the camera. ive been given hi-8 footage which is an old outdated video format and made it look great with the software.

grandpa_shig

heres raw footage i shot with the d90. i didnt do anything to it. no color adjustment or leveling. nothing. i uploaded this cuz i wanted to show some folks and ask them if this is real or implants. which begged a more important question. do i really care?

Hotsauce84

decent editing software.

Talk to me about software. What's out there? How much is it? Easy to get from a hookup? What did you use? How long did something like that take (second video)?

b/w

Implants. It's all in the (lack of) thighs.