studio interview show - what's the right camera

[timderoche]

I'm producing a half-hour interview show for PBS. We're shooting it in "limbo" (black set plus a couple of flatscreen monitors in background) and will include lots of close ups (similar to your standard episode of Charlie Rose).

 

I'm faced with a decision about cameras. Do I go with the DVX100A or do I go with Beta or Digibeta (which are both about twice as expensive)?

 

Since this is a pilot that will air on PBS affiliates and will also be used to raise money, I want it to look as professional as possible. Without a technical background, I'm not exactly sure if the DVX100A will produce the highest broadcast-quality results. Are there any other limitations that I should be aware of?

 

Anybody out there have any suggestions for me?

 

Appreciate the help.

 

Tim

[Michael Nash]

Well, the DVX 100 is neither "broadcast quality" nor "professional" ;)

 

Betacam as a tape format (and more particularly the cameras used to shoot it) are far superior to the "prosumer" DVX100, and has been the industry standard for years.

 

Digibeta may be overkill for what you're describing, but would certainly look good.

 

You can save a little bit of money by not getting the absolute newest or highest-end Betacam cameras. Try to find an older broadcast model (Sony BVW-600), or a newer "industrial" model like the Sony DXC-D35.

 

If Betacam is still too expensive for you, you might consider the Sony DSR-500, which records in the DVCAM tape format but is visually a much better camera than the DVX-100.

 

But quite honestly if I was serious about producing a show for a network like PBS, I'd choose a serious network-quality format. Nothing less than Betacam SP.

[timderoche]

thanks Michael. that's really helpful.

 

 

I'm producing a half-hour interview show for PBS.  We're shooting it in "limbo" (black set plus a couple of flatscreen monitors in background) and will include lots of close ups (similar to your standard episode of Charlie Rose).

 

I'm faced with a decision about cameras.  Do I go with the DVX100A or do I go with Beta or Digibeta (which are both about twice as expensive)?

 

Since this is a pilot that will air on PBS affiliates and will also be used to raise money, I want it to look as professional as possible.  Without a technical background, I'm not exactly sure if the DVX100A will produce the highest broadcast-quality results.  Are there any other limitations that I should be aware of?

 

Anybody out there have any suggestions for me?

 

Appreciate the help.

 

Tim

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[Phil Rhodes]

Hi,

 

I'll second Mr. Nash's comments. Something like that would almost inevitably be shot on either a DVW-790 or DSR-500 in the UK. It does show, you can tell, and no matter what any of the miniDV crowd tell you, it matters. That's why I bought a half-decent large format camera, rather than an XL1. I would consider a DSR-500 or other large-format DVCAM or DVCPRO camera to be a pretty decent second choice, and what's more, you can cut it on the same computer you'd have used to handle the DVX.

 

The only caution I'd reccomend would be that there've been people making Beta SP cameras for many years and there's a lot of difference between a BVW-D600 and a BVW-300 from 1988. Be careful.

 

Phil

[Korhan20]

So is the only real advantage of the dvx100a the 24p capability for around 3k?

[Phil Rhodes]

Hi,

 

Pretty much. It's possibly the best currently-available handycam style machine, but the optics, resolution and ergonomics fall far short of things like the JVC GY-DV5000 or Panasonic's own lower-end broadcast cameras. The difference does always seem particularly slim in PAL areas where the choice is 25 frames interlaces or progressive!

 

Phil