Shooting weddings with small handicams
 

Are there any wedding shooters out there that use smaller handicams only together with their dslr(s), with small I mean canon xa10 kind of small?

I have been shooting with my xh-a1 for 4 years now and it has been a real workhorse, I absolutely loved all the controls I had on the outside of the camera, most easily accessible.
But it really shows it's a first gen HD camera, with sufficient light it still performs well and I have and still am using it for corporate shoots and the clients seem to be happy with the output.

But for weddings there are some things I hate, lowlight is absolutely crap, even at 6db gain you see the ants crawl over over a big screen in HD. The viewfinder and lcd screen suck, I can't asses focus accurately, luckily the autofocus is very good, only not if you film wide and get too close, then it always focusses on the background.

I have got a sony hvr dr60, best investment ever and a solid performer but a real hassle if you need to act quickly because it has a 13 second start up time so you have to shoot to tape to get a shot if needed and for some shots still connect the camera to the pc via firewire to capture from tape and look for that shot.

With the dr60 it starts to become pretty heavy, not that fun to carry around for a longer time.

This year I wanted to invest in something new to replace my xh-a1 so I decided to get a sony xr730 to start with to complement my sony xr520 which I have been using as b camera during the ceremony. I really liked what this camera could do and how light sensitive it was but it lacks a decent wideangle lens so the 730 should cover that.

The first wedding I did with that 730 was a Chinese wedding, see link way below, and I was very impressed about this tiny camera output, I did some testshooting the day I got the camera and was so confident I used it all throughout the wedding day and the results have surpassed my expectations. I used it again at another wedding one day later and this time my xh-a1 stayed in the bag all day and when viewing the results, it's much better then what my xh-a1 can do.

So I started to question myself, do I really need a bigger xh-a1 kind of camera again when this tiny thing can produce such excellent results? it has an excellent wideangle, superb lowlight, amazing stabilisation when shooting handheld, it has peaking and very sharp display making focussing a lot easier and it even has zebra's so you get accurate exposure, it has a great autofocus as well for those run and gun situations. It starts up really quickly so you always get the shot you need.

But it lacks nd's which mainly shows in bright sunlight when they throw the rice f.i. which shows a high shutter, it lacks decent control, I can control exposure with a small knob but can't quickly change focus if needed. It hardly looses focus but if it does, only in very low light situations, it is completely lost and won't recover unless you assign the focus to that small knob and turn it until it's right.

I do like the mobility part very much, I can carry all my equipment in just one photobag, 2 dslr bodies, 3 lenses en 2 small handicams, 4 camera's hanging around your shoulder. I could put one camera in a small bag and attach it to my belt and make dslr shots on a monopod, hang the dslr around my shoulder and switch to the sony 730 for, "something important is happening now and I need constant good focus front to back", kind of shots. I can shoot in very narrow spaces, like I did during the Chinese doorgames and move the camera in positions not possible with the big xh-a1, high, low, at an angle, holding with one hand, 2 hands and each time as steady as a rock, what more could you ask for?

I do worry about how I look with that small cam in my hands, with a dslr everyone thinks you are the photog, "he has a photocamera so he must be a pro" right? But with a handicam holding in front of you, you see people look and think, "is that a handycam he's holding? Is he for real?" :)

For a corporate client I would show up with a dslr and get away with it but not with a small handicam, but for weddings it's different, here I first could show some footage and then the camera that has been used and they won't mind, as long as the outcome is good, I only feel quite "naked" if you know what you mean when holding that tiny camera. So I probably will be mounting it on a monopod next time, just for the sake of having abit more of "substance", not that it will improve that much and I might attach a viewfinder to the lcd, like I do with my dslr so it looks a bit more like a dslr.

I do get a kick out these very shallow dof shots with my dslr but I have been burned more then once with a 85mm attached to the camera, almost wide open as it was dark and suddenly lots of action all over the place and lots of, where should I focus first shots. Now I just grab that tiny camera from that small bag on my belt and get the shot I need that my dslr can't provide me with.

Since weddings account for 90% of my income this year, that's the are I should invest in, so it looks I"m only trying to convince myself that these small cams combined with dslr's are the way to go for a solo wedding videographer :) For corporate work I can continue to use my xh-a1 or rent a camera.

I"m just curious about the experience of other videographers that work with similar equipment. I do think I have no other choice then to get at least a canon xf100/sony nx70 type of camera just to get a bit more extra control when the camera goes haywire, only for the price of one such camera I could get 3 cx730's :). What are your real-life experiences and what have you done to bypass some of the small camera shortcomings (like that lack of control f.i.)

Shot with a xr520, cx730 and one dslr with a 35mm f1.4 and a Canon 10-22. Only one shot of the xh-a1 at 01:34 which was set up as safety. Used a blackbird and homemade slider.

Re: Shooting weddings with small handicams
 

Hi Noa! I do shoot with a small handicam camera, and sometimes if you need a quick draw, it is always fast and easy to pull from my holster. Im using the Sony CX550v with the hand grip that has the versatile of being a tripod so I can just place it anywhere on a table, floors, light stand etc.

I also shoot with a DSLR, what I do so that guest won't be posing while Im filming them is I put a mattebox on front of my 60D, so now it wouldn't look like a photog's camera.

Back with the small camera, I always shoot with 3 camera's and the small one during ceremony is place on front and is raise 8 feet on a light stand tilted down a bit with a wide angle lens covering the whole front of the ceremony. I just let it run for the whole ceremony, During reception, same set-up.

I don't have a problem matching 3 camera's in post, for I am using all Sony cameras, just a little cc, neat video filter and voila!

Re: Shooting weddings with small handicams
 

Years ago when we still used XHA-1s we also had a consumer camcorder the HV30 as backup & were really impressed with the quality & ease of use. I have recently been considering getting a couple of newer camcorders to complement our current cameras. For a minimal singlehanded wedding shoot I use a locked off XF105 for a wide 'safety' shot & XLRs for audio plus I operate a 5D3 on a tripod then have a 5D2 that I use locked off or on a Glidecam. I have also tried a GoPro up on a lighting stand but the video quality isn't good enough for using more than a second or two at a time. There are several current Canon consumer camcorders that use the same CMOS sensor as the XF105 but have apparently been tweaked for improved low light performance. There are at least half a dozen models all around the same price e.g. Canon Legria HF M41/46/406/52/56/506 I think that a couple of these on light stands would be great for additional angles of view.

Re: Shooting weddings with small handicams
 

thx for the input guys!

Have you been into a situation where the lack of controll (compared to their bigger brothers) caused you to miss a shot or have a not usuable shot? With my dslr that has been in many cases, with the cx730 I can take a manual whitebalance quite quickly and then switch to manual exposure which works very well, the autofocus is very good but there have been situations where it was really dark and it would loose focus quite bad and not recover automatically. With my xh-a1 I can make an adjustment in a second, with the 730 it takes at least 10 seconds to do the same. Do you rely on the auto features a lot with these camera's?

I have been filming interviews handheld during a wedding as well with the 730 and even though it was quite dim, the footage was nicely exposed, no grain at all, pinsharp and very stable, I only felt real silly holding that tiny camera in front of me and had the feeling everyone was looking at me instead of the guy giving his speech. With my dslr I at least "look like a pro" and those can also more easily be fitted with accesoires to give it a more pro video look (like Rick showed in his photo - thanks for sharing Rick!) but a small handicam...

Do you guys worry about the look of these camera's and what the guests (and maybe potential clients) might think of you when they see you carrying around with a camera they might have in their inside pocket as well?

I have noticed this as well in the many user videos I have observed, wedding videographers all crave for one thing and that's low light sensitivity because that's a very important factor when doing weddings, some will tell to use a videolight but often that is not done and only results in people looking away half blinded. How does the xf100/105 compare to the xa10 in low light? That last one seems to be very good in low light but I have the impression that the 100/105 outputs quite some grain at 12db based on some tests I saw.

Re: Shooting weddings with small handicams
 

Rickey, can I ask which supplier makes the mattebox and guiding rails you use? It does look quite compact, do you think a sony cx730 would fit as well? Does it also allow for wide angle lenzes to work, the cut out in front for the lens does look too narrow or can you remove that part?

Re: Shooting weddings with small handicams
 

Hi Noa

Sadly people still equate size with the price of a wedding package so if you charge $5K and arrive with a camcorder that looks about the same size as the one the groom has at home in his top drawer then they may feel that they have been cheated. I have two full size cameras up front and then my GoPro at the back and I admit that not one person has ever wondered why I have such a tiny camera.

I guess you can always put the cam on rails and a matte box to make it look more expensive ...has anyone actually queried the size/quality of your camera at weddings?? If not then just continue and tell them it may look ordinary on the outside but inside there is tens of thousands of dollars of hi-tech sensors..that should keep any questions to a minimum.

I have seen a guy in your part of the world you has used a Panasonic GH1 inside a DIY case and with a Betacam EVF and lens and it looks impressive!!! Maybe that's the way to go.

Chris

Re: Shooting weddings with small handicams
 

We"ll no, it's just that feeling I have, you know? Let's say your gopro would produce a better image then your bigger pana's, would you choose the Panasonic for their size and appearance even if you know the image quality will be worse to stand in front of the altar filming the couple's vows in a spot where everyone in church can see you or would you choose the gopro for a better image quality and hold it in one hand in front of you and point it at the couple?

I never had this feeling with my xh-a1 or even with a dslr but I do have this with the cx730, the cx730 produces a better image then my xh-a1 in church but the last weddings I did I had my right hand holding the camera and my left holding the lcd screen for stability and I held it in front of me. The image I got was really superb, (just look at the doorgames in my video I posted, that was all chaotic handheld work :)) so I should go for best image quality, right? And still, I feel like an amateur holding that small box in front of me. :) And I fear that this will be the impression more people, and maybe potential clients, will get, not the couple, because they choose me for the work I produce and they have seen samples but I see people looking at the camera during the day and it bothers me.

Re: Shooting weddings with small handicams
 

Noa. I use three Sony CX550s along with my two JVC HM700s at weddings, and like you I find under certain poor lighting conditions the Sony will out-perform the costlier JVCs. I never really worry about what the guests will think, or even if they notice me, I think most are busy enjoying themselves to worry about what camera I'm using, or even if I'm the videographer; not many are note-taking for their own weddings (though some may be). I had one couple book me after watching their friends DVD that I made: they were at the friends wedding and didn't even realise it was being filmed until they saw the DVD afterwards and then decided to have me at their wedding. As for brides and grooms, I could be using a corn flakes box for all the notice they take, in fact most tell me afterwards they hardly noticed me and I doubt if any one ever could tell me the camera I was using, they are only interested in the results. Having said that the weddings where size is important tend to be Asian ones where in my experience they really like to show the guests that money has been spent, the more and bigger the better.

Though I've never used one of my Sonys as my main gatherer and stood out front hand-held, I find that the are quick and easy to set up discretely for those extra shots in church, with a long life battery I can set it and forget it, no worry about them running out during the ceremony or speeches. During the evening they work as if on a glidecam rig when I go hand held on the dance floor. For interviews I found the opposite to you, people never get distracted by the size, in fact they seem to respond more comfortably with the small cam and I can shoot in situations I'd not be able to with the JVC or the lighting would be too low.

Like you I would choose the tool for the best result I can achieve and not to impress on-lookers who probably just assume that as I'm the 'paid professional' I must know how to get the best out of what may look like the one they've seem in the Argos catalogue.


As a sideways nod to they Go-Pro thread that's running here. I have considered the Go-Pro and although they are smaller any by extension more discrete the Sony's do give a lot more control and versatility as well as having quite useful audio.

These small cams get a thumbs up from me.

Re: Shooting weddings with small handicams
 

Noa, here is the link where I bought the mattebox

And the raiils
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/761118-REG/Genus_GL_GSBK_GL_GSBK_Shoulder_Brace.html

The Mattebox has different foam sizes depending on your lens size that can be mounted on the donut.
It is really compact and Im using a ef 50mm 1.4. The mattebox and rig are inexpensive compared to some, but the quality of mattebox and rig are impressive.

Re: Shooting weddings with small handicams
 

I use three Panasonic TM900's in addition to two Canon 5DII's; when I say "in addition" thats not stricktly true as the Panny's are taking over from the 5DII's in many instances because not only do they give superb images they are often the best tool for the job.

Their small form factor and the way they can be positioned in all sorts of unlikely vantage points using brackets suckers and lightstands, and work well locked down on auto-everything, makes them so versatile. A big advantage and disadvantage at the same time is that guests do not see them and block the view.

My main business is stills photpography but I've videod probably 50-60 weddings in the past year. NEWSFLASH: one reason why videographers get booked so infrequently is because of the take-over-the-room size of all their paraphanalia which the couples do not want intruding on their day. They do not want some huge sweaty creature at the front complete with broadcast size video camera on a tripod, wearing headphones and switching on video lights. Even less do they want a second huge sweaty creature on the opposite side at the front, and believe it or not a third huge sweaty creature doing the same at the back.

The small size and affordability of these cams and the associated audio recording devices is a massive opportunity being offered to you on a plate :- )

As regards the impression guests will gain? Your unintrusiveness will get many onside. Yes, if you were to be using just one handheld "handicam" that might not be good but they are going to see you working with maybe 3 or 4 or more, plus the audio gear and are more likely to be intregued than put off.

The very low light performance is not great, of course its not. But there aren't many ceremonies and wedding breakfasts where they can't cope. 1st dances are more problematic. At this stage of the day its more acceptable to use lightpanels but I tend to use the 5DII's. Again, you can often get the venue to turn up the lights a little if only for the actual 1st dance.

Just added a GoPro Hero 2 as well. First outing to be this weekend. I'm not expecting miracles from it but it should be good for a few seconds of scene establishing etc here and there.

Pete

Re: Shooting weddings with small handicams
 

Another long term "small cam" shooter. Adding A65's for the "big cams" (and stills since we shoot both, 2 ops), still a compact package.

First, get over the "size matters" question... you already know from your firsthand experience the "best" tool for the job, use it well, and as you've already said, show your "reel" with the great results, and say you use multiple high quality cams to capture the day discreetly from as many angles as needed. I've had comments that the small cam (decked out) looks very "Star Trek", i.e. futuristic/high tech... If some bonehead guest shows up with a "bigger camera", just chalk it up to "compensation" and move on knowing YOU are the one hired to do the job and get it right!

Small = discreet, so that's a BIG plus at a event that should have a degree of dignity to it! Sure, if the clients want it to look like a Hollywood set... roll out the crane, the steadicam, etc. etc.... but I've found the officiants really notice when the "tech" and ops are invisible or close to it.

With a little practice and a momopod, you can fake the crane shots with the small cam, the IS is solid enough to ditch the steadicam and vest, but STILL get the shots... with a operator that knows the shots and how to get them! When the bride sees the "high production value" shots in the finished product, that's ALL that will matter!

I've always "decked out" my cams a bit - hoods (cx730 should have one stock?), maybe a shotgun (even if you're using onboard mics!), and use a monopod, belt support (short monopod stuck in pocket!), or a shoulder rig like the Chinese MultiRig copies (cheap, and "look" more pro, though they are sort of overkill for a small cam!).

RESULTS are what matters, and you've already discussed the shortcomings of ANY camera - focus in low light is a PITA! No camera focuses on a black cat in a dark room at midnight with no moon... and unless there are sharp contrast points to "lock" on, it'll hunt.

IF you're close in and the camera needs more light, pick up a small LED - a REALLY small one would be best, but the smallest one I've found with a DIMMER (an ABSOLUTE MUST HAVE!!) is a CN-Lux560 (56 LEDS, 3 AA batts, rotary dimmer, and a couple "filters" included, dirt cheap). You need some form of shoe mount, either and adapter for the AIShoe or a bracket, but it's not a big or heavy add on, and might also make you look a tad more "pro"... you'll NEVER need the full on setting, the "low" is about the most you'll want, and that is not so blinding that it scatters your "talent". I'm still looking for something with an even smaller LED array (maybe 36?), a dimmer, and the ability to use the FP/FH/FV series Sony battery! Fact is that the Sony Handycams don't need MUCH light, but a little goes a long way!.

Have you tried spot focus using the touchscreen? IF there's something for the camera to lock onto, it should narrow its 'search".

Not sure if Canon still has that "radar" type AF system the HV20/30/40 used to have? Canon guys? That was the ONE feature that I thought was slick on the HV's, because it would shoot out a signal and use the reflected signal it got back as a rangefinder... IF the current small Canons have it (and have lost the "'toy" build quality with squeaky chassis), might be a reason to add one or more?


The simple fact is that at an average wedding now, the odds are good that every guest will have a "camera" with some varying degree of quality, up to and including high res stills and HD video on a dang phone....while our equipment can and should differentiate us a "professional" (most guests won't have multiple cams and 5-10K in gear... even small cams can add up!). What sets the pro apart is the skill as an operator and later an editor, plus all the other "hats" a solo shooter has to wear to 'git 'er done.

Focus on YOUR skill set and ability, NOT the tools you use to get the job done, then deliver a top notch product with "Hollywood" production values and multi-angle edits, good close ups, etc. Stuff the "guests" can't get and that "uncle Bob" with the old cam he pulled outa the sock drawer doesn't have the vaguest idea HOW to get...

Hope that helps...

Re: Shooting weddings with small handicams
 

Oh, one other thing, have you turned on the "low lux" setting on your 730? It's not on by default, it only kicks in when the lights are really low (so no penalty for leaving it "on", and it will give the camera nearly "see in the dark" capability, which should also improve the autofocus function significantly...

Re: Shooting weddings with small handicams
 

I challenge you to glue your cx550 in such a box and make a cut out for the lens and then post a photo here of you standing in the church :D
Thanks for the link Rickey, much appreciated. Have you ever tried fitting the small handicam to it?

The 730 is absolutely amazing in low light, it's much better then my dslr with a f2.8 at 1600 iso and rivals a 35mm f1.4 lens at 3200 iso. I did some side by side tests in very dark circumstances and will post but it can take a while.


I know it's all between the ears, I think next time I"ll just add my monopod if I need to film in a place like the church during the vows, in Belgian Catholic weddings you do stand at that moment right in front of the altar, just behind the priest, facing the couple but also facing everyone in church. At least I won't feel that "naked" as the monopod will add some size.

I also have been using my hoodloupe with those magnifying glasses (which sticks onto the lcd screen of my dslr with a magnet) for more critical focus by just holding the hoodloupe against the cx730 screen and it made all the difference. The lcd screen is equally sharp compared to my 550d and it made checking focus so much easier. I do have a unused hoodloupe here that uses some kind of elastic straps to attach to the lcd screen, I"ll see if I can find a way to easily attach it onto the cx730 screen when I flip that open. That does give the same appearance and ease of use when I"m using my dslr.

The cx730 has a build in videolight and it works really well, quite sharp and it will blind you when you look at it but in those too dark situations it can light up enough to save your shot. I"ll be fitting it onto my steadicam next week if there's another venue that likes to switch of all lights during the first dance. I only need to add wheight as the camera is too light for the steadicam to balance.

I have found the spotfocus to be less reponsive as the xr520, it takes longer ans sometimes it doesn't focus right, best bet is still to do it manually.
Yes :) I leave it on by default, it does produce a bit of grain but it still looks better then 6db gain on my xh-a1. I do use it with care as the shutter goes to 1/25th but for those pitch-black situations combined with the build in light you can light up any room.

Re: Shooting weddings with small handicams
 

For the canon xa10 owners;

It does have a lens ring for focus adjustments, what I only cannot see is how you adjust exposure? Both focus and exposure are 2 functions I like to be able to control somewhat easily in realtime, if there is a small knob that you can turn to adjust exposure, does it jump between stops if you adjust or does it do this smooth and gradually?

Also, are there any experiences matching this canon with the sony exmor's handicams, do they somewhat match?

For what the xa10 costs it seems to offers quite a lot, especially compared to the competition (price/feature wise) and I think such a camera should make my collection complete as it at least looks more "pro" then the small cx730. So I also can finally put my at897 shotgun to use (I only used it on my xh-a1 when needed but stayed off most of the time because it made the camera to bulky for weddings) I only think it might be to long?

In Belgium the xa10 is 1000 dollar cheaper then the Sony nx30 while I see nothing that justifies that price difference (both camera's seem to be each other competitors?)

Re: Shooting weddings with small handicams
 

We don't use broadcast size video cameras or have huge sweaty operators but there is no comparison between using a bunch of locked off cameras & having operators following the action. The former may as well be CCTV which admittedly is immensely popular here in the UK but isn't the sort of wedding video that our clients want to watch.

Re: Shooting weddings with small handicams
 

Working solo with 2 or 3 camera's is always a risk, that's why a camera with very good auto functions is almost a must, there are some times where you have no other choice then to let the unmanned cameras run in full auto. I do wish I had a operator at every camera though, would make a world of difference but unfortunately that's not the case.

Re: Shooting weddings with small handicams
 

It's amusing to see the assertiveness that some people have to to ridiculing others' ways of operating with the conviction that their way is the right way.

Anyone who has been doing weddings for sometime and is getting repeat work, be it by recommendations or showreels, must be doing something right even if it's only for their customers.

The day when there is one all-embracing generic style for wedding DVD and one way of doing it is still thankfully a long way off.

Re: Shooting weddings with small handicams
 

Nigel and others, its simple to avoid the CCTV look by ensuring that the cams are at eye level or lower unless the particular demands of the moment mean that you have no choice than to shoot from higher up. This ensures that the scene is as the human eye sees it e.g. as if present during the ceremony. In the multicam edit I cut between the bride and grooms sides and the rear (or whatever) when using 3 cams and further interest value is added by some cropping. In the real world all the cams are NOT locked down - I always have one close to me than I can readily reframe with etc. And if there is sufficient space to move around without causing a distraction I will move and reframe the other two cams as well. And I'm always mindful of not moving into my own shot - or if I have to then only move when I know one of the other cams has a "clean" shot or if I know I can crop myself out.

N. my comment about big guys with big equipment is only half in jest. I've read your comments about expanding into stills with some interest; I think that once you start to get a high volume of consultations for photography you may be shocked at how weddings videographers are perceived by prospective clients. Mainstream clients do attach a lot of importance to their day not being - as they would see it - disrupted, whether by videographers treating it like a TV shoot or photographers shooting endless formals. In the past decade in which I've been shooting a high volume of weddings as the photographer I've had under 5% where there has also been a pro videographer present. I've researched why with real life clients and thats the feedback.

Pete

Re: Shooting weddings with small handicams
 

Bravo George!

When I bought the 2 Panasonic AC-130's in February and was bitterly disappointed with all their auto functions I was severely told "you should be shooting in manual" ....I'd like to see them juggle three cameras all in full manual at a wedding ceremony solo!!! I NEED auto in some cases to cover my wedding correctly and I really couldn't care if it's not the accepted way..it works, my brides are happy and I get repeat business. (It really doesn't matter whether you use a big or small camera and how you use it...it's the end result that counts!!! If you can produce sparking wedding footage with 3 Android phones then, hey, I applaud you!! You can give a monkey a pro camera and you will get a bad result but give an expert (term loosely used) a handicam and you might just be surprised!!

Just for interest I ditched the 130's and went over to cams that work correctly for me in full auto when I need it to!! It was an expensive exercise!!!

In fact instead of lugging my big Pannys around gardens on the stedicam I'm going to use a Lumix GH1 instead...it's way lighter and might even surprise me with it's footage!!

Chris

Re: Shooting weddings with small handicams
 

Oh, thx for the compliment Chris! ;-)

You really "ditched" your 130's? You sold them or do you only use them in other situations where you have the time to properly set them up manually?

Just incase my earlier question might go lost in this discussion, I"d appreaciate any canon xa10 users feedback (see my question at the end of page 1)

Re: Shooting weddings with small handicams
 

I too would be interested in why you ditched the 130's I thought that you were taken with them.I think I told you a while ago that a friend of mine is shooting with those and she likes them, mind you she mostly shoots stage shows. What was it that put you off?

So what are you using now for weddings; GH1 or GH2? I assume that you'll be using a video camera as well, though not a handicam.

Re: Shooting weddings with small handicams
 

Yes, I want to know too about the 130's! Is it just the auto mode that turns you off, or are there other features you have been disappointed with?

Re: Shooting weddings with small handicams
 

Hi George and Noa and Katie

Here we go :
(1) Autofocus hunts badly ..if can use manual for static cameras but not on the steadycam and it's a pain on the fly too when things are happening fast. I do need AF sometimes. In my opinion if the option is on the camera it should work correctly.
(2) The chips have a pronounced jello effect if you bump the camera..even zooming up the image wobbles for a while
(3) Autoiris works BUT only within the iris range..the camera needs 4 ND filters and you have situations where you need to switch ND's in the middle of an outdoor ceremony which causes a glitch...even a cloud passing over might require an ND change. Manual iris is the same it only adjusts iris not shutter so you have a tiny exposure window...I ended up with doing outdoor shoots and maybe switching in and out ND's 6 or 7 times..tough on a stedicam!!
(4) Auto Audio is really bad..it just gives the waveform a haircut!!! I use manual anyway so it wasn't a huge deal
(5) The camera is impractical to use handheld..I ended up with a rig, shoulder mount and an extra loupe to use it handheld.

It's a good camera but I guess I expected the 1/3rd chips to work a lot better at receptions...Even at F3 using a video light the dark areas had more noise than my 1/4" chip camera running open iris and 12db gain!!!

I would say it's great for theatre work, dance recitals and that sort of event..for me (and that's just me) it just didn't cut it for weddings.

Yep I onsold the cameras and bought two new HMC82's that I previously had been using....they do an good job and have built-in ND's so when things get rough the camera can control exposure from bright sun to indoors with no issues. On the stedicam and at receptions I will be also using a hacked GH1

I'm not saying it's not a good camera..it just didn't work for me and my style of wedding shoots running three camera where they HAVE to look after themselves..they would be awesome with a full time operator.

Comparing weddings shot last year and this year, last years weddings look a darn side better ..I guess I upgraded cos they were supposed to be the latest and greatest...maybe I expected a camera that cost me twice as much to be twice as good ..it was only half as good....even the default scene files very very poor....I need a cam that does the job with minimum hassle and the 130 doubled the hassle so they had to go!!

Bear in mind that I did give them a solid test..12 weddings over 3 months and about 20 Realty shoots..I logged 80 hours and 100 hours on the A and B cam so I did give them a fair go (as we say here!)


Chris

Re: Shooting weddings with small handicams
 

About the ND filters, it's not that if the camera asks for it that you have to switch immediately, it's just telling you it's getting in too much light and that the iris is at a value which is not optimal anymore, it also means that you "could" get a soft image due to diffraction but that usually happens if you are at 1/4th ND and your filming in glaring sunlight.

The small handicams that have no ND's solve this by adjusting shutter but this is not always a good thing, sure you can get away with it but in certain situations it can cause effects that you don't want, I saw this clearly on a shot outside the church when they threw the rice which gave a "Saving private Ryan" effect. I didn't see what value it was at but can imaging it was very high. I honestly would prefer to add a nd filter onto the lens if I would have the time, just to keep the shutter at 1/50 but like it always goes with weddings you have to run outside to get the shot.

I used to own a dvx100b and it also had scene files but with some higher end Panasonic camera's you are supposed to dive into the tweak settings for your image and once set properly it can give a much better image. the small handicams don't give you those settings but they come preconfigured and that's usually fine to use. Only not on my sony xr520 which has too much contrast and added sharpness which can give it a forced look and I can't change that in camera. The cx730 has a flatter look which makes it easier to adjust like I want to in post. The dvx100b, and I also saw this behaviour on the ag ac130, did handle hot spots quite badly, the af100 also seem to display this problem, again this can be minimised by adjusting the image settings in camera but I think this should be set up properly when the camera leaves the factory.

Re: Shooting weddings with small handicams
 

We know exactly how traditional wedding video is perceived by the majority of couples. I have been at wedding fairs & seen the speed that prospects flee with an expression on their face like there is a bad smell under their nose if you even mention the word video to them. We have clients who tell us that they expressly booked us because we don't have broadcast sized video cameras & yet at those same wedding fairs I have seen other videographers dressing their stand with a large tripod & broadcast sized video camera presumably in the hope that it will impress the prospects with the size of their equipment.

Incidentally in my experience the requests for endless formal photographs usually come from the bride or more likely her mother.

Re: Shooting weddings with small handicams
 

I think the "big sweaty operators" was tongue in cheek... but big cams and gear...

SO do your UK weddings have people runnang about wildly or something? Because I can pretty much predict where the action will happen and place a camer at the proper angle and framing and let it run... so places I might not be able to get when I'm shooting are covered. It's not "stick one cam on a tripod at the back of the room with a lampshade, and let 'er roll"...

The multicam locked down approach relies on the experience of the operator to know where the shot will be - it's typically pretty predictable, and the one "manned" cam is there to cover the closeups, and anything unexpected... like if the groom runs screaming from the church or something... you're still depending on operator skil, but by multitasking/multicam'ing, you get things you otherwise couldn't without a big sweaty "crew" <wink> running around.

Re: Shooting weddings with small handicams
 

Now that the DSLR vs Videocam debate has died down here it seems that a bigcam vs littlecam battle is building up.

It's plainly obvious from the variety of ways we describe our different approaches that there is a market for a wide spectrum of approaches - broadcast cams or handicams - solo or crew - your belief that you've got it right is reinforced by the fact that you attract the clients that like your work and your way of working. That doesn't mean that nobody likes any other way.

Why the need to ridicule the way others do things when they don't accord with your way?

Re: Shooting weddings with small handicams
 

Not really sure there's a "debate" - you shoot what works - I've got image aquisition deveices (cameras) that shoot 1080/60p that range from a pocket camera (DSC-TX100) through the "small video cam", and have just added the A65, which of course has that "big chip magic". I gave up the "big cam" when the small cam image quality was as good or better, plain and simple. The samples with the A65 have that shallow DoF, and there are places where that will add visual quality that will be nice, other places a wide DoF is better, and the other cams will handle it nicely.

It's easy to say the tools make the shooter, but as has already been pointed out, that's not how it works...

Not everyone can afford (nor can every market support) "big cams", and when you can get excellent quality and have multiple cams/angles out of a troika or quartet (or more) of smaller cams, for the cost or less of ONE "big cam", it makes some sense when you want more to work with in edit to "tell the story".

In the end it's the nut behind the lens that matters most, learn to use whatever you've got to the maximum effect, then get better or bigger gear when warranted.

When you can walk up to any camera, take a quick tour through the menus/controls and manage to "get the shot", that's when you realize that while every piece of tech has "limitations", you use the tools at hand... some tools are better for some things than others, but you don't drive screws with a hammer or nails with a screwdriver (actually you CAN do that... sorta ugly though).

Learn the tools, use them appropriately...enjoy!

Re: Shooting weddings with small handicams
 

Hi Guys

Now just for interest from a technical POV I really don't think that bride's give a hoot what you shoot on as long as you go a good job. I have a photog mate who insists on taking his camera with him on interviews complete with a honking big zoom and proceeds to tell the bride all about how great his camera is!! (I know I was there with him!)

Firstly when I visit a bride, I take a contract and have a sample DVD in my case (just in case they want to see something) BUT I never ever take gear or tell them about gear. In the last 10 years I probably have had 2 grooms-to-be ask about the format ... otherwise the topic never has come up so in my market they are only interested in what they will get (they normally have already looked on line at samples) and how much it will cost them. Gear seems to be unimportant. So, for me IF I do the best job possible with a huge Digi Betacam then that's my style but I also may be just as comfortable with a little Canon 500D with a wide lens .... the bride couldn't care less so I use what tools work for me...yep I use shoulder mount cams so they are a little larger than a DSLR but that's what works for me and what I'm comfortable with.

Chris

Re: Shooting weddings with small handicams
 

I am not sure that there was a debate either or why anyone should take offence. Earlier in this thread I said that I was considering getting a couple of little Canon consumer camcorders to augment my existing cameras. However I would never rely on just three more or less locked off cameras which as I understand it is what Peter is using. However as he is basically there to shoot still photographs with the video as a bonus freebie I can see that as a single-handed operator there is no alternative. Even at the fixed parts of the wedding day like the service & speeches people move about & should ideally to be followed by a camera e.g. one of the wedding party gets up from a pew & stands behind a lectern to give a reading. You can theoretically cover it with locked off cameras but it's going to look like CCTV. One of the reasons that I want to get away from that look is because aside from big sweaty operators with big sweaty cameras what typifies a wedding video to many couples is that rigid point of view from the big broadcast camera on the big tripod at the back (so they can boast of being discreet) only mitigating the tedium by overuse of the 20X motor zoom.

Take a look at our videos on Alice Barker Images - Cinematic Wedding Video & Photography - Video Portfolio. There are locked off cameras used but usually at most two operators & the cameras are generally on the move whether on monopod, carbon fibre tripod, crane or Steadicam. Watch any TV show or movie. The cameras rarely stay still for a second. Even when it's a talking heads interview there is a little gentle push in.

Re: Shooting weddings with small handicams
 

One reason why I want to get smaller camera's is that I"m getting tired dragging around the bigger camera all day (if you regard a xh-a1 big but I guess it is compared to a handycam) so I can carry all my important gear with me in one instead of 2 bags, just like the photog. But that still leaves me, and I"m sure many other videographers, with my steadicam bag, my slider, my 2 and sometimes 3 tripods and my monopod. Even if you don't have a big camera, setting up this equipment takes more space, then what a Photog would need.

About not intruding the couples day, to be honest, I often found the photog very "present" at formal events, while I am standing still in church operating my camera in a corner on a tripod they often run around, also during the priester's speech. It's in fact the only thing that gets really distracting during the ceremony, not the man behind the bigger camera. I have seen photogs laying on their back between the couple and the alter (while the priest was speaking behind his altar), just to get that cool frogs eye point of view, or standing right behind the priest at the altar while the priest was talking to get a great shot as well. I even have seen a few priests stopping the ceremony, looking at the photog because he was too present, untill he backed down a bit, this never happened to me in 8 years, while I was operating bigger camera's

So in my experience a photog is often more intruding the couples day then a videoguy does, especially when they are with 2, That videographers are booked less then photogs has other reasons, one reason could be that photo's always had something video can't provide, the fact that you can hold it, show it to people, hang it against the wall and you can show that one amazing photo instantly. With video you need some kind of player, people need to sit down and watch it for a longer period. It just takes more effort to enjoy a video, even though they add more then a photo, like sound.

Re: Shooting weddings with small handicams
 

In this thread I've been offering real life feedback from very many real couples who are actually getting married, regarding their views on videography. Its not my opinion its theirs - right or wrong. But it does illustrate why booking for video have for years been so abysmally low.

And the low bookings ratio is at odds with what brides actually say after their day, which is that one of their biggest regrets is not having got a video record or only having got some aweful footage from a relation holding a camcorder on their knee. I even got this from a fellow stills photographer who had her own wedding a few weeks ago!

I started offering video once that affordable and compact video equipment that could deliver acceptable results in low light without auxilliary lighting became available. That bridge was of course crossed in the stills field several years ago.

It ought now to be more mainstream but its not and its up to us to change that.

Nigel - the edit really doesn't have to be as you describe. It can be much more varied and of course with just one operator the chances of the "manic grinning dentist with his drill" so to speak appearing in shot are much reduced. I have both my 5DII's custom functions set up so that I can instantly switch from a mode optimised for stills to a mode optimised for video then back again. Which would be the C1 C2 C3 dials on your 5DIII's if you don't know that already. Its easy to sync the shorts from the 5DII's with the footage from the 3 or 4 "locked down" cams in post with good old Pluraleyes. However I find I shoot less and less with the 5DII's as they don't bring that much extra to a reportage style video. I have the 50mm f1.2L the 70-200 f2.8L etc etc etc but I am supremely unimpressed with shallow depth of field when used in wedding video. Same with sliders. Same with steadycams. My goal is to produce something that is just like being there but better, not to produce something resembling an advert for cars as so many of the samples on Vimeo are like.

Noa I've got to say that the stills operator behaviour you've described is very much the exception than the rule and nearly all pro photographers would despise it for the negative effect it has on the house rules for anyone following on from these muppets. But there are always some - and videographers as well - whjo just don't "get it". I doubt if anyone on the planet has not already seen the tog taking a tumble into the water video but just in case:

Wedding Photographer Falls into Holy Water

The tog and his work are well thought of in professional circles. Unbelievably some others rose to his defence on a private form of which I am a member. Their view was that he was totally justified in taking his position because he was getting a different perspective using a short lens near the couple rather than a long lens from a respectable distance. They even criticised the videographer for not jumping forward to save him!

But for every clip like that there are 50 shots of some idiot with a boompole fishing over the couples heads or someone wheels around what looks like a hostess trolley with all their worldly posessions attached to it.

Pete

Re: Shooting weddings with small handicams
 

Do I understand you right that you do video and photo at the same time?

I agree that you don't NEED sliders and/or steadycam or even dslr with very shallow dof to make a compelling wedding video, they only add some nice eye candy. How do you treat your sound, do you record that separately or just use the internal microphones from your locked down camera's or 5D? The only way I see to produce a video like being there is to have very clear sound, without that you just have moving pictures.

Re: Shooting weddings with small handicams
 

Hi Noa, yes you've got it right.

I started off thinking that the two 5DII's and one Zoom H4n would be fine and that the final product would comprise some video content and a lot of stills. But I very soon realised the limitations of that in so far as the real value of video can be to capture the emotions in a way that stills simply cannot do. Too distracting for the viewer to jump between stills and video during the course of the same sequence of events, and disappointing for them if the "climax" to a build up is missing from the video.

So I added a small cam to act as a B cam. It quickly became apparent that the more b cams you have the more interesting is the final product and also the less demanding it is on the operator - because you always have some footage to cut to in the event of a whoops moment. I settled on 3 b cams and the GoPro will be a fourth.

As you might imagine I have amassed a bunch of tripods over the years but for video I prefer to use heavy duty lightstands of the type whose feet automatically collapse when you pick them up and spread when you place then down; so they are very easy to reposition during ceremonies even though I'm also carrying two stills cameras. The lightstands also have a height advantage over tripods plus a narrower profile so are far less intrusive. I use Manfrotto 501 heads on them - again small and unintrusive and they do the job. I have tripod straps on all the lightstands s that I can shoulder several of them at a time to transport.

The lightstands are not as stable as tripods - obviously - but the Pannys have excellent Image Stabilisation so its a non-issue. They can also just about manage a 5DII with a 70-200 f2.8 IS if the attachment is made via the lens collar rather than the camera body.

I've found that the Zoom H1's give just as good audio as the H4n's for wedding purposes so I added 3 of those. I prefer them because again they can be hidden in flowers, attached to lecturns, furniture etc. I also have an array of magic arm type brackets, suckers, table top stands etc and so even though I carry up to 4 lavs they seldom get used as I can get an H1 near enough without the hassle. My Senny radio kit is gathering dust; that was a waste of money for my purposes.

I also have the various cables pad cables and adapters should it be possible to take a feed from the venues audio system. In practice that opportunity seldom occurs and even if there are suitable sockets the operators don't understand what I'm asking.

I never use the audio from any of the cams other than to help sync to the digital recorders in post. I do have a Rode NTG2 running into one of the cams but that is only as an insurance policy in case something very unpredictable and unscripted happens.

One thing that has become apparent is that I get a lot more respect and co-operation from the officiants be they clergy or civil registrars. It must be a couple of years since I've had any restrictions fired at me. And that includes churches where they even publsih serious restrictions on their website :- )

So don't let anyone tell you it cannot be done or that it will compromise stills or video. It can be done and it won't compromise a documentary style approach. There is a lot of fluff that could be cut out of many videographers coverage. For example panned high definition stills of the venue, or the wedding breakfast room before the guests charge in, or the bride's flowers can work much better than video shot on a slider. And I won't even mention that cringeworthy moment that is the guest interview :- )

In the medium to long term I see customer demand for stills coverage narrowing down to the posed groups part of the day when a good knowledge of lighting and posing will make or break the photographer. The currently popular reportage style stills coverage of other parts of the day will be satisfied as far as the clients are concerned by the massed ranks of guests shooting with good quality camera phones and uploading to a shared site. I have one of the new Galaxy S3 smartphones and it does a remarkably good job of stills.

Oh, and one more observation: I show clients in consultations video on DVD bluray and on a laptop. Then I also show it on an Ipad3 and lately on the Galaxy S3. The latter two devices are a revelation to most and do start to make stills and albums look like very old hat.

The final product is a standard definition DVD with the option of BluRay plus an MP4 file optimised for computers tablets and phones. Its mostly video with some stills from certain parts of the day. As a stills photographer that part of the delivery is obviously the edited high resolution stills files, prints, albums etc.

Pete

Re: Shooting weddings with small handicams
 

Do you really do an all day wedding by yourself shooting video with several camera's, securing your audio with several recorders AND doing photography at the same time? :)

Sorry if I keep repeating myself but I cannot understand how you ever pull something like this off alone and still have acceptable results. Just take the exchange of the rings, do you hold the 5d in your left hand for close up photo's and a handycam in the other for the video? :) Even if you let the locked down camera's cover it by zooming and framing accordingly, if the bride or groom would just move half a meter, or even turn a bit into the wrong direction, how do you ever secure those important shots when you are dealing with a photo and video camera at the same time?

I already have my hands full with video alone and that needs 100% of my concentration, I can't imagine how I"d ever take photo's simultaneously. You must have an extra pair of arms :)

Re: Shooting weddings with small handicams
 

Noa I do it week in week out and get lots of gushing praise for the results from my clients. If you think you cannot do it then you won't. But if you try to find ways to make it work you may surprise yourself.

I wouldn't want to go into fine detail because that would just help my local competition. But to take your example of the ring exchange: I always have the two 5DII's on my shoulders for stills, usually one with a 70-200 f2.8 L IS and the other with a 24-105 F4 L IS. I may put a 50mm f1.2 on instead of the 24-105 if the conditions are particularly dark. I also have a 15mm fisheye on my belt as its great for wide angle scene establishing plus its very forgiving because of its enormous depth of field and wide aperture of f2.8. Sometimes I'll have the 20-35 f2.8 L as well (yes it does exist but its discontinued). At least one of the bodies will have a flashgun on as well for use in the posed photos with the register - NOT for use in the ceremony. Both bodies have the extra battery grip - which is not strictly necessary but I had trouble getting used to the "little" 5DII's when I moved to them from the Canon 1 Series which have the grips built in. You'll be getting the picture by now I'm sure - each body configuration is far too heavy to use with just one hand in the low shutter speed scenario of most ceremonies. Two hands are a must to get decent stills.

One video cam lives on a lightstand of the type I described earlier and is very close to me. So I can adjust it very quickly to account for changes. The Pannys cope very well with autofocus auto white balance and also backlight compensation so they are particularly well-suited to being trusted. They also shoot 1080 / 50p and can take a lot of cropping in post without degradation so framing is not life or death and I err on the side of too wide. The other two cams will have been positioned to offer alternative views of the scene and if it has been practical to move around during the ceremony I will have repositioned and reframed a number of times. After all I'm moving to get alternative stills shots so why not just do the video cams as well?

I can move to account for couples being off cue but as with stills photography I would never move to such a position that my presence dominates the scene for the assembled guests n.b. the scenario you described earlier where a photographer went behind the priest is just bang out of order. So if the view of the rings is not perfect so be it. The funny thing is that I may sometimes not be able to shoot ideal stills at that point but I've probably got a better view on video from one of the other cams :- )

Moving up from 2 video cams to 3 make life a heck of a lot easier. In fact its overkill in some civil ceremonies.

I have 4 digital audio recorders but again I don't always use all four. Big churches with a choir, a reading lecturn, a wandering priest, and the couple yes. A simple civil ceremony of 15 minutes in a small room, no. I switch them to record in plenty of time and then just chop off the unneeded beginnings and endings of the WAV 48/16 files in Audacity before using them. It is handy to have 4 in the speeches though, so whilst other videographers are running around trying to switch their one Senny transmitter and lav between speakers my units just sit hidden on the table very close to each participant.

Have I wetted your appetite yet :- )

p.s. one of the 5DII's will often have a Gitzo monopod hanging from its base attached via a Manfrotto 501 head to aid video stability.

Pete

Re: Shooting weddings with small handicams
 

Thx Pete for taking the time to share your workflow, if in your case your clients are happy with the result, that's really all that matters.

Actually, no :)

Like I see it you are a Photographer first as that seems to be your background, that's why you control your 5d's manually because you know that's the only way to get professional results, otherwise you might as well just lock the 5d's down on a lightstand, set the timer and let them flash every 10 seconds and reposition the stands now and them, that's exactly the same, no? :)

For me this more looks like the video is just an added bonus to make some extra cash but if you would take it seriously, you would control at least one camera manually (like you do with your photogear) and keep an eye out for the other camera's as well and check up on them to see what they are doing from time to time (not just repositioning but actually looking at the display to see it's still behaving right.)

It's just my opinion, but that's not taking the art of creating video seriously. I don't know if you have seen my video at the beginning of this thread, I don't consider myself that good, but creating that video takes up all my attention and concentration throughout the day, and I could never imagine taking photo's in the meantime, not without it having a very negative impact on the outcome or end quality of my videos. Unless I would just put them on stands and let them fire away, but that's not actually real photography, then I would just try to make something extra out of it and hope for the best, not sure this would be fair towards the couple to let them pay for this.

Also in regard to your statement that 1080/50p can take a lot of cropping in post without degradation, you do know that 50p is not a format that is any different from 50i or 25p when it comes to cropping your image? Once you crop the image WILL start getting softer or de-gradate. Only if you work in a 720p project, you do have do have some cropping space when your footage is 1080p but if you edit natively any cropping will affect the image.

Pls don't take my comments too personal, their just my opinion.

Re: Shooting weddings with small handicams
 

Peter, I respect your ingenuity in offering a video product as a supplement to your stills photography but I 100% echo Noa's sentiments regarding what you are actually delivering to your clients. I applaud your efforts in trying to find some sort of photo/video combination to give you clients as we have been kicking around similar ideas. However it's not how we want to do video as we know that the product can be so much better than a version of CCTV. While large cameras & intrusiveness may have historically been a reason why video has not been popular with wedding couples the most important negative has been that there is a perception that wedding videos are boring & tedious not least because of being shot from fixed positions. Multiple camera angles can improve that but there needs to more to it.

You are totally correct that photographers who promote reportage or photojournalistic wedding coverage are cutting their own throats especially when they emphasise using only natural light because this means that all the other wedding guests with digital cameras & phones are just as capable of taking pretty decent photos that the couple will love. The extra skill that the photographer offers is in posing the couple & the use of flash & artificial light to create stunning imagery that is far beyond what the amateur can create. Exactly the same is true of video. There needs to be creative movement & camera angles. There needs to be creative editing to tell a story not just intercut between cameras for a real time documentary. Otherwise the video can be satisfied by the venue installing fixed cameras & offering a video as part of the package. To be sure it will be a record of the day but it won't have the same impact & lasting worth as a beautifully crafted video just as photographs on a website won't have the same impact or lasting worth as a beautiful wedding album or large framed prints.

Re: Shooting weddings with small handicams
 

Incidentally lav mics on digital recorders will provide far better sound than the same recorders just laid on the table. We now use Yamaha C-24s as they are more pocket-friendly than even the Zoom H1. CPC have great little lav mics for about £5-6 each.

On another thought if videographers use additional lighting it's for the same reason as photographers use flash i.e. to produce a better image. With the cameras that we use now the image can always be exposed adequately just by opening up the aperture &/or using high ISOs. However without some extra light for fill or modelling the image can still look awfully drab & flat. So another reason why historically wedding videos have been movies & TVregarded as poor is because they are badly lit when compared to . Wedding couples need to be educated that if necessary we will add light in order to record the best possible video just as the photographer will use flash to get the best possible photograph.

Re: Shooting weddings with small handicams
 

have that one too! Just like the small handicams, great quality in a small package :)