Cheap HD - Does it Exist?

Gregor Mac · March 21, 2006

I have a fast laptop but am looking for a good decent cheap HD rig for production of a cable internet tv show.

Would prefer a camera that can take an anamorphic lens. What cameras are becoming readily available second hand.

Filip Plesha · March 21, 2006

What do you need a HD camera for a internet show. Surely you don't mean to stream HD resolution video?

Chris Burke · March 21, 2006

What do you need a HD camera for a internet show. Surely you don't mean to stream HD resolution video?

I second that response. If for the internet, save your money and buy a single chip mini DV camcorder. Friends of mine produce and shoot a web show www.starvinwithlouis.com with a single chip sony. I think the camera cost $500 US. Check out there website and see the quality. I think that it is more than adequate. HD would be overkill. Good luck

Chris

:rolleyes:

Gregor Mac · March 21, 2006

I second that response. If for the internet, save your money and buy a single chip mini DV camcorder. Friends of mine produce and shoot a web show www.starvinwithlouis.com with a single chip sony. I think the camera cost $500 US. Check out there website and see the quality. I think that it is more than adequate. HD would be overkill. Good luck
Chris

:rolleyes:

Sure. but I want to shoot in HD for archiving and cable tv.

So what rig fits the description.

I usually shoot on film, to me MiniDV is yucko.

Scott Fritzshall · March 21, 2006

Sure. but I want to shoot in HD for archiving and cable tv.

So what rig fits the description.

I usually shoot on film, to me MiniDV is yucko.

Panasonic's HVX200 is the cheapest you'll find unless you get an HDV camera, but if you don't like miniDV, you probably won't like these, since they're basically miniDV with higher resolution.

Rik Andino · March 21, 2006

I have a fast laptop but am looking for a good decent cheap HD rig for production of a cable internet tv show.

Would prefer a camera that can take an anamorphic lens. What cameras are becoming readily available second hand.

Try the Canon XL-H1

It's got a detachable lens so you could attach an adapter to use 35mm anamorphic lens...

Though I'm not sure if that'll work--anamorphic is mostly suited for 35mm film...

Why do you want to use anamorphic lenses?

The Canon H1 has the best resolution of all the prosumer HD cams out there

It also has an HD-SDI BNC port so you shoot straight to HDCAM or D5 through a deck (but it's costly)

The only thing it doesn't have is a progessive scan chip--so there's no 30P or 24P.

As for the cheap option we'll you have to define the word cheap.

This is one of the cheapest HD camera setups but at a little over 10K (plus anamorphic lenses and adaptors)

And with the post process being bit costly and more difficult than miniDV

I wouldn't call this bargain basement prices.

You have to define your budget and see what you can afford.

Then research the market and see what best suits your needs.

I think at a bit over 3K the Sony-Z1u is the cheapest of all the prosumer HD cams out there.

Maybe you should check it out as well.

If you're looking for cheap it does exist...

but if you're looking cheap and spectacularly fantastic...

Well that'll never exist. Welcome to the real world.

Good Luck

Invivo · April 2, 2006

http://www.sundancemediagroup.com/articles/A1U/HVR-A1U.htm

Still testing mine, got it recently for $2,100 US. But there are deals for incomplete packages and PAL for less out there.

So far I like it, but there are issues with getting used to it and using it properly. Hope to have more news later on it's use.

tt

Gregor Mac · August 21, 2006

Thanks for the input everyone.

I think I'll stick to Super 16.

I like the portability of the media (no need to worry about storing uncompressed footage).

I also like its compact nature.

And if I drop the rig its a lot less expensive.

A real pain editing however. Maybe I'll regret it. Oh no wait I just saw Miami Vice - would I ever regret not using GRAINY HDV after seeing that? I don't think so.

*Removes tongue from cheek*

Satsuki Murashige · August 27, 2006

Would prefer a camera that can take an anamorphic lens.

I guess you've already made up your mind, but I was wondering why you'd want to attach an anamorphic lens to a 16x9 camera (which the HD ones all are). Were you trying to get a 2.39:1 aspect ratio by using an additional 0.33x anamorphic adapter (like the Panasonic), or did you want to use 35mm 2x 'scope lenses via a mini35-type adapter? If the latter, the resulting aspect ratio would be about 3.55:1. You'll have the same problem trying to get 2.39:1 in Super16, but you probably know about that.

EDIT - If this will only live on video, then you can just crop your footage, however you acquire it, to get the desire aspect ratio.

Edited August 27, 2006 by Satsuki Murashige

Jamie Metzger · August 28, 2006

Thanks for the input everyone.

I think I'll stick to Super 16.

I like the portability of the media (no need to worry about storing uncompressed footage).

I also like its compact nature.

And if I drop the rig its a lot less expensive.

A real pain editing however. Maybe I'll regret it. Oh no wait I just saw Miami Vice - would I ever regret not using GRAINY HDV after seeing that? I don't think so.

*Removes tongue from cheek*