Jump to content

Jon Balkhead

Basic Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Jon Balkhead

  • Birthday 06/15/1990

Profile Information

  • Occupation

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  1. Thanks so much for the reply, Evan. I was beginning to think that I'd never get any advice out of this thread. That's a very convincing recommendation for the FX7. I was leaning toward the FX1 as of now because of the 1/3 CCDs vs the 1/4 CMOS, but I had heard about the FX1 losing color in low light. The HMC40 -- though I hate the body (very small and cheap looking and (probably) feeling -- is a fierce competitor considering its 24p and 720 60p slow motion. I'm not sure about its low light, though. That's very important factor to me. I'll likely be shooting in low-light a lot. Your trailer gives a good sense of what the FX7 can do at its best. (The photography is impressive, by the way -- great colors, beautiful landscapes.) I don't think I could go wrong choosing it, especially at $1500 - $1700 used -- a bargain. I hope some others will weigh in. I'm still deeply undecided. The XH A1 seems to combine a lot of the positive features of these cameras -- the solid body, attractiveness of the FX1, the 24p (f in the Canon's case) of the HMC40, the computationally undemanding nature of HDV, and excellent low-light, exceeding any of the camera's I'm considering according to most. It's just outside my price range though. Used, it almost always goes for $2000+. Keep the responses coming, please. Thanks again Evan (and by the way, how did you get that opening shot -- you didn't rent a chopper, did you?!)
  2. Ah, I forgot to mention this: I'd like for the camera to be able to engage gain even if the aperture isn't wide open and/or the shutter speed at its lowest. I don't think the HMC40 can do this; I'm not sure about the FX7
  3. Looking to buy my first HD camera. Currently I'm considering the Pansonic HMC40 and the Sony FX7 most strongly -- based in large part on these video: http://vimeo.com/7333327 (FX7), http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bc3WHh7hmGQ (FX7), (HMC40), and http://vimeo.com/8244743 (HMC40). Budget is not high (definitely sub $2000 -- preferably around $1500) and I'm perfectly fine (more or less planning on) buying used. I prefer CCD to CMOS -- rolling shutter, noise pattern, etc., -- so all things being equal, I'd prefer a CCD to CMOS censor (I haven't found a CCD in my price range that I like). I want a camera that can handle detail well (woods, densely packed, deep focus compositions). Shallow DOF is not important to me. I will be shooting in low light often, but my low light requirements are different that most, probably: I like noise/texture, so ultra-clean low light performance isn't really important. Based on the videos above, I like the low-light performance of the FX7 and HMC40. Light sensitivity is important though, and the way the noise is rendered is important. I like fine noise rather than smeary, chunky noise. I'll be using hand-held and steadicam shots most often -- probably another reason why CCD would be preferable. 24p would be nice, but isn't necessarily a dealbreaker. Some slow motion capability is a plus. I'd appreciate any thoughts on the two cameras I've mentioned, plus any others I may have overlooked. (Also, I have looked at some of the HD capable DSLRs out there [GH1, etc], but I'm not really interested. I don't want 35mm DOF, which seems to be their main claim to fame. I'm not sure I can be sold on one of these.)
  4. Don't forget RED. Two Scarlets will, apparently, be able to do 3D with the aid of some kind of add-on rig. http://red.cachefly.net/14/epic2.jpg
  5. Werckmeister Harmonies was excellent; haven't seen Satantango. I got it from Netflix and watched a bit of it, but I just knew I wasn't going to be able to commit to 7 hours of Tarr. The DVD is pretty bad too: 1.66 aspect ratio (and I absolutely appreciate their retaining OAR), but it's not anamorphic, and if your 16:9 TV doesn't have a custom zoom function, you'll be in for a letter and pillarboxed viewing experience. Also, something about the Tarr DVDs make the films look like they were shot on video; maybe it has something to do with PAL to NTSC conversion, if the films were sourced from PAL masters Also, Tarr's films have notoriously bad dubs, some of the worst I've heard. Worse than Fellini's oldest movie's from half a century ago. One gets used to it partway through the film, but it's disconcerting I want to see Satantango eventually, but one definitely has to be in the mood for a film like that
  6. If you do have photos / stills, post them here for all to see. I'm curious as well
  7. Do any books exist detailing the ins and outs of shooting 16mm in a substantial, clear way? From camera maintenance and loading to film speed, dynamic range, lighting. Textbooks, paperback, whatever, as long as the information is there
  • Create New...