Upgrade neccesary for weddings?

[Jeff Pulera]

I named my daughter Kelsey back in 1995. Can't say why necessarily, was just going through the lists of names and liked that one. Didn't want to use something that was so common at the time like Ashley or Nicole or Sarah, or whatever (no offense if that is your name). Being a "Jeff" born in the 1960s, my name is terribly common in my age group. I had one class in school with 4 Jeffs in the same small room!

Jeff Pulera

[Kelsey Emuss]

Apparently the female version of the name is Kellsey? My mon named me from a novel she was reading at the time. I grew up in a small town and my name was NOT common. I was an adult before I met another Kelsey.

But yes I doubt you would have guessed or known I was female based on my name :)

And yes, happy to report that my gender often gets me the golden ticket into the room the bride is getting dressed in ;-)

Lots to think about. Going to go look at all my options this weekend. Still so confused :(

[Noa Put]

Originally Posted by Jeff Pulera

Yes, it has small chips but the gain is said to be incredibly clean at high levels. The image stabilization also gets good marks.

The ac90 is also a good option, especially at it's price point where you get a lot of camera for the money.

[Kelsey Emuss]

So in terms of computer needs...
I am currently working on an HP with 8G's of Ram and a quad core proccesor. Will that be enough? I use Premier Pro for editing. This is fine for my DS footage but will it be enough for HD??

[Noa Put]

what type of quad core?

[Kelsey Emuss]

Great question! It says (I am reading off it) "Intel Core2 Quad inside"

[Noa Put]

Can you also see what the processor speed is, could it a be that it's a q6600 processor?

[Dave Blackhurst]

Kelsey,

I have to give you props for stretching a lot of life out of those GL's... but I think you've earned an upgrade!

Equipment upgrades can be daunting, sometimes even disappointing, that's why I tend to buy good used gear... if I don't like it, I can just turn it over to soemone else who probably will!

HD is probably "expected" now, where a couple years ago it wasn't as much a part of the public consciouness, and you WILL enjoy the improvements in image quality. Even over the FX7 and HV20 Jeff mentioned... those cameras were great, but now are probably 5+ years old? Technology moved farily fast, but we are probably now on the cusp of 4K cameras, and "full HD" may not see a lot of further development, though the equipment as it is, is quite capable. You could probably buy any camera introduced in the last 2-3 years and have a solid investment for the next few years.


You haven't mentioned any "big chip" cameras like a DSLR, so I think the advice has run to traditional video cameras, but the DSLR's and such open up some creative possibilities - I know I shoot both stills and video, and am comfortable with the manual aspects of my SLT cameras - I note Noa also has this "mix" - each type of camera has its strengths, and it "may" be worth considering?

The budget thing is always a bugger, but you CAN do it on a shoestring and still have very high quality image capture devices nowadays! I "downsized" and never regretted it or felt it hindered anything, I've added SLT's to the mix, the biggest camera I've got is a VG20, and I'm seriously debating where it fits in... great machine, but probalby NOT needed for a docu weding!

[Noa Put]

you can check it by pressing the windows button, then click on configuration screen, then device manager and then select processor. (Hope I translated right as I have a Dutch OS.)

[Kelsey Emuss]

Originally Posted by Noa Put

Can you also see what the processor speed is, could it a be that it's a q6600 processor?

Ok I followed your directions and it says: Intel (R) Core (TM)2 Quad CPU Q9300 @2.50Ghz

Actually...It has this 4 times..so does that mean it's 10Ghz in total??

It's Latin to me! Does that give you any more info? Thanks for all your help!

[Kelsey Emuss]

Originally Posted by Dave Blackhurst

Kelsey,

I have to give you props for stretching a lot of life out of those GL's... but I think you've earned an upgrade!

Equipment upgrades can be daunting, sometimes even disappointing, that's why I tend to buy good used gear... if I don't like it, I can just turn it over to soemone else who probably will!

HD is probably "expected" now, where a couple years ago it wasn't as much a part of the public consciouness, and you WILL enjoy the improvements in image quality. Even over the FX7 and HV20 Jeff mentioned... those cameras were great, but now are probably 5+ years old? Technology moved farily fast, but we are probably now on the cusp of 4K cameras, and "full HD" may not see a lot of further development, though the equipment as it is, is quite capable. You could probably buy any camera introduced in the last 2-3 years and have a solid investment for the next few years.


You haven't mentioned any "big chip" cameras like a DSLR, so I think the advice has run to traditional video cameras, but the DSLR's and such open up some creative possibilities - I know I shoot both stills and video, and am comfortable with the manual aspects of my SLT cameras - I note Noa also has this "mix" - each type of camera has its strengths, and it "may" be worth considering?

The budget thing is always a bugger, but you CAN do it on a shoestring and still have very high quality image capture devices nowadays! I "downsized" and never regretted it or felt it hindered anything, I've added SLT's to the mix, the biggest camera I've got is a VG20, and I'm seriously debating where it fits in... great machine, but probalby NOT needed for a docu weding!

DSLR's seem daunting with the length of capture time. Don't they only get 22mins of continuous capture on a memory card? Seems like a hassle? Not against the idea...but I think they are a bit out of my "upgrade" budget. But again...this is the first time in YEARS that I have been poking around to see what's out there and what the current prices are.

Lots to take in at once!

[Dave Partington]

Originally Posted by Kelsey Emuss

Don't they only get 22mins of continuous capture on a memory card?

That would depend on the size of the memory card ;) We use 32GB cards mostly and get around 88mins or so. What you may be thinking of is the continuous recording time (after which it stops and you have to press record again). Some cameras it's as low as 12mins, others it's 29m59s. Using DSLR means you also need a separate audio recorder otherwise you lose audio when ever the camera stops, and DSLR audio is not that great anyway.

However, while DSLRs are gorgeous, and much better than traditional camcorders in lower light conditions they are a LOT harder work, and I do mean a LOT. They are not for the faint heated by any means, and if you like to set a camera and leave it alone then DSLRs may not be for you. Combine that with the shallow depth of field that everyone craves for (for the 'film' look) not giving you much latitude if people don't start where they are supposed to (unattended camera) or keep moving about and they can be a major PITA.

Also, while some DSLRs (e.g. 550D / T2i) can look cheap to buy initially, you'll soon end up wanting some nice fast prime lenses which cost way more than the camera themselves and...well it's a slippery slope ;)

If the final quality worth it? Absolutely. Are they for everyone? No.

We shoot with a combination of video cameras (Canon XF100s) and DSLRs (5D3). We have enough of each that we can shoot entire weddings one one or the other, or we can combine them where needed to give us lots of unattended cameras and flexibility of moving around with the others. The most we've shot with recently has been 6 cameras (thanks to multicam editing it's a no brainer sometimes). We also have 768GB of card capacity so that we can shoot back to back weddings without having to erase the first day's cards in order to shoot next day!

For any one looking to operate DSLRs in an unattended mode but haven't seen this yet - check out the CamRanger ( CamRanger | Wireless DSLR Remote Control Tether for iPad ). I'm hoping to pick on up in the next couple of weeks, but we'll see.

Kelsey, you say this is a second job, so hopefully you aren't relying on all the money to live on. With that in mind, I'd be thinking about how long term you plan on doing this. Buying gear now, only to find it's not quite what you want, selling it and buying different gear gets expensive. It's worth taking your time to get this right, notwithstanding the fact that your current gear is depreciating by the day (isn't all gear!!!).

Try to find people using your proposed gear as their main camera for weddings. A lot of people are happy to use them as their second/third/fourth camera, but then have a better camera as their main camera operated more in manual mode. Get some examples of weddings shot on this kind of camera in low light. Almost any camera can look great in good light, but winter weddings in dark churches or speeches in candle lit venues have a nasty habit of making the gear look like what it really is, 'consumer quality'.

While the consumer cameras appear at first to do an awesome job in low light, what they are actually doing it applying massive noise reduction and then boosting saturation to give a very plastic smeared appearance with drastically reduced detail. Of course, the B+G could well be happy with what ever they get and it may not be an issue for you.

[Dave Blackhurst]

Sony SLT's, NEX's and their P&S line do 29.59 minutes, and can restart. There are potential heat issues with some models on longer clips, and they are a different "animal". Unless you spend for "fast" glass, low light may or may not be better than a good videocam. But they serve a purpose and tend to provide a bit higher production value to the footage, maybe pay for themselves if you can raise prices? I already had a good comfort level with an SLR, so it's not a big leap for me, but for some it can be tough!

As for the computer, took a gander at cpubenchmarks, you'll be struggling with a Core2Quad platform, and likely underpowered to work with 60p video, unless everything else is pretty optimal - this is where sometimes a newer system has some advantages as it might be better optimized for video. I'd at least have it in your "budget" to upgrade that as well.


@ Dave - I think that's not a fair characterization of ALL consumer cams. MAYBE lower end ones? I know I've not been impressed by some of the footage I've seen from Panasonics in "low light", but I've seen other footage that looked fine - maybe operator error is a larger factor in the end quality than the camera?

No camera can take footage of a black cat in a dark room at midnight with no moon... but with even a tiny bit of light, I can get more than acceptable quality with my Handycams...

I've seen side by side comparisons of small cams with more expensive cams, and done a few myself over the years - you're not typically getting 2-4X "better" images, commensurate with the costs of the cameras, usually it's more of a "pixel peeping" single digit percentage. There is a reason many people use small cams for secondary angles, and sometimes you realize the "image" of the big cam isn't worth the extra $$ if you want to meet your market and make a few $, but a few smaller cams do the trick.

[Noa Put]

Originally Posted by Dave Partington

However, while DSLRs are gorgeous, and much better than traditional camcorders in lower light conditions

Well, I can tell from experience that if I put a f2.8 lens on my 550d and use the standard profiles and set it at 1600 iso my cx730 outperforms my dslr in low light

Also, while some DSLRs (e.g. 550D / T2i) can look cheap to buy initially, you'll soon end up wanting some nice fast prime lenses which cost way more than the camera themselves and

Not necessarily true, if you get some Samyang lenses as they are cheaper then the body and a few about the same price.

While the consumer cameras appear at first to do an awesome job in low light, what they are actually doing it applying massive noise reduction and then boosting saturation to give a very plastic smeared appearance with drastically reduced detail. Of course, the B+G could well be happy with what ever they get and it may not be an issue for you.

Again, my cx730 can be placed side by side with my 550d when it gets dark, it even is close to a f1.4 lens on my 550d and using 1600 iso. You can squeeze more low light performance out of a dslr by using the technicolor cinestyle preset, use higher gains and use neatvideo to clean up but don't underestimate those top level small handicams. I bet they even outperform your xf100 in low light. I am against any form of image clean up as it is too time consuming, I don't have to use neatvideo on my cx730 but have been using it more then once on my 550d.

F.i. I"m filming a dance play today and used my nex ea50 with the stock lens as I have to zoom to reframe, the ea50 is a tiny bit better then my 550d in low light if you use the standard profiles on both camera's, the stock lens is a slower one but yesterday during the rehearsals I saw the cx730 put the ea50 to shame and I even have to use the cx730 as a main camera today and put the ea50 as B-cam. Even with teh gain turned all teh way up on the cx730 stays sharper then my 550d and retains color equally good, if not better.
A few days ago I was filming in a church and had a f2.8 lens on my ea50, I needed to go to 5000iso to match my cx730 at it's highest gain, only then the ea50 was noisier and just a little bit sharper, the ea50 has a sharper image then my 550d.

If your previous camera was a gl2 the image quality on a cx730 will be better in every way, so can't see how any client would have an issue with that.

[Dave Blackhurst]

Yep, the 7xx series Sonys are pretty tough to beat when it comes to clean low light performance... definitely better than the VG20/stock lens, or the A65/A77, even with a "fast" prime. They lose some as you zoom in, but that's going to be true on any camera due to lens physics.

There are plenty of "bargain" lenses out there for Sony A mount, I'm sure there are options for other cameras/mounts... but Lens Acquisition Syndrome is always a "risk"! One can pick up an A57 body and something like an 18-200 and maybe a fast 50mm fairly reasonably (used) and have a good still/video camera.


Camera technology has changed a lot since tape based SD... even cell phones are capable of surprisingly good results in many cases nowadays... so I'm sure Kelsey will be "impressed", it's just a matter of finding a happy place between "new toys" and "budget" that makes good business sense.