Should I go back to the ole' SD DVCAM?

[chad556]

I'm in a pinch fellas. I've been a freelance news stringer for a number of years, and make a decent living doing it. When I started, I was able to get by with using a Sony DSR-250 with only a 1/3" CCD DVCAM. I sold that, and purchased a Panasonic HMC-80 HD AVCHD camera. Now before we go any further, many of you might be scratching your head as to why I went with the AVCHD. Well, I simply cant afford a camera over $3,000. Yes, I make a decent living, but due to personal reasons, and a disabled person in the household, I just cant afford it.

With all of that said, the HMC-80 just isnt cutting it when it comes to stringing at night, in low light situations. More often then not, I am having to open the shutter to 15 and crank the db up to 18db or higher! Thus creating a noisy picture, non fluid pans, and slow mo figures walking, etc. Shooting with it during the day is top notch however. My only other concern with the Pani is the construction and lack of true shoulder weight feel.

The bottom line is this. 1/3" CCD DV cams shoot better then the AVCHD does in low light. The DV cams may be archaic, but they are coming down in price and shoot a hell of a lot better in the dark. Do you think it is worth turning back the clock in this instance and ditching the cheap HD for a once pro line DV?

For the record, I would only consider a camera that shoots in 16:9, shoulder mount, and has a 1/2" censor of larger. The JVC GY-DV700WU comes to mind, and I can pick one up any day of the week for under $2,000. I will keep the HD Pani for day shoots. And boy will I miss non linear tapeless editing if I go back to DV!

Thanks for your advice.

 

[2 Hungry Dogs]

Personally I would be very cautious about spending any money an additional SD gear. It's life span is so limited at this point you have to be very careful.

It all comes down to your clients. Do they still accept SD, and for how long? If they are requiring, or plan to in the future then it might not be a good idea. If they are still accepting SD and will for a while it might make sense.

One thing to consider is that these stations are accepting User Generated content from smartphones. And the quality of the picture on those things is getting better all the time. The shooting isn't any better, but the image quality is. Those things also have problems in low light. You don't want the UG video to look better then your stuff.

Have you looked into financing options to buy a better quality camera?

 

[canuckcam]

At 1/3", you can imagine how the surface area of each microlens (three: R, G, B, make up one pixel) has shrunk with the move from SD to HD because so many more pixels are required to make an HD image. Even with advances in technology, physics dictate the smaller the light gathering area, the less light gets through. Thus the horrid low light performance.

IMO, good, usable video in SD trumps bad video in HD.

 

[AKinDC]

The only factor should be what your end client/stations want.
Where I work, they'd rather use hideous HD video than beautiful SD...but things could be different where you are.

 

[chad556]

Thanks for the replies thus far, much appreciated. As for what the stations want, I'm not sure if that's really a factor in this decision. The reason being, is that I am the one who converts the footage to a usable format. As it stands right now, I send them HD footage via yousendit every night. I log and transfer the raw pain .mts HD files into FCP, and then export them into MPEG4 via H264 codec and it works fine. I can't send them the .mts files, because some complained their NLE didn't like it.

If I were to go back to SD, I would log and CAPTURE the footage into FCP, and export it the same way... MPEG4

So it's a wash in that respect. All of the stations here, in Phoenix air in HD 720p to the best of my knowledge, but again, I can't help but think that great night shots in SD would still look better than a so called HD noisy stuttery image.

Keep the replies coming. I can get the 700wu with a 2/3" censor and nice lens for under $1600 right now. Just a bit trigger shy at the moment.

 

[Ben Longden]

Depends... Most NDs dont know the real difference between SD and HD. Most assume its the aspect ratio. 4x3 is SD whereas widescreen 16x9 *must* be HD.....

My clients even the HD news ones want the best quality pic available, and they are more than happy with the SD I give them, especially low light stuff, which is ten times the quality of others...

Not only that, the rolling shutter (Jellocam) effect with CMOS chips and shutter is a major sticking point. There are stringers here who will not get a gig because the a CMOS chip makes football players look ridiculous.

 

[Cameradude]

"....I would be very cautious about spending any money an additional SD gear...."

Very good point.

I still do a fair amount of SD work, but they are mainly live shots. Even the major networks hate to pay for an HD truck and crew unless it is something big. While I still have a Betacam that works and delivers 16:9 images, most of the time I accomplish the SD shots with my HDX-900.

Back to the SD gear issue, the market for the gear is shrinking daily, so I would consider something that "swings both ways" if that is possible.