Best Documentary Camera

[DPStewart]

Optically? Any camera. (within reason...duh.) Because the viewers are RADICALLY MORE FORGIVING about the image of documentaries than of films and TV dramas.


As YOUR TOOL? - Conceptually - you are going to most appreciate the most 'all-in-one' package you can get. Sony FS5 or FS7 or the Canon C300. Why? because documentaries almost always are shot with far less crew than narrative work. You need as LITTLE technical crap going on as is possible. 1 or 2 lenses, and a mic you can plug INTO the camera. As soon as you start with external audio recorders and multiple prime lenses etc, etc,...YOU MISS SHOTS. And very often in the world of documentary production - you don't get another chance at it.


So, it's not "the camera" but more rather the "style" of the camera's construction.

 

[nedcam]

Well, the problem with a topic like this is that we are all coming from it at different ends, depending on what markets we serve, what we want to do, what our goals are, if money is a consideration, etc.

For me, I have always been a freelance shooter. Some clients will ask me what they should shoot it on and naturally, as a capitalist, I will strongly push what I happen to own at the time or can rent cheaply. Here in Chicago, when I look at the current top end doc guys, they own the Sony F55, Cabrio zoom all in a freshly washed Sprinter. I know because I will refer them gigs I can't do for a bottle of wine or restaurant gift card.

I believe the F55 is "long in the tooth" but if you were called by Dateline, 60 Minutes, etc., that's what they'd expect. Independent high end doc production companies have been enamored with the C300 the last 5-6 years so if I was Eric I'd keep mine until some thunderous breakthrough occurs. I have very high SEO so I get a lot of nibbles and as I mentioned they are now asking for the FS7. Much of the time they are "kids" who are doing the leg work but I can imagine their boss saying, "Find me a Chicago DP with a ___, and his soundman, and we don't want to pay more than $X". That's my life. I deal with non-technical types who are told to find a specific model, usually because they need scenes picked up in Chicago/Midwest/US for a video that has had filming elsewhere. I market myself as able to "match" what you have, often I interface with the other DP for settings, lighting, etc. I discretely ask about rates...

So...that long post above of mine, if you aren't an infielder like me, and to you non-US guys that's a baseball player who can stop any ball hit towards him, then you can get whatever model you prefer and not give a damn if it's popular or not. But I learned the hard way that if you are making a living on the quantity of requests for your services dependent on the most asked for camera, then logically you want the most common model, which is the C300, FS7 or a A7S.

Then on to the ergonomics issue- Yes, there is a problem with having to strip down and use your baby for car mounts, sliders, Ronins, etc., but to me the worst case scenario would be to be handheld all day, which often happens in a real documentary. This campaign year, I know guys who all they do is follow candidates all day. ALL DAY. ugh. But to me, and if I don't retire soon, it's not the camera and the ergonomics, it's the glass! I am so sick of changing lenses that I would love that Canon 18-80 to be my new girl. I hate constantly changing lenses for many reasons and out of all that was discussed above, the viewer will notice your composition, lighting and editing, and they have no clue which model camera you used.

And someone above mentioned "if the budget is big enough", wow, I wish I lived on your planet! Our interest and that of those who hire us are diametrically opposed : We want to make money, they want to save on spending. One problem with being older is that many of your doc clients are your friends, we've been through many projects together. Friends expect deals! They're giving you many days, over many months, a zillion half days, a day of just one 2 hour interview, etc. I do draw the line at sharing rooms! But to me the word documentary is another way of saying "we have a really interesting subject matter but a small budget". Seems that they're mainly activists: social or political or religious. Kind of zealots. Some are maxing out their credit cards. I am now trying to avoid doing docs but I do what I call "documentary style" and I do a lot of that for Fortune 100s and Non-FictionTV shows like Animal Planet, etc. Unless it's from a big production company or documentary producer, when I think of the word documentary I think: Uh Oh...Around 1992 I got a call asking me if I would like to shoot in the hood every weekend FOR AN ENTIRE YEAR and shoot a high school basketball documentary for deferred payment. Perhaps they asked because I came off the half year critically acclaimed doc I mentioned in the last post which was shot in a high school? Many of you are probably too young, and now it's a campaign problem for Hillary, but the early 90's the US was going through an extremely bad violent crime wave, so going into Chicago's ghetto for free for a year, usually at night, didn't rock my boat. But that doc turned out to be the Academy Award nominated Hoop Dreams. To this day I can't watch the awards, my wife watches alone. But I digress...

But alas I am tired, I shot today and brought my Ronin Killer along: The Osmo. Many clients and prospects have called and said they were interested in their new doc looking like an Anthony Bourdain TV show, even though we won't have two shooters. So you guys watch this and then respond:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILgxNgIaAM4

To me this is the height of doc shooting under the gun, with an unpleasant boss and no time to tweak. But I never reached the top tier as a shooter like Wolfgang Held:

http://www.wolfgangheld.com/?portfolio_category=documentary

To me, that's the height of doc and all the rest of us are "documentary style". And if he has the C300 it should be good enough for the rest of us! Perhaps what you all have is a lust for new gear? It's a disease you know...There's rehab for that.

 

[scorsesefan]

Optically? Any camera. (within reason...duh.) Because the viewers are RADICALLY MORE FORGIVING about the image of documentaries than of films and TV dramas.


As YOUR TOOL? - Conceptually - you are going to most appreciate the most 'all-in-one' package you can get. Sony FS5 or FS7 or the Canon C300. Why? because documentaries almost always are shot with far less crew than narrative work. You need as LITTLE technical crap going on as is possible. 1 or 2 lenses, and a mic you can plug INTO the camera. As soon as you start with external audio recorders and multiple prime lenses etc, etc,...YOU MISS SHOTS. And very often in the world of documentary production - you don't get another chance at it.


So, it's not "the camera" but more rather the "style" of the camera's construction.

Yeah, agreed. I traded in my BMCC for a C100 for all of the above reasons... And I usually work with my partner, who shoots and I do sound via a separate recorder. The other day I had to shoot/interview/record sound by myself and my camera was literally covered with my own sweat. I find it very difficult to interact with talent and do the technical side, too... So, even with a camera like the C series or FS5/7 you have to know your own strengths and limitations...

 

[Liam Hall]

Optically? Any camera. (within reason...duh.) Because the viewers are RADICALLY MORE FORGIVING about the image of documentaries than of films and TV dramas.


As YOUR TOOL? - Conceptually - you are going to most appreciate the most 'all-in-one' package you can get. Sony FS5 or FS7 or the Canon C300. Why? because documentaries almost always are shot with far less crew than narrative work. You need as LITTLE technical crap going on as is possible. 1 or 2 lenses, and a mic you can plug INTO the camera. As soon as you start with external audio recorders and multiple prime lenses etc, etc,...YOU MISS SHOTS. And very often in the world of documentary production - you don't get another chance at it.


So, it's not "the camera" but more rather the "style" of the camera's construction.

The problem with this thread is the question is too broad. In my mind, you are describing news style shooting, not high-end documentary.

 

[Greg_E]

He keeps stressing if there is no upper limit to the budget and the top most end of the budget, to which I asked if those clients are constantly knocking on his door and turning away when they find a lowly XYZ when they were expecting an ABC with all the extras.

 

[Run&Gun]

I think I've already said this in this topic; buying a camera requires a generalized approach. But the answers in this topic keep deviating to a non-generalized approach. All of those questions you ask are project specific. Most people don't buy a camera for one single project; they buy a camera for what they expect their general work to be over the next 2-5 years of the camera's shelf life. I guess in the original post I meant more as a doc camera to own, not as a doc camera to rent for case-by-case projects.

If a producer comes to me and asks what camera we should use on the shoot he's hiring me for, I'd probably tell them what cameras I own and ask what their budget is. If they don't like what I own and want to use a different camera, then I may not be the person for the job because my investment in cameras is so high that doing a shoot while renting other cameras won't pay me a day rate that will make financial sense to take on a regular basis. That's not to say I won't take occasional jobs using cameras that aren't mine, just that that isn't my target client base, nor would it be for anyone who owns a lot of gear. For example, I believe Philip Bloom doesn't take jobs that don't use his gear, even if X camera he doesn't own may occasionally be better suited for X job. I personally rent gear maybe like, once or twice a year on average, out of 130 shoot days in a year.

And yeah, of course most owners own more than just a camera and tripod. I sure do. But this topic isn't about support equipment.

In this day and age, you really need to have more than one camera and more than one kind of camera to serve different kinds, and even the same, clients. I have three VariCam's that I use primarily as my ENG camera's(and feature cams) and a C300 and F55(and 5D) and I use them ALL and even all for the same client, depending on the shoot.

 

[Run&Gun]

Ned, that's all fine from a business standpoint. I'm saying if one's business model is to aim for the top end, where the top end clients can afford to pay appropriate rates for the best gear for the job. Is the FS7 the best camera then? I don't think so, as I think the C300 Mark II is better in most ways unless you use 180 fps slow motion a lot or need 4K 60p. I think some producers may prefer the FS7 so they can get a lower day rate, but that consideration wouldn't be as important in the top end of doc filming.



But then it begs the question, is handheld shoulder shooting the best way to film a doc? With Steadicams, sliders, monopods, gimbals, etc., the long form factor of an ENG shaped cam such as the Amira can be a hindrance to getting shots other than shoulder mounted. Consider this post from the FS7 forum...




That's what would make me hesitant to consider a Varicam LT or Amira as a doc cam over say a C300 or FS7. I guess if one's "style" is handheld, then ENG ergonomics works fine. But if that's not one's style?

Of course with the larger cameras such as the Amira and Varicam LT you get the added benefit of better image quality, but at the cost of either shooting everything handheld or needing larger and slower support equipment for anything beyond handheld.

Then you just do what we've always done, you put it on the stix, the slider, SteadiCam, jib, etc… The only thing that you would really be precluding yourself from with an ENG style body is a gimbal like a Movi or Ronin. All of my support gear(tripods, sliders, etc.) serves my "big" VariCam's and my "small" C300 and F55. And let's be honest, by the time we rig up the small cameras, they're not really that small and light anymore and need decent support gear.

 

[Eric Coughlin]

He keeps stressing if there is no upper limit to the budget and the top most end of the budget, to which I asked if those clients are constantly knocking on his door and turning away when they find a lowly XYZ when they were expecting an ABC with all the extras.

I own two C300 Mark II's and three C100s. I've had a couple freelance clients ask about the Amira. In addition to freelancing I also produce videos, in which case those clients typically don't know the difference from one camera to another; they go based off of the end results, in which case I want to provide the best results possible, using the best camera for the job, for documentary style work. So for client based work, how "in-demand" the camera is is irrelevant. So as a producer, I want to choose the best camera for the job, which I can afford, if I feel it will give me a better result.

I personally think the Amira and C300 Mark II are the best doc cams out today if budget isn't an issue (along with, as mentioned, some smaller cams like the A7s II and 1DX Mark II, as b or c-cams), but like to hear others' opinions as well.

Then you just do what we've always done, you put it on the stix, the slider, SteadiCam, jib, etc… The only thing that you would really be precluding yourself from with an ENG style body is a gimbal like a Movi or Ronin. All of my support gear(tripods, sliders, etc.) serves my "big" VariCam's and my "small" C300 and F55. And let's be honest, by the time we rig up the small cameras, they're not really that small and light anymore and need decent support gear.

As your camera gets bigger, your support gear gets bigger, which generally means larger crew and more setup time. Often not ideal for doc style shooting. I tend to not do much rigging for my cameras, so they don't get terribly heavy compared to the ENG types. About 7 pounds for my C100 setup and 10 pounds for my C300 Mark II setup.

I have a Rhino slider I put on some Gitzo sticks. Works fine for a C-series cams at 7-10 pounds. I'm not sure it would work well with an Amira at 20lbs (plus 8-10 lbs for say an O'Connor tripod head on the slider). Sure, I could spend a few grand on a heavy duty slider, beefier sticks, etc., but the size and weight would slow things down.

I have a Steadicam Zephyr. It can take the weight of an F55 or Amira. It takes 5-10 minutes to setup. My Glidecam with or without a Steadicam vest takes 1-2 minutes to setup. C300 and C100 works with the Glidecam. Amira would not. So now in those extra 3-7 minutes, while I'm setting up the Zephyr for a fast paced doc style project, I'm missing out on potential shots. The camera's size slows me down, and leads to a lower quality product. Well, except that the Amira has better image quality. So is it worth it?

 

[deltoidjohn]

Just thought I'd add a little anecdote from the past week:

I'm currently working as the editor on a documentary style travel program shot mainly on FS7. The main DOP was unavailable for one of the location shoots so the Producer hired a DOP with a RED Epic Dragon kit. Now, it was partly the DOP's fault for not listening to our requirements, but what we've got as a result is causing us major headaches. Everything is shot at 6k (because more K's are always better, right?) with a cinema aspect ratio (ie: not 16:9), so every clip needs to be resized and cropped for a 1080p timeline - probably transcoded too to avoid unnecessary processor/bandwidth bottlenecks. It'll also need a totally new workflow to be implemented to edit and grade that particular episode. We've got to totally re-organise the project drives for the whole season, migrating from a series of duplicated USB3 HDD's to a RAID array, to accommodate all that data which is just going to be thrown out anyway. Many scenes were shot at odd framerates (82.5 fps??? Because more is always better, right?) which now need to have uneven frames dropped to fit on a 25p timeline in real-time. Much of the footage was shot at fast shutter speeds because the DOP didn't have time to change ND filters, or refit a matte-box every time he changed lenses. A lot of shots that should've been shot on a tripod were not, because his tripod for the fully rigged RED weighs 15kgs and he simply couldn't be mobile enough with it. All the sound is shot to a Zoom recorder because the RED doesn't have appropriate audio features - and there's not even scratch sound. This is not just for interviews either, but for shots which have ambient audio too. Pretty much EVERY single shot needs audio to be linked (not to mention located from amongst the thousand odd .WAV files). Again, it requires a totally different, much more time consuming workflow than the other episodes, for zero discernible difference in the final output.

This is a perfect example of one of the best quality cameras available being absolutely not the right tool for the job. Some of these problems could've been fixed with more crew, but the reality is that many times even high-end, unlimited-budget documentaries do not afford you the time and space requirements needed for this. Even if they did, how often do these jobs land on your doorstep? If your answer is "all the time" then chances are you are are far more educated than most of us here and don't need advice from any of us anyway.

This is why ENG cameras are still very popular for doc work, and why smaller cameras such as the FS7 and C300/II have become so popular for doc's in the past few years. Fast, flexible, and familiar often beats all the IQ in the world when it comes to critical, one-chance-only documentary production - no matter what the budget.

 

[David W. Jones]

I personally think the Amira and C300 Mark II are the best doc cams out today if budget isn't an issue

But let's be honest, budget is always an issue!

You mention unlimited budget doc work but I have never, repeat never, viewed a project with an unlimited budget. I have watched docs which were in the millions of dollars and containing scenes which were shot with multiple 35mm film cameras. But again, a finite budget. I understand where you are coming from. If you need a better camera to satisfy client demand then get one. But if you are at that point why question an Internet forum? You know your clients needs better than we do.

All the best!

Dave

 

[nedcam]

Wasting time at the service bay:

One of my niches is doing corporate videos but in documentary style. The last couple of cameras I bought I did not get a usable matte box or follow focus wheels. Either there is no time, their cases aren't nearby or I have to slim down the rig. I've established a reputation of being "fast", which has its plusses and minuses, but if the prospective clients are comparing apples-to-apples and it's known I am very fast, then I get the gig. Many of my peers are very good but...very slow, so I have to factor that in when I refer someone when I am not available. Even when I am producing I also shoot 85% of the time (I'm too cheap to hire a DP!) and the way schedules are nowadays, even when I am in charge of making the schedule I have to work fast because the budget isn't there to add another day or OT. I am a stickler about a lunch break however.


A poster above (can't find it) made a great point in that if you specialize in the documentary style then all your other related expenses are less and the space your cases take up is less, meaning a smaller vehicle can be used. If you are a highly stylized shooter then you must have very high end, very expensive gear such as matched primes, etc. and all this gear requires bulky cases which force you to own larger vehicles which require shelving, you can't park in the downtown garages so now you must get a parking permit, the level of nuanced lighting requires a grip truck and now a couple of extra grips, on and on. The two high end guys I interface with and throw leads to have Sprinters. I used to do a lot of that in my 16mm days, even had matched primes, did a lot of indies, shorts, teenage slasher movies, etc. But I really ended up hating the dramatic form of narrative, not my scene dealing with that end such as storyboards, thespian personalities, grip trucks with grumpy grips, etc. I often felt I was running a film school. 14-16 hour days the norm and lots of amphetamine fueled all niters. And with that package I did spots and I really started hating the advertising crowd (marketing folks are OK) with their 20 takes on the same exact shot, very fake folks and then when music videos started that was even worse: Listening to the same song all day and faking fandom of the lead singer. So my point is, you have to decide you're either a doc shooter or a highly stylized shooter, because the gear packages (and mindset), client base and even vehicle will be totally different. Also, there is definitely pigeonholing in this biz so I reckon it's better for me to be known as a doc/corporate/Non-fiction TV shooter than "highly stylized" since I work a lot more and my gear budget is less. I'm filming local web spots for high end car dealerships in a few days but it is in the doc style. But I digress...

But then, every now and then I was asked to shoot something documentary style or a TV series that was doc and what I discovered was that as a DP I had the most creative FREEDOM. It was up to JUST ME to figure out how to get the shot, what is happening next, positioning myself for that golden moment, figuring in my head how the editor could use a cut away to shorten the scene, etc. This was right before video taps were invented so the director could not see what I was doing, so they had to TRUST their DP, also with film you had to wait two days to see if everything was OK, so the choice of DP was extremely critical. Any of you reading this post imagine doing your work now where there are no monitors? No playback? Just the optical viewfinder and only YOU got to see the shot? Wow, that was a rush, total DP freedom. Before we became "button pushers".


Fast forward to 2016- I have this niche, I live near many Fortune 100 HQs, they all want that "authenticity look". Ever since the Great Recession it is NOT COOL to have a bigger crew coming in to film the CEO when they're laying people off, right? One Rock n Roller and maybe a wheeled light kit, that's it, and even then 99% of the time they say, "Wow, you really need all this stuff?" If it's the kind of day where the sun won't change I will ask to ditch the typical conference or CEO office and find northern facing windows and with my Diva with daylight bulbs and one bounce card I will do my interviews (if it's quiet). This is an extremely popular look now. I am so old I have lived through a zillion styles that came and went and thankfully the "camera constantly moving" one is zenithing, (although I just bought an Osmo for quick grab faux Ronin). That said, it's common for the same package to now have to be handheld all day, back and forth. There may be a press conference in the middle of the day that they forgot to mention. All clients who did not come up the production route, meaning males who were never shooters, they do NOT understand when we have to reconfigure, all the time it takes, so I give them some forewarning. Many are used to a kid with a DSLR and no lights or the one man local news shooter who walks in with just sticks and camera. I have perfected my cases to be wheeled with compartments so if they do throw me a curve ball whatever I need is somewhere nearby. I am a case fetishist and everything high priority must be on wheels, I use almost no foam so my cases are smaller. If there's air travel I have a section of my garage for cases like Pelicans, but locally I do arrive as a doc shooter "ready to go". Matter of fact I piece everything together the evening before (absolutely sober at that point) so when I arrive I often exit my vehicle holding my Frankenrig. When they compare me to their last "video vendor" they are very impressed. An old trick my mentor taught me...

When I was doing active marketing to the higher end doc crowd I called it "The Documentary Triangle" meaning Boston, New York, Philly. THAT is where all the best PBS stations are and they have staff producers who then go freelance or start their own prod cos and they were the ones got my documentary ball rolling, (but I mainly shoot just the Midwest scenes). Now you could add DC since Discovery moved there and Smithsonian is there and a million PR firms and think tanks that crave the "documentary look" for authenticity, so let's now call it The Documentary Trapezoid. The LA documentary scene, I never cracked and if you research all the highest end doc shooters you will see they mainly live coastal where they can do a meeting, so being in Chicago was not a plus. I am not referring to the do-it-yourself crowd of starving artist/activist doc producers but rather the high end, got a budget or foundation money doc crowd. Here are two resources, find the busiest DPs and what they're using, from what I've seen it's the C300 or F55 and as I mentioned the FS7 is being asked for. I used to run a classified or 1/8th page ad for years in this magazine, BEFORE there was this interwebby thing, you should bookmark it:

http://www.documentary.org


Lastly, all I watch is documentaries. Pisses the wife off. Please binge watch Making of a Murderer. Notice how the shooting is absolutely crap, field producers using consumer palm camera but they spent a fortune for a very high end doc shooter to come in and do the b-roll establishing shots including A+ drone work. His b-roll shooting really made the series, without that it would look amateur. Find out what he owns!


Sorry for such a long post, I'm getting my tires rotated at the moment!

 

[scorsesefan]

Just thought I'd add a little anecdote from the past week:

I'm currently working as the editor on a documentary style travel program shot mainly on FS7. The main DOP was unavailable for one of the location shoots so the Producer hired a DOP with a RED Epic Dragon kit. Now, it was partly the DOP's fault for not listening to our requirements, but what we've got as a result is causing us major headaches. Everything is shot at 6k (because more K's are always better, right?) with a cinema aspect ratio (ie: not 16:9), so every clip needs to be resized and cropped for a 1080p timeline - probably transcoded too to avoid unnecessary processor/bandwidth bottlenecks. It'll also need a totally new workflow to be implemented to edit and grade that particular episode. We've got to totally re-organise the project drives for the whole season, migrating from a series of duplicated USB3 HDD's to a RAID array, to accommodate all that data which is just going to be thrown out anyway. Many scenes were shot at odd framerates (82.5 fps??? Because more is always better, right?) which now need to have uneven frames dropped to fit on a 25p timeline in real-time. Much of the footage was shot at fast shutter speeds because the DOP didn't have time to change ND filters, or refit a matte-box every time he changed lenses. A lot of shots that should've been shot on a tripod were not, because his tripod for the fully rigged RED weighs 15kgs and he simply couldn't be mobile enough with it. All the sound is shot to a Zoom recorder because the RED doesn't have appropriate audio features - and there's not even scratch sound. This is not just for interviews either, but for shots which have ambient audio too. Pretty much EVERY single shot needs audio to be linked (not to mention located from amongst the thousand odd .WAV files). Again, it requires a totally different, much more time consuming workflow than the other episodes, for zero discernible difference in the final output.

This is a perfect example of one of the best quality cameras available being absolutely not the right tool for the job. Some of these problems could've been fixed with more crew, but the reality is that many times even high-end, unlimited-budget documentaries do not afford you the time and space requirements needed for this. Even if they did, how often do these jobs land on your doorstep? If your answer is "all the time" then chances are you are are far more educated than most of us here and don't need advice from any of us anyway.

This is why ENG cameras are still very popular for doc work, and why smaller cameras such as the FS7 and C300/II have become so popular for doc's in the past few years. Fast, flexible, and familiar often beats all the IQ in the world when it comes to critical, one-chance-only documentary production - no matter what the budget.

Uggghh, what a nightmare... The DP sounds a lot like the little bald guy driving a Ferrari for obvious reasons of overcompensation. The Red is perfectly capable of giving you the technical specs you require as an editor -- just seems like the DP let his ego/and or technical incompetence get in the way. BTW you're telling me you have to sync all of that sound without a scratch track? My sympathies :/

 

[nedcam]

New lecture. Starts at 7:00

http://www.newsshooter.com/2016/06/...-dp-zach-zamboni-shares-his-shooting-secrets/

Sony F5

 

[Run&Gun]

I own two C300 Mark II's and three C100s. I've had a couple freelance clients ask about the Amira. In addition to freelancing I also produce videos, in which case those clients typically don't know the difference from one camera to another; they go based off of the end results, in which case I want to provide the best results possible, using the best camera for the job, for documentary style work. So for client based work, how "in-demand" the camera is is irrelevant. So as a producer, I want to choose the best camera for the job, which I can afford, if I feel it will give me a better result.

I personally think the Amira and C300 Mark II are the best doc cams out today if budget isn't an issue (along with, as mentioned, some smaller cams like the A7s II and 1DX Mark II, as b or c-cams), but like to hear others' opinions as well.



As your camera gets bigger, your support gear gets bigger, which generally means larger crew and more setup time. Often not ideal for doc style shooting. I tend to not do much rigging for my cameras, so they don't get terribly heavy compared to the ENG types. About 7 pounds for my C100 setup and 10 pounds for my C300 Mark II setup.

I have a Rhino slider I put on some Gitzo sticks. Works fine for a C-series cams at 7-10 pounds. I'm not sure it would work well with an Amira at 20lbs (plus 8-10 lbs for say an O'Connor tripod head on the slider). Sure, I could spend a few grand on a heavy duty slider, beefier sticks, etc., but the size and weight would slow things down.

I have a Steadicam Zephyr. It can take the weight of an F55 or Amira. It takes 5-10 minutes to setup. My Glidecam with or without a Steadicam vest takes 1-2 minutes to setup. C300 and C100 works with the Glidecam. Amira would not. So now in those extra 3-7 minutes, while I'm setting up the Zephyr for a fast paced doc style project, I'm missing out on potential shots. The camera's size slows me down, and leads to a lower quality product. Well, except that the Amira has better image quality. So is it worth it?

Not true. I think there is a misconception that just because the camera is bigger and/or heavier it means more crew, more gear and a slower all-around process. I don't know your background, but mine is ENG. We have been humping around forever by ourselves or with just a sound-guy. When I get to have a grip or extra person on the crew, I'm ecstatic. But it's generally just me and an audio guy, but I've spent even more time flying solo with a lot of gear.

Yes, when you're shooting with full-size cameras your support gear needs to be more robust/capable of handling heavier payloads, but that doesn't mean if you shoot with a full-size camera you have to shoot with a tripod that weighs 50 lbs or the slider/dolly needs four grips to wrangle it. I shoot with the same tripods/heads with my VariCam's and F55 and C300. Vinten 100's and Sachtler Speedlocks. I think that's around 15 lbs for head and legs. I bought them originally for my ENG cameras, but I honestly would not shoot with anything less even on the "little" cams. Unless it was a strictly locked-off shot, period. And then not with a long focal length lens. My down & dirty slider is a MYT Works 4' that can handle both types of cameras. It's small, light and quick, because it's all one piece. Batteries are so powerful and light nowadays, it's not a huge concern either.

I would argue that you SHOULD be able to set-up FASTER, be MORE EFFECIENT and able to get a wider variety of shots with an ENG camera or Amira/Alexa type set-up with a zoom lens over a smaller camera and still/prime lenses. I know personally I can shoot circles around myself with my VariCam and 13x4.5 lens compared to me shooting with my C300 of F55. You've talked about worrying about missing shots, I've missed WAY more shots shooting with a C300 than an ENG camera. Things that happen in almost an instant that I could have gotten with my Vari, but I missed because I was trying to adjust the third party VF on the third party mount into position or d!cking around with the iris via a control wheel or buttons instead of being able to actually lay my fingers on it and adjust it instantly.

Remember, ENG cams were essentially designed for Doc work. That's basically what news gathering is.

Different strokes for different folks and you need to have gear that matches YOUR shooting style, as well. For me, it's a full size shoulder mountable camera with native VF and zoom lens.

 

[nedcam]

Yes Run & Gun, shooting with an ENG style camera is SO MUCH FASTER than any of these still lens rigs but the younger guys who never knew that world have nothing to compare their world to. This is why, if I decide not to retire shortly, I would go for the new Canon 18-80 servo zoom, although it is nowhere near an ENG wide angle 2/3" zoom with a 2X extender. I have missed many more shots with the new way than the old ENG way. Plus shallow DoF makes capturing quick harder.

But this is all getting the cart before the horse ain't it? Just because some DP gets a great camera for doc won't help him if he didn't get properly trained in doc shooting. I know. I have to cut the young ones' footage! Interviews are OK, b-roll is OK, but if they have to do reality and provide me with a wide variety of coverage, wow, they are clueless. No one taught them and it's really hard to learn doc shooting by yourself.

It's not their fault though, they are all self taught now. When I started you had to assist for an older guy who knew what he was doing and trained you, because the gear was so expensive and complex. And my early years of sports (predict who is going where next and passing to whom and plan focus), plus nature (stealth and be ready to roll is a second) and news (position yourself for what's about to happen plus have a Plan B,C,D,E...) all these things make one better at doc. Now they ingrain bad habits. Also, their instinct is to make a 2 minute video whereas with docs the shooter needs to hang much longer, have many cut aways so the editor can elongate for VO. Maybe if they had to cut a few docs before trying to shoot one? Then they would be more successful? Oh well...

Isn't it interesting that we're finally seeing the return to the ENG camera's ergonomics? No more crazy shoulder rigs, rods, focus wheels, hang on EVF, crap...BTW, I am starting a New Me. I'm turning off the phone and all inter web from Friday 6PM to Sunday 6PM to break my addiction!

P.S. I keep my Panasonic HPX370 in the car in case I have to Go Turbo.

 

[Greg_E]

Just another thing that ENG cameras have now that other cameras may not have... 2 to 10 seconds of pre-record so that if you see something and weren't recording, you can hit the button and it will have been in the buffer and stored on the card. For reality that must be a decent feature.

 

[oron cohen]

Just thought I'd add a little anecdote from the past week:

I'm currently working as the editor on a documentary style travel program shot mainly on FS7. The main DOP was unavailable for one of the location shoots so the Producer hired a DOP with a RED Epic Dragon kit. Now, it was partly the DOP's fault for not listening to our requirements, but what we've got as a result is causing us major headaches. Everything is shot at 6k (because more K's are always better, right?) with a cinema aspect ratio (ie: not 16:9), so every clip needs to be resized and cropped for a 1080p timeline - probably transcoded too to avoid unnecessary processor/bandwidth bottlenecks. It'll also need a totally new workflow to be implemented to edit and grade that particular episode. We've got to totally re-organise the project drives for the whole season, migrating from a series of duplicated USB3 HDD's to a RAID array, to accommodate all that data which is just going to be thrown out anyway. Many scenes were shot at odd framerates (82.5 fps??? Because more is always better, right?) which now need to have uneven frames dropped to fit on a 25p timeline in real-time. Much of the footage was shot at fast shutter speeds because the DOP didn't have time to change ND filters, or refit a matte-box every time he changed lenses. A lot of shots that should've been shot on a tripod were not, because his tripod for the fully rigged RED weighs 15kgs and he simply couldn't be mobile enough with it. All the sound is shot to a Zoom recorder because the RED doesn't have appropriate audio features - and there's not even scratch sound. This is not just for interviews either, but for shots which have ambient audio too. Pretty much EVERY single shot needs audio to be linked (not to mention located from amongst the thousand odd .WAV files). Again, it requires a totally different, much more time consuming workflow than the other episodes, for zero discernible difference in the final output.

This is a perfect example of one of the best quality cameras available being absolutely not the right tool for the job. Some of these problems could've been fixed with more crew, but the reality is that many times even high-end, unlimited-budget documentaries do not afford you the time and space requirements needed for this. Even if they did, how often do these jobs land on your doorstep? If your answer is "all the time" then chances are you are are far more educated than most of us here and don't need advice from any of us anyway.

This is why ENG cameras are still very popular for doc work, and why smaller cameras such as the FS7 and C300/II have become so popular for doc's in the past few years. Fast, flexible, and familiar often beats all the IQ in the world when it comes to critical, one-chance-only documentary production - no matter what the budget.

I feel the most important thing about working with people is to understand filmmaking and video making is a collaborative work so communication has to be very good and both sides should listen very carefully.

What you are describing is mainly a communication issue (not clear from which side).

All that dop had to do is:
1) Shoot at 5K HD mode which is 16:9 native and equivalent to super35.
2) connect an external mic to his camera via XLR adapter to have good scratch audio track (very easy and he could have hire one or buy one if doesn't have it)
3) bring along any kind of external recorder like Samurai blade or similar and record 1080p HD Prores or similar for easy hand off.
4) bring along vari-ND or just stick ND filter in a light weight matte box and make sure it's ON.

He should of known that and done it if communication was good, if he wasn't listening someone should've picked that up before he was hired and hire someone else.

 

[oron cohen]

I own two C300 Mark II's and three C100s. I've had a couple freelance clients ask about the Amira. In addition to freelancing I also produce videos, in which case those clients typically don't know the difference from one camera to another; they go based off of the end results, in which case I want to provide the best results possible, using the best camera for the job, for documentary style work. So for client based work, how "in-demand" the camera is is irrelevant. So as a producer, I want to choose the best camera for the job, which I can afford, if I feel it will give me a better result.

I personally think the Amira and C300 Mark II are the best doc cams out today if budget isn't an issue (along with, as mentioned, some smaller cams like the A7s II and 1DX Mark II, as b or c-cams), but like to hear others' opinions as well.



As your camera gets bigger, your support gear gets bigger, which generally means larger crew and more setup time. Often not ideal for doc style shooting. I tend to not do much rigging for my cameras, so they don't get terribly heavy compared to the ENG types. About 7 pounds for my C100 setup and 10 pounds for my C300 Mark II setup.

I have a Rhino slider I put on some Gitzo sticks. Works fine for a C-series cams at 7-10 pounds. I'm not sure it would work well with an Amira at 20lbs (plus 8-10 lbs for say an O'Connor tripod head on the slider). Sure, I could spend a few grand on a heavy duty slider, beefier sticks, etc., but the size and weight would slow things down.

I have a Steadicam Zephyr. It can take the weight of an F55 or Amira. It takes 5-10 minutes to setup. My Glidecam with or without a Steadicam vest takes 1-2 minutes to setup. C300 and C100 works with the Glidecam. Amira would not. So now in those extra 3-7 minutes, while I'm setting up the Zephyr for a fast paced doc style project, I'm missing out on potential shots. The camera's size slows me down, and leads to a lower quality product. Well, except that the Amira has better image quality. So is it worth it?

I personally disagree about needing more people as the camera gets bigger, it depends which camera, ENG style cameras like the Sony F800 do not need any extra people, in fact, they are made with a single operator in mind, and they feel more easy to work with then any super35 C300/F5 style camera I've used.

The Amira is an amazing camera that can be easily be a single operator camera and the same goes to the Sony F5 which I used on docs. Very easy to setup, and with the right lens on they are much easier and nicer to handle then say C300, especially the Amira.

 

[Eric Coughlin]

I think people who say ENG cameras are faster tend to mean faster for shoulder mount work, which of course they are. But what if you rarely do shoulder mounted handheld shots? I rarely do. I'm finishing up a doc style project now with the C300 Mark II which I never used my shoulder rig for. It has a few bare handheld shots in it, mostly at waist level with some side to side movement (which wouldn't have worked well if it'd been shoulder mounted), and is heavily made up of Steadicam, slider, monopod, and tripod shots.

As I mentioned, my Steadicam Zephyr takes 5-10 minutes to setup and can handle an ENG camera, while my Glidecam takes 1-2 minutes to setup and can handle a C300. There's no way around this fact that for Steadicam shots the C300 sets up faster since it's smaller and lighter, and the smaller C100 sets up faster than the C300 for Glidecam work.

I have a large rolling bag which fits a tripod, monopod, slider, three C-series cameras, a couple lenses, some audio gear, and a couple on-camera lights in it. Lots of gear in one bag. With multiple ENG cams, they're not going to fit in the same bag. An O'Connor 1030 is not going to fit well in that bag. The MYT Works 4' slider (How much does that cost? I couldn't find a price on their website.) is certainly not going to fit in that bag. Which means what? To use this larger and heavier gear, you'll need more bags, a bigger car (my small SUV is getting full as it is), and more trips unloading gear, which means more time. So again, if you're showing up with just a tripod and camera, and doing mostly shoulder mounted work, ENG is a great way to go, but if you want a variety of support gear and multiple cameras, I still don't see how it could possibly be quicker than using a smaller camera with smaller support gear.

Let's also consider jib shots. With the C100 I can mount it on my Kessler Pocket Jib Traveler. Takes about 3-5 minutes to setup, or two minutes if I've pre-configured various adapters prior to the shoot. The setup is pretty light - seven pounds for the camera, six pounds of counterweight, 5.5 pounds for the jib, five for the tripod - so about 24 pounds total. I can lift this entire unit by myself to position it in different locations without tripod wheels (up and down stairs, etc.). Now say you have an Amira at 20 lbs, 40 lbs of counter weight (since most larger tripods I see don't extend as far out the back as the Kessler traveler), 6.2 lb tripod, and 10 lbs for the jib. Now you've got a 75 lb setup that I'd have trouble seeing a person moving from room to room, up and down stairs, without wheels by themself without disassembling.

Of course larger support gear also tends to be more stable. An O'Connor 1030 is smoother than say a smaller Vinten Vision Blue (which I use), Sachtler FSB-8, Miller Compass 15, etc. Same with Steadicam; more weight equals more inertia, smoother moves, etc. The Kessler Pocket Jib Traveler has never been that sturdy, but is often good enough to get the job done getting some good and usable shots. Coming from the approach that you'd use the heavier support gear even with smaller cameras to reap the benefits of the added stability, then sure, that would level out the playing field in terms of how long they take to setup. But the smaller cameras give you the option to use smaller and less stable (but often still adequate) support gear which I would think actually sets up quicker.

 

[markfpv]

Not to sound too esoteric... but define best or at least type of "Documentary" first - then it's a bit easier to narrow down perhaps "best" camera / lenses for the job. Is this a nature type? Or is it lots of interviews? Is it trying to bring attention and document something / someone that wants the attention - or is it shedding light on something or someone who doesn't want the notoriety?
For me - and I'm probably really old school on this... because I have a large distaste for "reality tv"....the instant you put that camera in front of people - ( if people are part of your documentary) - then "reality" gets a bit altered - or perhaps "performed" is a better word. Setting up a jib (no matter how quick & easy it is to move) or having a steadicam follow someone can alter what happens in that moment you are trying to capture. I'm not saying those tools shouldn't be used... I'm just saying all the tools one chooses to use should always be a part of the discussion - as well as if it should be a multiple camera shoot.