On Sun, 20 Apr 2003 23:34:10 -0400, "Randy Brown"
<Randy@RandyBrownProductionsDO_NOT_SPAM_ME.com> wrote:
>Newbie question...
>
>I read lots here about cameras, and I'm wondering. I just dabble in video
>prod, mostly for my own amusement. But I'm learning, and I will get better.
>How far I take it remains to be seen. But for now, I'm just shooting with
>my little consumer-grade camcorder, a Sony
Handycam. It's a nice one - 1
>megapixel, but still just a consumer-level unit, and
obviously far short of
>professional grade.
>
>Went to dinner the other night and saw some high school
kids shooting a
>video for a school project. They were obviously using one of the school's
>cameras from the video production class (wish we had
that when I was in
>school, but then again, we were just beginning to get
color tv back then...
>ha!), and it appeared to be a "next level
up." Not as big as the mini-cams
>I'm familiar with from my days working alongside network
TV guys (I do
>radio, so I was only observing the TV guys), but still a
higher grade of
>camera than my little palm-size Sony Handycam.
>
>Anyway, here's my question:
>
>What would the next step up for me be? From the consumer-level camcorders,
>what class of camera is the next grade up? And would that next step up be
>"broadcast quality," or are there a couple of
levels one must go before
>getting to "broadcast quality?" I'm also wondering what the limitations are
>of the "next level up" from mine.
>
>Thanks in advance for the insight. I'm learning lots by reading this ng,
>though quite a bit of it is still wayyyyy over my
head. Talk to me about
>audio production and I'm an expert. But I'm still new to video. Just
>playing right now, but want to learn.
>
>Randy
If the quality or capability of what you are using now
is limiting you, then consider an "upgrade", most
likely
to a good 3-CCD camera (some at the low end offer no
advantages over what you have). This will cost about
$2500-3500 (or consider used). In new, I would look at
the Sony VX2000/PD150, Panasonic DVX100, JVC 300, or
Canon GL2 (or if low-light shooting ability is not
important, look also at the Sony TRV950/PDX10). In
used cameras, consider the Sony VX1000 or TRV900 in
addition to the above.
For a comparison of Sony imaging types, see:
www.David-Ruether-Photography.com/camcorder--comparison.htm.
For info on video image characteristics and problems,
see: www.David-Ruether-Photography.com/vid_pict_characts.htm.
For comparisons among brands/models, see:
www.David-Ruether-Photography.com/camcorder-comparison.htm,
www.David-Ruether-Photography.com/sony_dcr-vx2000.htm,
http://www4.big.or.jp/~a_haru/index.html,
www.bealecorner.com, www.adamwilt.com, and try
a search at www.google.com.
As for "broadcast-quality", this is the subject of
many threads on these video NGs...;-) In short:
"broadcast quality" is whatever can be broadcast
(as in, if the material is important enough, it
can be very low quality; if the standards are loose
for your market, 1-chippers may do; if the standards
are network-normal, 3-CCD Mini-DV may be at the low
end of what is sometimes acceptable; if the standards
are high, the cameras above will not be acceptable;
or, if you don't tell anyone what you shot with, and
you are skillful in covering the gear's shortcomings
[or in making them appropriate to your material], you
can shoot with anything...).