Hvx200 vs. 5d?

[kat.hayes]

I want to shoot some footage that will be used for a 30-45 second web based commercial. The footage will not have any audio recorded on location, and the video will have quick cuts and different angles, with the overall theme trying to create the feeling of a high tech, stylized, and innovative school environment. We may or may not have lighting. If we do, it will be ARRI lighting. The footage will be of students in classrooms painting, drawing, working on computers, professors
lecturing, demonstrating techniques, and footage of artwork on display in a small gallery. This commercial will be web based, and is not intended for a network. I know the HVX has better audio controls. and I think the 5D has a more shallow depth of field.


We have access to both a Panasonic HVX200 and a 5D and a 7D.
1. Which camera would you recommend we shoot with for this project?
2. By today's standards, is the quality of the HVX200 video outdated compared with a 5D?

Thanks in advance!

 

[wgzn]

1. Which camera would you recommend we shoot with for this project?

this sounds like a great gig for the 5d - IF you know how to use it and its shortcomings

2. By today's standards, is the quality of the HVX200 video outdated compared with a 5D?

absolutely NOT! two different tools for two (or more) different uses!
EDIT: just noticed you said 200 (not 200a) the 200 is dreadful in low light. so yeah, id consider the 200 outdated for anything other than say outdoors or situations where you have a lot of light. unless you just REALLY LIKE grain ; )

 

[kat.hayes]

FYI - I work at a school and have limited knowledge of all of this and am acting sort of as a producer to get projects done, that is why I am asking these questions.

1. What specifically makes the 5D great for this project?
2. I know that the HVX has better audio options than the 5D. What are some of the HVX's other strengths vs. the 5D and vice-versa? I'm trying to get an idea of which situations each might perform better.

Thanks!

 

[wgzn]

1. What specifically makes the 5D great for this project?

more depth of field control. should be nice for rack focusing and other fun stuff. way, way, WAY better low light capability than the 200

2. I know that the HVX has better audio options than the 5D. What are some of the HVX's other strengths vs. the 5D and vice-versa? I'm trying to get an idea of which situations each might perform better.

put simply. the hvx with its CCD sensor is better for events (out door and brightly lit events - the 200 is HORRIBLE in low light) where you might be moving the camera quickly to follow action. the 5d (as does EVERY VIDEO DSLR AVAILABLE RIGHT NOW) has a CMOS sensor and rolling shutter. that means that if you try to move the camera quickly, objectS will appear to sway (do a google search for "jello vision" you'll find a ton of info) another thing the 5D isnt good for is anything with fine patterns. bricks, shingles, fields of waving grass, herringbone suits, car grills, etc... (do a google search for "canon moire", you'll find TWO tons of info)

put even more simply:
hvx200 for "news style" shooting
5D for artisic shooting but with minimal camera movement

 

[kat.hayes]

1. You mentioned that the HVX200 is good for "news style" shooting. Does that mean that you can not really achieve the same artistic style with it that you can get with the 5D?
2. If we shoot some footage with the HVX and some with the 5D, is there a way to somehow match the look of the footage so it doesn't look like it was taken from two different cameras? So the edit points do not look real abrupt? We are going to be using either Final Cut 7 or Adobe Premiere CS5.5.

Thank you!

 

[wgzn]

1. You mentioned that the HVX200 is good for "news style" shooting. Does that mean that you can not really achieve the same artistic style with it that you can get with the 5D?

yeah, no. sorta-kinda... people will argue this subject and say you can achieve SIMILAR depth of field control with an hvx. thats to a degree true. but youd have to be like 30 feet away from the subject. zoomed in all the way with the iris wide open. for me, i dont call that a practical solution.

its just far, far easier to get the "artistic" or "cinematic" look with a DSLR/removable lens camera like the 5D. but that comes with a requirement that you understand the basics of photography. slap a 5D in the hands of someone who doesnt have a basis of photo knowledge, and they're almost guaranteed to shoot lousy footage.

comparing these two is just about as different as you can get. on one end, the hvx is about the oldest and smallest sensor professionally acceptable HD video camera out there. and the 5D is a "full frame" 35mm sensor. here is an good graphic to illustrate sensor sizes:
http://www.engadget.com/2011/12/16/engadget-primed-why-your-cameras-sensor-size-matters/

2. If we shoot some footage with the HVX and some with the 5D, is there a way to somehow match the look of the footage so it doesn't look like it was taken from two different cameras? So the edit points do not look real abrupt? We are going to be using either Final Cut 7 or Adobe Premiere CS5.5.

yeah, probably. if you light the crap out of the scene. close the 5D all the way down and add some grain in post.

i wouldnt make a career of it. but im sure it CAN be done... what i generally do is go the opposite direction. i shoot this singer-songwriter show called "honkytonkhappyhour". and on the first episode we had my hpx170 (the newer smarter more handsome brother of the hvx200) and two hmc40s. rather than try to match them (the hmc40s color doesnt compare with that of the hpx170) so i just made one sepia, one b&w and called it art. have a look:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PPguo8VLjCM&feature=channel_video_title