The XL2 is a great camera and I understand your need for a 3chip job. But any "consumer" camera promising 3ccd etc. will be limited in terms of manual focus and aperture rings. While the pic quality will be great, the more ambitious your filmmaking gets, the more pissed off you'll get with the camera. Try to go "pro" from the start. Some good XL1s and Sony PD150s hangin around on the second hand market.

I own a Panasonic AG-DVC20, and it is a 1/6" 3 CCD camera, with manual focus rings and adjustable aperture. I am pretty satisfied with it, and it is within the price range of a consumer or lower-budget camera. However, I am considering upgrading to a Panasonic DVX100B, as I gain some more money. The only issue I have had with this camera is a slightly soft focus, but otherwise a really great camera. I would highly suggest it. Don't take the focus issue to seriously, as it's just me griping about the one thing I have had issues with. As long as you learn how to light things properly, you could coax an image worthy of an XL2 out of this camera. I can say that, having used both. I was a cameraman at a low budget horror film, and they lit the entire short with flashlights. The movie ended up grainy enough to embarrass my DVC20. If you light well, you can go far with this camera. And if you don't, you can still do fine.

"We all have the potential to be great. It is our inability to do so that makes us miserable." C.S.Lewis

Welcome to filmmaking.net. In addition you might also want to check out these threads:
http://www.filmmaking.net/fnetforum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=4527
http://www.filmmaking.net/fnetforum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=4479
http://www.filmmaking.net/fnetforum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=4183
http://www.filmmaking.net/fnetforum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=4555
http://www.filmmaking.net/fnetforum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=4586

=============================================
The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but progress.
Joseph Joubert, essayist (1754-1824)

Thanks for the help guys. I was just wondering, the JVC GZ MC-500 is only $449.99 through broadywayphoto.com. Would it be better to invest a little more money into getting one of the other models with better manual focus etc. or should I just go with this one. Again thanks.

Chud

Wherever you buy from, remember to check sites like http://www.resellerratings.com/ before you do. There are a lot of dubious practices in the camera selling business so the price you think you're getting may be a lot less than you eventually pay.

If you tell us what kind of budget is possible for you, then you'll be more likely to get an answer that matches your options better.
So what is your budget, and how much are you willing to stretch.
What will you be using this camera for?

"We all have the potential to be great. It is our inability to do so that makes us miserable." C.S.Lewis

quote:

---

Originally posted by chud

Thanks for the help guys. I was just wondering, the JVC GZ MC-500 is only $449.99 through broadywayphoto.com. Would it be better to invest a little more money into getting one of the other models with better manual focus etc. or should I just go with this one. Again thanks.

---

There are three thing that are VERY important when getting a camera:

Three CCD?s
Manual controls for the iris, shutter, focus and white balance.
A microphone input.

The JVC GZ MC-500 has 3 CCD's and some manual controls but no mic input. Another down side is it records to a 4GB Microdrive which holds 60 minutes of MPEG-2 video. This camera is really aimed at the "combo" market - it's a fairly impressive still camera with video capabilities. The lens is only fair and it doesn't produce video that compares favorably to the Panasonic PV-GS series.

It's difficult to know if getting a better camera is the right thing for you. As you know from reading the links I posted there is so much more to making the most professional looking film possible than just the camera. If this camera meets you needs and tech specs then it's the camera for you.

I like the new JVC GZ-HD7. A really nice Fujinon lens makes a huge difference and full manual controls is important. Three 1/5? 16:9 progressive scan CCD?s are pretty impressive for a camera in this price range. It, too, records directly to a built in hard drive but the HDD is 60GB.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/ is selling the GZ MC-500 for $495. They are MUCH more reliable than Broadway Photo.

The main purpose for my camcorder would be to make short films that are better quality than a lower level Hi-8 camcorder that I have now. I have about $500 right now but could stretch to $600 maybe $700 if I absolutely needed to. I'm just trying to get a good starting 3CCD camcorder so my films won't look like home movies. I've looked at every local shop (all 3 of them) and have checked the local retailers like Wal-Mart etc. but haven't found anything that produces the best bang for your buck in terms of image quality and overall control. Where I live everything is massively overpriced because there's no real market for what I'm looking for. We typically have the typical consumer level $200 camcorders at the local shops.

quote:

---

Originally posted by chud
I'm just trying to get a good starting 3CCD camcorder so my films won't look like home movies.

---

Your films won't look like home movies if you light them. The reason "home movies" look and sound like they do is because people point the camera and press record. If you take even a top of the line HDV camera and just point and shoot, it's not going to look much better than your basic home movie.

Unfortunately your price range isn't going to get you a camera that's too much better than your standard "home movie" camera. When you use only the available light in a room and the automatic exposure on the camera you will get that "home movie" look every time. But there is good news. Learn to use light. Put together a small, cheap easy to find light kit. It's amazing what a back light and a little fill light can do to make your movie look better.

How about this:
A couple of work lights with stands from any home improvement store.

Five or six ?scoop lights? - those clamp on work lights with the silver reflector.

Three or four pieces of Foamcore from any art supply store to use to bounce the light.

Two or three paper lanterns that you can get at Ikea. I hook each one to a dimmer (home improvement store again) to get better control.

Some colored gels (check on line or if there is a small theater in your town they often have extras) and some black wrap. Check Studio Depot. ?url? http://www.studiodepot.com/store/?/url?

A do-it-yourself soft box made from foamcore and gaff tape can be made to use as a gel holder, soft box and light shade.

Hey thanks for the help. I was actually wondering if it would be possible to make a low budget lighting system for my film. Compared to a 3CCD camcorder with proper lighting how well will an HDV camcorder with good lighting look? I appreciate all of the help you guys have given me, I'll definitely put it all to good use.

Chud

Keep in mind, if you plan on purchasing an HDV camera, that you will need more editing power to handle it. Even if you are only using Window's Movie Maker, you'll still need a decent computer.

"We all have the potential to be great. It is our inability to do so that makes us miserable." C.S.Lewis

I have a pretty good system that I had custom built by Compaq. It's because of this darn thing I'm nearly broke?:)?, oh well it was worth it. If I were to use Avid would it be sufficient enough to handle the footage from an HDV or 3CCD? I have a friend who could hook me up with the newest version on the cheap. Or would I be better off trying to get Final Cut? I don't really know what editing software would be best suited for the task.

Final Cut is Mac only. I'd say Avid HD Xpress Pro is the PC equivalent (in terms of price and performance). That's my opinion tho, others will have different views on which PC software equals FCP

=========================
There's daggers in mens' smiles

I was just looking at some magazines and saw another camcorder that looked the same as an HDV made by Sony except it was an HDD. They had nearly the same capabilities and controls. Does anyone know what the main difference is? The HDV costs a little more but they're very similar. Could it be the size of their drives or resolution they shoot in (one said it shot in 1080i)?