Finally got to see "the big three" cameras on a HD projector

pwalker said:
Dan, this is a bit off topic here. Maybe we could move the topic elsewhere. But I would love to know more about your experience with the HF11. I'm thinking of picking one up just as a secondary b-roll cam to mix in with DVCProHD footage that I get - mostly shot on HVX200s or HDX900 cams. If you've written about this elsewhere let me know. I'm interested in your experiences with workflow and mixing these sources. Thanks. Phil.
Click to expand...

Hi Phil:

Feel free to PM me, but so far, I am where you are. I don't have an HF11 yet but will be getting one. I am just waiting to see if Canon updates the current models at CES this week. I have a friend who has been shooting with the HF 11 for about 6 months and he loves it. He is a really talented motion graphics artist and has shot some killer HF11 stuff.

Okay, back to the thread topic.

Da
 
LuckyStudio 13 said:
Canon just released hv40 today. The Hv40 now comes with real 24p recording. Just maybe oyu guys wanna check it out.
Click to expand...

I thought we are all done with tape?

All of the HV cameras are tape.


The hf11, hf10, hf100 are all great cameras for the price.
I would say it is the best under $2,500 camera period, and you can get one of them for around $700

The trouble is, you won't have mic inputs, and that is why you would buy an hmc150
 
Green Hornet said:
The trouble is, you won't have mic inputs, and that is why you would buy an hmc150
Click to expand...

Hi Green:

They all have mic inputs with manual levels and 24 segment audio metering. Pretty slick. Of course, you would still need a Beachtek box or some custom cables but these cameras look pretty impressive for the price.

I am buying strictly for size, I need something really small that looks touristy. Going to be shooting in some places where I could get busted with my 170 ;-)

Dan
 
DanHD said:
but small 1 chip sensors = yuck
Click to expand...

You would be surprised. A really talented graphics friend of mine has the HF11 and I have been blown away by some of the footage he has shot with it. Like everything else, if you can work around its limitations, you can shoot beautiful images with even a tiny, small chip camcorder. You just have to exploit its strengths and take into account its weaknesses. Turn on cable, shows like Bizarre Foods look like crap but are still fun to watch and are making the producers and Travel Channel a boatload of money. Not everything needs to imitate 35mm film. ;-)

Dan
 
How can you compare video shot with these cameras with out color grading them? The Canon or sony cams can mimic the hvx200 color easily with some color grading! Also some things to consider are The Ex1 has more latitude and more depth of field. You want your movie to look more filmic but you didn't go with the camera that offers these strengths?

Ok you are seeing jello or whatever when you do fast pans. Are you making a movie based on fast pans? That is a serious question. You seem to want the most out of your movie so please do this. Send a clip of your footage here http://lightpress.tv/video-sweetening/ have them color correct some of that Ex1 footage. No movie is done unless it has been color corrected!
FYI not affiliated to lightpress.tv
 
Nik Manning said:
Ok you are seeing jello or whatever when you do fast pans. Are you making a movie based on fast pans? That is a serious question.
Click to expand...

No, I'm not making movies based on fast pans, but if it happen to me I need a camera that will work accordingly. Every camera has it's limitations, even very expensive film cameras have their drawbacks.
In our world (most of us here) of lower end professional HD cameras it's always a question of understanding needs and selecting limitations.

About the rolling shutter issues I have made my mind a long time ago, but for for kicks I start to noticed in independent movies how many situations it will have been a concern.
I invite people to do the same and it will help them to make decisions.
Last time I did that was with "Slumgdog Millionaire", that movie couldn't be done with a camera that does not support fast pans, fast moving object and so forth.
 
Green Hornet said:
I think the easiest way to see the diferences in resolution is to compare the EX1 against the Panasonic with subject more than 10 feet away.

Close up, everything looks good.
It's when you shoot things that are not close up that the differences are overwhelming.
Click to expand...

This is exactly what I am talking about - in the two clips I posted about 30 responses back, they both look fantastic in close ups but when the panny hvx200a goes wide it crumbles compared to the EX1. Watch the couple wide shots in the park and looks at the leaves and how soft they are - now imagine that on a huge movie theater screen which is how I look at everything - I project it.

That being said, we ended up going with the EX1 for the current film I am shooting and I have a car accident seen with a lot of weird fast motion and the EX1 is a nightmare for me but you know what - I may be insane because a lot of people JUST DON'T SEE the cmos issues! I don't have permission to post up footage yet but basically I have an interior shot where the driver bangs up against the dash and the camera whips with him and then whips back fast to show a key element on the floor - and the jello vision is awful to me and makes my eyes itch - I reshot 4 different times - but the other editor is blind to it.

Panny would clearly be the winning camera if it had the resolution, that's the only thing the EX1 has going for it.

I think we are going to see something soon... the hvx200a just doesn't cut it anymore yet the EX1 is not the answer.

Ok engineers whip some magic out of your ass- I COMMAND YOU!

24p NATIVE as full 1920 x 1080 raster with no JELLO issues!
MAKE IT SO!
 
That already exists - you can get 1920 x 1080 full raster in a 24p native recording format with no jello issues.

It costs $48,000; it's called the HPX3000.

If you want 1920x1080 in a chip size (and price tag) smaller than a 2/3" system, right now that pretty much means CMOS, and that means jello. No two ways around it.
 
LOL! Barry Green.. nail on head.

If you don't want to spend the dough, you have to make the compromise. Most of my shooting is interview and conference. The EX1 was an easy choice. Especially with it's low light performance. If I was shooting narrative and moving the camera all the time, I might have chosen differently.

Buy what fits, or rent.
 
I think it would be silly to spend $48,000 on a camera for an independent studio. That could be far more than you need for the budget of an entire movie, and I feel technology is moving so fast that someone will figure out this issue and a camera will soon be out at the $5000 level that matches that $48,000 quality. We see it happen time and time again.
Sure, HB0 can pop for a couple HPX3000s... I can't and even if I could...and I have had the cash flow that that sort of a camera requires at certain times in my life - again I would use the money differently then blowing it all on the cam.

I would by the cam and tomorrow someone would make an announcement that a nww codec for CMOS analyzes all the lines and fixes skew and jello with no res loss - it shifts them back into their correct place. Or panny would say they have solved the supposed limit of res on CCD chips...

Something is going to fix it soon because too many people have an issue with it and work within the same budget range and don't want to buy $48,000 cameras. When a demand is that high, it gets figured out.

I have also never seen HMC150 footage until today and it does not appear to have the softness issue that the HPX200a does - so maybe it has been the DVCPRO codec all along that is the problem more than the chips. I need to do more tests.
 
Blackout said:
I think it would be silly to spend $48,000 on a camera for an independent studio. That could be far more than you need for the budget of an entire movie,

Sure, HB0 can pop for a couple HPX3000s... I would use the money differently then blowing it all on the cam.
Click to expand...

Yes, it would be silly to spend $48K on a camera for an indie project.

Most high-end production companies and movie studios rent their camera/lens packages, not buy them for a project/projects. You can't buy Panavision 35mm or Genesis cameras or lenses anyway.

If there is a specific project happening now and the cameras within your budget to purchase won't give you the features/imagery required, it makes sense to rent. That's how it's done everyday, even with big budgets.

Otherwise, the option would be to delay the start of shooting and wait for technology and pricing to do what you require if you must own the camera package for some reason.
 
Ha I have already been following the Ikonoskop people. I thought it's called the DII though and it's still a prototype isn't it?

Also - can anyone else verify my experience that the HMC150 is slightly sharper and has slightly more detail than the HVX200a or am I completely off?
 
One of the advantages of the low cost cameras is the ability to great images and save money. But there are always sacrifices when spending less than $10,000 on a camera.

If you want to step up to an HPX3000 or higher, renting is always an affordable option. The great thing about rental houses is that you can check out the camera and talk to people who have used it, before making a decision.

David
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top