Re: DV53
 

<<<--
Another thing about this cam to watch out for is the EIS. Don't use it. Ever. On my unit, at least, it degrades picture quality to the point where I thought I needed to get my heads cleaned for the second time in the same month. -->>>


I'm confused how the EIS can cause any trouble with a camera's heads. EIS is electronic, not physical. And yes, it can degrage the image somewhat (this is common knowledge) -- but only because of the way it *electronically* interpolates the jittery footage. How would it cause head wear or gunking?

Hmmm.. In no way did I mean to imply that I though the EIS damaged the heads. what I was trying to say was that the image degradation was so severe that it actully resembled the so called "mosaic style dropout" one encounters with dirty heads. This would be my reasoning behind using the "thought" in my sentence. If the EIS had actually casued head wear, which is, as you so astutley point out, impossible, I would have selected another word. Furthermore, I also made it a point to mention that this problem might be specific to my unit. Apparently, I need to work on my communication skills.
I will be more careful in the future.
Thanks
Michael

EIS and image degradation
 

Michael,
EIS degrades the picture when light is not sufficient.
Most EIS systems set the default shutter speed at 1/100 sec. instead of standard 1/60 (NTSC). That's why, whenever the light goes dim, you'll have heavy grain and noise in your stabilized picture coming from the electronic gain pushed beyond +9dB to +15 or +18dB to compensate for too fast a shutter. Nothing of the sort happens in bright daylight but, for indoors or evening shots, use a tripod and turn EIS OFF to take advantage of regular 1/60 shutter speed.
Optical stabilizers found on more expensive camcorders do not interfere with shutter speeds.

Michael -- sorry, I thought you were saying that you had already once cleaned the heads because of the EIS and thought you needed to do it again. My poor comprehension skills may also be at play here :)

Certainly, this sounds like a problem unique to your camera that you should get checked out. The EIS on my DV53 does not cause degradation of the type you mentioned. Norm is correct that the EIS defaults to a faster shutter speed, but with the DV53, you can press the Manual button and drop back down to 1/60 while keeping the EIS on.

John, Norm, thanks.
Who could fix such a thing? I've kind of learned to compensate for it- by never using the EIS- but I would love to get it working right. Except I'm cheap and I don't want to spend big money on what is soon to be my second cam.

Anyway, sorry if I seemed a bit snarky in my last post. I was recently promoted and the new postion is making me nuts.

Michael

A camera for getting started
 

I have been looking at cameras for almost a year now, planning my attack for purchasing a camera. I have started out buy accuiring a mac ready for video editing. Now I have been in the market for a camera, and was wondering if anyone could give me some pointers. I am looking to spend the least amount possible for a camera that will capture great visuals and quality sound. I have been pointed towards looking at a camera with a 3 ccd and I have heard that panasonics have a great lense. The camera will be used for some short lenth clips and possibly some large ones. I am also going to India and Sri Lanka to study villages and landscapes and record it all on film. so any advice for a novice would be great. I learn really fast so a reasonably complex camera would be perfect, but I probably dont want a professional style since I would most likely be overwhelmed both with its functions and its price.

any second hand opputunites would be great to know about aswell.thanks a bunch Josh Shemroske

Michael, no problem. I've been rather curmudgeonly recently, myself. I think it's because of all the pollen we have here :)

Unless your DV53 is under warranty, I don't know that I would bother with it. I bought my DV53 as a "fun" camera -- not necessarily disposable, per se, but one that I wouldn't mind giving a beating, so that my DVC80 wouldn't have to. While I don't think that $300 is chump change, it is a pretty inexpensive cam, relatively speaking. And if the cost of fixing the EIS is even $100 (factoring in shipping, etc), it seems like too much to spend on a $300 cam.

If you're getting a 3 chipper soon, then I'd say save your money.

The Pana NV-MX500 or the new NV-GS400 when it comes out. If you want to spend more and you need the XLR, consider a Sony PDX10.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=314961&is=REG

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=276528&is=REG

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=249633&is=REG

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=252192&is=REG

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=277532&is=REG

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=316087&is=REG

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=303956&is=REG

The PDX10 has very good sound with XLR inputs and stunning 16:9. Small form is good too.

The DVC80 is the best deal going right now, with it's larger CCDs, it's manual controls, it's wide lens, it's XLRs, and, of course, it's price.

These are my rec.s, without knowing your budget.

Suitable camera for school studio use?
 

Hi all,

I am helping a local residential school to upgrade and modernise its inhouse TV studio. They operate a 3 camera studio with full online editing capabilities - the purpose is to promote team working, not have individual children working on offline computers you see. Most children using this studio are 8-12 years old.

They have a limited budget, so need the most cost effective way to improve the qulaity of their results and future proofing.

First I am looking for advice on what to do about the cameras. Currently they have old, old, old, analogue cameras (not camcorders) feeding svideo to a live vision mixer. I suggest that they stay for now with the svideo signal path, and replace the cameras with modern digital camcorders with good low light level performance and the widest possible lens as standard (so they are good indoors/close up).

What's a good camera for this brief? For starters, any price point is good. Any suggestions maybe for cost-effective cameras (not camcorders) if such exist. How robust are these cameras - this kit needs to last a long time. If it's a camcorder, does it work fine (svideo and audio output) with no tape? Balanced audio would be good, but I know it doesn't usually happen at cheaper pricepoints - but these cams will be permanently tripod-mounted and have separate audio path most of the time, so it's not a must-have.

How about a fourth camera to be used off site? Again, robust is the keyword here. Easy to handle by children (so not too complex, but with manual override should Steven Spielberg's children drop in...)

Secondly, they are currently mastering to SVHS which is a major quality bottleneck. Given they want to have loads of kids involved, they need to keep this online online setup, and I have suggested mastering to DV. They can do this without changing anything else out - cabling (svideo) or vision mixers. They can also bring in third party recoded DV material on tape.

What's a good deck for this use? It would need 1394 i/o, svideo and composite i/o (must have), and XLR balanced audio. Supporting both small and large tapes with no "adapter". Robust (to last for years). They will need two of these, with an editing controller.

I would love to hear suggestions - fire away!

Regards,

Julian

Aren't you going to edit with a non-linear editing program? iMovie I've found is *really* easy to use although it doesn't handle large projects well. It has changed since I've used it and don't know if it's gotten less buggier or more.

2- Maybe quality isn't as important as what the kids get out of it. If learning is the primary goal then I'd go for equipment that is easy to use and not too restrictive (you have a degree of creative freedom). However, a reasonable level of quality is good to have. The three biggest flaws in low budget productions are usually bad content (this is the most important) followed by shaky camerawork and poor sound.

I'm not sure what the distinction between a camera and a camcorder is. But anyways, I think you'll find that camcorders will ALWAYS turn off if you have a tape in there (and the camcorder is in camera mode, not VTR). If there is not tape in there and there is adapter power then most should stay on forever.

Manual controls on consumer cameras usually aren't that useful. They are useful if you only need one setting (i.e. fixed focus). Changing focus is going to be nearly impossible. Changing exposure on the fly usually won't work. Nearly all cameras change exposure in steps (the change occurs in steps and isn't gradual). The newest Sony cameras don't do that with spot exposure but you'll find the exposure control very difficult to operate.

Iris and shutter speed controls would be nice... but IMO kids won't learn too much from using those. Manual white balance is nice and some cameras have that.

How about the Panasonic AG-DVC7 for right around $1000? It was designed for middle and high school.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...=274107&is=REG

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aren't you going to edit with a non-linear editing program? iMovie I've found is *really* easy to use although it doesn't handle large projects well. It has changed since I've used it and don't know if it's gotten less buggier or more.
------------------------------------------------------------

No we are not. The important thing about this is that it is NOT a "learn how to make a video" class. It's a "learn how to work in a team" experience. The video creation is not the prime objective, but the coordination of different people doing different things is. Hence the online solution.

Having said that, there is a technician who will try to offline edit anything that just looks crap after the online work...

Quote
-------------------------------------------------
2- Maybe quality isn't as important as what the kids get out of it. If learning is the primary goal then I'd go for equipment that is easy to use and not too restrictive (you have a degree of creative freedom). However, a reasonable level of quality is good to have. The three biggest flaws in low budget productions are usually bad content (this is the most important) followed by shaky camerawork and poor sound.
-------------------------------------------------

Fortunately shaky footage and bad quality sound aren't an issue here - they have solid tripods all round, and good quality microphones and interconnects. Content - well, yes, this is children's output... But the quality of the final result here is low because it is a second generation VHS dub - it is this last proble I want to solve.


quote:
-------------------------------------------------
I'm not sure what the distinction between a camera and a camcorder is.
--------------------------------------

A camcorder has a tape recording device built in. A camera doesn't - it outputs down a cable..

I agree with what you're saying about consumer camcorder manual control not being really useful/useable. That's why I am asking to see if there are any higher end consumer/lower end professional camcorders that may suit here.

From my experinec consumer camcorders are just not robust - so probably not suitable for this environment - but I stand to be convinced.


Julian

DVC7
 

Tommy,

that looks interesting. Do you know if there is a PAL version available?

Julian

hi Julian,

The AG- DVC7 is available in the UK. The college I used to goto brought 2 of them. Unfortuantly they brought them just after I left about 2 years ago, but they were said to be happy with them. They look good, and have all the feature you would probably need in your situation. However i can't seem to find any suppliers, nor find it on Panasonics europe broadcast site (http://www.panasonic-broadcast.com/_web/index.cfm) but did find it on there USA site :( I remember seeing an ad in Computer Video magazine, but that was ages ago.

Sorry Julian, I didn't notice that you were hailing from the UK. A quick glance on the Panasonic UK site doesn't reveal an AG-DVC7 variant in either consumer or broadcast. Looks like they carried them at one time.

The PAL version of the DVC7 seem to be the MD9000.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...#goto_itemInfo

Getting Started in DV -- Camera choice?
 

Alright, I'm almost ashamed for my first post here to be so completely newbish, but, here goes:

I am a college sophomore, soon to be junior, studying film theory and hoping to move into film production in some role after graduation. I've been working with video since Jr. High, and led several DV productions in highschool, but I've never owned my own camera. I have access to a Canon XL1 and several GL1s through the university's film and DV clubs, but I'd like to invest in my own camera for use away from campus. Since I'm paying tuition out of my own pocket, my budget is severely limited. I'd love to be able to buy a GL2, or even a used GL1, but the only way I could justify the $2,500 expense would be if I could immediately put the gear to use recovering some of that investment. So, question, part 1: Does anyone have advice with regard to finding work as a freelance videographer in a college town? The DV club only gets a few requests for filming assistance every year, usually about $50 a gig -- nowhere near what it'd take to recover the $2,500+. I already have basic DVD burning equipment, and experience in FCP/Premier/various Pinnacle products, again something I could justify purchasing for myself if I could turn a profit with it..

Considering the likely impracticality of actually making money immediately, then, it seems like maybe I should settle for a lower-end camera for personal use and to "play with," jumping through the necessary hoops to use club equipment once I have a serious project. My main concern there is budget (probably under $1,000) but I'd want decent image quality and, at the very least, a microphone input for expanding to an external mic. Manual adjustments would be great, but I know that's asking a lot from this price range. Does anyone on the boards have experience with a decent lower-end camera that they'd reccomend? I've previously worked with consumer-grade gear (Canon ZR60, and some JVC rig that was perpetually requesting tape-head cleaning and had issues with everything but Sony tapes with the red door) that didn't live up to my expectations in terms of quality. I'm half-convinced its stupid to buy a $700 camera now, and then another $3,000 camera in a couple of years, but I'd really like to be able to experiment with DV now, without the frustration of checking out cameras, dealing with 24-hour loan periods, and so forth.

Thanks for at least taking the time to read this. Cheers!

-Ryan

If you want to do industrial videos, you'd need:
skill/talent to make good content (i.e. good writing skills)
people skills (dealing with clients)
experience
time (can't conflict with school right?)
gear
car?

As far as gear goes, you'd need:
camera (i.e. Panasonic DVC80)
audio gear - wired/wireless lav + short shortgun or hypercardioid would probably do.
accessories (especially tripod)
lights?
Editing suite- most computers will do, although you need software (i.e. Vegas with academic pricing, ~$200)

business expenses: website?, business cards, transportation, food, ?phone?, furniture/stationary, etc.

Some of this gear you can rent cheaply.

You also need to make enough money to pay off your expenses and your time. If you need to build experience and a client base by giving away free/cheap work that will be harder. If you want to continue doing that kind of stuff once you graduate then your calculations will be different.

Instead of industrial videos you could do other things... like weddings, adult videos (apparently very lucrative... although probably not what you're looking for). etc.

Camera that can produce good DVD like picture quality
 

I think most people here have watched "fifth element" superbit DVD? (or maybe, even Charlies angels)
OK, the question, is there a cemare can make good looking PQ like this DVD? (under $10k)
The DV at 720x480, exactly the same as a DVD, however, I have never seen a DV tape that it's PQ is better or even close to a good DVD. (and the DVD compression ratio is much higher, at most 10Mb, while DV is 25Mb).
So, I guess only 50k video camera can do this? Any suggestion?

(By the way, on a normal HDTV up to 60", I found even $2000 PDX10 looks very close to DVD, but on a 150-200" HD projector, the different is huge, especially the resolution and color.)

You're concentrating on the DVD media for some reason when what you should be looking at is 35mm film.

Those films don't look great because they're on DVD, in fact they look great in spite of being on DVD. As you mentioned, the bitrate on DVDs is much lower than DV.

They look great because they were shot on 35mm film by people who knew what they were doing.

They would look just as good dubbed onto a DV tape as they do encoded and burned onto a DVD.

So, what you probably want is a camera under 10K that can shoot something that looks like 35mm.

-Luis

check out www.kinetta.com

it won't be under 10K, but it's still cool

I would'nt get an expensive camera with the hopes that you will find some work to pay for it. Line up the work first. I bought a FCP system but had two projects lined up so I already knew I had money coming in. I was then able to use those projects for a demo reel and gained other work off that.

As far as a camera goes I am cutting a documentary shot on the Panasonic dvx1000. It looks great. I regret shooting my last short on the xl-1 after seeing the Pani. But I would do a search in here to find out what other people say about each camera. There are pro's and con's on everyone of them.

So I interpret your reply as "no such thing exsists", DV is not impossible to rival 35mm DVD transfer, right? (at least not for $10k and lower....I know $50 can do as I have watched it).

The camera is only part of the equation. Hundreds of hours and thousands (?) are spent on post processing the original footage. DV would benefit from that kind of treatment also.

Since DVD and DV have the exact same resolution you can
basically do the exact same thing. The issue is usually within
other systems as others mentioned above.

I would get the best camera you can get *AND* supporting
equipment, don't forgot to buy things like:

- camera support: tripod, dolly, steadicam etc.
- lighting support: lights, cases, cables, filters, stands, scrims etc.
- editing computer + software

I disagree that most camera's DV source doesn't come close to
DVD. In my opinion my XL1S certainly does. Does it look the same
(or perhaps feels the same is a better word). No. But that isn't
the camera's fault. It's not a film camera, but you can get a very
good film like look if you invest in story, lighting, acting, camera
moves and post-production.

There is a reason why the credits are so long for most movies...

Also, the XL1S in this example will not look great if you just put
it in automatic mode and point it at something. Switch the camera
to full manual, into frame mode, change the setup (black level),
frame properly and use a good exposure (slightly under exposed)
etc. etc.

Rob took the words right out of my mouth... take a look at the credits listing at the end of a movie like The Fifth Element. That's why it looks the way it does, despite being on DVD, as Luis correctly points out.

DV and DVD are the same resolution, but you can't really compare the two... DV is an aquisition format and DVD is a distribution format. The DVD medium has nothing to do with how good a movie like The Fifth Element looks. Check out the same title on VHS. It would be like asking, "where is the VHS camcorder that shoots as good as Fifth Element looks on VHS?" I'm sure you get my point.

Lighting and color grading/correction will make your stuff look a lot better.

Feature films have a lot spent on lighting and are usually color graded on some pretty expensive software. 35mm and highdef also have a lot more latitude than DV cameras. They also have people doing makeup, art direction, and costume design which make make some things look a lot better.

Those Sony miniDVD cameras do DVD quality I think.

;)

You guys are talking about color, gamma, film look, etc...I agree the post plays an important roll here.
But I a mainly talking baout resolution. I don't think you can improve resolution in post, the information was recorded and that's all you have afterward. So, I see 720x480 resolution, on DVD all the pixels are there, on DV, I just can't believe it's real 720x480. In other word, if a DVD looks like anamorphic DVD, DV looks like letterboxed, which all color reprodution is fine, it's just not that sharp..

Now we are getting in a different territory: anamorphic DVD. The
only way to get a widescreen resolution the same as with DVD
is to get a true 16:9 capable camera or an 16:9 anamorphic
lens attachment. To the best of my knowledge there isn't a true
affordable 16:9 camera out yet. But there are a few attachments
mainly from Optex I believe.

Please be more detailed about what you want to ask in the
future. Comparing anamorphic DVD's to DV is a whole different
ballgame then just plain 4:3 DVD's / DV.

Sharpness also has to do with the camera and lenses. More so
than the increase a true anamorphic signal will bring I think. If
you have an XL1S for example you could attach the manual lens
for a higher resolution lens or a complete 35mm system to attach
35mm cine and photo lenses.

There are a lot of things you can do to increase (apparent)
resolution.

I still believe a letterboxed DVD from DV source can look very
good compared to an anamorphic hollywood movie if done right.
Will it look better with the 33% vertical resolution increase with
anamorphic? Sure! Will most people see the difference. Doubtfull.

But in 4:3 DV really produces 720x480 (or 720x576 for PAL) with
a good enough camera. It will just not do 850x480 (anamorphic)
at full resolution without an anamorphic attachment or true 16:9
CCD chips.

Plus, any of the newer megapixel CCD camcorders which produce native 16:9 (such as the Canon Optura Xi) will give you exceptionally sharp wide-screen video.

850 x 480?
 

Rob,

where does 850 x 480 come from? Not only won't DV do that, but neither will a DVD!

Regards,

Julian

Rob Lohman wrote: "To the best of my knowledge there isn't a true affordable 16:9 camera out yet."

Well, the Sony PDX10 is a true 16:9 camera as it produces "full resolution" anamorphic 16:9 video and not letterboxed video. It has a 4:3 chip, but who cares about shape (square, rectangular, circle or triangle) if the chip is large enough to fit a full 16:9 area...

How much does this PDX10 cost?

840 x 480 is in my understanding the real resolution on a 16:9
chip. Or if I export an anamorphic image from the Vegas timeline
it exports it as 872 x 480 (a bit larger even).

You are correct in that the miniDV and DVD format do NOT support
this resolution. I was merely stating that a true anamorphic CCD
block will scan at that resolution before it is RESIZED to 720x480
(at a different pixel aspect ratio!). A non anamorphic camera will
start with a vertical resolution of something like 270 instead of
480 and upscale that to get an anamorphic pixel aspect ratio.

Keep in mind that with a true anamorphic lens/attachment or
CCD block your field of view will increase when you switch to
16:9 from 4:3. With a non anamorphic block it will not do that
(unless the camera does some trickery which some camera's do).

The final format will always be 720x480 (NTSC) or 720x576 (PAL)
for both DV and DVD. The difference is in the resolution the
camera worked with prior to laying it down on "tape".

Which camera is best for me? DCR-VX1000 or Canon GL1?
 

Both are about the same price, VX1000 is older of course, but seems like a higher quality camera. Also I am still learning, therefore I need a camera which is both complicated and not-complicated at the same time (one which I could learn a lot about cameras by using...Meaning if I upgrade in the future to a more complex camera, I won't totally be a fish out of water). Also keep in mind that I do documentary/short film video work. I am leaning towards the GL1. My budget is $12-1400, so if there are any other models I should look at, please let me know. Thank you. Andres Bant.

Camera suggestions
 

I am currently looking for cameras to be used in a professional environment and thought I would ask for suggestions.
These cameras are to be used for videotaping depositions and some handheld work, but very minimal.
The ones I am considering are the
DVC80
DSR PD170
VX2100

I would prefer XLR inputs and zebra option as well as more manual control. A great zoom is nice, but not a deciding factor one way or the other.
16-9 is nice but again not neccesary nor is the ability for a film-like presentation.
Price range is about $2K to $2700K.
If you think there are other cameras that would be worth looking at, please offer those thoughts as well.
Thanks in advance.

Do a Search on "deposition", as there have been many conversations on the subject. The key attribute for such a camera selection has nothing to do with cinematic values. The key attribute seems to be the ability to burn accurate time of day onto the footage. That basically eliminates several good cameras.

Well those are a little older cams, but if you can find one in good condition-go for it. I would prefer GL1 because of 2.5' LCD on the side which can be very helpful occasionaly. Both cams are ok for beggining, and i am very happy that you considered 3CCD cams.

In the newer scheme of things, the Sony TRV950 takes fine mighty pictures, comes with a warranty, and will last longer than a much older and more used model.