ALL: Would you choose an AC 130A or AC 160A for interview work or something else?

Nate,

You're an amazing guy to jump in like that. I can see why you might be dismayed by the comparison. For about 1 /3 the cost of the AC130, the VIXIA CU looks just fine to me.

My brain keeps going back to this: For publication on the web, maybe the DVX IS OK?

I've got some new backdrops coming in a few days and I'm going to do a full on test with the DVX to see what it looks like and let that guide me. Far too often, I jump in & spend money without fully researching if I can make something I already own work.

Hold off on setting up shots with both cameras. Based on what you've shown me here, the Vixa would certainly get my vote at 1/3 the price of the AC 130.

I'm using Adobe's Business Catalyst as a hosting platform during the site construction process so I can view it privately during construction and once I get a test take that's OK, It'll be easy to put it up & see what the average viewer would see.

Ken
 
I agree with Nate that a 1/3" sensor camera is probably the best bet for you. If I had to jump into a large sensor format camera without knowing anything about them, make a choice on which to buy, get a good lens or two, and be ready to use it in a few weeks-- I don't think I could do it. It would certainly be right about a full time job in that duration if I had to make it happen.

As far as whether or not the DVX will work-- I don't know whether this is work that you are making a profit from or not. If you are, I would say that in 2013, HD is expected for web video. It's the standard for today, and to give a client that is paying a proper budget their money's worth, it needs to be HD. Obviously content is more important overall, but you need to check off the basics first.

If this is something that you aren't doing for profit, then if you want to take time to figure out what camera you want to get and use the DVX100B for this, then I think that is fine as long as you shoot in 16:9 (which I think I remember that the 100B does, right?). My only concern there is that this sounds like it's going to be a REALLY good collection of videos with some heartfelt moments that will be great for your demo reel. But with it being SD, plus that the DV codec doesn't look very good (by today's standards), that will be points off for potential clients that are looking at it.

Good luck. I'd like to watch it when you complete it if you want to post it here.
 
kenackr said:
Nate,

You're an amazing guy to jump in like that. I can see why you might be dismayed by the comparison. For about 1 /3 the cost of the AC130, the VIXIA CU looks just fine to me.

My brain keeps going back to this: For publication on the web, maybe the DVX IS OK?
Click to expand...


Well, that is a call that only you can make. Since it is an interview, image resolution is indeed probably not that important. Still, just 720p looks so much better than 480p on the web. And whether it is on YouTube or Vimeo, everyone these days is uploading HD.

Nate's argument for the G20 is very sound. His comparisons are indeed quite shocking, when one realizes it is a comparison between a $1,000 camcorder and one costing $3,400. One thing to keep in mind regarding the G20 is that its only native progressive mode is 1080/24p. For interviews, I would think that is what you would want to use anyway. So that is probably a non-issue.

Regarding sound, it has no XLR support. Again, you would have to get a juicedLink to add support for XLR audio. However, I can tell you that the Canon G series does have very good audio processing in them. Much better than their other consumer camcorders, with an excellent audio levels display that you can monitor while recording. It is also quite easy to find tune the sound levels while recording.

I own the previous model, the Canon HF G10, so I can attest that it is a solid performer.

Here is a video of a panel discussion that I shot with my G10 recently, and uploaded to Vimeo at 1280x720. Shot at night in a university classroom with soft overhead fluorescent lighting:







Another indoor video with my G10, but this time late afternoon with a lot of natural light coming into the room from a picture window:



 
Here's what you might expect using a window as your light source. 0db gain on the Vixia G20 and wide open iris at 1/48. Images are pretty much untouched from the camera besides a subtle vignette for effect. There's a little noise in the dark areas behind the subject, but that could be the result of having the color depth cranked up a little higher in the camera profile compared to upping color during color correction.

Ken, if you're going to be putting in the time and effort to capture these interviews, I think the minimal investment it would take for you to "go HD" would be worth it. Besides the image quality, you'll never have to log a DV tape ever again and the camera will be even less intimidating to your subjects.

Vixia_CU_1.jpgVixia_CU_2.jpg
 
That looks quite good with that lighting, Nate.

And like he said, never having to log DV tapes again is a major benefit. Just know that it will take you some time to get your workflow sorted. So be sure to give yourself some time to do some tests and get that figured out before you start shooting.
 
I like Nate's apparent characterization of the AG-AC130A as a "no hassles" camera relative to a camera with mulitiple lenses.

There are enough things to get right without having to do extra steps. For a pro who uses a particular camera evey day, all day long, the extra steps probably go unnoticed.
 
I wish I could have recorded a prettier model! FYI both of those last two interview shots were Vixia G20. I suppose that if you're shooting with backdrops, there's no real need for depth of field. Keep it simple and focus on the stories.
 
Brandon,

Absolutely no money comes to me in this project (or any other I might hasten to add), in fact, I pay for everything out of my own pocket. I never want any vet to think there is any conflict of interest (read as greed). I'm a disabled vet too. I'm strictly a hobbyist. That doesn't mean I want to make the equivalent of the dreaded "home movies" that friends & neighbors shrink from. It just means that I have no interest in any commercialization here. On the other hand, it doesn't mean that I don't want to do a creditable job that will endure with meaning.

I'm one of those (strange?) people that have a need to right wrongs, fight injustice, and rail at the short sighted, greedy clowns that currently have no moral compass whatsoever, like our politicians. It has been said many times: an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. On the other hand, where does it get us as a society if we turn a blind eye to the political one-ups-man-ship that leads to gridlock on what's good for the country? Really, why do we need more immigrants in this day & age (other than agricultural guest workers) when we still have about 15 million American citizens out of work ??????

I do not think in terms of demo reel because I'm not looking for a source of income ! (I know it seems daft by today's standards). I seek only to tell true stories that bring understanding for others to consider with no strings attached. I want people to hear & see the truth, see it and appreciated it for what it is.

In this particular project with veterans and getting at the real human cost of war, my perspective is that John & Jane Q Public do not yet understand what the level of sacrifice is for the price of their freedom. This lack of understanding permeates our very society and government and as a result, political and bureaucratic games are played at the highest levels never fulfilling the promises made to heal our veterans of their wounds.

As far as seeing it, have no fear. As a minimum. I'll put a link here, and possibly an excerpt from the interviews. But this is a work in progress and not a static snapshot.

Ken
 
My .02 as a DVX, DSLR, and AC-130 owner:

I sometimes use the DSLR for interviews - but I also setup and shoot the 130 and use it for audio; I tend to use the DSLR for getting hand gestures, etc - having those helps to cut out stutters and "umms" when needed. But generally it's the 130 unless I really want the soft DOF. It's just a no-brainer to me.

Dual-system sound (separate recorder) is a hassle in editing and means being very organized when shooting, so your audio clips can be matched to video clips. If you've done it a lot it's second nature, you may regret it if you go that route out of the gate.

If you get a bunch of really powerful & emotional footage, the odds of someone being interested in broadcasting this project seem pretty good - and having only SD footage will possibly make any broadcast parties say "oh, never mind". Shoot it HD by all freakin' means. The media needs content - you may have some really compelling content. Don't shoot yourself in the foot when it comes to exponentially increasing your audience for the project.

And - make sure to get releases from all of your subjects. Good luck!
 
Ken- another vote for HD (future proofing, though impossible, as much as you can). You're recording these stories for tomorrow, not today.

Camcorder (of your choice and budget). As previously stated, shallow DOF is not very important with backdrops.
Servo zoom lens, not so much for zooming while they're speaking, but for being able to quickly reframe the shot into CU, MW, WS for visual variety.
(you can do this during questions, so it's not seen in their answers).
In camera audio (XLR), a big plus for you.
Since you're using available light, be aware of how light changes during the day, do tests...
You may want to experiment with one vs two windows, seeing if you can get a soft shadow on one side of their face.
And be sure the backdrop is not distracting from the subjects. With natural light, you'll want to be sure their faces are much brighter than the background.

A decent lav mic (with the wire inside the shirt).

And definitely, as Michael said, signed releases.

Have you seen Restrepo? It may be too harrowing for you, but the interviews are mostly extreme CU, one soft box source of light, against a black background.
(less intense answers are in wider shots).
And, of course, a black background totally negates the worries of shallow DOF....
Just as a reference point, here's the trailer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DjqR6OucBc

Good luck, please keep us updated!
 
Chuck,

Thanks for the input!

Having come from a sound background (recording studio, sound company (live events including stadiums), Installations of all kinds (museums, stadiums, clubs, ice rinks, churches, etc), I'm a great believer that sound & video should always cohabit in the same device. With EM waves buzzing all over the place, wired mics & lock in xlr's are the preferred choice for me. Countryman B3's are also my normal go to interview mic.


The backgrounds that should arrive tomorrow are: Black, Charcoal, a dark blue (almost Navy), and chroma green just to play with and I have a few others here now.

Good point on the soft shadow which will probably come from the north facing windows, and the sunny side from the south. Both sides are easily controllable. Ditto on the releases.

I had not seen Restrepo and appreciate the mention so I can study what they did.
 
Lance,

I'm not sure what keeps happening to the 3 replies I have written to thank you for all the incredible information you have furnished, but somehow they wound up in nether space. I must be pushing the wrong button at the wrong time. Anyhow, thanks for the all the data , it truly helps.

Based on everything so far, I think I'm not ready for something like the AF100 or the DSLR (M) but I certainly AM convinced that "HD future proofing" is the right step to take instead of the DVX. Audio collection on the DVX might be possible IF and ONLY IF it's needed and it could be run in sync with an "A" cam.


The AC 130A is still a contender, but now I wonder if there is something price wise between the VIXIA 20 that Nate's shown off well, but also has XLR inputs with quiet preamps and decent audio processing. Used is also a distinct possibility too. Not sure about the 90 because of lighting situation.

You guys are fantastic for all the help !!!!

Ken
 
kenackr said:
The AC 130A is still a contender, but now I wonder if there is something price wise between the VIXIA 20 that Nate's shown off well, but also has XLR inputs with quiet preamps and decent audio processing. Used is also a distinct possibility too. Not sure about the 90 because of lighting situation.
Click to expand...



That would then take you back to the brand new Canon XA20 that I mentioned earlier, which has XLR inputs and good audio processing. And at $2,200 would be $1,200 less than the AC-130a.

It has numerous other improvements over the Canon HF G20 as well:


http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/camcorders/professional_camcorders/xa20


Here is a sample clip from a new XA25 owner here in the USA. The XA25 is identical to the XA20, except that it also has HD SDI out.

This footage was recorded direct to a SDHC card. No external recorder was used using the HDMI or SDI connections.





And here is a sample from someone who just bought the XA20 in Canada:






The JVC GY-HM150U sells for only $1,995 and also has XLR inputs, but I'm honestly not that impressed with it myself. I shot a band as a second camera recently with my GH3, with a JVC GY-HM150U used as the primary cam.


My Panasonic GH3 provided the footage from the left side of the stage, and the JVC from the right. So the video of this song below will give you a comparison of the two.

Note: No post processing was done on the clips from either the two cameras. They are both straight out of camera. No attempt was made to color grade or match the footage at all. The clips were just simply spliced together.


 
Last edited:
Either of the clips of the XA 20 or 25 looked excellent at certain points with the saturated colors Canon is so famous for. What are your thoughts on what happens to that saturation, that I love so much, as I attempt to shoot with as much natural light as possible in the interviews ?

I definitely see the difference from left to right and I agree, the JVC did not win with me either.
 
Last edited:
Controversy on color space?

Controversy on color space?

The XA25 & 20 are very appealing. I could no find no direct statement from Canon on what the color space is for them. In some comments on the B&H in-depth site there was allusion to 4.2.0. but no confirmation or denial. There is a notation on the Canon web site that the BNC connector for sd-hd output does provide 4.2.2 color space out but that seems incongruous with allusion of 4.2.0 in normal output. Does anyone have any accurate information on the color space these cameras operate in? Further, whether it is possible that if they don't operate in 4.2.2 that it could be furnished as an FTP upload ?

The reason for the question is in regards to "future proofing", specifically, the Canon xf100 stated plainly it is 4.2.2.. When I went to see what the AC130 & 160 color space was, I could not find that either and leaves me wondering. Any one know?
 
The XA20 and XA25 shoot in 4:2:0 color space to AVCHD and MP4. It is the standard for the codec being used. The same is true of the AC130/160, Vixias, and pretty much any other affordable consumer/prosumer camcorder. AVCHD is recorded to the cards at 4:2:0.

The XF100 and XF300 record a more robust 4:2:2 MXF file using MPEG2 encoding at 50 mbps. This is a benefit, though it doesn't necessarily mean you'll automatically get a "better" image than a XA20; the XF100 just records more color information.

HOWEVER: All of these cameras output 4:2:2 uncompressed from their HDMI and/or SDI ports if you should choose to record externally using a secondary device. All the Canon cams, all the Panasonics, all the Sonys do this. That's why the XA25 is listed as having 4:2:2 - it comes out the SDI port (and the HDMI).

Make sense? Record to the SD cards and you get 4:2:0, record externally and you can get 4:2:2. Unless you're talking XF100/300, where the recording is done to compact flash at 4:2:2.
 
There is a custom setting in the Xa20 that allows saturation of color as well as color balance to adjust red or blue. Also there is a VIVID setting as well.



kenackr said:
Either of the clips of the XA 20 or 25 looked excellent at certain points with the saturated colors Canon is so famous for. What are your thoughts on what happens to that saturation, that I love so much, as I attempt to shoot with as much natural light as possible in the interviews ?

I definitely see the difference from left to right and I agree, the JVC did not win with me either.
Click to expand...
 
Dangerously self-serving here since I'm selling an HVX and HMC, but have you considered any of the "one generation behind" tapeless HD cameras such as a HVX200/HPX170, HMC150, or Sony EX1? They're all still darned good, especially at interviews where you generally don't need ultimate resolution. An HMC especially can look just as good as the P2 cameras, but record for hours on a 32GB SD card
 
mcbob,

I've been thinking about it, but haven't investigated it yet. I did see an ad for an HMC 150 on B&H the other day, but haven't yet had the time to go back and learn about it.

I'll check to see if you have listings in the marketplace here. I haven't ruled anything out yet other than the over $4K camera's that I can't afford. Like most others in the world, I'd like to my buck to stretch as far as it can.

Self serving is OK when presented front & center like you have.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top