The XL1 is OK: after all, '28 days later' was shot on an XL1 with expensive lenses, and while it's obviously DV (and a bad movie), it still looks pretty good within the limitations of the format. There are better cameras, but there aren't that many better Mini-DV cameras.

With that budget, though, you might want to consider renting rather than buying, unless you're going to make several movies. The other thing you should definitely get is a good mike: I see plenty of decently-shot movies that are ruined by bad sound.

Another option, depending on where you live, is to find a crew who have their own equipment: even professional DoPs and sound recordists may be willing to work on a movie if you pay them the money you'd otherwise have had to pay to hire the equipment they're providing.

Edit: Actually, I just noticed you're in the UK... if you're around West London I could probably do the edit for you if you need help with that. I have an Avid system at home with about 500GB of disk space.

Thanks for the quick reply. I dont have to get the Canon, could you perhaps recommend me a more professional camera thats not rediculously expensive, even though I appreciate it wont be cheap.

Thanks also for your offer of editing help, I dont know what an 'Avid System' is but I may ask you more when I have finished the shooting.

I know it's very forward of me, but do you use MSN instant messenger by any chance? I only ask because you seem very knowledgable in this field but please feel free to say no if you dont want me intruding.

Calumn

Well, that's kind of the point: I don't think there is a more professional camera in that price range :). The XL2 is better (e.g. it has true widescreen shooting rather than electronic widescreen), the PD150/170 is better in some ways and worse in others, the high-end DVCAMs are better and Digibeta is certainly better, but they're all substantially more money.

I don't have any instant messenger programs, but I keep thinking about getting one: you can always email me at (removed). I've worked on a lot of low-budget movies in and around London in the last five years, many of them shot on DV rather than film, and a couple of those used XL1s. I'm still waiting to see what the XL1-shot feature I worked on looks like when it's finished, but the raw footage I saw looked quite good.

Avid is a fairly high-end editing system (well, their $100k systems are very high-end, but I don't have one of those :)), so basically it can capture DV or DVCPRO HD from tape to hard disk, edit there and output back to tape or to DVD.

Calumn, you might also consider buying a camera and then reselling it once you are done with the shoot. While the initial outlay of cash is expensive, you can get alot of it back when you sell the camera bringing the final cost to be less than the cost of renting.

OK, thanks, I'll look into those. I may just go for the Canon and work up. On the other hand, I have been offered ?20'000 for one of my really good scripts so I may just cash in on it to buy better equipment, although I'd love to make it myself.

I did notice that, as you said Paradox, cameras seem to hold their value very well with what seems like less than a 15% drop in value, however I would quite like to own mine permanently.

If you want to keep a camera for a long time, I'd seriously look at the new Sony HVR-Z1, which records 1080 line HDTV onto DV tapes. The upside is that it's an HD camera for 3500 pounds with XLR audio inputs and a few other 'professional' features, the downside is that it's a new camera (well, actually not even out for another few weeks) and new format, so no-one really has enough experience to say for sure whether it will turn out to be a good investment in the long run.

I'm probably going to buy one in six months if I hear good things about it in that time and no-one else produces something better. Hopefully it will last me five years like my TRV900 has.

I'd better not risk that Sony, might turn out to be a flop. I can get the TRV900 for under a thousand pounds, do you reckon that might be a good one to go for?

Yes and no :). It was by far the best price/performance deal for its time, and there's really nothing like it on the market new anymore, but it's been out of production for a couple of years now. The other downsides are that some of them eat tapes, and many of them (including mine) have dead internal mikes due to a manufacturing defect... as a result, while it's been a great camera for me, I'm reluctant to recommend anyone buying one second-hand.

Picture-wise it's similar to the XL1 in quality other than an annoying sharpening filter they apply to the video which can cause odd 'halo' artifacts around the edge of object. I know a number of TV news people used them in places where even an XL1 might be big enough to get them unwelcome attention from the local authorities (e.g. East Timor and Palestine).

OK, I will probably leave it. I may go for the XL2. The XL2 records onto DVDs and not Tapes doesnt it?

Sorry to ask so many questions, you've been a great help already so if I ask too many please say so.

"The purpose of learning is growth, and our minds, unlike our bodies, can continue growing as we continue to live."

-- Morris Adler (1870-1937)

In other words, it is never possible to ask too many questions, Calumn. Especially in an area of knowledge as vast as filmmaking.

-------------------------------------
"Never ask a man what kind of computer he uses.

If it's a Mac, he'll tell you. If It's a PC, why embarass him?"

-Tom Clancy

No, the XL2 records to DV tape like the XL1.

I am having the same problems as you. I am just getting started in filmmaking, I have no technical experience or whatsoever. I do have some rough scripts, which I will work out in the coming months, while saving money for a camera in the meantime. My problem is however, that I am completely lost in the woods. There is DV, 16mm, HDV, HD, DVCAM, DigiBeta -- which format to use? My budget will be somewhere between 2000 - 5000 $ for the initial investment. I did figure however, that I need thinks like a mic and maybe some filters as well, so I am not sure if a XL2 is in my budget.

I do believe that the script and the style of the movie are far more important than the quality of it. I do not mind watching the best movie classics now, image quality is not the most important. What I do want is decent quality, which I think MiniDV offers. The HDV format is interesting, but I feel there is to less information, about editing, the advantages and disadvantages etcetera.

So my main question is should I go with something like the DVC-30, GL2 or VX2100 and start filming within one or two months, and learn the craft, or better save the money for a more expensive camera? Or to say it differently, when creative enough, does the XL2 really have to offer more technically wise? Or will a movie shot with the XL2 need the same expenses to be brought into theaters or on DVD as a movie shot with a VX-2100 or something similair?

That?s my many question at this moment.

"Revenge is a dish best served cold."

Personally, if I had $2000-5000 to spend on a camera at this point it would either be an XL2 or a Sony FX1... they're the only sane choices at this point in that price range as far as I can see. However, I'm waiting a while to see how the Z1 works out and possibly long enough to see what happens with the rumored Panasonic low-cost DVCPRO HD camera if it is released.

quote:

---

Originally posted by MarkG

Personally, if I had $2000-5000 to spend on a camera at this point it would either be an XL2 or a Sony FX1... they're the only sane choices at this point in that price range as far as I can see. However, I'm waiting a while to see how the Z1 works out and possibly long enough to see what happens with the rumored Panasonic low-cost DVCPRO HD camera if it is released.

---

I am not sure if this help's but I found a good site for cameras http://store.yahoo.com/royalcamera/sohdhdv10.html I am in the same boat I am want to do a film my family is telling me I am crazy spending my money on this stuff I don't know how the hell I'm going to do this but I have too, for me.