Im looking to buy a DV camera in the near future and Im trying to figure out what would be best. I obviously cant afford any of the crazy HD cameras like the Panavision Genesis which sounds really cool. I was thinking maybe a GL2 but ive heard theyre bad in low light situations which might not be good for me. Is there a way around this or a camera in the same price range that I could use in low light situations? Basically Im planning on shooting a feature and I want it to look professional so what do y'all think would be best?

If you want a good camera to shoot in low light conditions the Sony PD-150 (or higher) is an excellent choice. If you're shooting a narrative feature (where you should have control over lighting), a GL2 would be fine, or better yet the Panasonic AG-DVX100a (which shoots 24 frames per second and has better color rendition) if you can afford it.

Now Ive never really shot anything other than 8mm and simple digital camcorders and I know that the color quality on film is MUCH better than ive gotten with anything digital. A lot of the stuff that ive seen on this site too, the colors seem a little dull and the contrast a little too low. It might just be that Ive been using crap camcorders in the past and internet video is usually not the highest quality, but I cant help noticing the difference. I love my rich colors, do any of the cameras you've mentioned let you get anywhere close to the rich deep colours and dark full shadows of film? Because I can't afford to shoot my feature in 35mm and I don't have the experience to do the post work with it. But I still want my colors free from the dullness of the DV ive seen so far.

I had the Gl2 for about a year and I thought it looked really good, about as good as my Xl1s does. But my question for you is if you want your film to look professional why would you even care if it shots well in low light situations. Good lighting is one of the important factors that makes your film look professinal. Shooting in low light with any camera is going to take away that look that you want. Get a decent camera like the Gl2 and use the extra money you save to buy a small light kit like the lowell dp's. Thats going to do tons more for you than a 24p panasonic with no special lighting.

The only reason I wanted something that could shoot in low light situations was that I might need to shoot at night or in rooms with the lights out and only (for example) the reflected light from the tv as a real source. Things like that anyways. There are a lot of things about digital that make me want to shoot with film. Depth of field is a big one, but colors and shooting in shadowy or night environments is also big.

I totally understand about you thinking about shooting with say the tv as the only real source. But I truly think that with any camera, uncluding film, if you only shoot with something such as tv light in the night, its not going to look good with anything if you want it to look professional. I'm sure if you just wanted to "get the shot" than you could gain it up and hope for the best. But to make it "look" professional you need to start using additional lighting. Depth of field is tricky but its not too hard to achieve in digital. Just keep your iris as open as you can and use a tripod, get as far away as you can from the subject and zoom in on them. The farther away you can get from the subject and the farther they are from the background, the more you will create that shallow depth of field. I feel that film (mainly 16mm)is extremely overrated. Especially here in film school it seems that people want to shoot on film just so they can get bragging rights. But most of the time you see their finished film and it looks terrible because they were so obsessed with shooting on film that they forget how to light and shoot it. If you light and shoot video good, it can go head to head with film and its a hell of alot cheaper. Colors can be tweaked too, try and change the gamma settings on your camera, and mess with the footage in post. Its amazing what you can do with digital.