What's the industry standard HD camera?

EP2005

EP2005

Well-known member
Is there really that BIG of a difference *picture quality wise* between an HVX200 and an AJ-HDC27H?

would i be an idiot to try and save money by using an HVX200 over a higher end camera?


What kind of HD cameras would be used at a professional MTV music video shoot, or a live concert dvd taping, or a discovery channel program?


I'm asking all of this because I'm trying to figure out if i should spend the extra money on renting an expensive camera for a project that needs to be done "the right way" the first time.


With so many "higher end" camera's on the market, wheres a good place to research these cameras?
 
CineAlta F9XX is the workhorse for Discovery Channel shows - the CineAlta series has dominated that tiffany net for three years or so. Their deliverable specification is largely, unless with express-written permission, HDCam masters. TLC and the rest of DCIs disparate interests have wild and varied specifications, though most lens 1080/60i or 1080/23.98.

Most MTV videos still lens film - 16mm and 35mm - though they are also lensing more and more HD. Panasonic dominates this scene with the VariCam. There are plenty of guys on this board who deliver to MTV, so I'll let them answer on deliverables.

Live concerts are taping more and more HD (as opposed to SD), but those often are multi-cast for iMag and recording - meaning the stuff you see live on the LED wall and projection screen is what is being switched or iso-recorded backstage. For multi-cast, HD is less prevalent except for the biggest acts.

Even very recently, headline, national tours were still doing their iMag with the worst imaginable SD flypacks you can imagine. I mean, the worst. Duct tape and wet poodle style.

e
 
Last edited:
I have shot numerous projects with both cameras. The Varicam does definitely look a lot better than the HVX, as well it should, it costs about 15 times the amount the HVX does. Most lenses for the Varicam cost about as much as three or our HVXs. You will not notice a huge difference between them on a typical daylight exterior but under low light or indoors, the Varicam will look MUCH better, will have a shallower depth of field, less noise, etc. Either cam can photograph beautiful images but it's up to you an or your DP to create the beautiful images with lighting, wardrobe, locations and composition.

But don't forget, if you rent the Varicam, are you renting the paintbox? Will you have budget for a DIT? All of the toys that make a Varicam work are much larger, heavier. more involved and more expensive than an HVX-200. Heck, the tripod you will get for a Varicam rental will cost as much as two HVXs. If you hav a DP, get the Varicam. If you are shooting this yourself, you may have a harder time using the Varicam than the HVX, the HVX is much more of a prosumer, fairly simple camcorder versus the Varicam is a full blown high-end digital cinema camera. If you or your AC don't have knowledge of how the Varicam works, you could screw up your shoot pretty badly.

Almost all music videos are still shot on film, other than low, low budget deals.

I agree with Overland, the majority of higher end HD shoots for television are still mostly done on the F900/F950. The Varicam is popular on lower budget shows for cable, but it too is capable of beautiful images if you know what you are doing.

Your choice of which camera to rent is not nearly as important as how good are you and your crew, wardrobe, props, locations, post. I have seen and created very beautiful images with the HVX, it's more about your talent than which camera to shoot with.

Dan
 
I will shoot my feature next spring on the HVX. I think that for the most part, the footage it produces is very good, certainly good enough for the direct to video purposes that I am looking for. And I also know that if I have to blow it up to film for a limited theatrical release, I will not be embarrassed.

I've shot several TV pilots with F900 cinealtas. Very nice camera, and as Dan and Erik said, the workhorse of the HD industry. If I had to purchase a cam, I'd probably buy a RED rather than an F900 (F950 now) since those are soooo expensive. We used a set of Zeiss Digiprimes on our last shoot with the F900. My DP told me that they were something like an $80K set. Yikes!


The one downside to renting is that I think I know more about my HVX having owned on than I think my camera crew knows about the F900. Sure, they can do just about anything with that camera, but actually owning one gives you a depth of knowledge you just don't get, unless you rent one for like 100 days a year.
 
Thanks for the replies. Helped me in deciding the right direction to go with my production.

This isn't a movie or a TV show, and i'm not working with lighting, so my only concern is the best possible widest outdoor image i can get for a final output being an HDTV.

Looks like the HVX is the winner at the moment...
 
taormina said:
And I also know that if I have to blow it up to film for a limited theatrical release, I will not be embarrassed.
Click to expand...

I was under the impression that the size difference between 35mm and HD was very little, would my HV20 live up to streching to 35mm size? its all shot in the day so good round lighting no grainy night shoots...
 
Ive shot a couple things that made it to Mtv on Hvx. But, id rather have shot on the newer HPX2000 or 3000, or the HPX500/Varicam at least. Thoes cameras image intergrity is astounding. But for the budget, the HVX200 really saved the day. We shot 1080P, and the editor/director took it down to Digibeta i think for the delivery to MTV. Gotta ask him.

Over all, i think the best route to go is to rent the higher end camera. Braodcasters use them for a reason.
 
I think the Viper is slowly replacing the F900 series. Both are great cams but the Viper has more dynamic range and is more versatile with its RAW output.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top