Hi

I'm doing some research in China and have decided to replace my Panasonic NG-GS100 with something more professional. I'm going to make an anthropological documentary and although I started with the NV-GS100 I don't think its up to the task. I'm worried about sound, and its lousy low-light ability.

So my question is this.
1. Should I buy a Panasonic AG-DVX100B and just use conventional standard format definition? Cost: approx $2300 USD
Or should I spend more and get a High definition camera like the newer AG-HMC150. Cost: $3300

2. Is the High definition format really SO necessary? Are a lot of filmmakers still using standard definition? If so, I'll just go with the DVX100B as funding is quite tight.

I will be interviewing people, and shooting festivals and will shoot many hours of film. I will want to keep most of it for archives and for later research. If I use the DVX100B, the video is safely stored on cheap tapes. But if I use the HMC150, I will have to download the SD cards to harddisks (rather costly)

(i guess this question has been asked many times, but I must make a quick decision, get a camera and start shooting a festival next week)

If anyone has any advice, I'd really appreciate it. I have to get up to speed on this stuff asap as the festivals I want to film are all taking place in the next few weeks.

Thanks for your advice and patience!

The DVX-100B doesn't shoot 16:9 and neither does it shoot HD. It also does not record to a cheap, non-linear medium as the HMC-150 does. I think these are enough reasons to justify the price difference between them. Still if you want or need to stick with the tape workflow, there are better cameras of comparable costs that will hold their values, monetary and production, longer into the future e.g. Canon XH-A1, Sony Z1, V1 and the new FX1000 (minus XLR) etc.

Even if your final delivery is SD, one of the above cameras will generally give you better results if the HD files are downsampled properly in post. If your final delivery is SD 16:9, it's just no contest.

Hope this helps,
Wacharapong

So my question is this.
1. Should I buy a Panasonic AG-DVX100B and just use conventional standard format definition? Cost: approx $2300 USD
Or should I spend more and get a High definition camera like the newer AG-HMC150. Cost: $3300


As a DVX owner (and EX1 owner), buy the HMC150. No question.


2. Is the High definition format really SO necessary? Are a lot of filmmakers still using standard definition? If so, I'll just go with the DVX100B as funding is quite tight.


Yes HD really is necessary. I don't know of any professional filmmakers shooting SD unless forced to.


I will be interviewing people, and shooting festivals and will shoot many hours of film. I will want to keep most of it for archives and for later research. If I use the DVX100B, the video is safely stored on cheap tapes. But if I use the HMC150, I will have to download the SD cards to harddisks (rather costly)


Rubbish. Offload to DVD which is cheaper than tape. Dual Layer DVDs will hold an hour of your raw footage at $2 a disk. And the tranfer at 8x realtime unlike tape which is realtime only.

Dual Layer DVDs will hold an hour of your raw footage at $2 a disk.

Cheaper yes, more reliable, certainly not. I would never trust important footage to a dvd, a harddisk perhaps but then I would buy 2 disks and double copy. For me tape is still a very reliable and cheap backup medium.

This is a discussion that has been done many times here, one thing you need to consider with a dvx is pal vs ntsc (720x576 vs 720x480) as the last one will offer you less resolution.

To say a dvx would be obsolete is questionable, it all comes down to what you will be using it for, do you need all that detail, do you want the sharpest possible image on a lcd screen or do you want a razorsharp film on the internet, go HD.

But are you a story teller, is the content much more important then detail the dvx will serve you well.

Do you see a difference between a dvx and a hmc or xh-a1 when downconverted to dvd, yes, the last 2 are sharper, especially when the lens is wide and on a larger lcd screen that difference shows. That becomes even more noticeable when working with a ntsc camera.

I'm sure if I would deliver a weddingdvd f.i. to my client now with either of those camera's they would be happy with it in any case, to them it's not the image detail that matters but the content/story behind it. My pana is also the only camera I ever got complemented on how nice the colors look like and it was a standard setting.

But in my business things evolve as well and large screen lcd's are very common here and for sure BR players will start to enter a lot of clients' houses as well next year and then my trusty dvx can't deliver anymore and then resolution makes a bigger visual difference.

But if you don't have to deliver to clients in HD I don't see why you could not work with a dvx, bear in mind that it will be very difficult though to get a dvx sold afterwards as it will be a bad investment if you plan on selling it again. But for it's price at this moment and the possibilities it is still a very decent semi-pro cam.

One thing to consider with a dvx, get an external xlr shotgun mic as the build in mic is crap, but beside that I never had any big complaint about it.

Cheaper yes, more reliable, certainly not. I would never trust important footage to a dvd, a harddisk perhaps but then I would buy 2 disks and double copy. For me tape is still a very reliable and cheap backup medium.

I didn't say it was more reliable. However, I still have the very first DVD I ever purchased and it works fine. And even the oldest DVDs that I burned years ago are still just fine. Got any 10 year old Hard Drives? How are they working for you?

I didn't say it was more reliable.

I know that, I just wanted to point it out for Ray.
I always use tape as back up medium for my raw files and use 2 seperate ext harddrives to store identical copies of my iso's.
10 years ago I didn't even have a computer :) But I converted a 16 year old hi8 tape this summer from my daughter when she was born to dvd without a problem. (and a copy to both my ext harddrives :))

I know that, I just wanted to point it out for Ray.
I always use tape as back up medium for my raw files and use 2 seperate ext harddrives to store identical copies of my iso's.
10 years ago I didn't even have a computer :) But I converted a 16 year old hi8 tape this summer from my daughter when she was born to dvd without a problem. (and a copy to both my ext harddrives :))

LOL!

You still had a hi8 player? I got rid of mine years ago. Sony Handycam Evo9800 or some such. What fun that was.

Tape as an archival medium is nice, but MONDO expensive once you get into HD. And I don't mean HDV. I work with computers for a living, and I'd never trust archival footage on a hard drive.

LOL!

You still had a hi8 player?

My father did, he has been in the filming business for over 20 years now. His house looks like a movie museum with all that equipment he has been saving during all those years. :)

Totally- the HMC150 is the bomb. And the SDHC cards are getting cheap enough you can conceivably use them once as you would with tape and have a much more reliable backup than the average hard drive.

Noah

Totally- the HMC150 is the bomb. And the SDHC cards are getting cheap enough you can conceivably use them once as you would with tape and have a much more reliable backup than the average hard drive.

Noah

What if you are on a budget as Ray indicated? The hmc150 requires a fast pc for painless editing which would mean another costly upgrade, using SDHC cards as back up would also be more expensive then tape. What about compatible editing software? If Ray would have premiere CS3 he would have to upgrade which adds to the total cost again.

The choice of a camera first depends on your budget and hardware/software support, for me a PMW-EX3 would be the bomb, but unfortunately my budget would not allow that so I have to stick with what I can afford.

The tradeoff for money, is time. If you don't have the money, you have to wait.

Case in point:

My primary editing PC is rather old. But it has lots of disk space, and all my editing gear is connected to it. It's a bit too slow for me to move around my XDCam EX files. So, since I can't afford a new machine, I transcode my footage to Cineform files or smaller proxy files. I usually do this overnight or over a weekend. Then I can edit as normal.

Yes, editing AVCHD natively requires serious hardware. But unless you've got deadlines to meet, transcode the footage into something miniDV sized and cut and grade. Then substitute in the real footage and output your master. Takes more time, but it's pretty painless.

If you ARE working on client footage, then you should be charging enough for your time to stay current on hardware and cameras. And if it's your business, you should be amortizing anyway.

What if you are on a budget as Ray indicated? The hmc150 requires a fast pc for painless editing which would mean another costly upgrade, using SDHC cards as back up would also be more expensive then tape. What about compatible editing software? If Ray would have premiere CS3 he would have to upgrade which adds to the total cost again.

The choice of a camera first depends on your budget and hardware/software support, for me a PMW-EX3 would be the bomb, but unfortunately my budget would not allow that so I have to stick with what I can afford.

well any current Mac would do the trick just fine. That plus Final Cut Studio assuming he doesn't have it already would be camera plus gear for around $6K. That's still less by a bit than an EX3 all in. Having an ancient PC is going to be a burden with any modern camera these days so that's kind of a given that an upgrade if needed be done.

Noah

Having an ancient PC is going to be a burden with any modern camera these days so that's kind of a given that an upgrade if needed be done.

It all depends on Ray's current set up which would be nice if he could share that making it easier giving him pro/cons when making a decision.

Hi and thanks to everyone for their helpful comments.

Until now, I've been using a Panasonic NV-GS-100
- NV-GS100
- 9 hour battery model number VW-VBD7
- External zoom microphone Panasonic model number VMH3
- 3 1400 maH batteries (2 are new never used)
- rain jacket
- ND filter and skylight filter
- External mics: Rode NTG-2; AKG C1000s; mini binaural cardiod mics by Church Audio
- External amp: Mixpre (Shure FP24)

Using the Mixpre as my external amp has proven to be unworkable. The camera does not have a pure line-in and running the Mixpre's signal in through the camera's mic-in port doesnt' work. The signal is too hot.

And I hate being tangled up in a mass of wires all the time and not being sure about the quality of the video or sound. Will I be able to use it to edit the documentary film that I hope to complete? So I've decided to sell this equipment and get a new camera. I've pretty much decided on the AG-HMC150 unless someone can convince me otherwise

I plan to use the Rode NTG-2 and AKG C1000s with the AG-HMC150.
I'll sell the Mixpre (Shure FP24) as i'm fairly sure that I won't need it anymore.

I don't know much about video to tell the truth, I don't know what format my final format my documentary should be in. So any advice on this would be appreciated.

The HMC-150 is a lot of camera for the money.

You can only go wrong with it, IMO because it is AVCHD, which means your files can be difficult to work with if you've not used it before.

Other than the AVCHD issue, there is no better camera for the money.

Regarding AVCHD, see the following quote from a post made in the Vegas forum earlier today:

"I would have never went AVCHD if I knew this was going to happen".

I don't know much about video to tell the truth, I don't know what format my final format my documentary should be in. So any advice on this would be appreciated.

What are the specs of your pc?

The HMC-150 is a lot of camera for the money.

You can only go wrong with it, IMO because it is AVCHD, which means your files can be difficult to work with if you've not used it before.

Other than the AVCHD issue, there is no better camera for the money.

Regarding AVCHD, see the following quote from a post made in the Vegas forum earlier today:

"I would have never went AVCHD if I knew this was going to happen".

Maybe on Vegas but this is a Panasonic camera and that's a Sony editing program. In Adobe Premiere CS4 and Final Cut Pro 6.0.5 working with AVCHD couldn't be simpler. Far simpler say than digitizing DV tapes or even working with P2 or XDCAM EX because the transfer rates are much faster off the SDHC cards. It's a total non-issue as long as you have up to date hardware and a current version of Premiere or FCP.

So yeah, I'd go with Noa(great name) it all comes down to your PC specs or what sort of budget you have to replace them if they're out of date.

Noah

Far simpler say than digitizing DV tapes or even working with P2 or XDCAM EX because the transfer rates are much faster off the SDHC cards.


Are you saying that SDHC transfers faster than SxS? Really?

Are you saying that SDHC transfers faster than SxS? Really?

Heck yeah- at least on my machine. Plus we're dealing with smaller file sizes so that helps.

Noah

Heck yeah- at least on my machine. Plus we're dealing with smaller file sizes so that helps.

Noah

Wow. That has not been my experience at all moving files from my EX1. And since I use SxS and SDHC, I get to test it often!

Hi everyone.

Thanks for your comments here.

My computer now is an IBM Thinkpad T61 with 4 gig ram, 320gb harddrive. I run Linux only, with windows running as a virtual machine.
I don't think I can do any serious video editing on Linux yet (I've heard that good software is not really available). Is there anything out there for editing on Linux?

I pretty much refuse to use Windows (crashes incessantly and is always attacked by viruses), so I'll likely have to get a Mac for video editing later.

I plan to shoot my video this year, and worry about piecing it together into a documentary next year. Next year, faster computers will be cheaper yet and AVCHD won't be such a big challenge.

I've pretty much decided to buy a AG-HMC153MC (which is the Asian PAL model of the 150). Its about $3400 USD here. But it doesn't come with a long-life battery as far as I can figure out. I have to pay something like $150 for a Panasonic battery.

I really have to kick myself to spend so much money knowing that my living budget is so tight and shooting my documentary will NEVER make me any money. But I've wanted to do this for years now and should just go ahead and do it.

Thanks for all your advice!

PS.
I'm going to sell my Panasonic NV-GS100! Should I sell the VMH3 mic separately? And the 9 hour battery (VW-VBD7)?

Ray, you are certainly free to do as you please however, I'll offer a few comments.

My computer now is an IBM Thinkpad T61 with 4 gig ram, 320gb harddrive. I run Linux only, with windows running as a virtual machine.
I don't think I can do any serious video editing on Linux yet (I've heard that good software is not really available). Is there anything out there for editing on Linux?


I am not aware of any software for Linux, but you'd be hard pressed to edit on a laptop anyway. I do it for dailies and such, but my real machine is a nice Dell desktop. I also have a faster machine just for rendering with no monitor attached.


I pretty much refuse to use Windows (crashes incessantly and is always attacked by viruses), so I'll likely have to get a Mac for video editing later.


Your choice of operating system is of course your business, however I have 3 video workstations. All Dells. None has ever crashed. Ever. None have ever had a virus. Ever. So here's a tip from me. If you build a PC for editing, build it, optimize it, and install your software. Then leave it alone. Do NOT connect it to the internet. If you need a machine on the internet, use a different machine with a LAN and internet connection. This has worked beautifully for me for years. My primary editing machine has been running smoothly with the same OS for 3 years now, and has never seen a blue screen.


I plan to shoot my video this year, and worry about piecing it together into a documentary next year. Next year, faster computers will be cheaper yet and AVCHD won't be such a big challenge.


Very true. HDV had a very similar curve when it arrived.


I've pretty much decided to buy a AG-HMC153MC (which is the Asian PAL model of the 150). Its about $3400 USD here. But it doesn't come with a long-life battery as far as I can figure out. I have to pay something like $150 for a Panasonic battery.


The HMC-150 is a terrific camera. The batteries are insanely expensive though. Nothing you can do though.


I really have to kick myself to spend so much money knowing that my living budget is so tight and shooting my documentary will NEVER make me any money. But I've wanted to do this for years now and should just go ahead and do it.


There is a lot to be said for chasing dreams. What you lose in money you will gain in lifelong satisfaction. I felt the same way when I shot my documentary. I just wish I had known 1/10 what I know now about video and film.

If money is an issue, don't spend so much! Buy a canon HV-30 Vixia. For travelling it is perfect and takes great images...many advantages to a smaller cam. It has a mic input and it takes upbelievable images and costs less than $600.

The panny is relatively large. Travelling you would want to have the most inconspicuous cam possible, I would think.

At any rate you will buy what you feel is best, but I can't imagine hauling a larger cam around overseas.

Yeah I suppose you go for something compact like a Vixia but c'mon its pictures don't come into the same class as the HMC150, not with those optics and chips. Anyways- just to clarify the 150 uses standard issue Panasonic consumer camcorder batteries which you can find fairly cheap at any major electronics retailer, shouldn't be an impediment.

Noah

No one said the video was the same, Noa. He's talking about his budget and travelling overseas.

Ray said he could kick himself for spending so much. I'm saying he doesn't have to. He's not a paid professional, he doesn't need a more expensive camera. If he chooses to go ahead and spend more that's his decision and in the end it will work out, it always does.

I suspect, however, that coming from a GS100 he would likely be blown away with the Vixia. If I were a hobbyist I am sure I would be more than happy with it.

Hi Thanks for your advice about Canon HV-30 Vixia. The reason I bought the Panasonic NV-GS100 back in 2004 was to begin my documentary. I wanted a small camera for convenience and because its far less conspicuous. But I found that its low-light capabilities were lousy and this inhibited me many times. As I filmed more, I became more concerned about sound quality. My NV-GS100 doesn't allow line-in input so I can't use my MixPre/SHURE-FP24 with xlr mics for sound input as I hoped. I fear that the preamps in the NV-GS100 are probably too noisy.

So, instead of purchasing a small camera that might be able to do the job, I might as well put the $600 into a the purchase of a HMC-150. The low-light capabilities will be good, the sound should be excellent with 2 xlr mics. I can sell the HMC-150 in a year's time when I've completed filming. I assume I won't lose too much on reselling the camera.

At least I think this is what I will do now! I appreciate everyone's advice!

You certainly won't be disappointed with it, that's for sure Ray. I haven't even laid eyes on one, but I've read up on it since it was recommended to be comparable to my Sony FX1000. By all accounts it is one fine piece of equipment.

I can't imagine it would match up with my Sony, or I would buy one myself. I'm likely going to buy another FX1000 or the V5....haven't decided yet.

Let us know what you think of it after it arrives.

[QUOTE=Jeff Harper;980513]No one said the video was the same, Noa. He's talking about his budget and travelling overseas.
QUOTE]

I'm Noah. Noa is the other person... Just remember- the other one is spelled like Boa. Mine is like a friendly denial of something or a moment of intense realization- No! Ahhhhh. :)

Noah

Hi everyone

Thanks for your comment.
Windows is probably reliable if you dont install programs often, or connect to the net. But here in China, I only have room for 1 computer and its Linux. All my friends are incessantly plagued with viruses and system crashes. Il either use a Windows or Mac machine for editing video later

Im off for 7 days of research in the villages. So I be offline for quite some time. When I get back, Ill buy the Panasonic and report on my progress. I sure Il have MANY questions about how to go about filming my documentary. I really dont know how to do this at all, and lack much of the technical understanding about video. All I can say is that I know that I want to tell a few stories, and have a decent eye for photography.

Bye for now! Ill look forward to reading posts when I get back

Thanks Noahhh!

The best argument that the DVX100B is still a viable camera is the documentary "Iraq in Fragments" completely shot with a DVX100.

IRAQ IN FRAGMENTS (http://www.iraqinfragments.com/)

The HMC150 is a great camera, but it's an HD ONLY camera, which is a problem for me as much of what I shoot is destined for corporate training where HD is still pretty much non-existant. ( down-rezing HD to SD is a big time waster )

Right now I'm using a DVX100B and have been very happy with the results. I am buying a Nnovia digital deck in a few weeks so I can start recording in DVCPRO 50 format and bypass tapes completely. I will also be adding the HPX170 to my kit simply because it can shoot both HD and SD formats. ( the Nnovia ProFlex 100 deck can record DVCPRO and DVC PRO HD formats )

- Guy

The best argument that the DVX100B is still a viable camera is the documentary "Iraq in Fragments" completely shot with a DVX100.

IRAQ IN FRAGMENTS (http://www.iraqinfragments.com/)


True, but the movie had a VERY professional up-res before the film-out. A bit different that showing native DV footage on a large screen.


The HMC150 is a great camera, but it's an HD ONLY camera, which is a problem for me as much of what I shoot is destined for corporate training where HD is still pretty much non-existant. ( down-rezing HD to SD is a big time waster )


How fast do you have to deliver? I can down-res 6 hours of footage overnight or same day if I start early. If you're trying to deliver same day footage I can see where it might be a problem. But the fact is, you CAN down-res. Going the other way... not so much.



Right now I'm using a DVX100B and have been very happy with the results. I am buying a Nnovia digital deck in a few weeks so I can start recording in DVCPRO 50 format and bypass tapes completely. I will also be adding the HPX170 to my kit simply because it can shoot both HD and SD formats. ( the Nnovia ProFlex 100 deck can record DVCPRO and DVC PRO HD formats )

- Guy

I looked at all the same arguments in buying a new camera. I also have a DVX100. But I went with the EX1 for a myriad of reasons, but the fact that it only records HD internally was not one of them. I just see it as a non-issue. I went tapeless on the DVX shortly after getting it. Mid 2004 I'd say. Much better workflow. But I have no idea why you are going to record in DVCPro50 when your camera is outputting DV.

With the national changeover to digital broadcast on the near horizon, I think SD is going to fade rather quickly. Maybe not in delivered DVDs, but certainly for other deliverables. If I could only buy ONE camera right now, and had a choice between SD and HD, I'd be looking to the future, not the past.

How fast do you have to deliver? I can down-res 6 hours of footage overnight or same day if I start early.

Most of the time I need to get it out ASAP, which was one reason to go digital so that I won't have to deal with the hassle of tapes.

I looked at all the same arguments in buying a new camera. I also have a DVX100. But I went with the EX1 for a myriad of reasons, but the fact that it only records HD internally was not one of them.

I do too much corporate work that will end up either on an internal web-site, DVD-ROM, or a standard DVD. So it's important to me that I can shoot in SD format. The Sony EX1 is interesting, but I prefer the look of the Panasonic cameras. Colour and look are far more important to me than having a full-res HD image, which is why I am partial to the HPX170 right now. ( also batteries and most of my DVX accessories will still work with the HPX170 )

But I have no idea why you are going to record in DVCPro50 when your camera is outputting DV.

My understanding is that the DVX100B outputs 4:2:2 color-sampling via the firewire port, which is why I am interested in DVCPro50 recording.

With the national changeover to digital broadcast on the near horizon, I think SD is going to fade rather quickly.

I completely agree when it comes to the broadcast medium, though there are a lot of non-broadcast uses for video where SD works just fine.

None of my clients has a means of playing or distributing HD video for any of the projects that I work on, so going HD isn't going to help me right now. I will likely use the HPX170 mostly for SD shoots, and will play with the HD output when I have the time.

Most of the time I need to get it out ASAP, which was one reason to go digital so that I won't have to deal with the hassle of tapes.


Completely understood. But I think you mean tapeless and not "digital".


I do too much corporate work that will end up either on an internal web-site, DVD-ROM, or a standard DVD. So it's important to me that I can shoot in SD format. The Sony EX1 is interesting, but I prefer the look of the Panasonic cameras. Colour and look are far more important to me than having a full-res HD image, which is why I am partial to the HPX170 right now. ( also batteries and most of my DVX accessories will still work with the HPX170 )


You'd be amazed how closely the Sony can mimic the Panasonic if you try. However, I understand about keeping the accessories. Starting over was a big PITA.



My understanding is that the DVX100B outputs 4:2:2 color-sampling via the firewire port, which is why I am interested in DVCPro50 recording.


Not unless something changed between my DVX and the "B" version.


I completely agree when it comes to the broadcast medium, though there are a lot of non-broadcast uses for video where SD works just fine.


That's very true. But I really didn't want to support two standards. I was delivering everything in 16:9 anyway so the jump to HD didn't "look" different. Just a lot cleaner.


None of my clients has a means of playing or distributing HD video for any of the projects that I work on, so going HD isn't going to help me right now. I will likely use the HPX170 mostly for SD shoots, and will play with the HD output when I have the time.

Makes sense. My primary clients have already moved to HD tvs and such but we had no HD sources. So in this case, the back end drove me forward. A nice situation to be in honestly.

I think you mean tapeless and not "digital".

Yeah, I meant tapeless. ( I still think of tape as analog )

BTW, I was a commercial photographer for about 10 years, and planned on getting back into it with the purchase of the Canon 5D MKII. The video capability of this DSLR looks interesting. I love the DOF from the sample footage I've seen.