Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

What *VIDEO CAMERA to use with RED-One ??

George D.

George D.

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 22, 2008
Messages
980
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
N. California, USA
We are shooting a television documentary and, due to circumstances beyond our control, we are forced to shoot a few secondary scenes, like scenics and establishing shots, with a camera other than our RED-One. While by no means ideal, these shots will have to be integrated within the documentary back to back with Red footage. Unfortunately, we have no choice and this is the way it HAS TO BE.

I know there are those of you who will cringe at the thought of this, or think we are out of our minds, and I don't blame you, and agree whole heartedly, but, as I said, this is due to unalterable circumstances. The quality will in no way match that from the RED-One, and we are fully aware of that, but these scenes will have to be edited within the completed documentary. You might call it the secondary camera, used for the less important shots.

This camera will have to be smaller, lighter, more compact, and more economical, than the RED-One.

With that in mind, I am interested in people's opinions as to which would be the best camera (under $5,000.oo) we could use for these shots. Maybe a Nikon D7000 DSLR, or a used Nikon D3 DSLR, or a used Canon Mark II DSLR (not a Canon fan), or a good camcorder of some kind?

Renting is NOT an option. We must OWN the camera.

Any help is appreciated.

Thanks.

UPDATE:

Thanks to everyone for the feedback. But, going by National Geographic's Approved Camera List and what they show for "secondary" camera shooting, it looks like the best choice for us is a good, used Sony EX1 or EX3. They do not approve of "any" DSLR. We use their list as a general guide for what is expected by television documentary productions. I don't think the Sony FS100 would be approved since it is not on their list.
 
Last edited:
You could just rent an Epic!

George D. said:
We are shooting a television documentary and, due to circumstances beyond our control, we are forced to shoot a few secondary scenes, like scenics and establishing shots, with a camera other than our RED-One. While by no means ideal, these shots will have to be integrated within the documentary back to back with Red footage. Unfortunately, we have no choice and this is the way it HAS TO BE.

I know there are those of you who will cringe at the thought of this, or think we are out of our minds, and I don't blame you, and agree whole heartedly, but, as I said, this is due to unalterable circumstances. The quality will in no way match that from the RED-One, and we are fully aware of that, but these scenes will have to be edited within the completed documentary. You might call it the secondary camera, used for the less important shots.

This camera will have to be smaller, lighter, more compact, and more economical, than the RED-One.

With that in mind, I am interested in people's opinions as to which would be the best camera (under $5,000.oo) we could use for these shots. Maybe a Nikon D7000 DSLR, or a used Nikon D3 DSLR, or a used Canon Mark II DSLR (not a Canon fan), or a good camcorder of some kind?

Any help is appreciated.

Thanks.

.
Click to expand...
 
IMHO, if you have to go DSLR, shoot timelapses. They're stylistic, affordable and more than a match for the RED's resolution.
 
Canon 7D. For documentary work no problem, and you can get the depth you need, if that's the style. I've also been working with some impressive 60D footage this week.

Canon DSLR footage will more closely match the look of RED than any camcorder, even if the capture quality in camera is not as good, for 1080 resolutions its good. You could also consider using a nanoflash type-device to record it ProRes.

I'm also a fan of the Sony F3, with nanoflash, but that may be out of your budget.

Although roundly condemned here, DSLRs in 1080i or p productions can produce beautiful images if well handled.
 
Have you looked at the Sony FS100? It's 35mm sized sensor renders great detail without all the line slipping and moire artifacts. Also, because of these artifacts, DSLR's suffer greatly at high detail scenes like "scenics" and "establishing" shots, but are much better at close up, shallow DOF type shots. If Scarlet weren't an option for the near(ish) future, it would be the camera I would buy. Good luck!
 
Same here, and with the settings from Abel Cine you can match the FS100 pretty well.
 
The toaster gives a better picture than DSLR, regarding skew, moire and aliasing, but on-board 24Mb/s become apparent on wide shots.

If you don't need 35mm DOF check out Canon's XF100/105 or XF300/305.
Cheapest on-board 4:2:2 with decent resolution and picture customization.
 
Second on the GH2. Very high actual resolution (much higher than the Canons, and almost no aliasing either), very small and still all the lens choices.
 
Since you are aware you wound not be able to match it. Specially if you are cutting both footage together. Then why do it?.
But since you are that dilemma, My suggestion is that you use all the red footage together and use another camera footage in another part of your documentary. No together.
That will smooth and fool the viewer's eye.
 
Yeah ur right I have see footage here and there from the FS100 and looks really good, for it's price range. It is still my alt cam if Scarlet is out of my price range, but good alt.
Kyle Presley said:
Have you looked at the Sony FS100? It's 35mm sized sensor renders great detail without all the line slipping and moire artifacts. Also, because of these artifacts, DSLR's suffer greatly at high detail scenes like "scenics" and "establishing" shots, but are much better at close up, shallow DOF type shots. If Scarlet weren't an option for the near(ish) future, it would be the camera I would buy. Good luck!
Click to expand...
 
I own and use a Canon XF305. It is similar to an EX1 and EX3 in size, but records 50mbs at 4:2:2 to CF cards. Its on Discovery and BBC camera list, not sure about National Geographic.
Another alternative is to find a camera with HD-SDI out and hook up a Nanoflash. However, it adds ~$3k to the price of the camera.
Good luck with your project.
 
sony FS100 best cam for the price. i use it all the time for pick up shots. with a little color correction the average person cant tell the difference the sensor is full 35mm the workflow is easy, if you opp for the PL mount it will run you and extra 800 so youll be right around 5,500 after tax. its no RED 1, MX or SCARLET but the image is about as close as youre going to get. think lexus and toyota same car one just has better features but they will both get you to work on time
 
I have cut Panasonic AF100 footage with the RED One and it does amazingly well.
 
George,
you're shooting for tv right? you are not blowing it up for cinematic projection.....I'd take most comments listed here as being a bit biased towards blowing up footage. I regurally cut dslr, and camcorder footage for tv all the time....your taking a tank to a knife fight basically. Overkill with red....but the latitude and options endless.

That said, question is what is the other camera shooting and frame rate....that will knock out a few cameras. If for 30p i'm assuming then most dslr's i've been working with are just fine for television--sure they don't have depth of red and lattitude, but large sensor cannon is great for tv. I recently used the nikon d7000 as well and bought it.....great affordable backup BTS camera....and i'm biased here since i own all nikon lenses...If i was cannon lens hog, i'd go Cannon 7d. The nikon shoots 1080p at 24p and then 720p at 30p....where i believe cannon gets you 1080p at both....
....personally i like Dslr for versatility and how small.....and you get benefit of shooting production stills.....Remember it's television. and for those that are squashing the DSLR's---think back 5-8 years and these dslr's are like owning a sony f750....I've made tests with rez charts with r1, sony950 and cannon 5d....in the end 5d and sony were so close....red beat them out of course. ....but the options with red are superior of course. But dslr is just a camera you can't count out as many do here.
 
Johnny Friday said:
George,
you're shooting for tv right? you are not blowing it up for cinematic projection.....I'd take most comments listed here as being a bit biased towards blowing up footage. I regurally cut dslr, and camcorder footage for tv all the time....your taking a tank to a knife fight basically. Overkill with red....but the latitude and options endless.

That said, question is what is the other camera shooting and frame rate....that will knock out a few cameras. If for 30p i'm assuming then most dslr's i've been working with are just fine for television--sure they don't have depth of red and lattitude, but large sensor cannon is great for tv. I recently used the nikon d7000 as well and bought it.....great affordable backup BTS camera....and i'm biased here since i own all nikon lenses...If i was cannon lens hog, i'd go Cannon 7d. The nikon shoots 1080p at 24p and then 720p at 30p....where i believe cannon gets you 1080p at both....
....personally i like Dslr for versatility and how small.....and you get benefit of shooting production stills.....Remember it's television. and for those that are squashing the DSLR's---think back 5-8 years and these dslr's are like owning a sony f750....I've made tests with rez charts with r1, sony950 and cannon 5d....in the end 5d and sony were so close....red beat them out of course. ....but the options with red are superior of course. But dslr is just a camera you can't count out as many do here.
Click to expand...

Thanks Johnny. Finally someone understands what kind of shooting we do and the needs we have.

I agree with you completely about the modern day DSLRs, like the Nikon D7000, D3, or Canon Mark II, for video. Used with discretion and for only certain select shots, I see no reason why those shots could not be inter-incorporated with R3D.

The problem is, it does not matter if you and "I" think that way, because National Geographic and other TV documentary production companies do NOT. At this time, there is NO current DSLR that NGSTV will allow as a secondary camera for their productions. So, unfortunately I have to abide by that.

The Sony PMW-EX1 and EX3 "are" on the list, so, for now, it looks like that is the best choice for me at this time.

One last thing: You are absolutely correct. We shoot EXCLUSIVELY for television NOT for the big screen. If we were shooting on theatrical productions, it would be an entirely different matter. But, for the TV documentaries like you and I shoot, these "less-than-perfect-cameras-compared-to-Red" are sufficient.

Say hello to the Whale Sharks for me. ;)

.
 
The EX cameras are about 4x noisier than Red... noise also starts fairly heavy in the mid-tones. They may be "approved", but I don't know how well they are going to match in the end...
 
uuuummmmmm yea ex1 and ex3 were good cameras not good for cutting with red well not without a 35m adapter and you getting a camera with a smaller sensor and less functionality for a higher price. then lets say the FS100 or 7d i havent used the nikon d700 so i cant speak about it you can deff shoot for tv with the ex1 or ex3. we shot two season of a reality show for mtv with ex but not the best idea for cutting with red. oh and let us not forget your only getting 8-16 bit audio from those DSLRs
 
Shane Kelly said:
second on the fs100, beats the hell out of the dslrs and with the right adapter will take any lens out there.
Click to expand...

Agree! Even better, if you can afford it, is an F3 (same sensor but much better processing and better QC). Of course best of all is an Epic....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top