The gigantic "which camera should I buy" thread! - Page 120 at DVinfo.net

Go Back   DV Info Net > The Tools of DV and HD Production > Open DV Discussion

Open DV Discussion
For topics which don't fit into any of the other categories.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old January 29th, 2011, 02:10 PM   #1786
New Boot
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wakefield, MI
Posts: 12
Just comparing the AX2000 and the XF100 considering what I am looking to do,

-

"I am looking for a video camera to use to try and teach myself... well how to shoot. I know little to nothing about video production outside of home videos. I am looking for something that is versital meaning I would like it to do just about anything well. It doesnt have to do everything the best but good enough to produce usable video.

I plan to use it like I said to learn, but to learn for the purpose of creating website videos, area tourism videos (waterfalls, people skiing, wildlife, etc.), action sports videos, green screen shoots, and also to use with 3d animations created with 3ds max. Ill expand this list hopefully as my skill level increases.

Initially will probably be doing more of the area tourism type stuff and next video advertisments for the internet. For the area tourism stuff this to me requires something semi compact as things like the waterfalls requires some work to get to the best shooting spot. Meaning I think that it needs to fit into a back pack so I can hike and climb."

-

Which to you guys think would be the better option?

Thanks,
Peter Koruga is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 29th, 2011, 03:06 PM   #1787
Trustee
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Antrim, Northern Ireland
Posts: 1,569
Peter,

It may be worth seriously considering the new Canon XA10 or something similar:
Canon XA10 HD Professional Camcorder 4922B002 B&H Photo Video

(Although it isn't released yet, so if you're in a hurry then it's no good).

Search on this forum and you should find out some more info. It is certainly compact, and has a nice wide angle lens too (30mm, I think). It will allow XLR audio if required, and take SDHC instead of more expensive CF cards. You can remove the handle to go ultra-small.

I'm not sure if it is "man enough" for your needs, but it looks like a great little camera.
Mike Beckett is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 29th, 2011, 03:29 PM   #1788
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Fairfield, Dunedin, New Zealand
Posts: 3,634
Images: 18
Hi, Peter................

Let me throw one in from left field, if I may?

It reads, to me, as if the primary destination of your video output is going to be on the web.

If that is correct, maybe something that does excellent 720p and has all the bells and whistles.

I won't suggest any particular camera as I'm not familiar with any of them, but why not dive into the JVC Forum and have a thorough scrute.

Maybe someone here has JVC experience and can chime in?

Just a thought.


CS

PS: And that was from a hardened Canon shooter, no less!
Chris Soucy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 29th, 2011, 05:52 PM   #1789
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Miami, FL
Posts: 52
Well.... let me throw my situation into the pot. I'm planning to buy a camera by the end of March. I travel a lot and have to shoot a lot of guerrilla style stuff, so size and portability are important to me in a cam, but I'm not willing to sacrifice much on image quality to get it. So right now I'm leaning towards the Panny HMC150 and the new Canon XF100. I'm still waiting to see how the Canon is going to hold up image wise with that single sensor though. I'd love to get ahold of an NX5, but I don't think my budget can swing that unless it drops down in price a bit. Anyone have any advice or even other models that I may be overlooking?
Stephen Boss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 29th, 2011, 08:55 PM   #1790
Major Player
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Washington D.C. Metro Area
Posts: 384
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Hardwick View Post
Yes, that Canon XF100 does look interesting and I've not read up on it before. The blurb reads, 'In contrast to a typical 6-blade iris, the XF100's 8-blade iris captures extraordinarily smooth out-of-focus "bokeh" for a more attractive image effect. The additional blades also reduce diffraction of light passing through the iris, allowing for the use of smaller apertures while maintaining image quality.'

Now the first part - about the bokeh - I can accept, but more iris blades giving less diffraction effects? C'mon Canon, don't feed us this BS or we'll go off you.

tom.
Uh, Canon is telling you the EXACT truth in their marketing. At least within the limits of marketspeak.

You probably ought to look up diffraction, but I'll explain a bit here.

More blades in the iris give a better approximation of a circle. That gives you a more circular iris, and that gives a more circular smooth appearance to the bokeh.

Diffraction is what happens at the edge of any solid object. Hold your fingers in front of eye as close as you can while keeping it in focus.

Now observe the edge of your finger... it will seem to have a blur. That blur is caused by diffraction.

(This works better if you are in a dark room looking at a lit object.)

OK... so there is an example.

Now what you need to know is that the out of focus area is affected by diffraction as well as the iris shape.

So, if you look at good lenses they will have curved iris blades- to create a more circular lens aperture. They will also have more blades.

Why?

Even with curved blades there is a slight distortion where the blades overlap. Just a few blades, say 5, will have a visible change in the shape of the bokeh. Adding just a few more leaves does two things. First it makes each distortion smaller, and second it makes the distortion more "even" as the various distortions average out.

I hope that explains.
__________________
Alexander Ibrahim
http://www.alexanderibrahim.net
Alexander Ibrahim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 30th, 2011, 06:53 AM   #1791
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Billericay, England UK
Posts: 4,711
I'm pretty sure we're in agreement that diffraction is caused when light hits a sharply defined edge and the light ray doesn't carry on past that point in the expected straight line. An iris blade (or blades) are exactly that; very sharp edges that cut into the light path. Having 6 blades or 8 does indeed alter the shape of the aperture, but I can't see that it alters the sharp edge that the light hits in any way or form.

tom.
Tom Hardwick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 30th, 2011, 10:57 AM   #1792
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Tucson AZ
Posts: 2,206
Well, there is more than one "flavor" of diffraction. One is as you mention, the bending effect at the edges of objects. But what I think is at work here (or at least what I think Canon is thinking about) is a form of slit diffraction, where as light passes through a very small aperture relative to wavelength you would get a wavelength dependent spreading effect - in effect as the opening becomes small with respect to the wavelength of the incident light, a new wave is generated originating at the aperture. This is most often seen with a thin slit or a pinhole.but when the leaves of a diaphragm meet at an acute angle you would get this effect at each intersection, and you would see it well before the size of the aperture itself was small enough to cause severe diffraction limiting - the "opening" where the leaves intersect approaches zero, after all. So more leaves -> less acute angles -> less diffraction.

How significant the improvement going from 6 to 8 leaves - hard to say, but certainly non-zero.
Jim Andrada is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 30th, 2011, 08:43 PM   #1793
Major Player
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Washington D.C. Metro Area
Posts: 384
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Hardwick View Post
I'm pretty sure we're in agreement that diffraction is caused when light hits a sharply defined edge and the light ray doesn't carry on past that point in the expected straight line. An iris blade (or blades) are exactly that; very sharp edges that cut into the light path. Having 6 blades or 8 does indeed alter the shape of the aperture, but I can't see that it alters the sharp edge that the light hits in any way or form.

tom.
Your error is thinking that the edge is the issue. The real issue is what the light does after hitting the edge.

When light diffracts it often does so at right angles to the edge causing the diffraction.

The exact shape of the aperture is an issue. So, anything you think might alter the shape of the aperture affects the diffraction and bokeh, prima facie.

Have a look at the Zeiss Master Prime brochure on the bottom of page 7:

http://www.zeiss.com/C12567A8003B8B6F/EmbedTitelIntern/ARRIMasterPrimesBrochure/$File/ARRI_MasterPrimes_brochure.pdf

The MP lens on the left is compared to an 8 blade iris, with straight edges on the right.

The MP has a very nice round bokeh.

The other lens (probably an old Canon BNCR or OCT19 mount) has a bokeh that is roughly an octagon, but each of the points is slightly "starred" out. What you can't see in that picture is that those defects in the octagon's shape are elliptical.

They are caused by the angle where the blades meet. The sharper (more acute) it is the more the diffracted light will act unexpectedly. Partly due to interference partly to dispersion.

This is what led to circular iris blades, once the technology to design circular blades emerged.

More blades are also important, because the more blades you have, the more open the angle of intersection is.

Just suffice it to say, what Canon is saying makes perfect sense.

You don't have to believe me or Canon though. Go try the camera out and judge the bokeh for yourself. Who cares why it looks the way it does... its really just about whether or not you like the result.

Frankly... I think we've spent entirely too many words discussing what has to be a very very minor part of the total performance picture of this camera. This is not the camera to use if you are looking to use bokeh a lot in your work.

On most set ups You are going to have very deep DoF, and so bokeh will be a minor concern.
__________________
Alexander Ibrahim
http://www.alexanderibrahim.net
Alexander Ibrahim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 9th, 2011, 09:52 PM   #1794
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Jackson, MS
Posts: 44
What camera would you suggest for shooting strictly white screen, interviews and training videos for web (mainly) and some DVD? It doesn't have to be mobile and everything will be shot indoors. Will be using LED lighting (Cool Lights) as well.

Thanks!
Michael LaHatte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 10th, 2011, 05:17 AM   #1795
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Boca Raton, FL
Posts: 2,979
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael LaHatte View Post
What camera would you suggest for shooting strictly white screen, interviews and training videos for web (mainly) and some DVD? ....
@Michael...this is a little like asking "What car should I use to go to the bakery if it's raining?" Truth is, if you know how to drive, pretty much any car will do but probably not a convertible and you should make sure the wipers work. There isn't a car you can climb into, push a button and arrive (safely) at the bakery.

Don't get a toy camera. There isn't a "White Background Produced for DVD" model camera or mode button. Pretty much any camera with manual exposure will let you dial in a properly lit subject/scene. Frankly, it'll be your skill at lighting, staging, audio and editing that will have the most impact on the result but skill at using lighting to reduce the dynamic range with a nicely lit subject will have significant affect on the visuals and not whether you use camera model ABC versus XYZ.

Perhaps a more productive question would be for you to do some easy research on DVInfo sponsor site with cameras and reviews, pick a camera that fits your budget and workflow, then post on DVInfo to discuss that camera's merits and techniques from those who know that camera.
Les Wilson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 10th, 2011, 07:30 PM   #1796
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Jackson, MS
Posts: 44
Thanks for the reply Les... I should of also included:

-Budget of $2000-$4000
-Would prefer no tape, i would like it to have memory card, etc... I don't want to deal with tape (if i can help it)

I have a Canon HFS10 now but feel I need a pro series to truly do it right.

I agree with your statement about lighting. That truly is an art! I am still working on my skills there!

Thanks!
Michael LaHatte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 10th, 2011, 07:48 PM   #1797
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Boca Raton, FL
Posts: 2,979
Michael, I think a good way to start is to go to the B&H website and drill down "Professional Video" links until you get to ENG camcorders. Then sort by price. Here, bookmark it:
Camcorders (ENG)

Study the features of each camera as you walk up to your price limit, skip the tape cameras etc. This will give you a good education on what's out there. If you've bought a house, a good agent will do that on the first outing... show you what's out there in your price range.

One of the features that separates the low end of the prosumer market from the next level up is XLR audio built-in. There's some Panasonic solid state cameras in the HMCxx line that are modular and may fit the bill for you. Make a shortlist and research/discuss them here on DVInfo.
Les Wilson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 11th, 2011, 11:42 AM   #1798
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Athens Greece / York UK
Posts: 48
guys, would like to invest some money either in to a SD700 or 550D. Which you reckon will be better for video?
George Logothetis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 26th, 2011, 12:45 PM   #1799
New Boot
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 19
Re: The gigantic "which camera should I buy" thread!

After using my Canon XL1s for a year, I'm looking to upgrade to HD. It was used for weddings, sports and other events, and served me well.

My budget is around the 2000 mark, and I'd prefer to stay away from tape. It needs to be decent in low light situations, have at least one XLR without an adaptor, and preferably Canon, as the XL1s done be proud.

I'm very open to suggestions, thanks guys!
Ben Turvey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 26th, 2011, 10:31 PM   #1800
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Boca Raton, FL
Posts: 2,979
Re: The gigantic "which camera should I buy" thread!

I loved my XL1s. I've not been happy with Canon since. If you are on the quest for a low light performer in a traditional 3-chip ENG camera, that sojourn leads directly to a Sony EX1. Period end of discussion. It's now my "best camera ever" hands down.
Les Wilson is offline   Reply
Reply

DV Info Net refers all where-to-buy and where-to-rent questions exclusively to these trusted full line dealers and rental houses...

Professional Video
(800) 833-4801
Portland, OR

B&H Photo Video
(866) 521-7381
New York, NY

Z.G.C.
(973) 335-4460
Mountain Lakes, NJ

Abel Cine Tech
(888) 700-4416
N.Y. NY & L.A. CA

Precision Camera
(800) 677-1023
Austin, TX

DV Info Net also encourages you to support local businesses and buy from an authorized dealer in your neighborhood.
  You are here: DV Info Net > The Tools of DV and HD Production > Open DV Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 



Google
 

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:16 AM.


DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2017 The Digital Video Information Network