Affordable Pro Level HD Camcorder?

Jeff Cooper wrote on 8/22/2007, 7:45 AM
Hey... Does anybody know of a decent professional level Hi Def Camera that doesn't cost fifty thousand dollars?

I actually have a GR-HD1 that records to MiniDV but it really doesn't produce what I would consider to be a pro level image because of all of the compression that it has to do to fit the images on a MiniDV tape.

From what I've seen, it seems like there's a huge price gap between consumer level HD Cameras and the pro level Cameras.

Cheers, Jeff

Comments

busterkeaton wrote on 8/22/2007, 8:35 AM
What's affordable?
Quryous wrote on 8/22/2007, 9:17 AM
Look for the upcoming HDCAM EX, soon, at the WalMart near you.
JJKizak wrote on 8/22/2007, 9:22 AM
They won't have affordable ones until Walmart figures out how to make the Chinese create $50,000.00 glass for $199.00.
JJK
Jeff Cooper wrote on 8/22/2007, 10:14 AM
I'm thinking something under ten thousand....

The one I have was bout 3K.... but the MiniDV compression technology doesn't really cut the mustard...
Quryous wrote on 8/22/2007, 11:45 AM
The XDCAM EX is slated for "under" $8,000.00USD at introduction. It is not RED, but it is interesting, none-the-less.
Patryk Rebisz wrote on 8/22/2007, 12:03 PM
In my order of preferences:
JVC HD110U (HDV)
Panasonic HVX200 (DVCPRO HD)
Canon XL-H1 (HDV) -- only played with it, but spects look good
Sony's XDCAM EX -- but it didn't come out yet
farss wrote on 8/22/2007, 2:58 PM
Well if you want a top shelf kind of image for $14K you could get the Silicon Imaging MINI. That money even includes the editing software and you get better than HD resolution in 10bit log 4:4:4

You'll need a laptop for recording and lenses. The last part is where you can really spend some serious money. Without much trouble you could easily spend another $100K on prime lenses or else use something way cheaper like C mount lenses from Fujinon.

For under $10K, unless there's some major stuffup, the XDCAM EX is going to be very hard to beat. But as Patryk said, no one that can talk about it has used one as yet but that should change in the next few weeks. Also it should work very nicely with Vegas.

Bob.
MH_Stevens wrote on 8/22/2007, 6:19 PM
Are these cams true 35mm retinas to take 35mm lenses at par?
farss wrote on 8/22/2007, 7:01 PM
The SI uses a Super 16 sized sensor.
You can use S16 glass via a PL mount.
Or B4 glass such as the Digiprimes originally made for the F900.
Or you can use 35mm glass straight onto the PL mount but you'll get a narrower FOV. Or you can use the P+S Technics adaptor ($4K) to get the same FOV and DOF.
C Mount and various still camera lens mounts are also available.
P+S are also offering rehoused Nikon lenses at around $2K per lens.

I've only tried S16 glass in 16mm and 25mm so far. At around T1.4 you get a VERY shallow DOF and nice bokah.

The 11+ stops of latitude is pretty challenging, this really is as close to shooting neg as you'll get without shooting film and at least an order of magnitude cheaper. Using real cine glass is a very different experience to anything I'm used to. Coming from using PD 170s and Z1s etc rather than a film background you can feel like you're starting all over again. At first the lack of edge enhancement makes you wonder where the resolution went to. Only having to worry about exposure and focus takes me back a very long time. One things for sure, this camera does a very good job of capturing what you put in front of it, all of it, warts and all.

With the XDCAM EX, OK, you're not going to get the same experience as you would with 35mm adaptors but you're getting closer. It seems it comes with a hopefully decent manual lens. That means no autofocus and that alone is going to be a challenge for many of us, myself included.

Bob.
Coursedesign wrote on 8/22/2007, 7:03 PM
None of the cameras listed here have cine 35mm size sensors.

For that ballpark you need to step up to (and wait for) RED, or use a Redrock M2 or similar adapter (search forum here for info).

Patryk,

You list the JVC HD110U which is not manufactured since some time.

I have heard several sources suggest that this cam is actually preferable to JVC's newer 200/250 series cameras. Could you elaborate on why that is?

farss wrote on 8/22/2007, 7:41 PM
If you want to see a still from the SI MINI, I've got a shot of a severed hand prop. That's from a dpx file converted to jpeg through PS. There's plenty of footage, screengrabs and production stills on the Silicon Imaging site taken by people way more competant that I'll ever be.

Bob.
Tim L wrote on 8/22/2007, 9:28 PM
farss: With the XDCAM EX... It seems it comes with a hopefully decent manual lens. That means no autofocus and that alone is going to be a challenge for many of us, myself included

I think it will certainly have autofocus, unless I'm not following what you're saying about lenses.

Check the photos at this link: http://www.xdcamuser.co.uk/articles.php There is an extreme closeup of the EX about halfway down the page, and it shows a "Focus" switch, with an Auto position.

Perhaps the lens is manual, but can be driven by the camcorder in the same way auto-focus works on 35mm film (still) cameras?

(But like I say, maybe I'm misunderstanding something...)

Tim L
Spot|DSE wrote on 8/22/2007, 10:20 PM
XDCAM EX has an autofocus-capable lens
farss wrote on 8/22/2007, 10:25 PM
Me thinks you're right!
Well I hope you're right cause I can get pretty lost without autofocus.
It also looks like there's a mechanism on the lens barrel to disengage the focus motor or maybe it's not quite what we think it is.
The guy from Japan said "manual lens" which to me meant a real manual lens, which means follow focus is doable, as in the focus ring directly drives the lens. Issue is to have that and autofocus would mean a pretty beefy servo to drive the lens which would use a lot of battery power.

Guess we'll know for sure shortly.

Bob.
FuTz wrote on 8/23/2007, 1:17 PM
This XDCam EX , will there be a real back focus so we can finally focus in full zoom and reframe to shoot ?
Coursedesign wrote on 8/23/2007, 2:35 PM
That is not about "back focus" but about having a real zoom lens instead of a variable-focus lens.

The former is supposed to hold focus when the zoom ring is turned, while the latter requires refocusing after a focal length change.

Back focus is an adjustment that allows calibration of the distance setting on the lens to the camera body at any time. This can change based on temperature especially.

An important, secondary effect of a back focus problem is that it can much exaggerate the small focus change of a zoom lens when zooming. Perhaps that is what you were thinking of?

FuTz wrote on 8/23/2007, 4:29 PM
So if I read farss previous post and go with the definition above, we'll be able to focus in full zoom and reframe (while maintaining focus) with the EX ? That'd be so much good news... But if it goes wrong, there's no way we can compensate so I guess these lenses will be rock steady/sturdy to avoid that?

My confusion came with the fact that when cameramen (I work with) focus in full zoom then zoom back to reframe, if it's out of focus then, they'll re-do the back focus so it's accurate all throughout zoom values. I took for granted this came with true focus lenses so you can adjust according to temperature, etc. like you said (or simply to tune it up from time to time). And yes, I noticed the guys will sometimes use the back focus ring to make extreme rack focus shots.
rmack350 wrote on 8/23/2007, 5:13 PM
A proper zoom lens for video or film will allow you to maintain focus throughout a zoom. This is a capability of the lens.

Backfocus is simple (afaik) the state of being in focus on the sensor or film plane. When you have a camera with interchangeable lenses backfocus needs to be adjustable.

Backfocus is normally set with the lens set to it's widest setting. This is because lenses have a depth of field both in front of and in back of the lens, and backfocus is shallowest at short focal lengths. (This is the opposite behavior as seen in front of the lens). The important point is that backfocus is most critical at short focal lengths and least critical at long focal lengths. If the lens is capable of maintaining focus and backfocus was set at the shortest focal length, then focus should be maintained across a zoom. If you set backfocus while at the longest focal length odds are high that the lens will not maintain focus when you zoom out.

Rob Mack

FuTz wrote on 8/23/2007, 6:15 PM
"When you have a camera with interchangeable lenses backfocus needs to be adjustable."

...+_O... why didn't I think of that ?

That pretty sums up the question. But I still wonder if that EX lens will do it... according to what we know about this cam already, this sounds good.
rmack350 wrote on 8/23/2007, 7:37 PM
It's not a changeable lens, is it? I'd think backfocus would be set at the factory. This isn't something you play with, it's something you get right and then leave it alone.

Rob Mack
FuTz wrote on 8/23/2007, 7:59 PM
Seems like it. Fixed lens, fixed focus throughout zooming.
farss wrote on 8/23/2007, 8:21 PM
For fixed (prime) lenses backfocus matters if you set focus using the distance markings on the lens. In general backfocus is set through shimming the lens mount, definately a job for a pro with the right tools. As far as I know cine zooms don't have a backfocus adjustment, it's just set right.

Interchangeable video zooms do have a backfocus adjustment and from my experience it pays it check it regularly.
Most of the fixed video zooms have the backfocus set in the software, as you zoom the focus is being adjusted by the software.

Bob.
rmack350 wrote on 8/23/2007, 9:59 PM
I really can't remember how backfocus was set on film cameras. When I worked in a rental house in the 80s I remember that our techs and the ACs picking up the packages would check it along with columation etc before leaving with a camera package, but I was over in the lighting and grip rental area, not cameras. Of course, checking it and actually adjusting it are two different things.

For professional video lenses I expect focus to stay sharp throughout a zoom, as long as back focus is correct. If the lens can't do that it either isn't much of a lens or it has some other special redeeming quality. For prosumer fixed lenses...well, if it has to use autofocus to stay in focus through a zoom then it's not much of a lens.

Side note - color viewfinders are nearly useless when trying to set backfocus. They just aren't sharp enough to do it. Was on a shoot several years ago with two XL1 cameras, one with a color viewfinder. We had to use a field monitor to set backfocus because it just couldn't be done in the viewfinder.

Rob Mack