I need some opinions as to where I should put my money. Should I buy a super 16 camera like an Arri sr1 sr2 sr3, Aaton A-Minima used, Aaton LTR 7, etc???? Or should I buy a high end video camera like a Sony PMW-EX3, Sony PMW-F3, Panasonic AF100 etc????
Super 16 or High End Video Camera???
- Thread starter filmmaker253
- Start date
Do you have the money to digitize film for EVERY project?
Yep, that's what it comes down to -- if you can afford 16mm, go for it, it will blow away those cameras you've listed, which aren't btw, "High end", they're bottom scraping cheap as$ low end pro.
It's subjective but I don't think there's a video camera made that can beat good 16mm. 16 is 2k equivalent resolution and about 14 stops and then there's no need to make a "film look" since it's already film. But 16mm isn't good if you plan on a lot of FX, so if that's your plan, forget 16.
Film is not for begginers, or even experienced filmmakers without big founding.
With a film camera, you'll need to buy well...film, which can get expensive when you are bound to do multiple takes. Developing and digitizing will be expensive in the long run. Nevermind that you will definately need an external audio recorder.
It does have advanteges. As Brian said, you do have the familiar film look alredy in your source material.
If you can afford it go with it.
Eitherway, you can get both. Just get a camcorder and practice. When you are ready to take up a projct that you deem film-worthy, sell your trusty cam and get your fim camera.
With a film camera, you'll need to buy well...film, which can get expensive when you are bound to do multiple takes. Developing and digitizing will be expensive in the long run. Nevermind that you will definately need an external audio recorder.
It does have advanteges. As Brian said, you do have the familiar film look alredy in your source material.
If you can afford it go with it.
Eitherway, you can get both. Just get a camcorder and practice. When you are ready to take up a projct that you deem film-worthy, sell your trusty cam and get your fim camera.
Last edited:
Thanks for the quick replies.
CamVader, I will have the money to digitize for each project. I know it can get expensive but I'm willing to pay. Some of the packages I looked at came with lenses. I was going to purchase some lenses from visual products. Any other places I should look?
brianluce, I won't be using alot of FX. Does it no look very good on super 16? I wasn't sure if the newer video cameras would surpass super 16 in image quality. Thanks.
JakeSully, I have shot 16mm on an Arri S no sync sound. Are DAT recorder good for sync sound? Which recorders are best?
I will definitely go with Super 16. I was always told go with Arri or Aaton. Which cameras are best to purchase and why? Thanks.
CamVader, I will have the money to digitize for each project. I know it can get expensive but I'm willing to pay. Some of the packages I looked at came with lenses. I was going to purchase some lenses from visual products. Any other places I should look?
brianluce, I won't be using alot of FX. Does it no look very good on super 16? I wasn't sure if the newer video cameras would surpass super 16 in image quality. Thanks.
JakeSully, I have shot 16mm on an Arri S no sync sound. Are DAT recorder good for sync sound? Which recorders are best?
I will definitely go with Super 16. I was always told go with Arri or Aaton. Which cameras are best to purchase and why? Thanks.
I wouldn't know about sound recorders. There's people here that will be able to help you with that tho...
About what brian said, film is not ideal for FX work since it's more difficult to get them to look right. Still, if done properly the end result will look better on film.
About what brian said, film is not ideal for FX work since it's more difficult to get them to look right. Still, if done properly the end result will look better on film.
Why don't you try renting your first package instead of buying? You'll find out the limitations real fast.
I have a super 8 cost breakdown on here somewhere... $15/ 3 minutes of film + $15 processing + $15 digitizing = $45/3 minutes of raw footage. 16mm is more expensive... at a 3:1 shooting ratio, a 10 minute short is 30 minutes of footage = $450 just to get it to the point where you can edit digitally (if you choose to do so). I shoot a 10:1 ratio on DV @ $5/ 60 minutes of footage, ready to edit. I've done a dozen productions - if I'd done them on super8, they would have been ~ 100 minutes running time, which is typical for a short studio feature... which would be 1000 minutes of source footage @ $15/minute = $15,000 just in film stock and developing/digitizing - just to get my skill set to the point where I don't quite suck!
My how times have changed.
When I was 12 I was using film. I shot on film well into my 20's.
At one point film was for beginners. I think it still is.
You should buy the format you will use most.
Here on indietalk you will find it difficult to get much balance. Almost
no one here shoots film and most are rather strongly against shooting
film because of its learning curve and expense. I am a supporter of
shooting film despite its expense.
It's clear to me you have done the financials - you know the cost difference.
So where you spend you money depends on what your five year goal is.
I would suggest going with a film camera over a video camera, but only if
I knew what you overall plans were.
Shooting film is a different set of skills than video - you know that. So if
you will be the DP then getting a super 16 camera is an excellent choice.
Depending where you will be shooting films over the next five years you
might find it difficult to find qualified DP's - that is if you will be directing.
But I'm just stabbing in the dark because I don't know anything about you
or your needs.
You know, I couldn't agree more.
It was media that could be worked with at home, and used by begginers, but there was no decent alternative.
Nowadays you can get a nice videocamera for 350 bucks, and you don't have mantainance, nor developing costs.
A begginner can use film, but we can't deny that it will be much more costly than using digital video.
On the other hand, the experience you get while working on film, and the final look, does make up for the cost of using it.