Camera for wedding

W

Wampa

New member
Hi,

Please help me with choice of new camera. I and my wife take pictures of weddings now. But I want to start make videos. For outside video shoot I have Nikon D7100 for shallow depth of field. But for wedding ceremony and bridal I want to buy camera. My budget is 2000 Euro (2800 dollars).
This is list of potential cameras:
Canon XF100
Canon XA10
Canon XA20
Panasonic AG-AC8
Panasonic AG-AC90

What do you think ??? Which one is the best for my needs.

Thanks
 
How about 2 of these? http://cvp.com/index.php?t=product/sony_hxr-mc2000e

Just over budget, but you will need 2 cameras for weddings. I don't own one, but for the price, I like what I see, and they have that TV look that people think look pro.

I have considered 2 of these myself, but we shall see. Here are some videos to view.

A decent review http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mo84wb7gsyA

A documentary shot on the camera http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xz477386alw&feature=c4-overview-vl&list=PLA315C71B69C2A406

Another test which shows the sound quality http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQeZrjtyQQo

Low light test http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekXJCX5Ra38

A wedding http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-JQmxE2-V4

Hope this helps.


 
Thank you for your answer. I read the specification but I think all cameras which I wrote are better then this. Second camera will be Nikon D7100. I don't know why need two of this.
 
Why two cameras for wedding video coverage? You will find out when you edit the single-camera ceremony coverage. Unlike still photography, video is continuously running. During the edit, what will you do when repositioning the camera at various times throughout the ceremony? Just cut that portion out? Or leave it in? Neither looks good. As a basic setup, many folks like to have one camera in the rear on a wide or medium shot, with the other "main camera" capturing all the action - processional, close-ups of readings, minister, couple, wedding party, parents, lots of interesting things. Many of these shots, if lip-sync is not involved, can later be inserted anywhere as cutaways to cover camera movements or other things you need to "hide" to produce a video that is engaging to the viewer. A single camera for an hour is boring, sorry. Unless you are offering some type of "highlights only" coverage of the ceremony. Then you might get away with one camera, but if editing the full-length event, you will greatly appreciate having the second camera angle, even if stationary and unmanned. Been doing this over 22 years.

Also, regarding DSLR versus a "camcorder" - DSLR are difficult for long event shoots as some can not record for long periods without stop/start. Then there are audio concerns. And the zoom on a camcorder is a necessity to get a variety of shots without moving all over and changing lenses and such. The AC-90 would be a good choice.

Thanks

Jeff
 
Who knows how many cameras one needs? Depends on the type of coverage, could be one, or two units of two or more cameras.

But indeed, I think two is probably the minimum..

S
 
I have shot a few weddings in my time, you will need 2 cameras minimum. I've shot on both camcorders, and then tried DSLR's. DSLR's have a nicer image, but at the cost of ergonomics, focus, a decent zoom etc. People laughed at me using DSLR's on a wedding shoot. I realised the look of a camera is just as important as the images it produces. I would go for 2 camcorders, and use the DSLR as a C camera. If you insist on the Panasonic's, then go for the ones that are cheapest. As you are new to wedding videography, I presume you won't be charging thousands for a video, charge low and slowly build your gear, experience, etc up that way.

I'm in a similar boat, been contemplating doing wedding videos again, but don't want to spend thousands on kit. My primary camera is a PMW F3, I could get a second, used F3, and shoot with two F3's, but the ergonomics, no power zoom, etc, I'd rather go for 2-3 of the cheap Sony's.

Another thing to think about is codec, can your editing system handle AVCHD? Mine can, but I would prefer to edit other codecs. What is your delivery format? DVD or Blu ray? If it is DVD, then maybe it would be wise to film in SD, as HD doesn't look good downscaled.

Wedding videos are hard work, don't think it's easy. I was put off after doing only 3, then I sold all my gear for lenses for the F3. I was asked to shoot a friends wedding this year, and I enjoyed it, even though it was shot on DSLR's. I enjoyed it because I had built a new computer, and it cut through the AVCHD footage without any problems. So the computer/edit suite is just as important as the cameras.

Sound is another thing, this is the area that I must work on next.
 
Sure for a trad wedding coverage you need at least two video cameras with long roll and good audio.

I was hired in with my XLR cam and my 702 sound recorder to add some oomph to another shooter recently.

But people also shoot weddings with everything from reds to super8 film (very successfully) - it depends on the service you are offering

S
 
I don't shoot weddings for a living, but was asked to shoot one not too long ago for the relative of a very well known hollywood actor. I used 5 cameras to cover the ceremony. A GoPro HD behind the alter, a wide shot showing the attendance shooting toward the alter, a camera covering the bride, A camera covering the groom, and a roving camera on a monopod getting the action and select tights.

Good Luck covering a wedding with a single camera and no microphones.
 
I am from Slovakia and here 95 percent wedding cameramans use only one camera. I dont know what is your financial reward but in my area it is only 200-300 euros. I think it is little to invest to second camera. I saw work a lot of cameramans and it is simple here. And final DVD is only documentary film. No creativity.
 
You're lucky that you've got a Nikon D7100, as Nikon's D5200/D5300/D7100 cameras are already the best APS-C hybrid cameras out there for video (far better than anything from Canon for instance).

So I'd stick with your D7100 for now, spend the cash instead on the many accessories you'll need for it. If you do need a second and third camera pick up cheaply a D5200 (or even better a D5300 if you don't mind the extra cost).
 
Wampa said:
I am from Slovakia and here 95 percent wedding cameramans use only one camera. I dont know what is your financial reward but in my area it is only 200-300 euros. I think it is little to invest to second camera. I saw work a lot of cameramans and it is simple here. And final DVD is only documentary film. No creativity.
Click to expand...

The point is, the family hiring you isn't going to care how wonderful your camera is, they're only going to care how wonderful your video is. If it's all shot from a single camera position, and every movement, zoom, focus etc. of the camera is included, then it's going to be tedious to watch -- especially if the ceremony lasts more than a few minutes. The more cameras you have, the better your finished video will be.

BTW, I used a GoPro and a DSLR to shoot a wedding recently and had a very unfortunate issue. The DSLR would only record continuously for 12 minutes, at which point recording had to be stopped and restarted. I was using the GoPro for a master shot, so I figured I could cut to it in editing at the point where I had to stop and restart recording on the DSLR. Unfortunately, time ran out on the DSLR right in the middle of the groom's vows. Not a good time. When I got into editing, I discovered that the GoPro had reached its file size limit, and started a new file, at that same exact moment -- and there was a lag of several seconds between the end of the first clip and the beginning of the second. So I lost audio and video from both cameras at a crucial moment in the ceremony.

So make sure your cameras will run continuously long enough for the ceremony you're covering. The one I shot lasted 22 minutes. If you're shooting a Catholic wedding, they go on quite a bit longer. I was fortunate to have a 3rd camera that was HDV -- running tape continuously for the entire ceremony. That saved my behind.
 
Wampa said:
I am from Slovakia and here 95 percent wedding cameramans use only one camera. I dont know what is your financial reward but in my area it is only 200-300 euros. I think it is little to invest to second camera. I saw work a lot of cameramans and it is simple here. And final DVD is only documentary film. No creativity.
Click to expand...

It sounds like wedding videographers in your area aren't delivering very professional results. If you have at least 2 cameras, you should be able to beat the socks off of them when it comes to the quality of your wedding videos. Your superior quality would allow you to charge more money, and make you in higher demand.

I actually shot a wedding once with a single camera -- a Panasonic DVX100a. The video was okay, but it would have been far better if I'd had at least one more camera.
 
Okay, these look nice and you've got a good eye. But these are what I would call 'teaser' videos. They're great for the happy couple to put on their website so that people get an overview of what the wedding was like. And I do those same kinds of teasers. Here's a rough cut of my most current one -- http://vimeo.com/95077763

But then I deliver the full video of the wedding ceremony -- every minute of the ceremony itself, with audio of the whole proceeding. That is followed by select shots from the reception. When doing video of the entire ceremony, it gets very tedious if the audience is watching everything from a single camera position, especially if the ceremony is long.

If all you're doing is teasers, then you can certainly get away with a single camera. But I believe most wedding videographers in this country are providing the full ceremony on video.
 
For years traditional Wedding videographers have used one broadcast/ENG style camera. To this day there are plenty that still offer this. That being said, there are big drawbacks in editing and it will put you in the lower price range market. You could definitely shoot with one camera and offer a highlights and raw footage only. 1 camera is usually enough for a half decent highlights if you know what your doing.

Video cameras v.s DSLR video is a whole other debate. These days clients are typically interested in the DSLR look. I love shooting 2 or 3 camera DSLR jobs. It allows me to use lightweight support gear and it's great in low light situations. While some people still think I'm taking a photo of them, nobody laughs at me when they see a full size steadicam rig flying down the aisle...ok maybe they laugh a little but they still think its super cool.

Here is a highlights with two camera DSLR:

[video]http://www.eliecreative.com/ydm05122013/yael_daniel_highlights.html[/video]
 
egproductions said:
For years traditional Wedding videographers have used one broadcast/ENG style camera. To this day there are plenty that still offer this. That being said, there are big drawbacks in editing and it will put you in the lower price range market. You could definitely shoot with one camera and offer a highlights and raw footage only. 1 camera is usually enough for a half decent highlights if you know what your doing.

Video cameras v.s DSLR video is a whole other debate. These days clients are typically interested in the DSLR look. I love shooting 2 or 3 camera DSLR jobs. It allows me to use lightweight support gear and it's great in low light situations. While some people still think I'm taking a photo of them, nobody laughs at me when they see a full size steadicam rig flying down the aisle...ok maybe they laugh a little but they still think its super cool.

Here is a highlights with two camera DSLR:

[video]http://www.eliecreative.com/ydm05122013/yael_daniel_highlights.html[/video]
Click to expand...

People do tend to look at me funny when I bring out my DSLR, my Canon HV30 and my GoPro Hero 2. But when they see the results, they're floored. And the results matter more than anything else.

That being said, I'd love to show up with 3 high-dollar HD camcorders. Would definitely look much more professional on location. Gotta wait for the wallet to get a little fatter first.
 
I was shooting an event on the AG-AC90 the other day. It was like the baby brother of the AF101. It was a very small venue and was ideal for remaining discreet and not using a tripod. I found it very comfortable to handle. Didn't really have enough time with it to get any more detailed than that - will be shooting on it more in the coming weeks to give it a test drive! No in built ND which was annoying.
 
egproductions said:
For years traditional Wedding videographers have used one broadcast/ENG style camera. To this day there are plenty that still offer this. That being said, there are big drawbacks in editing and it will put you in the lower price range market. You could definitely shoot with one camera and offer a highlights and raw footage only. 1 camera is usually enough for a half decent highlights if you know what your doing.

Video cameras v.s DSLR video is a whole other debate. These days clients are typically interested in the DSLR look. I love shooting 2 or 3 camera DSLR jobs. It allows me to use lightweight support gear and it's great in low light situations. While some people still think I'm taking a photo of them, nobody laughs at me when they see a full size steadicam rig flying down the aisle...ok maybe they laugh a little but they still think its super cool.

Here is a highlights with two camera DSLR:

[video]http://www.eliecreative.com/ydm05122013/yael_daniel_highlights.html[/video]
Click to expand...

Nice vid - what steadicam were you using? Full rig or something like a Merlin?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top