• Wondering which camera, gear, computer, or software to buy? Ask in our Gear Guide.

Pro Mini-DV vs. Consumer HD

Our XL1 broke recently. We estimate it'll cost a few hundred dollars to fix. New it was a several thousand, but now we're wondering which is better: A more expensive Mini-DV camera, that has the big lenses and lots of settings, or a 1080p consumer HD camera, which has no removable lens, but is higher resolution and presumably has a higher dynamic range.

Thanks in advance for any advice!
 
Depending on if you mean a broadcast pro SD camera (not prosumer) and which HD cheapo camera.

Look at www.hv20.com and look at what the inexpensive under $1,000 Canon's can do. Especially with 35mm lens adapters under $400.
 
CF is 100% correct. The new DLSR's like the Canon T3i is a sub $1,000 gem for filmmaking, and the only downside is if you need to record anything over 15 minutes long consecutively like a play or an event.

For filmmaking, these cameras are the best thing in their price range.
 
CF is 100% correct. The new DLSR's like the Canon T3i is a sub $1,000 gem for filmmaking, and the only downside is if you need to record anything over 15 minutes long consecutively like a play or an event.

For filmmaking, these cameras are the best thing in their price range.

Well, it's not the only downside, but I do agree that the DSLR is the poor-man's camera of choice, and rightfully-so. On a shoestring budget, this is the best bang for the buck.
 
I think format for delivery should be considered also - if you're going online or to DVD then SD is fine, but if you're workflow can handle higher res and the delivery is for screen or blueray then HD format should be your choice. However, ALWAYS go with that which affords you more choice creatively
 
Thanks for the advice!
I'm reading up on the HV20s now. They look like a pretty good deal.

DLSR would be nice.

And that's a good point to keep delivery in mind. I'd like screen and blu-ray, so HD is probobly the way to go. Our editing system will need a renovation, I expect, but thats fine. Be worth it in the long run....
 
HV20! Man thats ANCIENT! Its so old it uses TAPES! I mean TAPES can you believe it! ;)

Look at the VIAXX line or newer.

Not all DSLR have the SAME problems.. the Panasonic GH2 for example has long record time and other advantages, but its just not as cool as the canon stuff..
 
Okay, I'll take a look.

I also found a camera that looks a lot like an HV20, and records 1080p HD, but does so on a chip instead of a tape.

EDIT: I think the VIAXX is the one I was looking at.
 
Last edited:
HV20! Man thats ANCIENT! Its so old it uses TAPES! I mean TAPES can you believe it! ;)

Look at the VIAXX line or newer.

Not all DSLR have the SAME problems.. the Panasonic GH2 for example has long record time and other advantages, but its just not as cool as the canon stuff..

I hear ya', but there are some pretty good deals out there on used HV20/30/40's that are hard to pass up for what you get. Another big plus is mt2 is so easy to edit even with an older puter.
 
You'll be losing alot of the ergonomics you're used to for shooting... much of the manual controls will be more difficult to access as well, as the DSLR cameras are not made to be video cameras... and the comsumer hdv cams will be much more geared toward the auto functions than manual as far as ergonomics controls work.

They also don't look as authoritative on set, so you'll lose a bit of your "on-set street cred" (in the eyes of the clients/public, not the other filmmakers who know the difference).
 
I think the rig I had prior to DSLR was quite rockin..
Viaxx hfs100 with a 35mm adapter (letus) is a pretty sweet image. I'm still not getting as good out of the T2i or the GH2 DSLR's (yes I have both, its a long story well documented elsewhere), but thats more a practice and do thing.. time will fix it..
 
Back
Top