[Mallrat]

I'm starting to think again about making a feature film... script is getting in order, so I thought it would be a good idea to decide which camera I should use.

Keep in mind, that my main point of this ramble is:

WHICH CAMERA SHOULD I RENT FOR WHAT I WANT TO ACHIEVE AND WHY (IF YOU CAN). Thank you.

A year ago, the DVX-100 was the way to go for me or if I could afford it the SDX-900.

But Panasonic has the updated DVX-100B and introduced the AG-HVX200. Canon has two options that look good too and the JVC (GY-HD100U) looks awesome too.

I've been thinking of making a feature film since I was 16 and the VX-1000 came out... now the tools are getting easier and better by the day.

Basically I'm looking to get AT LEAST that 16mm film look that movies like CLERKS, BROTHERS MCMULLEN, and SHE'S GOTTA HAVE IT HAD.

So that's what I'm going for. I went to film school. I would prefer to shoot on film then transfer over, but it makes so much more sense to shoot on video at this point. At least to me.

But I want that look.

My setup is for post production is

iMac G4, Final Cut Pro 4.5, external HD 120gb, and my mini-dv camera for transfer. I edited short films and a feature film on this setup.

With that in mind, I would love to shoot HD, but i don't know if that's worth bumping down. I think the highest I would go is DVC-PRO50. I could rent a deck.

It seems that the HVX-100 is the perfect camera to make a feature film at the smallest budget possible while still getting a great look. How do you think it compares to the SDX-900. It seems that it records the same format, just that the lense size and capture lense isn't as professional. Still, DVCPRO-50 or HD sounds great.

I would like it to be 24 frames per second, widescreen and if it could look like movies that Robert Rodriguez shoots on HD that would be awesome.

I was looking through this post and I founda lot of technically things. I'm looking more for nuts and bolts. It looks like I can't lose.

So I'm not looking for the best HD image possible. I'm looking for the best image possible that looks like film using a video camera. Whichever one is best, works for me.


Right now I'm leaning toward Panasonic in this order:

SDX-900
HVX-200
DVX-100B
Canon-XL H1
Canon-XL2

Considering the JVC (but I don't love JVC).

Sony doesn't seem to offer a camcera right now that does film like images, just pretty HD images for TV broadcasters.

Canon's XL series has 24 frame rate, but I think most people would pick the DVX-100B over it. Or am I wrong?

Is the Canon-XL H1 or HVX-200 HD in 24 frame rate have any chance of looking like an HD movie like say ONCE UPON A TIME IN MEXICO or JACKPOT.

Thanks for your thoughts fellow filmmakers.

[SirCastor]

I'd shoot on a Panasonic. Canon makes excellent lenses.

These are all great cameras, but I gotta ask you how much time you've spent thinking about shoot on 16mm. It's not easier, it's not cheaper, but there's something that comes with shooting on film. It's not just a look either. The first project I shot on film taught me a new respect for cinema, and gave me a deeper understanding of how to go about making a film. Also you avoid pesky digital vertical problems.

Enough philosophical ranting. The Panasonic DVX series cameras are fantastic. They've had their go and I think by the B they've gotten it right. I think going HD is going to be a bit over kill.

IMO, everyone wants to make a movie that is a good image quality, but that's not what makes a good movie. Shoot on what's available, with a good script, cast and crew, and you'll get a good movie.

[Mallrat]

Thanks for your reply.

I went to film school and I've shot short movies on 16mm. I do understand the difference and appriciate that at least right now, 35mm film is the BEST FORMAT hands down for overall look and feel.

But I don't have the budget for that.

I used the DVX-100 for a short film as well 2 years ago.

I just have been reading about all these cameras for a long time, but I was looking for someone with more experiences making a film to shead light on the subject.

thank you.

[stevesnj]

dvxuser.com

[sith33]

The SDX-900 is a standard def camera, whereas the HVX-200 is HD (DVCProHD). The SDX-900 takes beautiful pictures though.

Is your subject something that can deal with the limitations of the HVX-200? In particular, I'm refering to the limitations of shooting on P2 cards. Even with two 8gig cards, the best you'l do is 16 minutes before you need to offload to a laptop or a P2 Drive.

If your subject is something that needs 60 minute takes, or in which you can't pause to offload data. March-ish there will be a firestore drive available, which will extend your recording length up to ~90 minutes.

I highly recommend you take a look at the dvinfo.net forums - you'll find more folks who are actually using this gear hands on.

My order of preference (for an indie film) would be:
HVX-200
Canon XL-H1
SDX-900
JVC GY-HD100
DVX-100B

I own a DVX-100 and love it, and a big part of that is the form factor and general feel of it. The HVX-200 continues a lot of that. Just gotta get used to P2 cards instead of tape.

The Canon XL-H1 is probably the most flexible HDV camera on the market right now - you get 1080i, 1080p, 720p, 480p, 480i, interchangable lenses, etc etc. But HDV is a step down from DVCProHD.

As I say - spend an afternoon browing the forums at dvinfo.net, and perhaps some of the forums at creativecow.