My New Toy I Got

King Goldfish

King Goldfish

I know its not a DVX100 but then again I dont have near 4000 bucks to buy a camera right now.

But I think in about a year or more I will after I try and pay off my motorcycle. (Ill go through the same credit union)

But today I was walking through the county mall and drifted into Sears and saw the Panasonic GS120

PV-GS120PP-S_LCD_Open.jpg



Ill take a photo of it tomorrow with me holding it but its dark now and im charging the battery.

Its the lowest price 3CCD on the market and though it doesnt have any fancy modes Neccisary to make a good short film, it does have some decent resolution and very good color.

Just something to toy around with since my older panasonic seems to be too grainy to render 3D Objects (to make it look natural.)


I know some of you will say I should have kept saving for a better camera, but at the rate Im saving with all our bills it would have taken longer then next year, So My bike is my first priority to keep my credit good.


this is the camera if you want to read.

http://www2.panasonic.com/webapp/wc...PV-GS120&surfCategory=3CCD Digital Camcorders

Someone else on here was asking about it, if it was a good first camera to experiment with. Hell it was about mid price range compared to the single color chips in the store.

I even tried it out on the Display LCD screen. it has a built in simulation Cinima Mode that adds black bars (Not that Its practical for me) but when the HDTV monitor adjusted it for 16:9, it still looked high resolution in wide screen mode Without the black bars.
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
Demosthenes X said:
The GS200 has a lot of the manual functions, including a focus ring. But it's about $300 more.

But these are supposed to be great cameras. I'm getting the 200 or the 400, when I've got the cash.
Click to expand...

All that the 200 had that I notice that was different was the wireless mic/remote thing. Im not even sure exactly what it does.

Not sure about the 400 but it was 1400 bucks. Sears didnt have it.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
though it doesnt have any fancy modes Neccisary to make a good short film
Click to expand...

A good short film does not require fancy modes, let alone a fancy camera.

A well-written story will make up for almost anything, including bad actors, bad cameras, bad locations and bad breath. 8)

(Well, maybe not the bad breath part. Altoids-brand breath-strips will, though)

Still, it's always nice to get a new and improved camera. I second the idea of making some UFO movies. You sure do like that 3dMax! :P
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Zensteve said:
A well-written story will make up for almost anything, including bad actors, bad cameras, bad locations
Click to expand...
I guess you could make that case if you are the screenwriter, but a film with bad acting, bad camera work, and bad locations is not well directed.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Bad acting bothers me...even if the story intrigues me *cough* Star Wars i & ii *cough* Signs *cough*

...man, I gotta stop coughing onto the keyboard!

Aaanyway...a bad camera doesn't limit you that much. If you read reviews of that movie "Open Water", they all mention the poor DV video quality, but still praise the movie.

...You can also make up for bad/mediocre/not HD taping by having great sound and also after effects..

...just my two cents.

It's a great camera anyway, so it's all good.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Meh, maybe I'm just easy to entertain.

If the story is good enough, I'm more than willing to overlook almost anything... especially in a non-Hollywood production.

The indie filmmaker that can tell a coherent & decent story, regardless of budget or gear, will have achieved more than any big-name director that pumps out a worthless hack of a tale.

Star Wars III and the next episode of "The Portal" will likely be out at the same time. I know which one I'll be watching. 8)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You shouldn't limit yourself to the script to tell the story. No matter what the budget is, you can tell the story with the camera, lighting, art direction, acting, editing, AND the script. So many great stories are told through the lens. Filmmaking is storytelling -- screenwriting is story writing.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Screenwriting is story writing
Click to expand...

Exactly.

Everything else on top is icing on the cake, as it were.

Sure, it would be great if indie filmmakers had the budgets/actors/sets to make that story look as great as possible... unfortunately, for the most part they don't.

What does that leave? The basic underlying story to show.

If every indie short-film waited 'til grade-A actors, studio soundstages, union-crew and top-notch CGI renderers became available... nothing would get made in the indie scene. Nothing.

They take the story they believe in and run with with it. They get it made... and learn something in the process at least, even if the final visual result is... well... less than stellar.

(That's not to say that there isn't more than a fair share of crap scripts floating about, mind you.)

Edit: and stop editing your posts, right before I reply :P
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Zensteve said:
Edit: and stop editing your posts, right before I reply :P
Click to expand...
LOL.

I agree to a point Zen. Of course great writing can shine through, but if the acting is really bad, the camera work is horrible, and editing sucks, no one is going to ask who directed it - they're going to ask who wrote it. No matter what your resources are, if you're a good director you should be able to get good performances out of your actors and work with the DP to help tell the story.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Here is a pic of my cams I've now collected over the years.


Though my first camera was a 1978 betemax my stepdad gave me in 1983 this was the first real drop in tape camera I bought in 1989.


Toshiba Movie Video TK-F200 with flying erasehead
kg2.jpg


kg3.jpg


My Panasonic PV-DV400 with Infer Red Night Vision.
kg5.jpg


My new Panasonic GV120
kg6.jpg


Panasonic says this Leica dicomar lens is supposed to be pretty good. I wouldnt know but thats why Im here to learn :D

kg7.jpg



And of course my lunch, Tomato Soup and a Tilamook Grilled cheese sandwich that has nothing to do with this, But damn tastey non the less ;)

kg1.jpg
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Demosthenes X said:
The main difference between the 120/200 and 400 is CCD size and features. The 400 will have most of those "fancy" ones - zebra stripes, shutter speed, etc.

Not neccessary, but convient.
Click to expand...

I didnt know that. But im not going to cry over this camera, Now that I figured out my problem with the resolution lines (Thanks to zen and the others) I find the quality to be a rather good buy for the money.

I mean, If I want to get more serious in short movies and stuff then Im eventually going to want to purchase an AG proline camera.



Whats funny about this camera though, Is the fact its so tiney. i mean its like less then a pound in weight and is just a little bit larger then those "mini cams" you see people buy that fit in their pockets. it fits nicely in the inner pocket of my Leather Jacket.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Heheh. The 400 is just a bit expensive, especially if you consider that for a thousand dollars more or so you could get a GL2, which is a better cam...

Anyway, I was going to ask, since you mentioned size... have you shot anything with the 200 yet? I've been looking at it, great reviews, but it seems to small to be a good choice for shooting film... just in terms of being able to hold it and shoot easily.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
It weighs like a pound. Though I didnt use the 200 or 400. I didnt test them but they are basically the same camera with more features. I guess the 400 has a larger 3 chip setting to get more resolution. but I can tell you that this camera I have is not a whole lot smaller then my PV400 i bought 3 years ago but comparing the video is like comparing apples and oranges. The older Panasonic is grainy and weights like 5 pounds. Its pretty heavy for a small camera. The GS120 is like holding a plastic CD Walkman. its light and kind of seems a bit flimsy. Im scared to drop it but then again I would be scared to high hell to drop an expensive proline camera too.


I think Im going to drive into San Francisco Tonight and just video tape some of the buildings and nightclubs and maybe Northbeach.

But yeah, Its like having a mini Broadcast quality camera. Its not small enough to fit in your pants pocket unless you have some baggy painter paints or shorts with huge pockets. but it fits nicely in a larger jacket pocket with some bulge.

BTW I dont have an external lamp and it will probably be pretty dark by the time I get there so it wont be very impressive im sure without the right lighting.

which is what I need to work on next.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top