Forum index / Cameras / Post your camera

Post your camera

96 posts · page 3 of 4

post #61
30 November 2005, 19:59 UTC#61
QUOTE(Scott @ Nov 30 2005, 07:55 PM)
QUOTE(WEAK @ Nov 30 2005, 08:52 PM)
QUOTE(Scott @ Nov 30 2005, 07:47 PM)


are you serious? Thats like a $4,000 camera...
[right][snapback]232392[/snapback][/right]


serious, but 2650. rich boi, parents loaning me most of the money and I gotta pay it back by when I leave university.
[right][snapback]232397[/snapback][/right]


is it really 2650 $?
post #62
30 November 2005, 20:00 UTC#62
£s not $s
post #63
30 November 2005, 20:02 UTC#63
ahh I see :(
post #64
30 November 2005, 20:12 UTC#64
You shouldve made a thread about it and reviewed it. Have you got the hang of HDV yet? Is it worth the money and shit?

btw...if thats a Z1U...thats $5,000 camera in the US...
post #65
30 November 2005, 20:28 UTC#65
yeah, its called the Z1, I was saving up Sony HDR-FX1, but my cousin whos a producer, was telling me how I really should bother paying the extra money. It's got some awesome features and is pretty damn sexy. But I haven't got all the hi def capturing and stuff sorted out yet, but it has xlr inputs which is pretty cool, great sound wiv a external microphone. I don't have a HD tv so can't truelly appreciate quality, the difference isn't really major, but I've more to learn about it, so many different settings and stuff.
post #66
01 December 2005, 05:01 UTC#66
my buddy has the hdr-fx1 and its a fucking insane camera. the nighttime shooting is awsome you can get the lights off buildings and shit to stand out a lot, like the night scenes in collateral.
post #67
01 December 2005, 07:54 UTC#67
I was thinking of getting a HD camera purely for the ability to cope better with dim lighting. But I'll wait around for a bit first and use spotlights we have.
I think the problem with HD cameras are that they tend to be big, attracting attention and more likely to get robbed off you.
post #69
01 December 2005, 08:18 UTC#69
Do you always film widescreen with the pc1000?
post #70
01 December 2005, 08:31 UTC#70
Yeah, but you don't have to.

PS I will be at your house in 25 mins, I have to get mcdonalds and I have to do some ghetto sticker tags.
post #71
01 December 2005, 12:38 UTC#71
I'm jealous of your setup Word. Liking the PC1000 so far?
post #73
02 December 2005, 03:42 UTC#73
QUOTE(Wilbur @ Dec 1 2005, 12:38 PM)
I'm jealous of your setup Word. Liking the PC1000 so far?
[right][snapback]232932[/snapback][/right]


Loving it eh, we did motorway spots last weekend, and when I had to climb up stuff I just put it in my hoodie.
post #74
10 December 2005, 17:03 UTC#74
QUOTE(WEAK @ Dec 1 2005, 02:10 PM)
personally, if I had $5,000 to spend on a HD camera...Id get something with a variable frame rate and real 24p. This cam is the hd100..it also has an interchangable lens like the canon xl2.

External image not preserved — inspect source: http://professionalmarket.com.pl/fotos/JVC-foto/GY-HD100.jpg
[right][snapback]232949[/snapback][/right]


24p isn't as useful as you might think. Especially if you are staying on video, as without the right monitor or equipment, you'll most likely view it as a 30fps pulled down picture.
post #75
10 December 2005, 18:06 UTC#75
Youre actually right. 24p is pointless if you stay on video. When you play 24p footage on an NTSC tv or computer monitor, the camera uses a process called "telecine" in which it adds additional frames to make the fps 29.97 so that it runs smoothly.

I wonder how many people out there actually know that...as only serious film makers put the money into converting their video into film for the big screen..
post #76
10 December 2005, 18:06 UTC#76
Youre actually right. 24p is pointless if you stay on video. When you play 24p footage on an NTSC tv or computer monitor, the camera uses a process called "telecine" in which it adds additional frames to make the fps 29.97 so that it runs smoothly.

I wonder how many people out there actually know that...as only serious film makers put the money into converting their video into film for the big screen..
post #77
10 December 2005, 18:08 UTC#77
the answer to this question doesnt make much sense to me. It didnt really answer anything, any ideas?


QUOTE
4. If I'm not distributing my program on film why should I shoot 24p?

Most prime time television episodic programs are shot in 24p - either 35mm film or HD video - and therefore a very large audience exists that equates the "24p look" with very high production values. In this case the material is most often delivered as a 4:3 aspect ratio presentation, but other 24p based non-film outlets - such as DVD (DVD-R or DVD-RAM) - could be 4:3 or 16:9 widescreen aspect ratios.
post #78
10 December 2005, 19:57 UTC#78
QUOTE(WEAK @ Dec 10 2005, 06:06 PM)
Youre actually right. 24p is pointless if you stay on video. When you play 24p footage on an NTSC tv or computer monitor, the camera uses a process called "telecine" in which it adds additional frames to make the fps 29.97 so that it runs smoothly.

I wonder how many people out there actually know that...as only serious film makers put the money into converting their video into film for the big screen..
[right][snapback]239599[/snapback][/right]


The camera calls it "telecine", but it's really just your standard 2-3 pulldown process that adds the extra frames along with a slight change in sound speed to keep it all in sync (about .01% shift).

Traditionally, "telecine" refers to the process of converting film to video using a telecine projector hooked up to an NTSC or PAL camera.

</nerd mode>
post #80
10 December 2005, 20:41 UTC#80
QUOTE(Scott @ Nov 30 2005, 02:55 PM)
QUOTE(WEAK @ Nov 30 2005, 08:52 PM)
QUOTE(Scott @ Nov 30 2005, 07:47 PM)


are you serious? Thats like a $4,000 camera...
[right][snapback]232392[/snapback][/right]


serious, but 2650. rich boi, parents loaning me most of the money and I gotta pay it back by when I leave university.
[right][snapback]232397[/snapback][/right]

im asking for one of those for Xmas
post #81
10 December 2005, 20:46 UTC#81
I have 2 canons mini DV's

zr 300 and zr 80 and the zr80 sucks balls no night vision

and 1 sony DCR-TRV320 NTSAC....


Those are mine the rst of my crew have cams too not sure what they are...

Im planning on buying some HD cameras as soon as they drop in price probably after Christmas
post #82
10 December 2005, 21:03 UTC#82
QUOTE(smack_daddy_j @ Dec 10 2005, 03:46 PM)
I have 2 canons mini DV's

zr 300 and zr 80 and the zr80 sucks balls no night vision

and 1 sony DCR-TRV320 NTSAC....


Those are mine the rst of my crew have cams too not sure what they are...

Im planning on buying some HD cameras as soon as they drop in price probably after Christmas
[right][snapback]239718[/snapback][/right]

y would they drop after x mas? it's not like their toys.. if they drop it will be when a newer model comes out..
post #84
10 December 2005, 22:22 UTC#84
QUOTE(THC @ Dec 10 2005, 08:39 PM)
QUOTE(WEAK @ Dec 1 2005, 09:10 AM)
personally, if I had $5,000 to spend on a HD camera...Id get something with a variable frame rate and real 24p. This cam is the hd100..it also has an interchangable lens like the canon xl2.

External image not preserved — inspect source: http://professionalmarket.com.pl/fotos/JVC-foto/GY-HD100.jpg
[right][snapback]232949[/snapback][/right]

JVC is shit and breaks under pressure like bobby brown,
Japanese
Video
Crap
[right][snapback]239709[/snapback][/right]


you dont know shit.
post #85
11 December 2005, 02:43 UTC#85
lol JVC has been making studio cameras for years and they are top notch. that thing has awsome HD capability and a fucking awsome lense. JVC's new professional cameras are just as good as Sonys if not better because of the lenses.

HD is the way to go now, the TV prices are dropping and the image quality of HD is mind blowing. that camera shoots true 24p and you can output it to 720p right out of the camera which is considered HD straight from there. as for 1080i I would like to see that be able to export straight to TV or firewire because 1080i shit looks fucking awsome.
post #86
11 December 2005, 02:49 UTC#86
QUOTE(WEAK @ Dec 10 2005, 05:22 PM)
QUOTE(THC @ Dec 10 2005, 08:39 PM)
QUOTE(WEAK @ Dec 1 2005, 09:10 AM)
personally, if I had $5,000 to spend on a HD camera...Id get something with a variable frame rate and real 24p. This cam is the hd100..it also has an interchangable lens like the canon xl2.

External image not preserved — inspect source: http://professionalmarket.com.pl/fotos/JVC-foto/GY-HD100.jpg
[right][snapback]232949[/snapback][/right]

JVC is shit and breaks under pressure like bobby brown,
Japanese
Video
Crap
[right][snapback]239709[/snapback][/right]


you dont know shit.
[right][snapback]239795[/snapback][/right]

my parents sell dv cams and after useing a number of jvc's I have come to the conclusion that they are shit in comparsion to sony. if youd like u can make a hgf poll asking wich is better, all sony cams or all jvc's. tho youre jvc looks more pro it will still break as easly as all the others. that is y I choose sony. as far as the lense goes u can always buy other lenses... and I just realisied that when u said $5000 u ment usd I was thinkin canadian wich is a big diff in price... so obviously you cant compare a sony hd cam that costs 5000 cad to another cam that is 5000 usd..
post #87
26 December 2005, 19:58 UTC#87
This are cowardice, you have cameras very superior to ours, this type of camera that you uses normally in its filmings, few people have financial condition here to buy... know that they go to laugh at me... We use a Sony P-32... you do not have nor to make idea of that is this... thus does not give to make good films... without counting that for you the technology mini DV is normal... this for we is future... knows that none of you has nothing to see with this, but is therefore that I hate my country... garbage of the third world

It will be that somebody could me sell one descent cam... that is not very expensive... remembers... is of a very poor country

That is so sad. Image file not present in the recovered backup Image file not present in the recovered backup
Attachments
Sony_P_32.bmp · 31 KB
Attachment metadata survives, but the file is absent from the recovered server backup.
post #88
26 December 2005, 20:02 UTC#88
QUOTE(THC @ Dec 11 2005, 02:49 AM) [snapback]239940[/snapback]

QUOTE(WEAK @ Dec 10 2005, 05:22 PM)
QUOTE(THC @ Dec 10 2005, 08:39 PM)
QUOTE(WEAK @ Dec 1 2005, 09:10 AM)
personally, if I had $5,000 to spend on a HD camera...Id get something with a variable frame rate and real 24p. This cam is the hd100..it also has an interchangable lens like the canon xl2.

External image not preserved — inspect source: http://professionalmarket.com.pl/fotos/JVC-foto/GY-HD100.jpg
[snapback]232949[/snapback]


JVC is shit and breaks under pressure like bobby brown,
Japanese
Video
Crap
[snapback]239709[/snapback]



you dont know shit.
[snapback]239795[/snapback]


my parents sell dv cams and after useing a number of jvc's I have come to the conclusion that they are shit in comparsion to sony. if youd like u can make a hgf poll asking wich is better, all sony cams or all jvc's. tho youre jvc looks more pro it will still break as easly as all the others. that is y I choose sony. as far as the lense goes u can always buy other lenses... and I just realisied that when u said $5000 u ment usd I was thinkin canadian wich is a big diff in price... so obviously you cant compare a sony hd cam that costs 5000 cad to another cam that is 5000 usd..


Yeah, your mom works for Sony.
post #89
26 December 2005, 20:03 UTC#89
QUOTE(Mono @ Dec 26 2005, 08:02 PM) [snapback]252764[/snapback]

QUOTE(THC @ Dec 11 2005, 02:49 AM) [snapback]239940[/snapback]

QUOTE(WEAK @ Dec 10 2005, 05:22 PM)
QUOTE(THC @ Dec 10 2005, 08:39 PM)
QUOTE(WEAK @ Dec 1 2005, 09:10 AM)
personally, if I had $5,000 to spend on a HD camera...Id get something with a variable frame rate and real 24p. This cam is the hd100..it also has an interchangable lens like the canon xl2.

External image not preserved — inspect source: http://professionalmarket.com.pl/fotos/JVC-foto/GY-HD100.jpg
[snapback]232949[/snapback]


JVC is shit and breaks under pressure like bobby brown,
Japanese
Video
Crap
[snapback]239709[/snapback]



you dont know shit.
[snapback]239795[/snapback]


my parents sell dv cams and after useing a number of jvc's I have come to the conclusion that they are shit in comparsion to sony. if youd like u can make a hgf poll asking wich is better, all sony cams or all jvc's. tho youre jvc looks more pro it will still break as easly as all the others. that is y I choose sony. as far as the lense goes u can always buy other lenses... and I just realisied that when u said $5000 u ment usd I was thinkin canadian wich is a big diff in price... so obviously you cant compare a sony hd cam that costs 5000 cad to another cam that is 5000 usd..


Yeah, your mom works for Sony.



biased as fuck
post #90
26 December 2005, 20:28 UTC#90
I take so little care of my JVC minidv. I've had it for about 6 months now and it's usually chucked in my bag along with spotlights, spray cans and other things it's gonna get mashed around with. It's still standing strong today with no problems.