what hi-def vid camera has the best stability and focus?
 

Oh, and 1k or less.....

For under $1K you're best to put it on sticks as many sub $1K consumer cams OIS suck ass. Canon just announced a few new consumer cams (their tape lines are dead) that hit the streets in April and offer some upgraded features over their HF20/200 lines. Their new lines actually include a focus dial which was sorely missed on the HF20 which was focused by using a stupid ass joystick.

I would throw another grand on your budget and pick up the Panasonic HMC40. Not exactly the HMC150 but still not a bad cam that kicks most consumer cams right in their dicks.

Thanks
 

I thought that might be the case. After all, you are losing 1k when your money shot goes out of focus......

I have the Canon Vixia HF S100 and my roommate who does video production has the HMC150. We have tested both inside and out shooting the same scenes and the Canon is noticeably sharper and more detailed. The colors just pop alot more and it does a better job with lower light thanks to its larger and higher megapixel sensor. The only thing the 150 excels in are things like a dual XLR input and a few other things a pro may need. The Canon is loaded with more manual controls than most will need though. It even features a gain control as well as color bars and tone. Its manual focus is very good and stability? You mean how stable it is as in not shaking? A good glidecam will take care of that. You cannot beat it for its price.

Stability has nothing to do with the camera and everything to do with the photographer. Focus???? how fast do you want it?

No way in blue hell would a 1 chip CMOS beat 3CCD chip in color representation. The reason for the color tweaking in the consumer cam is because most consumers will not have the knowledge or the care to even color correct their image. The HMC150 excels in every single area including but not limited to, focus, gain control, low light, xlr audio, iris/aperture control, etc... Canon consumer cams are for point and click home movies. You can get good professional results with just about any camera provided the shooter understands what to do. But there is a reason the HMC150 is 3x the cost and its not just marketing. Its performance and control for the professional.

You have obviously never used either camera, much less compared the two side by side. Your ignorance of the HF S100 tells me that. Every reviewer and most everyone else agree it is on par with most semi-pro cams, even Canon's XH A1s. I have seen many great videos shot with the HF S100. Go to Vimeo and look what some people have done with one.

Here is a rule of thumb about cameras. You will get what you pay for. No company is going to put out a cheap two grand camera that will compete with its six grand camera. It makes no sense. Personally, I would never buy a thousand dollar camera for business. It will always look cheap. So on the day of the shoot, you get your talent....you get them in make up...you buy the costumes...you pay for the location...and then you shoot it with a crappy camera and from then on, all your work will look crappy. Why bother. If you can't afford a real camera, go out and rent a good one for your shoot. Do that a few times, get good product that will have legs and make you enough money to get a decent camera.
Failing that if you must use a crappy camera...get good lighting and that will probably see you through it. One or the other will sort of kind of work if you know what you are doing. If you don't have a handle on any of the above, go out an hire someone who does and you will be much happier than tossing it all down the toilet on a cheap camera with sound like a tin can.

Like I said in my other post, if you can light and shoot you can work within the capabilities of the camera and produce good work. However, there is an old adage in film making....shit in shit out. No matter how you dress it up, in the real world of high contrast, high volume, amateur talent, uncontrolled extraneous sound, no crew....you really should have at least an entry level decent camera. That is what I shoot with...a basic entry level prosumer camera....a sony z7u and it produces good pictures at a good price.

This is completely false as well. The Canon 1Ds Mark III is $6100, the Canon 5D mark II is $3100. Does the 1Ds perform twice as well as the price would suggest? Hardly. The 1Ds has more AF points and shoots at a higher frame rate, but thats about were the differences end. The 5D II will do everything else just as well if not better. The same is the case with their video cameras. People who believe a camera must be superior because its more expensive are pretty amateur.

what he said.....

Depends on the type of scene you're shooting, no? It wouldn't makes sense to use a pro camcorder to shoot exgf scenes...

Personally I couldn't be happier with my $450 Canon HV20. :)
Sample: http://thestrippedsuperstars.com/Home-Page.html

Ya know....whatever works. But here is a thought. In five years your 450 buck camera scenes have little chance of survival. Better to make a sows ear out of a silk purse than vice versa.

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

Rent cameras before you buy them and argue that price makes no dif to the camera store and you'll walk out with the camera they use as a door stopper. Seriously though, take a photography class or a filmaking class. Learn what you are doing before you "just wing it" with production. The wide angle lens on my HD Sony was $1100. What about lights? Still cameras? Locations? Talent? Flash cards? Editing software? HD tapes @ $15 a pop. Come on people. I can take a great picture with a Box Camera because I know what the fuck I'm doing with it. It's not the camera, it's the operator, but let's not be dillusional about cheap ass handicams VS a pro set-up. Who are you trying to fool? Yourselves?

My beta cam lenses were 17 to 35 grand. The equipment we are discussing here is all cheap in the real world of production. That is not the point. It is just how cheap do you want to go before fucking up the product for future use.
There are a ton of online photography courses out there that will improve a novice's skill a thousand percent quite quickly. But I agree with you that a little education goes a long way.
BTW, if you can get your hands on it anymore, Kodak used to put out a book for guys with 8mm film cameras and it was pretty decent. All the same rules of film making apply to day as they did way back then and it was really easy to understand. An axis is still an axis...a simple sequence is still a simple sequence....horizons and looking room are still the same. Learn the rules then figure out how to break them.

You're a fucking moron. I own not only an HMC150 but a HF20 as well. There is VERY little difference between the HF20 HFS100 models. Again, great video can come from any camera from someone who understands all limitations each camera presents. Try doing a rack focus with the HFS100. Shit, try creating a decent depth of field. After adding on all the extras (wide angle lens, XLR adapter, etc...) you spent near or around the same cost of an HMC150 out of the box. There is a reason the Canon cams (not XH A1) is marketed to consumers and not pros. Next, you'll tell me shooting on automatic mode is better than manual.

Quoted for truth :thumbsup

OK, in a nutshell....for all you guys who think a cheap camera will do the job....here is what will change it all. This little device that allows you to easily watch your fav porn site videos on tv was the hit of ces. Just for fun, run up that video on a 1920 X 1080 television set and have a look at it. Then think about looking at it 2 years from now....

http://www.cnn.com/2010/TECH/01/09/boxee.brown/

Boxee will definitely change the game and for all of those that have been saying that HD is not needed for the web will be so far behind the eight ball because many have been shooting standard def. Exciting times indeed.

go with anything from panasonic - but hardly with something below 1K - maybe you can shoot your wife walking the beach at your holiday but hardly some pro stuff with cheap stuff :2 cents:

I love my Canon HV40 it runs around $750 plus another $100 for a wide angel lens.


http://www.usa.canon.com/app/images/...40_586x225.jpg

I think the hv40 is a good, wise choice.

Are you seriously cussing and calling names over a discussion about camcorders on the net? Wow man, how old are you? 12? Pretty sad. Ok, here are a few screen grabs from the HMC150 and HF S100 low light test my roommate and I shot a few weeks back. Two from the 150 and two from the S100. If the 150 is SO superior, the difference should be night and day and easy to tell which cam is which right? So tell me, which camera shot which video? Good luck :thumbsup



http://img125.imagevenue.com/loc547/..._122_547lo.jpghttp://img17.imagevenue.com/loc153/t..._122_153lo.jpghttp://img225.imagevenue.com/loc669/..._122_669lo.jpghttp://img187.imagevenue.com/loc667/..._122_667lo.jpg

My HF S100 was $1100, wouldnt really call that "cheap". But I have a 55 inch HDTV and the video looks amazing on it :thumbsup

Well when assholes like you make the wrong assumption that I had "obviously never used either camera" that is what you get. So let me get what you are saying... that basically Panasonic is screwing over its customers by overcharging their customers $2500 more than what we could get in a consumer model camera? By your statement, there are a lot of dumb ass filmmakers in mainstream using overpriced equipment. Tell your friend to take a film class and for the love of god, learn how to use his camera.

$1100 is cheap especially for an HD camera that records 1920x1080 with no pixel squishing. When your glass on cameras cost more than the camera itself, then you can say it's not cheap.

Not at all. What I am saying is cams like the HMC150 and others like it are great for pros who NEED things like XLR inputs, 720p at 60fps shooting and all the other bells and whistles. Although the HF S100/S10 offer tons of manual controls as well. However, when it comes to the final results, a solid camera like the HF S100 can produce just as good (if not better in some cases) video than its more expensive and higher end counterparts. So to say that there is no way in hell a prosumer camcorder can produce video from a semi-pro camera is just silly and inaccurate. I noticed you couldnt tell a difference in the screen grabs I posted :) Besides, the OP said UNDER $1k, so this argument is moot anyways.

I didn't even bother to look because unless they are raw images, there is no definitive way to tell. Again, ask any DP worth their salt if there is any difference between the cams image quality wise. Canon is notorious for over saturation in their consumer models. Even the XHA1 over saturates. Most consumer models who offer manual controls do so in very limited capacities. Like for example, focusing with a joystick on the HF20. Good luck with rack focusing and creating a shallow depth of field. Very few areas in life support the "you get what you pay for" but video cameras are definitely one area that this applies.

http://vimeo.com/6447257

We filmed this with an EX1. There's no way in hell a sub $1K cam could ever accomplish this.

http://vimeo.com/6555478

Again another one that cannot be replicated with the same quality on sub $1k cams. Quality is normally determined by the glass you have.

Are you the Mr E. that shoots (or shot) a lot of the Cali Logan stuff for her site?

That IS raw footage, hasnt been rendered at all. Oh and I can achieve a MUCH better rack focus and better DOF than the HMC150 or pretty much any semi-pro cam when I have my Letus ultimate and Canon 85 f/1.8 attached :thumbsup

bump to read later.

WTF. As could I do better with a Letus on a HMC150. We are talking out of the box here, no add ons. And thats not raw footage, it has jpeg compression.

Ah ok. Well still. My argument was you can do ALOT with the HF S100, not just point and shoot home movies. Thanks to its larger sensor and better video resolution than most semi-pro cams, it will perform just as well as your HMC150 or the XH A1s in most any situation despite its price and size. Thats all :)

That is nice work fml. It has a huge 5d footprint, I think. I love that look. I have a 5d, but it is pretty useless for rack it and whack it porn which is all I shoot anymore.

This is getting worse than a mac pc argument. And what the fuck is semi pro? Is that like semi pregnant?

But I will tell you that the number one most profitable camera I ever owned was an Olympus 3030 that cost 1600 bucks and I probably made over half a million bucks over the years out of that camera. It was slow. It was a pain in the ass. But the quality when lit was pretty good for a 99 vintage digital. Olympus could have had the whole market, but they never seriously moved into slr and Canon and Nikon dived in.

Thanks. My work on those vidz lead me to the job I have now. Yeah we used 5d a lot.

The 5d is the coolest camera I have ever owned for the fun factor. Best bargain in photography today.

Don't know what you're going to shoot with it, but after it's all compressed, will the average consumer be able to tell the difference if you spent $1500 or $4000? Maybe a few can, but most of them won't be able to tell or care.

I agree with what Roy said, learn how to shoot first and how to control your lighting, then you can make just about any camera look nice.

This is true. Also, things like a shallow DOF and rack focus are pretty silly to mention on a porn site. You think the guy spanking to a porn will be pissed off at the lack of DOF in the video or a bad rack focus? LOL

No but for those of who actually care about what we are shooting and offer higher end vidz, these things are appreciated. That's what separates the Andrew Blakes from the John Doe's of the world. Some are looking to bring a bit of artistry to what we shoot as opposed to making the same looking shit that everyone else does. :thumbsup

I agree with the back end of your post. But think of the shit that the consumer would accept ten years ago, and look at what they demand today. In five years as this shit is being watched on tv's more and more,it will make a difference.
Personally, I don't give a shit if the whole lot of you shoot on these cheap cameras. It just helps clear the chaff as delivery systems improve and makes me look much better than I really am. So rock on. Maybe there are some great deals on 4 X 3 cameras. Hell the customers will never know the difference.

In a word....yes.

I gain more and more respect for you in every post. :thumbsup

I have been shooting video for a very, very long time. My first video camera was a tk76

You are wrong. I guarantee you 80% of surfers looking at porn dont even know what DOF or a rack focus is, much less care about it. I have yet to see a porn site with amazing DOF in their videos, dont be dumb. Most scenes are shot using AF even.

80 per cent of movie audiences have no idea what a rack focus is, nor are they supposed to. Film making is supposed to be invisible. A good edit is invisible...some even to the trained eye. You do not want to break the plane and involve your audience in the process. These are all tricks and techniques used by the film maker to engage and suspend disbelief. The closer you can come to suspension of disbelief, the hornier your viewer will get and the more money he will spend. Its a basic rule of film,whether it is porn, documentary, feature film, or news.

We are talking about shooting porn scenes dude, not making Lord of the rings over here. As long as its good quality and the tits and ass are in focus, most surfers couldnt give 2 shits less about anything else. I dont approach shooting tits and ass for porn sites the same way I approach shooting fashion or glamour for a high end client, not even close. Know what audience you are shooting for.