So, I'm looking at making a documentary that will be broadcast quality so I definitely need to upgrade from mini dv. I was thinking along the lines of a used betacam or dv cam. I don't have a budget yet, but I'd like to get the camera for under 25,000 (because I'm also looking at a small back up 3 chip mini dv for low light and dangerous situations but I already know what I'd like there.) and from what I've seen used usually runs at about half of retail
I'll be working in 4:3 and traveling a lot. I'll have to occasionally work in crappy weather. I'll have the mini dv for low light but I'd like the main camera to be able to handle a little dim lighting (better then my xl-1 does).

Any suggestions?

All I'll say is that you shouldn't discount minidv's quality so quickly.

640x480 is 4:3 broadcast quallity

I'd be very cautious before making such a huge purchase. You seem to mainly be concerned with the low light performance. Under what kind of low light conditions will you be? You could save a whole lot of money if you were in a situation where you could just light properly and you'd still get beautiful results if done right.

But then again, if you're gonna be in the jungle at midnight or something, then there will be some problems.

If he can afford to spend $25k on a camera, I'm pretty sure that he knows what he's doing. If that's the case, buy the new RED. It'll work wonders and is arguabley going to be one of the most revolutionary cameras ever made.

-Kegan

quote:

Originally posted by XeOn:
640x480 is 4:3 broadcast quallity

Not quite. That's broadcast format. I've seen web cams that meet those requirements, and trust me, they're not broadcast quality.

Broadcast format is 720 x 584 at 29.97, uncompressed NTSC video. Broadcast quality traditionally comes from a 3 CCD camera.

quote:

Originally posted by funkbomb:
All I'll say is that you shouldn't discount minidv's quality so quickly.

It's not that. I'm plenty happy with my Canon. It's just with the quality loss during broadcast mini DV is not deemed "broadcast quality" footage.

quote:

Broadcast quality traditionally comes from a 3 CCD camera.

Maybe this is just in the advertising business but 3 chip isn't enough for us to punt something onto the air. We require DV cam or betacam and a component import rather then firewire.

And while low light would be nice, I'm looking for a cheaper camera specifically for that so when I'm unable to light something properly I can still pull out the backup.

quote:

If he can afford to spend $25k on a camera, I'm pretty sure that he knows what he's doing. If that's the case, buy the new RED. It'll work wonders and is arguabley going to be one of the most revolutionary cameras ever made.

Please don't assume I know what I'm talking about. I've never shopped for anything bigger then a Canon Xl-2. I'm just very good at getting people to give me money. Thanks for the suggestion though.

I'm working on a tv show right now and we're shooting on miniDV. I was surprised, but the executive producers told me that a lot of tv shows are shot on miniDV. We will, however, have to convert it to BetaSP for broadcast.

quote:

If he can afford to spend $25k on a camera, I'm pretty sure that he knows what he's doing.

Oh I don't doubt he knows what he's doing for a second. I've seen some of his work. The fact still remains that you should never just jump into dropping 25k on a camera without being sure that you absolutely need it. Just my two cents.

You're right. You really shouldn't spend all that money without being sure of it. A Canon XL-2 is still a rather large camera to purchase. You're just moving up the chain, that's all. You can check out some of the Panasonic Vari-Cam options for under $25k, but I think the RED is a camera that will blow away the competition. Of course this is all theory though. Just my two cents.

-Kegan

Just checked out some pictures of the RED (couldn't find any footage) and I have to say, it looks like the camera the Terminator would use. Really interested to see some footage.

I don't think you would be able to get a RED package that would be useful to you in a documentary setting that would cost you under 25 grand (the base model is 17,500, not including lens and something to record onto). You would also need some insane editing suite to handle that footage (unless of course you cut it offline). But definitely look at the Varicam series from Panasonic or the XDcams from Sony, which would probably more suitable for the documentary setting (that is of course if you have the means to process and edit the footage).

But, who knows.

Dude, just go HD. HVX-200 or GY-HD100, The new Canon options... sure to be MUCH cheaper than the Panasonic Vari-cam variation I saw mentioned above, probably far below the RED's price too, and it'll have a much clearer picture than you'll get out of an XL-2. Semipro HD cameras are already commonly used on TV, where budget or size and portability are a factor.

True.

I have the Canon XH-A1 and I couldn't be happier. I was going to suggest one of these HD cams earlier but I didn't think you were going that route. The image is signigicantly better than the XL2, with more manual controls, and like Ignis said, these kinds of cameras are used all over television, and are completely suitable for a documentary. The Canon XL H1 is the shoulder mounted version of the A1, and goes for about 9000. You wouldn't need to upgrade your editing suite from DV, and you still get a great image. If you don't know too much about these 25K cameras than you might not realize that much less expensive cameras such as the ones I've mentioned could still get the job done.

I agree with NySpree89 (and many others) that an HD cam is more than enough. A XH-A1 or HD-200 should be more than good enough.