The Ultimate Camera Debate

[TheDark12]

Hey everyone,
To cut to the chase I have decided that I want to become an indie film maker without ever owning a camera before. I have never filmed anything before and for my first camera I want something good. As good as I can economically find at least.

For starters, I don't want to dive into the semipro cameras until I've had experience in filming in small projects. I do however want to start filming in HD.

For the first camera I was thinking Sony HDR-SR7. Then I checked out this forum and noticed that the Canon HV20 is favoured.

Secondly, I want to buy with an aim to upgrade to something closer to the $4,000-$5,000 mark, mostly for the features that will offer. The XH A1 interests me. For now though I want the features and versatility that I can learn from and a camera cheaper than $1500 so that when I'm finished with it I can hand it down to my parents.

As far as First camera goes I am looking at either:
Sony HDR-SR7
Canon HV20

As far as semipro:
XH A1
HDR-FX1

I'm mostly interested in what you guys recommend based on your experiences and what you actually use. If there are any samples on the net they might be helpful too.

Thanks

 

[clive]

28 days later was shot on relatively expensive nasty SD Prosumer camcorders

Sorry Knightly, I used the term "relatively cheap," rather than just "cheap" because I was comparing the cost with professional production cameras... £3,000 as opposed to £28,000+

I should have been clearer in what I was saying...

 

[knightly]

yeah, the cameras were relatively cheap, but all the kit they attached to it made it look impressive as all get out and added thousands to the price tag...but yes, the camera itself is waaay cheap for a feature film.

 

[directorik]

And as always, don't dismiss the skill, talent and experience of the people.

I know this is a "camera debate" thread, and the camera is important, but
there is so much more to making a successful movie than the camera. Give
a first time filmmaker with a crew of 5 first timers a top of the line Panavision
and you won't get as good an image as an experienced DP and crew with
a Panasonic GS400.

And don't forget that the watch-ability of the finished product has more to
do with the script, actors, sound, editing and direction than the camera
used. I'm sure we would all rather spend 90 minutes watching an exciting,
compelling movie shot on SD than a boring, beautifully shot HD movie.

I own one of the top of the line HDV cameras - in my opinion the best of
them - and I still shoot SD with it. I prefer SD in post and so far, I haven't
been shooting for theatrical release so I haven't been hurt. I tell the
distributors it was shot HD and show them pictures of the camera on set.

They believe it.

 

[Will Vincent]

Is there a reason you don't shoot in HD, and then downconvert to SD for the edit? I know with my HV20 I can export standard def footage from HDV footage I've shot. I suppose not every camera can do that, but it seems to be fairly common.

Is it just the SD in post that you prefer, or do you shoot in SD also because critical focus is easier to obtain in SD?

 

[spinner]

Yeah, that's a fair point spinner. My reasoning is simply that in five years time other cameras that are far more technologically advanced by todays standards will be the same price as the DVX and therefore more likely to be bought.

The main reason that I think this is because to me it already looks like SD is on its way out. I went to my local HiFi store yesterday to find that they dont sell SD televisions anymore. Surprising but true. If people won't buy the TV's anymore how long before they won't buy the cameras? My best guess is five years and thus my comments.

I guess only time will tell.

Oh, I see....

But the thing is, people still own standard definition tv sets. So for a while, standard will probably still be available. It may be on its way out, but I think it may take a little while before it is scrapped altogether...

-- spinner