Nice cam for its age, but SD kinda makes me cringe. Is there anything comparable that shoots 720p or 1080p for $3-4k aside from JVC HD100?
Also, couldn't I just get a 35mm adapter to learn DOF on? I have one on my HV30 now.
Which cam for me?
- Thread starter Jack.M
- Start date
Nice cam for its age, but SD kinda makes me cringe. Is there anything comparable that shoots 720p or 1080p for $3-4k aside from JVC HD100?
Also, couldn't I just get a 35mm adapter to learn DOF on? I have one on my HV30 now.
Anyone wanna comment on this?
Cheesesailor77
Veteran
SLR is the way to go. Learning how to expose and grade RAW data is going to help you use a RED ONE much more than playing with an HD100 or XL2. I own a RED ONE and speak from experience. The RED ONE has much more in common with my Nikon than my DVX100.
So you think I should get an SLR as opposed to a 35mm adapter for a camcorder? What would an SLR allow me to do that a camcorder with the adapter wouldn't? Also (sorry, I know this is probably a really noobish question), what's RAW? Uncompressed data? If so, what do you mean "expose and grade" it?
Mike Harvey
Veteran
Jack, I'm thinking you may want to rethink the whole buying a RED thing. Why do you want to buy it in the first place? To get a functional setup, you're looking at upwards $30k. That's a crap load of money for someone whose only experience as it stands is an HV20. Unless you have some sort of guarantee you'll make your money back, there really isn't a reason for someone with so little experience (sorry, that's not a knock against you) to go out and buy one. Do you really need to shoot on a RED? Nothing against the RED, it's a wonderful camera by all accounts that is great at what it does, but do you actually need it?
The lenses on an SLR are going to be a lot closer in how they work to the lenses on a RED than an HMC. A 35mm adaptor will accomplish the same thing.
RAW is a file format. Most SLR's will shoot it. It's basically a very lightly compressed image that allows you to tweak the crap out of it. RED RAW is RED's iteration of it were they took the RAW still format and made use of it for moving images. Cheesesailor, being an actual owner, can probably answer this a lot better than I can since he knows it better.
The lenses on an SLR are going to be a lot closer in how they work to the lenses on a RED than an HMC. A 35mm adaptor will accomplish the same thing.
RAW is a file format. Most SLR's will shoot it. It's basically a very lightly compressed image that allows you to tweak the crap out of it. RED RAW is RED's iteration of it were they took the RAW still format and made use of it for moving images. Cheesesailor, being an actual owner, can probably answer this a lot better than I can since he knows it better.
Nektonic
Veteran
Probably the Panasonic GH-1 is your best bet then. It will give you good quality 1080 24p and 720 60p video with full 100% manual controls. You'll be able to practice using RAW in still image mode, and will also be able to use different lenses all for less than the price of an XH-A1 or HMC150.
The only downside is that it doesn't have an XLR input built in, so you'll have to use an external audio recorder like the Zoom H2, H4, or H4n. The plus side is that you will get higher quality audio with a digital audio recorder, and you won't have an annoying mic cable tethered to your camera, thus freeing you up to shoot with some more freedom of movement.
A good solutions could be using an affordable camera now (HMC150, XH-A1, GH-1, 5D mkII, etc.), and waiting about a year until RED starts shipping the Scarlets, or Canon and Panasonic have something out by then that has a strong codec plus interchangeable lenses in a video-friendly camera body made for filmmakers and videographers.
Last edited:
Cheesesailor77
Veteran
Forgive me, Jack, but these are distressing questions. I'll reiterate the consensus, you might want to reconsider your need for a RED ONE and get a nice video camera (like those suggested at the beginning of this thread).
The RED ONE is admittedly a pretty hefty piece of kit, both physically and feature wise. Not to mention monetarily. I definitely consider my setup to be "modest" and it still cost me over $35,000 (and I still need a follow focus and ND filters!).
But the big thing is that in order to take advantage of all that technology, you HAVE to "expose and grade" your material. The RED ONE records sensor data rather than video. Without turning this into a lecture, the basic idea is that with "RAW" sensor data, you have a lot more information to work with in order to make your image look it's best. It's the same way still photographers have been working for years. This makes up easily half, if not more, of what you'll need to learn in order to properly work with a RED ONE.
Which is why I suggested skipping the video camera and buying a dSLR. Many have video capabilities, however it's the RAW still capture that the RED ONE has in common with these cameras (just at 24 frames per second instead of 1) and also the lens characteristics.
Scarlet will be coming out within the next year, so that's something you still might be interested in. In which case I'd still recommend a dSLR such as the 5DmkII or maybe Panasonic's new one. They capture compressed video as well, but you can start learning how to use a light meter to provide the proper amount of light, and then work with the RAW files in post.
If you maybe decide you'd like something easier to work with (a perfectly valid point of view) look again at the Panasonic, Canon, and JVC prosumer cameras available. I shot very happily (and got a lot of practical experience) with a DVX100 for 5 years before deciding to move on to a RED ONE.
Accomplish the same thing as an SLR as far as making it more similar to RED, or accomplish the same thing as in nothing? I don't understand why a camcorder with a 35mm adapter wouldn't be more similar to a RED than an SLR...?
As far as buying the RED - we'll be borrowing or renting one for a film, so it's kind of a no-brainer. I just want something that'll get me used to shooting with a RED.
Wait, SLRs shoot 1080 24p now (sorry, I know nothing about em)? Why don't more people use em then? Would I still get DOF like I do with a 50mm lens on an HV30 with a 35mm adapter?
edit: Oh and how does the GH1 compare to the 5D MKII?
Last edited:
Mike Harvey
Veteran
That one... since you're using an SLR lens on the 35mm adapter. Or to put it in a different way, either an DSLR camera with video capability or an SLR lens/35mm adapter combo on a video camera will behave closer to how a lens on a RED functions than a bare HMC-type video camera.
Okay, that makes more sense. The way you put it earlier made it sound (at least to me) like you were going to buy one, which kind made me cringe.
Mike Harvey
Veteran
For a host of reasons. Some have issues where the chips overheat after shooting for so many minutes, some of them use a less than desirable bitrate or codec, and none of them have good audio, for a host of applications they're more trouble than they're worth. BUT... the are starting to catch on, and a few folks on this board are starting to swear by them. If you know what you're doing, and can come up with some workarounds, they are truly cabable of some simply stunning images.
Depends on the camera and the size of the imaging chip (not all DSLR's with video ability use 35mm chips), but it would be close... "close enough for governement work," at least.
Cheesesailor77
Veteran
I say get a HMC150 or 5DmkII. The 5D is more expensive and more difficult to work with, but it's RAW still mode will be closer to using a RED ONE.
Care to comment on #29?
Also, I still don't quite understand why you guys feel that an SLR would be better to learn on than an XHA1 (or whatever) with a 35mm adapter...
Nektonic
Veteran
Care to comment on #29?
I think they mean that you could practice working with RAW image files, albeit only RAW still image files. Still though, you can experiment with these RAW pictures in photoshop, and anyone with proper knowledge correct me if I'm wrong, also in one of RED's image editing programs that are free as far as I know.
Of course, then you'd also have a video camera that can use interchangeable lenses too. Sort of a win-win and cheaper than an XH-A1 or HMC150 plus the 35mm adapter. Also, the 35mm adapter combos can get unwieldy and are not really good in low light, where as a video DSLR, especially a 5D mkII is going to be just about the best in low light as long as you have a normal to fast lens on it.
Another thing to consider is that the cost of a camera (again let's say an A1 or HMC), a 35mm adapter kit, plus lenses, a mattebox, not to mention the extra lighting equipment you may need to get proper exposure on the adapter combo all adds up to way more than just getting a video DSLR and some lenses. Personally, I also feel that video DSLR's have overall much better image quality than adapter footage. There is just something about adapter footage that a lot of times feels off.
Personally, I put off getting a 35mm adapter for a couple years and am glad I did now that the video DSLR movement is taking off. I think adapters are on their way out. Not that they don't make great images in capable hands, but let's face it, they might not be around a whole lot longer.
Cheesesailor77
Veteran
Care to comment on #29?
Because, once again, the RED ONE is not a video camera, it's a digital stills camera that shoots 24 frames a second. Learning how to feed the sensor the right amount of the right kind of light, and then processing the RAW footage in post are the skills that specifically take advantage of the RED ONE and make that camera what it is.
As the stated motivation in starting this thread, you simply need more experience shooting. I would say give us your budget and we can easily tell you the best camera for the money you'd like to spend.
For $5000, I say the 5DmkII. for $4000, the HMC150. for $2000, DVX100. Done and done
EDIT: what Nektonic said
Because, once again, the RED ONE is not a video camera, it's a digital stills camera that shoots 24 frames a second. Learning how to feed the sensor the right amount of the right kind of light, and then processing the RAW footage in post are the skills that specifically take advantage of the RED ONE and make that camera what it is.
As the stated motivation in starting this thread, you simply need more experience shooting. I would say give us your budget and we can easily tell you the best camera for the money you'd like to spend.
For $5000, I say the 5DmkII. for $4000, the HMC150. for $2000, DVX100. Done and done
EDIT: what Nektonic said
I kinda get it now, with both RED and 5D mkii using RAW and all, but what exactly does "processing RAW footage in post" entail? I mean, how is it (the processing) different from normal footage, and how is having RAW stills going to help me with this?
Also, why is your the 5D budget higher than HMC150? Here are the average completed auction prices from eBay:
5D Mark II, used, excellent cond.: $2500
HVX200, used, excellent cond.: $2500 ($3000 with adapter)
HMC150, used, excellent cond.: $2800 ($3300 with adapter)
So 5D and bare HVX200 are pretty much identical, and the bare HMC150 is a bit more expensive than the two. However, taking the entire package into account, the 5D is at LEAST $500 cheaper compared to HVX200 with an adapter. Does this change anything?
Last edited:
Well, say 5D mkii? How would the DOF compare to RED or say HV30 w/ adapter? Also, does this camera have overheating issues like you mentioned? Plus, wouldn't audio be a non-issue with a recorder?
Convincing argument, sir!
What about customizability? Someone on another forum mentioned that a 5D mkii wouldn't be as customizable as XH A1 / HVX200, and I'd miss out a bit in that respect?
Mike Harvey
Veteran
I don't have experience with any of them, I only know what I've read... none of which was a comparison of 5DmkII vs RED footage. BUT, if this is just for practice, it really shouldn't make a difference, should it?
I can't remember if it was that or the Nikon D90. You'll have to do a Google search.
It just depends on what you're using it for. For what I use my camera for, having to use a second audio recorder is just a pain in the rear. But for situations where you would have a second audio guy recording stuff anyways, then yeah, it's a non-issue.