Best professional video camera?

Question

Hi. I currently own this video camera ( http://www.circuitcity.com/ssm/Panasonic-SDR-H60-Hard-Drive-SD-Card-Camcorder-Silver-SDRH60/sem/rpsm/oid/204258/rpem/ccd/productDetail.do ) and have been unsatisfied lately due to low quality and very, very low battery life.

I've been looking around at more professional cameras and have found that this one ( http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10551&storeId=10151&langId=-1&productId=11038608 ) looked pretty good, but it has no night filming feature, which I'd like to have.

As you can probably already see, I'm not afriad to spend a good bit of cash, as long as the camera is worth the money.

I'm not too picky with the type, like MiniDV, HD, or SD, but the one that I currently have is SD, and I'm not too familiar with MiniDV or HD, so I'm not sure which one works best.

Also, I really like the Sony Handycam products because of the quality etc. But, I'm willing to look into other brands if they are just as good or better.

Answer 1

It depends on your primary uses for it. Overall, the Sony FX1 is a solid camera. It has excellent HD interlaced video perfect for anyone wanting professional controls and quality.

However, it's not the best choice for a serious filmmaker interested in more theatrical purposes like short films, documentaries, or independant films for the following reasons:

1) lack of XLR audio inputs. The FX1 does have a consumer quality mini-jack, which is decent, but not nearly as good as pro XLR inputs. Of course, you can spend $180 on an adapter, like those made by Beachtek.  

2) lack of 24p mode. 24p stands for 24 fields progressive. It's a somewhat new feature that filmmakers absolutely love. To put it simply, it makes digital video look like it was shot on celluloid film. It makes the picture a bit more "cinematic", though it's far from perfect.

3) If you want to be really really picky, HDV isn't the best format for big time filmmakers. It compresses a lot less than other consumer formats like AVCHD, but it is still highly compressed, and HDV does NOT allow for variable frame rate.

NOTE: these features, listed above, aren't worth too too much consideration if you don't plan on making the next Juno or whatever. These features are very complex and only really needed for serious filmmakers.

the FX1 is one of the best choices for beginning videographers wanting a simplified version of professional HD cameras. HDV is probably the easiest HD format to work with, and the FX1 has a "consumer camrea" feel to it (not in a bad way though), while incorporating professional manual controls.

If you are more the type who wants the best stuff out there regardless of complexity, you may want to look at the RED Scarlet, in my opinion, the best camera under $17,000. It's $3,000 btw, so it's in your price range. Not only does it have full professional controls it:

1) Shoots in a codec called 3K RAW....let's just say calling it an HD camera would be an understatement. 3K RAW is still a compressed format, but with very very little compression. It's referred to as Ultra High Definiton

2) Scarlet has a 2/3" CMOS sensor which is pretty big. In general, the bigger the better. The FX1 has 1/3" sensors. The larger the sensor, the better (more narrow) the DOF, which is a good thing for filmmakers, but sorta a bad thing for point-and-shooters...

But Scarlet comes out in 09. Til then you have to wait. Also, keep in mind that you can't edit 3K on any computer or editing program; it needs to be pretty powerful. http://www.red.com/

If you can't wait til 09, other cameras that I recommend:

1) Sony PMW-EX1                    $6500

2) Panasonic HVX200A            $5200

Sure they are quite a bit more expensive than Scarlet, (but Scarlet will require additional accessories), and they also don't shoot as high of resolutions as Scarlet, but they are professional in their own right. Both are solid state (tapeless) camcorders with excellent HD quality.

Hope that helps! Feel free to contact me if you have any more questions. Good luck!

Answer 2

Well, here are some from a previous posts.

Canon GL1

Canon GL2

Canon XL1

Canon XL2

Canon XH A1

Canon XL H1

Sony PMW-EX1

Sony PMW-EX3

JVC GY-HD250U

Panasonic HVX200MC

Panasonic AG-DVX100B

Sony HDR-FX1

I would avoid sony at all costs, because their hardware is way to overpriced. They cut corners, A LOT. They use cheap hollow plastic bodies, and cheap glue on their light sensors so they fail (they were in a class action suit which required them to manditorily extend the warranty of out of warranty products to replace the ccds of sensors suffering from this.

The RED cameras are pretty awesome....

JVC, Ikagami, Panasonic, Arri and Panavision...and recently RED rule the top of the line in digital video. These are cameras that are top of the line, the only reason that some sony fake as movie cameras are because panavision partnered with them in the beginning.

Thought....some of these cameras start at 100k USD.....

If you would like to know the truth, film is till the best way to go.

35mm film has between 20-25 mpx in color, more in B\W in resolution.(and thats your basic kodak gold c**p, not really pro low grain film)

A 67-70mm film is about 4 times 35mm so it would have 100mpx of image data if not more if its a special, low grain film or black and white..

Since sony bought out 95% of all the movie studios in Hollywood, all, if not most use sony digital cameras....which saves a LOT of money, they also skip on the script too......and basically churn out c**p films....and dont pass on the saving to the consumers either...

I, myself, have owned the Canon GL1, GL2, and the AG-DVX100B