Suggestions for a Starter Camera?

N

nsideguy

I'm finishing film school and havent really had much film making experience (my school mainly focused on theory and criticism). I am passionate about making films and very skilled at editing and computers. I've been doing research on the current state of video cameras and am looking at getting a Panasonic AG-HMC80 to film some short films/mockumentaries. The main features I like about this camera are the shoulder mount, manual focus, and xlr inputs. I'm not too crazy about the price though.

Does anyone have an opinion on a good place to start video camera wise? I was seriously considering a DSLR until I realized how problematic they are to use as a main camera, and the amount of accessories it would require to get good lenses, a good shoulder mount, and a sound recording system, make it overly complex and problematic.

For now what kind of rig would you reccomend for me? I'm pretty much debating between the HMC80, or a cheaper camcorder I can get a shoulder rig for, it should have manual focus, xlr inputs, and full hd though.
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
I bought a canon T2I, and it has the capability to capture some amazing footage. The biggest downfall is all the hoops that I have to jump through to get the footage onto the computer. Since it records in .mov and Vegas pro 9 doesn't support that file, I have to surrender some quality to re-encode to .avi

If you're computer savvy then it might still be a viable option. I don't know how necessary a shoulder mount is. I use a tripod for steady shots, a dollyish device for tracking, and a DIY steady device for that "handheld" feel.

That being said I'm probably the second biggest noob on this site. That's just my .02
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
The HMC40 is essentially the same thing as an HMC80 as far as video quality. It only costs $500 less though. I like the built in XLR inputs on the HMC80 (which costs $300 to put on an HMC40), the shoulder mount, and the viewfinder so I wouldn't be saving much with the 40.

I'm open to the idea of a DSLR because I know how their DOF is much more dynamic, and their low light performance is unmatched at that price range. But I'm worried that it's not a good choice for my main camera because of its recording limitations (10-15 minute videos I've heard as well as a tendency to get really hot), a need for a separate sound recorder, and only having a manual focus that I would have to constantly adjust for moving shots. I've heard that the auto-focus on the HMC40 or 80 works well and is really quick, so I think that'd be a nice option to have if I'm going to invest $2k+ on a camera.

My idea is that I can use the HMC80 to make the short films I want to make, without the need for a boom operator, and down the road when I get more comfortable with the filmmaking process I can get a DSLR to add in shallow DOF shots and low light shots when the situation calls for it. Does anyone have any contrasting opinions? :D
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
A hacked Panasonic GH1 doesn't have the same limitations on video length as some other DSLRs, and I haven't heard any reports of it getting too hot.

I'm not an expert by any means, but I'm pretty sure that you're not going to want to use auto-focus on any camcorder you get if you can avoid it. You want to be in full control of your camera and the images it captures, not the other way around.

If you want really good sound, you'll need a boom op and an external recorder either way. And with the money you'd save buying a GH1 (I just paid $400 for a new body only), you could afford a decent basic sound setup.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Hello and Welcome. My first suggestion would be to do a couple searches. This subject has been exhausted here and you are sure to find something to read up on. Then you will be able to ask more pointed questions. :) No sarcasm intended.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
cameronchapman said:
A hacked Panasonic GH1 doesn't have the same limitations on video length as some other DSLRs, and I haven't heard any reports of it getting too hot.

I'm not an expert by any means, but I'm pretty sure that you're not going to want to use auto-focus on any camcorder you get if you can avoid it. You want to be in full control of your camera and the images it captures, not the other way around.

If you want really good sound, you'll need a boom op and an external recorder either way. And with the money you'd save buying a GH1 (I just paid $400 for a new body only), you could afford a decent basic sound setup.
Click to expand...

GH1 get my vote. Dirt cheap, and if you hack it you'll have arguably the best image on the market below 10k usd. Throw in a cheap Cowboy Studio shoulder mount for $25, a f1.4 50mm vintage prime and and some kind of self powered mic and you can rock the world for under $500.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Awwwwww, is there no video camera love?? Well my opinion is starting to sway, I've heard of zoom's audio recorder being top of the line, I guess the issue is getting a rig that will hold a microphone in the event I need to shoot something and don't have a boom operator, no one wants to be a boom operator :lol:. Does anyone know of an attachment for a microphone that fits on DSLR's?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I'm a huge fan of video cameras and not so much of DSLR's. But I usually
just keep my opinion to myself these days because everyone is mad about
DSLR's.

nsideguy said:
The main features I like about this camera are the shoulder mount, manual focus, and xlr inputs. I'm not too crazy about the price though.
Click to expand...
What is your price range?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
The Zoom H4n is hardly top of the line, I'd say it comes in at passable, but could be a hell of a lot better. Of course, it's still worlds ahead of DSLR audio implementation. Attaching a microphone directly to the GH1 or most any DSLR and you'll be primarily recording lens sounds; you'll really need to find a different solution. Some shoulder mounts will allow you to get the microphone further away from the camera, but it's still far from ideal. Of course, that issue is still present on video cameras.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
My price range is below $2500, I know what you mean about people being mad about DSLR's, I do see some advantages, mostly the interchangable lens and the superior low light performance. But a big part of me knows that these cameras aren't primarily designed for video and it seems like the DSLR's are still too new to know the lifespan of one of these cameras.

Can anyone confirm that the video quality that comes out of a DSLR is superior to a full HD camcorder aside from the DOF and low-light performance?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
nsideguy said:
My price range is below $2500, I know what you mean about people being mad about DSLR's, I do see some advantages, mostly the interchangable lens and the superior low light performance. But a big part of me knows that these cameras aren't primarily designed for video and it seems like the DSLR's are still too new to know the lifespan of one of these cameras.

Can anyone confirm that the video quality that comes out of a DSLR is superior to a full HD camcorder aside from the DOF and low-light performance?
Click to expand...

"Superior" is very subjective. That being said, I find the video quality of my $900 Panasonic GH2 superior to to the $2,900 JVC GY-HM100U I shot a documentary on last year. Of course, it has drawbacks. For on-the-go shooting where you only have one chance to capture the moment, I would definitely go with the GY-HM100. For a narrative project where I have time to set up the shot and get everything right, the GH2 would be my choice.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
nsideguy said:
My price range is below $2500, I know what you mean about people being mad about DSLR's, I do see some advantages, mostly the interchangable lens and the superior low light performance. But a big part of me knows that these cameras aren't primarily designed for video and it seems like the DSLR's are still too new to know the lifespan of one of these cameras.

Can anyone confirm that the video quality that comes out of a DSLR is superior to a full HD camcorder aside from the DOF and low-light performance?
Click to expand...

Here's a video that compares the Canon 5d MkII, a GH1 (I'm pretty sure this is an unhacked one, the hacked one has a significantly better picture), and a Red One (one of the best HD cameras you're going to find, and starting at $25k+ without a lens): http://vimeo.com/5981422. Decide for yourself.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
It's refreshing to see someone not gaga over the DSLRs (no offense intended, I'm using one on my upcoming shoot).

But just bear in mind, you may not need a separate audio recorder with the HMC80, but you will still need a boom op. A mic mounted to the camera is 99% of the time not going to be close enough to the actors to record quality audio.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Well, after hearing your guys' tips, and talking to professional filmmakers, I understand why DSLR's are a great way to go for a low budget camera.

I plan to get the GH1, and use an SR to MFT adapter so I can use minolta lenses which seem to be the best bang for the buck. Also, the adapter from what I have heard is lossless and has no problems with focusing (something ive heard happening from Canon and Nikkon adapters).

I also think I'm going to go with the Zoom audio recorder because I heard it's excellent for the price. The guy up the post said that it's not professional quality, but it's passable. Can anyone elaborate on that?

So now my issue is what lenses I should use, and also what shoulder mount. The cowboy one seems pretty good and its only $30, but I've seen some that have two foregrips and have mounts for external audio devices.

I know the 50mm f/1.4 is a must, but does anyone have any reccommendations for zoom lenses? Or any other prime lenses that are very useful?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top