Professional camcorder or DSLR?

[paulears]

Gary for work, uses amazingly expensive cameras and lenses, but he bought a few years ago for his own use, a panasonic 300 series, and has never had a bad word to say about the quality. Over the years, quite a few examples of his work have appeared on youtube/vimeo etc. and it survives their squashing very well. It's proof, I think that very often it's how you use them, rather than the cameras themselves.

 

[GaryNattrass]

Well as a lower budget camera the canon XF300/305 and the panasonic HPX250/251 fit the bill as they both have broadcast codecs for recording but are lower cost than a full sized ENG camera, the new sony PMW-300 will also fit into that category.

I shoot for broadcast and corporate but have also done material just for You Tube and on-line but the AVC Intra 100 10 bit 4:2:2 codec that the HPX300 and 200 ser cameras have is just about as good as it gets but you must have the edit workflow to deal with such high bit rate material.

I just uploaded this short we did a few years ago on the HPX301 and as a test I took the full res HD pictures and dropped it down to 720p at only 1mbs data rate for You Tube so see what you think:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6-03NdlK6Y

I also use a $500 canon HF11 handycam as b-camera and for behind the scenes shooting and find its AVCHD codec that is still 1920x1080 28mbs very good too: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CC94y16hxSU

 

[Thomas Theron Cooper]

It's proof, I think that very often it's how you use them, rather than the cameras themselves.

True. Nothing replaces experience, I'm sure. Just trying to decide if it makes sense for me to get better gear at this point.

Well as a lower budget camera the canon XF300/305 and the panasonic HPX250/251 fit the bill as they both have broadcast codecs for recording but are lower cost than a full sized ENG camera, the new sony PMW-300 will also fit into that category.

I shoot for broadcast and corporate but have also done material just for You Tube and on-line but the AVC Intra 100 10 bit 4:2:2 codec that the HPX300 and 200 ser cameras have is just about as good as it gets but you must have the edit workflow to deal with such high bit rate material.

I just uploaded this short we did a few years ago on the HPX301 and as a test I took the full res HD pictures and dropped it down to 720p at only 1mbs data rate for You Tube so see what you think:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6-03NdlK6Y

I also use a $500 canon HF11 handycam as b-camera and for behind the scenes shooting and find its AVCHD codec that is still 1920x1080 28mbs very good too: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CC94y16hxSU

There is quite a difference between the footage of both cameras. The HPX301 footage really 'pops out' while the HF11 footage was somewhat flat. A major part of that is because of your own professional expertise, I'm sure.

Handling the edit workflow may be another hitch. I'm comfortable with Sony Vegas Pro but it looks like FCP will be the way to go with higher end cameras. That will mean expensive software plus a powerful Mac.

One final query:

If we shoot video in a better codec such as AVC Infra 100 10 bit 4:2:2 and then downscale it for YouTube, would the final result be better than dealing with footage of the Canon H.264 codec, everything else being equal?

 

[GaryNattrass]

Well the hf11 probably looks flat as it was just as shot with no lighting where the indie film had far more production values.

The better you can shoot thjngs the better it will be in the end and that goes for any camera or codec so you need to get the best out of whatever you have so to do a true comparison you need to try cameras out rather than rely on opinions on a forum.

It is all about what is acceltable to you but it doesnt matter what you buy if you are not prepared to follow basic production rules and learn how to light and use your tools properly.

 

[GaryNattrass]

Basically the xf305 and hpx250 should be capable of getting the same results as a full sized hpx301 or 371 as they are all comparible codecs. But as you rightly say your edit workflow needs to be considered too as well as how well you use and light any material you shoot.

But all of those cameras will be easier to manage than a dslr and the sound interfacing and shootability straight out of the box will be easier as you don't need to add grips or external monitors to use them.

You pays yer money and makes your choices at the end of the day but you could always shoot at lower bit rates initially and then go full res as you upgrade an edit system or workflow!

 

[Shooter]

Would it be better for someone learning the ropes to work with a mid-level camcorder rather than a DSLR

Yes.

Everything HDSLR is about a compromised motion picture camera.
eg audio control metering/attenuation, exposure control (histgrams!), video monitoring (delay and lag and live view!), I/O connections are non standard and miniaturised...

They are all obviously still cameras first and foremost with the after thought option of "make a movie"

imitations and complexity of operation are able to be reduced by add on hardware ...but this gets one to the level of a camcorder price pretty quickly without the same practicality and ease of use

 

[Thomas Theron Cooper]

...imitations and complexity of operation are able to be reduced by add on hardware ...but this gets one to the level of a camcorder price pretty quickly without the same practicality and ease of use.

Yes. It does seem so. Once I have the editing workflow in place, maybe I will get an affordable camcorder. Thank you.

But all of those cameras will be easier to manage than a dslr and the sound interfacing and shootability straight out of the box will be easier as you don't need to add grips or external monitors to use them.

GaryNattrass, it's been very enlightening reading your elaborate answers to my questions. Thank you for all your guidance!

 

[GaryNattrass]

You are welcome and glad to be of some help, I hope you manage to get your camera and start shooting soon.

As a final note it is also possible to shoot at huge bit rates with high end cameras and codecs but then load the footage into an edit system such as FCP at lower rates such as pro res LT.

I also still shoot a lot at 720p avc intra 50 and it is still good quality for most work that is non broadcast, the sony NEX cameras are also superb and avchd at 28mbs still has many uses as does my little canon hf11

 

[Jim Ritscher]

I have seen some amazing work done with a DSLR such as you own. There is a huge continuim of cameras. I own a Sony FS700 and love it, but it's no Alexa. And it wouldn't be legal on BBC. You seem like a sincere person. I have the following suggestions for you:

1. Find someone near you who has a better camera, and ask them to demonstrate it. Maybe go out on a shoot. Then you would get a better idea what the difference is.
2. Work with your existing camera. Since you mentioned interviews, shoot the best interview you can and post it. Ask us for feedback. In short, learn lhow to produce the best image (and sound) you can with your current camera. Then you will have a better sense of what would be your next step. Good luck.

 

[Samuel H]

Everything HDSLR is about a compromised motion picture camera.
eg audio control metering/attenuation, exposure control (histgrams!), video monitoring (delay and lag and live view!), I/O connections are non standard and miniaturised...

Well, if you ask me, everything small-sensor-camcorder is about a compromised motion picture camera. They have all they need to have (controls, features, connectors) except what they would need most: a good sensor.
(and aliasing/moire and other IQ issues are gone by now if you know which DSLR to buy: D5200/D7100 or 5D3)

 

[Shooter]

My comments relate mostly to useability for purpose regarding HDSLR vs "Camcorder"

Menu driven audio control in HDSLR vs camcorder knobs
Lack of VU meter in HDSLR
Mini jacks on HDSLR vs audio standard XLR on camcorders
Histograms vs waveforms
Video outputs and connections.
Still lenses vs film lenses
Menu driven features instead of switches
Unuseable audio
Un monitorable audio

....

As I said ...HDSLRS are for those that have not used proper production motion cameras. I acknowledge their place though and have high respect for the imagery they can produce. Its just such hard work to do so.

Sensors...I guess its where one draws the line between "camcorders" and the high end cameras. I would consider the Panny AF102 & Sony FS700 are at the top end of "camcorders" and the bottom end of production cameras.