Camera Question

[Elderlandwurm]

hey everyone first thread. I've only got a basic question. I'm looking to shoot an independant film, strictly low to no budget. I'm talking unpaid actors (suckers for friends). The only money i'll be spending will be going into feeding people and equipment. Which is why i'm trying to be careful in camera purchases.

I'm looking to buy one or two cameras, trying not to spend 4k on them. I had originally settled on a Canon XL1s due to the look it gave 28 days later. But then I came across several reviews for a Panasonic DVX100, but now there's a new incarnate to that camera the HVX200. I know I went from cheapest to cheaper to cheap (friggin Goldilocks), so i'm just wondering does this mean more $ = better? I'm mostly looking for features, but again I want a good solid reliable camera as it will be used a LOT after purchase.

Thanks, and please be kind again i'm not exactly a vet or anything so I dunno if I Can take a shitload of criticism

 

[Will Vincent]

My response is only going to be partial, as this is a big topic...

But I thought I would raise a few points you may not have thought of or may not be aware of. A good portion of the XL1 offering the look it gave 28 days later had to do with the use of a 35mm adapter and expensive lenses, well planned shots, lighting, and blocking.

The only question you have posed that I can give you a definite answer on is a resounding NO, more money does not equate to a better product. All the equipment an enormous pile of money will buy does not a good film make, unless you use it properly and tell a compelling story.

My suggestion would be that if you decide you are definitely going to buy rather than rent, spend most of your budget on lighting and its related elements (stands, reflectors, etc) and a good chunk on audio gear. Without light you have no picture (or at least one most people aren't going to be thrilled to look at) and without good sound, you're more or less wasting any other effort that goes into the film.

 

[Elderlandwurm]

lighting shouldn't be too much of a problem, most of my shots will be done during the day in direct sun, so i'll use filters to correct what little issue there is. Sound is definitely a worry, but something i know more about than cameras. So you'd nix the canon xl1s? What camera would you recommend?

not neccessarily direct sun but mostly natural lighting will be used. It's hard to explain but i've had much experience shooting photography (still) and achieved the look i've gone for without much lighting adjustment. If that makese sense at all...

 

[knightly]

I own an XL1s. We spend 1/2 hour to and hour setting up a shot and 5 minutes on the actual camera bits. The rest of that time is lighting, blocking action and camera movement. The sound guy has to boom according to the shot as well, so that is rehearsed during this time as well.

I have a $500 camera that I can get amazing shots with, it's not the tools, it really is how you use them. My site will be up this weekend with lots of example of stuff captured with this 6 year old beastie! Other cameras to consider If you're looking at the HVX's... The JVC HD110u is really a nice value for the price and looks very professional on set (big camera, big lenses) I've used the Canon XHa1 which I really was impressed with, The HVX is a good camera, and as Will has shown in the recent 48 hour project, you can get incredible footage with a canon HV20 (consumer-ish level HDV camera).

That said, you can still get incredible footage with the XL1s. Light hasn't changed its' properties in the last 6 years, it's still photons reflecting off of colored surfaces after being emitted from a light source. Most likely, at your/our level, you'll be releasing on the net/DVD. you don't necessarily need all the resolution HD offers you yet (although I think the HD cameras do a better job with managing whites and reproducing reds than the SD offerings).

My advice is to find someone who has these camera and take them for a test spin. I'm sure there's someone around that can show you one or the other (canon XL vs. Panasonic DVX) of the "Indie filmmaker cameras".

 

[Will Vincent]

So you'd nix the canon xl1s?

I wouldn't say that.. just pointing out that the reason 28days looked as it did had more to do with the lenses, lighting, and post production work than it did with that particular camera being what captured the image.

As knightly explained, it's much less about the equipment than it is about how that equipment is used. Personally, I really like my HV20, and it can be beefed up will all the 35mm adapters and extra goodies to your hearts content.. is it a "pro" camera? No, but it can be beaten into submission to comply with your wishes pretty easily, and it's much less expensive than any of the others you've mentioned.

I used a dvx quite a bit on my first project, and a couple others, and I've always been a fan, probably will always be a fan of that camera, but I could never afford to purchase one.

This is the 48hr film knightly was referring to. It was lit with several home-depot/lowes style halogen work lights, and a few fluorescents. No attachments to the HV20 other than my beachtek audio adapter. Though perhaps one day I will make my camera look like this:

 

[oakstreetphotovideo]

Elderlandwurm,
First, if you are in Eastern NC, you may want to come see me and we can do some real world testing. I'm just east of Jacksonville, NC.

There are a couple of points I'd like to make regarding your comments, so far;

1) shooting in daylight doesn't necessarily get you off the hook, because video has a rather limited dynamic range
2) because video cameras have limited dynamic range, the camera you select could make a world of difference in contrasty lighting

Doug

 

[Elderlandwurm]

Good good this is what I was looking for. Thanks guys. I'm going to spend this holiday weekend getting some more ideas together with the lighting (probably taking a few pointers from the 48 hr project) and do some more research on booms and cameras.

The only reason i'm going with miniDV or Hi8 is because of price and ease of editing. I can't afford to shoot and/or edit film, so digital made sense. I'm not trying to be scene, or look like an 'indie' director with this camera. I'm trying to achieve the look and feel I think is necessary for my film. So please understand if I seem a bit inquisitive or picky with certain things. I don't want this to fail, it can't really.

 

[Will Vincent]

Definitely go the dv (or HDV) route over Hi8. Not only is the quality better, but editing will be much easier as all you need to get the footage imported is a firewire connection (and cable, the cameras don't come with one, many people don't realize that when they buy a camera)... with Hi8 you would need some kind of video capture card.

Questions are good, that's what this forum is here for.


Oh, and since I forgot to say it earlier,

 

[Elderlandwurm]

computer editing is definitely how I wanted to go. I've always been a computer nerd, and I have aside question, is there a way to capture my audio on a laptop instead of using another medium. I'm really paranoid about losing data and if it's on a PC or laptop I can burn backup copies immediately, and keep my peace of mind.