Camera suggestions for our situation

M

M1CEtro

Active member
Hello everyone,<br>
<br>
I understand that people on advanced forums such as this can get very
annoyed by newbies. But I would like to take any advice that I can.
Myself and two business partners plan to open up a production company.
We are still very early into the planning and research stages. One of
the main avenues that I personally will be focusing on is doing music
videos. I'm starting to research cameras and try to understand the
different specs of high definition video recording cameras. I understand
that technology these days can allow a director to shoot good quality
music videos that dont have to be recorded on those multi-thousand
dollar TV broadcast-like cameras. If possible, I don't want to spend
more than $1500 on the camera, excluding other accessories which I can
pick up piece by piece along the way. So this thread is to ask for
advice from those that are experienced in this kind of thing or know of
good equipment for my situation. Recommended accessories and any kind of
tips that could help me in my endeavors would be greatly appreciated.
As far as video editing is concerned, I have a couple years of
experience and plan to move up to Sony Vegas Pro. Now, I just need a
better quality camera. <br>
<br>
Thanks for the advice in advance guys!!!
 
Hmmm... the budget you mention leads me to make a ton of assumptions which may or may not be accurate. "Music Video" is a definite subset of the marketplace. High end ones routinely use high 6 to 7 figures worth of equipment. Local struggling artists tend to see this as the bar, making it a tough market.

That being said, today's equipment allows a talented person to capture images that would be impossible not that long ago. At the price point mentioned, your options are pretty much limited to a DSLR rig or used 3 chip prosumer grade camera. Lots of advantages & pitfalls to each.

My one piece of advice - be sure to leave enough for a good tripod and maybe slider, dolly, crane - even if it's a DIY. Handheld sucks.

It is always helpful if you include your location in your profile - suggestions can vary tremendously and this forum is truly worldwide.

Best wishes on your adventure.
 
The first thing I would do before I purchased any equipment or even started a production company, is a market analysis to see if making a living from producing music videos in your area is actually a viable option. Are there really that many bands in your area with money to spend on music videos to support the 3 of you over the course of X amount of time?
 
I personally will be focusing on is doing music videos
Click to expand...

the budget you mention leads me to make a ton of assumptions which may or may not be accurate.
Click to expand...

speaking of assumptions. i assume that you wil be making hip hop videos. as that and high-budget teeny-pop are about the only genres spending real money on "music videos" these days.
yes. there are also a number of established artists dropping big bucks on videos. but they generally go to established producer / directors. and not a couple guys with a $1500 camera
yeah, there are a number of local or regional acts in various genres that are making videos. but from what ive seen, the $3k-$5k they are generally wanting to spend isnt really enough to fund a "production company" once you consider lights and sliders and jibs and dollys and post...

thats what the DSLR fad has done, is make anyone with a couple grand and a high school media class or two think theyre gonna be an overnight "production company"

with that said. at your budget. id say the smartest camera options would be:
a canon 60D or T3i
or a panasonic lumix GH2
 
Last edited:
You might want to give us a better idea of your entire video budget, rather than saying you can pick up extras later on. The reason being, some of the essential extras can cost more than some of the cameras being recommended to you. Tripods, lenses, rigs etc can all add a significant cost to the investment. If you say "I can spend $1500 just for the camera" then people might recommend a 60D. However, to get the most out of the 60D you're going to need to spend an extra $2000 on lenses, another $500-1000 on a tripod, etc. Whereas if you give us a total budget, then people might give better recommendations for your situation.

Having said that, DSLR's are a great choice for low-cost music video production. They are small, portable, affordable, flexible, and give an image that is perfect for the web.
 
Hello all,

I appreciate your responses. To kind of clarify a little further, the official establishment of our company is a long ways off. We are still only in planning stages as we are still working out a business plan and collecting capital. My plan as of now is to do freelance jobs on the weekends for local artists looking for low budget hip hop videos. I have an 8-5 steady job so my livelihood is not dependent on these projects. This is simply to help build my experience with filmography and post video editing. I am located in Kansas City MO and have an extensive network to many local artists.

Pixelated - can you explain what you mean by a 3 chip prosumer grade camera.

Deltoidjohn - what brand is the 60D, different camera lenses is another thing I am beginning to do research on and was wondering if you could give me a quick run-down as far as the basic types of lenses and which situations each is best suited for? currently, I plan on purchasing an inexpensive tripod that still can get the job done

For a more general question to everyone, just to set a benchmark and know what to compare camera options to, I've looked at test videos for higher end cameras that seem to be a little over my budget such as Canon Mark 2. I don't know how to explain other than some of these videos have that "movie-look/feel" to it. I'm still learning so I was wondering what about these videos or camera gives something that "movie feel". Obviously movies are shot with much higher end and expensive cameras, but I would say that these videos are definitely closer to that feel than cheaper DSLRs. Does it have to do with a higher frame rate or special lenses, special filter, or post-production editing that gives that look? I'm sure an easy answer would be a combination of all of these, but if I could get some specific advice I would greatly appreciate it.
 
A $100,000 budget GSD&M shoot for Royal Caribbean is nothing other than "a couple guys with a $1500 camera". No kidding.
 
i would suggest a few times around using the search feature at the upper right of this page. as this has all been covered over and over and over again.

here is the short very brief, tip of the iceberg answer:

"3 chip" = 3CCD. a ccd is a charge coupled device. 3 ccd technology has been a long standing "standard" imaging feature of pro, and higher end consumer cameras. and still a favorite of many shooters. the panasonic hvx200 and hpx170 are two of the more popular "affordable HD" cameras using 3chip technology

the more modern counterpart (or competing technology actually) of 3chip is called CMOS. this is the technology in most (if not all) popular DSLR cameras.

video DSLRs are what all the hipster video producers are flocking like mad to. video DSLRs have a number of groovy benefits:
they have a smaller footprint than a traditional HD video camera
have better low light sensitivity
use interchangeable lenses
give you greater depth of field control
for the image quality you can achieve, they are VERY affordable

but just about ALL video DSLRS have a number of fundamental drawbacks when compared to a traditional hd video camera:
- CMOS, rolling shutter can result in "jello-vision" artifacting when the camera is moved. see this:
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?257999-Need-buying-advice-14k-at-hand!
see posts 27 and 31 for still and video examples of this.
"3chip" cameras dont suffer from this issue.

- DSLRS dont have standard "pro camera" audio inputs. you have to use a number of converter boxes, external recorders and even software hacks to achieve higher end sound behavior

- some brands of DSLRs are subject to moire issues. (most are actually. but some a great deal more than others) moire, is an "artifact" that produces wavy lines when shooting things with fine, regular patterns. like some clothing, bricks, siding, fences, etc...

the more popular video DSLR brand / models are:
CANON: 5Dmkll, 7D, 60D, T2i, T3i and all their localized variations
PANASONIC "LUMIX" GH2
NIKON also produces some. but the canons and panasonic are by far the most popular.

you will read all kinds of HEATED arguments here from fans of both cameras citing reasons why the other one sucks.
and they are both right. there are reasons to LOVE, HATE or totally DISREGARD all video DSLRs.
but it all comes down to what you shoot. how you shoot and what your experience and expectations are...

with that i will send you off to do your own research.
search terms like:
60d, 7d, GH2, 5d, moire, aliasing, micro4/3, lumix, DSLR audio, 3ccd, rolling shutter
those terms alone should provide you with HOURS of informative reading
 
Last edited:
goetzpd said:
A $100,000 budget GSD&M shoot for Royal Caribbean is nothing other than "a couple guys with a $1500 camera". No kidding.
Click to expand...

Exactly, I remember My professor telling me he lost a job to someone shooting with a 5d and he had a red camera...... Many people here still fail to realize just how powerful this Dslr 'Fad' is
 
Thanks alot for the info wgzn, I will definitely do more research on these things now that i have a better sense of direction
 
If anyone else has suggestions or input i would greatly appreciate it, more specifically if anyone could address the second part of my general question, I will repost in this message

For a more general question to everyone, just to set a benchmark and know what to compare camera options to, I've looked at test videos for higher end cameras that seem to be a little over my budget such as Canon Mark 2. I don't know how to explain other than some of these videos have that "movie-look/feel" to it. I'm still learning so I was wondering what about these videos or camera gives something that "movie feel". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZNxikQ7FTY Obviously movies are shot with much higher end and expensive cameras, but I would say that these videos are definitely closer to that feel than cheaper DSLRs. Does it have to do with a higher frame rate or special lenses, special filter, or post-production editing that gives that look? I'm sure an easy answer would be a combination of all of these, but if I could get some specific advice I would greatly appreciate it.
 
each camera has sort of a native "look" to them. and its widely considered that the 5Dmkll has the most cinematic look. that may have to do with its full frame sensor.
very good article that speaks about this:
http://philipbloom.net/2011/03/17/whichdslr/

ive used a canon 5dmkll, 7D, T3i and have owned both their 60D and the panasonic GH2. and from my experience, yes. the canons (at first glance) are the easiest to achieve a "movie feel" right out of the box.
but i have also learned first hand, that good glass levels that playing field pretty quickly.

another thing to consider about a DSLR is they look really, REALLY good when the camera itself isnt moving. move the camera more than a little and some would say that beauty falls off pretty quickly.
 
wgzn said:
each camera has sort of a native "look" to them. and its widely considered that the 5Dmkll has the most cinematic look. that may have to do with its full frame sensor.
very good article that speaks about this:
http://philipbloom.net/2011/03/17/whichdslr/

ive used a canon 5dmkll, 7D, T3i and have owned both their 60D and the panasonic GH2. and from my experience, yes. the canons (at first glance) are the easiest to achieve a "movie feel" right out of the box.
but i have also learned first hand, that good glass levels that playing field pretty quickly.

another thing to consider about a DSLR is they look really, REALLY good when the camera itself isnt moving. move the camera more than a little and some would say that beauty falls off pretty quickly.
Click to expand...


So do you mean the footage looks great in static shots? I think I have seen some nice slider shots that looked truly amazing. In my opinion these Dslrs do not shoot good footage of architecture and wide deep dof shots where everything should be razor clean. Now if you are shooting closeups to medium shots you will have some great footage. Just my observation, also I will agree that these Canon dslrs have a certain look that can be recognized instantly that at first glance looks very cinematic when properly used.
 
I think I have seen some nice slider shots that looked truly amazing.
Click to expand...
yes, i have too. but thats not what im talking about. im talking about when you go handheld (or shoulder rigged or even simply a quick tripod pan) and need to move quickly. as we saw in that guys video where he claimed he had no rolling shutter issues. when he clearly had several within the first few seconds.

and again, im not trying to bash DSLRs here. just trying to make the OP aware of all the variables...
 
wgzn said:
another thing to consider about a DSLR is they look really, REALLY good when the camera itself isnt moving. move the camera more than a little and some would say that beauty falls off pretty quickly.
Click to expand...
Sometimes the converse is truer. I have seen plenty of static 5D video shots that look very bad due to aliasing - to the extent that I would rather see the shot moving so the aliasing was masked somewhat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top