lighting

Rasmus wrote on 11/12/2003, 2:05 AM
i'm about to pull the trigger on a camcorder purchase. in my research, people always complain about the low light performance of sub $1500.00 cameras, which is what i'll be buying. is this only a concern for folks who are point and shooters? i'm prepared to set up cheap, diffused shop lights for in door shots, but would like to have darker scene flexibility, meaning subjects that are lit but backgrounds dark. is this possible with consumer dv cams? i want to make short films, not casual family home videos. do all the older analog cams deliver better low light performance than digital cams as a rule? i'm leaning toward a panasonic dv-953.

thanks for any comments,

rasmus

Comments

Jsnkc wrote on 11/12/2003, 9:34 AM
I've heard a lot how the Sony Cameras have really good low light shooting capabilities, but I've never been a big fan of their consumer electronics.
BD wrote on 11/19/2003, 12:37 PM
I think that you'd get excellent low-light results with a single-CCD Sony camcorder that has the "latest and greatest" CCD chips, for less than $1,500. However, the limiting factor is the narrow contrast range of video, when compared to film.

My 2-year-old Sony VX-2000 has excellent low-light performance, for a 3-CCD camcorder -- unlike my 5-year-old TRV-900 which is useless in certain adverse lighting conditions. Some (lower-cost) single-CCD camcorders may do even better in low light.

Also, the VX-2000 seems to have a good contrast range for a video camera, so there is some latitude when adjusting the brightness/contrast in Vegas.

For specific advice, I always call the staff at B&H Photo in NYC.

Brandon's Dad
BrianStanding wrote on 11/19/2003, 1:01 PM
Even if you're shooting in controlled lighting conditions, low-light sensitivity is a great asset. If you've got a camera that gives you a decent image at low lux, you can use lower wattage and more diffuse lights. This in turn extends bulb life, makes your subject more comfortable, and keeps harsh shadows to a minimum.

It's always easier to decrease light-sensitivity (to open up the iris and get that short depth-of-field, out of focus background look) using neutral density filters than it is to increase it.

The Sony PD-150 and VX-2000 are widely regarded as having some of the best low-light ability around.
johnmeyer wrote on 11/19/2003, 1:07 PM
Everything I read shows the VX-2000 to be the clear leader in low-light capability, although it pushes the top end of your price range.

I provided, in an earlier thread, links to various sites that had done comparison studies of low-light capability. Here is a link to that thread:

Low Light Comparisons
craftech wrote on 11/20/2003, 6:33 AM
If a camera has good low light capabilities it doesn't mean that you will be pleased with the image. Most of the consumer cams have a lousy image compared to the average image of a 15 year old Hi8. That is because they keep making the CCDs smaller and smaller. They used to put a single 1/3 CCD in a consumer cam. Then they went to 1/4 CCD. Now I see 1/6 CCD !!!!

The VX2000 takes a great picture. It has three 1/3 CCDs. When it shoots in low light (I shoot mainly theatre productions) the images are clear and the manual settings are easy to adjust. Try it with a 1/6 CCD camera with "good low light performance". The performer's heads will be radioactive blobs.

Go for the largest CCD....preferrable with three of them.

John
Jay Gladwell wrote on 11/20/2003, 7:09 AM
Yes, there are cameras that can record an image in low light. Some are better than others, true. Still, for professional-looking results, you have to learn and use professional lighting techniques. That's the bottom line.

Using the low-light capabilities as a basis for buying a video camera (presuming you are after professional results) would be like buying a race car based on how well it does in everyday city traffic.

Just my two cents.
dholt wrote on 11/20/2003, 8:17 AM
Check the Lux rating on the camera. My Sony VX2000 is the best for low light and takes really clear pictures. I just purchased a Sony TRV 950 thinking it would be close to the VX2000. I was wrong and although it takes nice clear shots, it is worthless in low light situations.

Another HUGE consideration is what are you using the camera for? If your going to shoot weddings and live events then many times you will be at the mercy of the available lighting. If your doing your own video, then you can control the lighting so it shouldn't matter as much how the camera does in low light situations. when I shoot live events the VX2000 has saved me many times with it's capabilities.