"Our style is mainly run and gun, without much reliance on a tripod for steady shots. "

Then you need a camera with a good image stabilizer. Your choice of Panasonic TM700/900 is very good. Also consider TM90 - it has incredibly wide angle lens that you might find extremely useful.

If you really want shallow a DOF then dSLR is the only choice. But it completely changes the shooting technique, requires a lot of preparation where pretty much EVERYTHING should be set manually.

In any case, by all means avoid any latest Canon's P&S, they all severely suffer from rolling shutter problem - here is a good example:

User amendegw over at the Pro forum has the 700 and loves it. I have both viewed and edited his footage for mutual projects, and I very much like what I see. Preview-ability in Vegas on different systems is not really predictable until you try it, but yours sounds favorable. Perhaps you can contact him and obtain some sample footage to play with.

>they all severely suffer from rolling shutter problem - here is a good example

That's actually not a good example, because the guy had a camera in his hands and started walking without any regard for the camera he was holding. All dSLRs have as much rolling shutter and yet all short movies are shot with dSLRs these days. Just go to vimeo and check any short movie of worth. Even the Captain America movie used the 5D MkII, which has as much rolling shutter.

If you are going to shoot an actual movie, you're supposed to be careful how you move the camera. Even with a CCD camera we'd get dizzy if the camera goes left and right.

Thanks everyone for your responses so far.

Eugenia, now you've got me back to thinking about the T3i/T2i option again!. But I still wonder whether I'll need a bunch of accessories - viewfinder, separate sound, lots of lenses? And is it hard to maintain good focus on a moving object with these cameras? On the other hand, it sounds like this is the only way to get decent DOF. By the way, which prime wide angle lens would you recommend.

Anyway, if I understand the responses I can get decent DOF but I'd need to invest time and effort in learinign a different way of filming.

Alternatively, I can take the easier route with the camcorders- still get good quality pictures, have some manual controls but have to give up on getting DOF.

I need to keep thinking about this dSLR vs camcorder tradeoff. Thanks for your offer of further help offline (Eugenia) and your reference to amendegw (musicvid) which I may follow up further down the line.

Any more input from you experts always welcome.

Thanks

And michaelt I'll look into the TM90 further

>>they all severely suffer from rolling shutter problem - here is a good example

> That's actually not a good example, because the guy had a camera in his hands and started walking without any regard for the camera he was holding.

It is not a good example of how to shoot movies, but it IS a good example of the specific rolling shutter problem that all latest Canon's P&S cameras suffer from.

> All dSLRs have as much rolling shutter

This is way over the top. Absolutely not AS MUCH, and absolutely not ALL.

Musketeer, you are asking for a good DOF and a good wide angle. These are completely opposite things. I wouldn't try to achieve both with a dSLR alone, and would get a camcorder. TM90 is only around $400, yet it will give you 28mm wide angle, 60p @ 28mbps, full manual control, and very good IS. For a good DOF I would get a dSLR (body-only) with a 50mm f1.8 prime lens (also cheap, somewhere between $100-200). You can definitely have both cameras and spend less than $1500. Sony just released A65 and A77 that also have 60p @ 28mbps, full manual control and continuous autofocus,

>But I still wonder whether I'll need a bunch of accessories - viewfinder, separate sound, lots of lenses?

Sound is best to always be separate for best results (you use a clapper to sync in post processing). This also means that you will need an audio guy. I have here a breakdown of accessories a hobbyist filmmaker would need for short movies: http://eugenia.queru.com/2011/01/06/becoming-a-filmmaker-for-ultra-cheap/

>And is it hard to maintain good focus on a moving object with these cameras?

Yes, pretty hard if you want lots of DoF. The more you "stop-down" the lens, the easier would be to focus. That's why I suggested the S100, which is a P&S and it can easily be made to either be easy to focus (use it at 1x), or with shallow DoF and less easier to focus, but still acceptable difficulty (use it at 5x zoom).

>On the other hand, it sounds like this is the only way to get decent DOF.

Not all scenes require shallow DoF. But yes, if you want to make it very cinematic, you'd need a dSLR with the Technicolor Cinestyle picture style. In that case, the T3i is the best option because it's cheap for what it does.

>By the way, which prime wide angle lens would you recommend.

Any you get will be fine. There are sharpness differences between very expensive Canon lenses and cheap ones, but the internal resizing of the picture from 20-22 MP to 1080p is usually pretty bad, so it won't matter than much at the end. I use $100 lenses without that much quality loss (for video, for still pictures there IS big difference).

The important thing you need to know about short movies is that your camera must be capable of true 24p. Without 24p, the frame rate of all movies and TV series, your movie would feel amateurish. Most cheap cameras don't support this at all, and most of the rest ones that do, only record in PF24, not in real 24p. PF24 is 24p wrapped inside a 60i wrapper. PF24 requires "pulldown removal" in order to transform it to real 24p, which is something that Vegas can't do (Cineform NeoSCENE can, but that costs an extra $100). So make sure you get *real* 24p with your camera. All Canon 24p dSLRs do it right, all Canon 24p-capable P&S digicams do it right too, but only 1 consumer camcorder does it (the one I linked above). For the rest of the manufacturers, you won't know for sure until you google all these keywords to make sure your camera shoots in true 24p or not. All the ones I suggested you btw, do.

I'd still suggest you go for the S100, and use the rest of the money to get accessories.

Thanks again everyone - some food for thought here and some more options for me to think about - ie the S100 (for some DOF options at "manageable technical difficulty") and the TM90 (for the wide angle).

Must admit I haven't checked but does the TM90 do true 24P? I'm assuming not, if I have interpreted Eugenia's comments above correctly.

Also (and back to one of my original questions) has anyone got views on the TM900 vs the GH10 - there's a $600 price difference but is the GH10 worth the extra?

"User amendegw over at the Pro forum has the 700 and loves it. I have both viewed and edited his footage for mutual projects, and I very much like what I see. Preview-ability in Vegas on different systems is not really predictable until you try it, but yours sounds favorable. Perhaps you can contact him and obtain some sample footage to play with."Hey, I just discovered this thread - and I do like my TM700. There's a good discussion of cameras over in the Vegas Pro forum on a similar subject in this thread: Sony CX-560V

I made some comments on my TM700 which I'll repeat here (btw, one of the criticisms of the TM900 is that it was not a great improvement over the TM700).

Likes:
..o Great Picture quality, particularly at 1920x1080 60p.
..o Light and easy to "run-and-gun"
..o Great optical stabilizer. Used in conjunction with Mercalli V2 it can be mistaken for tripod mounted.
..o It has a focus ring.
..o One of the few 3 sensor consumer cameras
..o I like the Zebras & Manual focus assist
..o It has a viewfinder.
..o Records to SDHC cards

Dislikes:
..o Image Quality of viewfinder and LCD is not great
..o Manual menu settings are not intuitive to my thought process.
..o I'd like more hardware knobs & switches rather than software based controls.
..o Mic picks up slight fan noise.
..o Can't switch mic to stereo from 5.1 in the "auto" mode.
..o And probably my biggest "issue" is that the auto WB & exposure is slow to respond

Here as short test video (downrezed from 1920x1080 60p to 960x540 30p: Peacock the Sequel. fwiw, all footage in this vid was handheld - stabilized with the TM700's excellent optical stabilzer and further processed with Mercalli V2 - comparable to tripod (at least to my eyes).

Here's some source footage 1920x1080 60p: parrots.zip

Finally, if the "depth of field effect" is a prime critera for your selection, is suspect you will be happier with a DSLR.

Good Luck!
...Jerry