Buying a camera for our production company

R

randomname

Well-known member
I'm starting a production company in the near future, and am trying to decide what kind of camera setup to invest in. The company is just made up of 3 co-owners who are all a bit tired of all the workarounds of DSLR shooting. Our main focus is going to be music videos, higher end corporate work, and web based videos for local businesses, while looking to get into feature work in the future. While we have plenty of people that we can bring on for a shoot with a bigger budget, we want to make sure that whatever setup we get can be run with just us 3 as a barebones crew. The options we have it narrowed down to are:

Red One (probably an M, but maybe an MX if we can find a good deal): It would most likely be a fairly minimal package and we would just have to shoot on Nikon Primes. I love red footage, and I feel like just using the "shot on red" badge gives you quite a bit of credibility. BUT, how much do clients care about that? Is this camera alone going to lead to much work? Also, I've heard it slows you down, but by how much? and is it even possible to run it with such a small crew (these won't exactly be big complicated shoots). We also plan on buying an Epic-x or Epic-s whenever that ends up coming out, if it means anything.

an F3 with a KiPro mini and some L glass or ZF lenses (or maaaaybe a red 17-50 if we're lucky). The f3 seems like a really great camera, and I've been really impressed with the image quality. While only being able to shoot in 1080p is a bummer, are we REALLY going to be missing 4k if we don't have any real plans of shooting something to be shown in theatres before we get an epic (assuming that we can have one in our hands within a year)?

an FS100 with a very nice rig, HDMI to SDI adapter, Ki pro mini, PL adapter and either CP.2 set, Red 18-85 zoom, or older cooke zoom. I imagine any issues with image to clients would be dealt with w/a giant lens and nice rig. I don't really know how well this guy compares to the others IQ wise. Also, how much of the support equipment can we buy that we would also be able to use for an Epic?

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
 
F3 is amazing. For music videos, corporate work and web content, you should be golden.

The FS100 lacks picture quality and form function. No internal ND's, strange camera body shape and buttons... worse image and compression, etc. It's decent for the amount you pay for it, that's for sure. It can get a good image, it's just clearly not as good as the F3, internally and externally.

The RedOneMX is a great camera, but can you really afford it? If you can't afford an F3 and a RedProZoom, I don't expect you'll do so well finding an entire RedMX kit to shoot. For what you want to use the camera for, you don't need 4k resolution... the only thing the Red could offer you, that the F3 can't is higher frame rates (120fps at 2k) and the ability to have a RAW image/workflow for coloring purposes. Red's are expensive. Have fun buying their batteries, hard-drives, cables, and etc. It's also not the fastest camera to work with. It's 10lbs, body only, and after fully built with MB, lens, FF, battery and hard drive, often tips the scales at 40+ lbs. Not the best camera for a three person crew, although I've done it countless times.
 
Last edited:
I would throw in a recommendation for the F3 as well. The fact that you can start pretty bare and eventually add to it (sLog, 10bit out) for something like a feature is a huge bonus.

I would recommend trying to get some better glass than the Red Zoom though. Every time I've shot with Red Lenses, I've been disappointed. They sound great on paper, but in actuality, they leave something to be desired. Perhaps starting with a three lens CP.2 set and eventually adding it. Maybe even hold off on the Ki Pro. Better glass is more important.
 
Would a set of Duclos modded ZF lenses be a good option? While I'd be perfectly happy shooting with them, would that be a detterent to potential renters?
 
Your clients customers are going to view on what? the web, maybe from a distance on a 40inch at a trade show, maybe over some uber compressed TV station?

All I would say is allow space in your budget, if you can afford 2 F3s, then buy one because that is what you can actually afford, if you cant afford 2, dont buy one

For example my 70-200 2.8 is off for service at the moment, but I work on .. I have a 70-200 canonF4 too

My EX1 menu button is playing up. . I can get it serviced and still shoot with my FS and a DSLR

These outages dont mess me up

If its a stretch to get an F3 or Red, get the FS

To me being professional is all about never letting people down and that means..

A spare camera (doesnt have to be as good)
Loads of batteries
2 of every cable
Sound kit galore

For example what does 3 Vlock and 2 brekout boxes cost, $2k with custom wires duplicate

Id keep it small and cruise your budget

Be super solid with the accesorires then..

.. have some fun.. 2 cams, a jib, some funky glass like a fisheye, 3 or 4 Go Pros, a slider, a T2i on a Merlin?

Clients love that s**t

and they love people who are chilled and happy.. which you wont be if you are desperate to keep up with your kit payments

Any single camera is only 5 drips of coffee away from going down at any time

S
 
Last edited:
Timur is right don't forget about the AF100. I have a RED ONE and a AF100 and both take excellent images. Use the right lenses on the AF and you will be very happy, plus you can buy two with lenses for the price of an F3 with lenses.
 
I'd be weary about dumping $50K+ into a Red when just starting out. If I was in your position, I'd consider the AF100 also.

To be honest, the price of this camera has dropped so much in the past few months that I'd get three. Great image quality and all the lenses, batteries, and other accessories would be interchangeable between you and your co-owners.
 
AF100 or F3. Wouldn't recommend the RED at this stage unless you are set to gather in some really high profile clients.
 
Also consider the RED requires extra time in post. Even with a Rocket you need faster computers, more secure storage and the pipeline to manage the data rates.

Red is more about workflow.
 
Don't get me wrong, I love my RED, but I have to have the budgets (from clients) to handle it. I look at every job from strictly a business standpoint. If I can justify the RED and all the additional expenses then I will shoot it, if I even think it is border line I will not hesitate to shoot with the AF100. My clients are equally happy with the results from both cameras.

It is really more about composition, art direction, lens selection and quality lighting. A quality, modern HD camera will work in harmony with all of these to make your business a success. I really think people forget about these things sometimes.
 
Definitely crossing the RED off the list and adding the AF100 (after doing more research I'm much more impressed with that than the fs100). I'm leaning towards just buying that and saving for an F3 (and using the af100 as a backup or selling it), does that sound like a good idea?
 
Ryan Patrick O'Hara said:
F3 is amazing. For music videos, corporate work and web content, you should be golden.

The FS100 lacks picture quality and form function. No internal ND's, strange camera body shape and buttons... worse image and compression, etc. It's decent for the amount you pay for it, that's for sure. It can get a good image, it's just clearly not as good as the F3, internally and externally.

The RedOneMX is a great camera, but can you really afford it? If you can't afford an F3 and a RedProZoom, I don't expect you'll do so well finding an entire RedMX kit to shoot. For what you want to use the camera for, you don't need 4k resolution... the only thing the Red could offer you, that the F3 can't is higher frame rates (120fps at 2k) and the ability to have a RAW image/workflow for coloring purposes. Red's are expensive. Have fun buying their batteries, hard-drives, cables, and etc. It's also not the fastest camera to work with. It's 10lbs, body only, and after fully built with MB, lens, FF, battery and hard drive, often tips the scales at 40+ lbs. Not the best camera for a three person crew, although I've done it countless times.
Click to expand...

No offense, but internal ND filters are a new thing, and formerly considered to part of the 'prosumer' world. RED doesn't have built in NDs either. Neither does the Phantom, or the F35. Built in NDs, if of VERY high quality could be a nice feature, but certainly don't make a camera 'pro' or not.

(fyi, we don't have the FS100 either...)
 
PS, we do have a non MX red one, and, if you're good with computers, the post is not that big a deal. The image is mind blowingly good.
 
If you never plan to show stuff in theaters then I dont' know why you'd be considering a RED as your first camera. Your debate should really be between the AF100 and the F3. Of those two cameras, the F3 is definately the better one to go for with its larger sensor, sharper image, higher dynamic range, and less compression. The problem is that it's more than twice the cost of an AF100 and even though it's a better camera, it's certainly not twice the camera (look at the recent shoot out to see examples). So, the question really becomes is it worth it to you to pay twice as much for a camera that is about 10-20% better? If you already have a whole bunch of high end clients then the extra money is worth it. If, on the other hand, you're taking this business one step at a time, I would go for the AF100 and move up to the F3 (or RED) when you feel it is worth it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top