What's the best you can get for $2000?

T

tojo

Hey folks,

I realize these kind of questions get asked all the time, and some of you are probably tired of replying over and over again, but since I'm a newbie, I'll go ahead and ask anyway.

I'm a first-semester film student and currently looking to get some equipment for my school assignments, but also for local festivals and showcases.

I might have a budget of around $2000 by the end of the month, so I was wondering, what's the best deal I can get with this money? That would be including sound obviously, which as we all know, is as important as photography, if not more. For audio, I was thinking the Rode VideoMic Pro, but I'm in a haze when it comes to cameras.

Obviously, I want to get a camera which for the price offers the most filmic look. I've a Nikkor 50-200mm lens... do you think I should go ahead and get the Nikon D7000... or would you guys recommend a video camera rather than a DSLR?

For $2000, what kit could be assembled to produce at least decent sound and image?

Thanks a lot; hope to get some insight from you!!!
 
Last edited:
Sort by date Sort by votes
Personally I think the best camera under 6,000 dollars is a hacked GH2. None of the other DSLR's come close to its resolving power and the smaller chip cams that have its resolving power can't do the shallow DOF thing. All other dslr's are also plagued by nasty moire and aliasing. Your lens wil fit it, as will every other lens ever made. Though that's not exactly the most useful lens for narrative work.
For audio, I like Tascam better than Zoom. Ther might be some areas to $ave on Alcove's audio kit, for example, I have a set of Sony headphones called the MDRv6 that are the same as the 7506 but cost a lot less. Probably get a cheaper XLR cable vendor too, though BH is always super competitive.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I am going to save Alcoves post as a shopping list, because that is around my budget, too. :yes:
Alcove Audio said:
You can substitute the DR-40 for the DR-100 and sacrifice some conveniences and some quality - and save a whopping $70.

You can not buy the battery packs and substitute the AT897 or NTG-2 (which supply their own phantom power) for the AT875 and deal with lower volume rates.
Click to expand...

If you had to choose between the AT875 and the NTG-2 (connected to the DR-100), what would you prefer and why? I had the NTG-2 on my list, but as the AT875 seems to be in the same price range, it would also be an option.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
A college told me a solution for the Hi-Z problem. Usse copper tubes for the cabbels to shield them. Ussing more exspensive cables wil also limit the interference.

So I have a solution for al 3 problems. Making a cage to protect the body, Use a converter for XLR jacks and ussing good Audio Copper cables....Comments if i'm wrong.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Copper tubing is rigid or semi rigid - you need flexible cords. It's also HEAVY. BTW, have you gone out and priced copper tubing lately? A 50' roll of 1/2" soft copper tubing is $100. You may as well spend the money properly and get Low-Z gear in the first place. Low-Z cables already have braided copper wire as a part of the build.

And by using a "cage" around the recorder you make it heavier, ungainly and more difficult to access.

So yes, you can do it, but why would you want to? You are making everything much more difficult to use, and the ultimate cost would be the same or more. But of that's what you want to do go right ahead and let us know how it worked; don't forget to include video of you making it and using it!!!
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Gh2 and a pro-level audio recorder like Alcove suggested.... thats your biggest bang for the buck for sure...

On a side note, I think I'm going to invent a cradle that snaps onto headphones that the boom can pivot on...
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Feutus Lapdance said:
Also.....how is it for recording a DJ set from a DJ mixer? I want to do some recordings on partys.
Click to expand...

That sort of depends on what you want the recording for.

a) to sell yourself as a DJ. Might be better off with a mix done in a home studio. Be the best you can, record on the cleanest gear you can because people will want to hear your skills through the music.

b) to study your performance to become a better DJ. Just about anything would be fine; you know what you did and what you didn't, and a little interference probably isn't going to distract from that.

c) to share with other DJs. Actually, in this case a little low-fi isn't bad. Makes it sound more "live". Again, anything could do the job here. Some of my favorite live recordings I've done were made into a box radio set on the stage. Low-fi, crappy audio and fantastic!

Bottom line is, if you are DJing and doing film audio, buy gear for film. Anything will get the job done for DJ recordings, so you can use it for both.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Chicken Joe said:
If you had to choose between the AT875 and the NTG-2 (connected to the DR-100), what would you prefer and why? I had the NTG-2 on my list, but as the AT875 seems to be in the same price range, it would also be an option.
Click to expand...

I think that you mean the AT897 vs. the NTG-2. On paper the the NTG-2 is the better mic, but the differences in actual usage are minor, at least to my ears. The NTG-2 is the more popular of the two

If it was my money I would get a couple of battery packs for the DR-100, let the DR-100 supply the phantom power, and get the NTG-1. I'll get hotter signal levels and I'm saving on buying batteries (a sleeve of 20 is about $12 and you can easily go through a sleeve per day) so save a few dollars in the long term.

Mind you I would not go this way at all if I was actually buying for myself. I rent when I need to go out into the field (I already have a nice selection of mics). If I had to buy on a "budget" I would probably get the Roland R-44 as recorder, the NTG-3 as a shotgun and the ubiquitous AT4053b as my hypercardioid. Next up would be a pair of Sennheiser G3 wireless trans/rec sets with CountryMan B6 lavs. And, of course, all the needed stuff like a nice boom-pole, substantial wind protection, headphones and headphone distribution, cables, cases, etc., etc. - probably about $5k or so.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Alcove Audio said:
I think that you mean the AT897 vs. the NTG-2. On paper the the NTG-2 is the better mic, but the differences in actual usage are minor, at least to my ears. The NTG-2 is the more popular of the two

If it was my money I would get a couple of battery packs for the DR-100, let the DR-100 supply the phantom power, and get the NTG-1. I'll get hotter signal levels and I'm saving on buying batteries (a sleeve of 20 is about $12 and you can easily go through a sleeve per day) so save a few dollars in the long term.
Click to expand...
I checked www.bhphotovideo.com and noticed there is no big price difference between the AT897 and the AT875. In a German online shop (www.thomann.de) the difference is about 160 Euros :weird:
Sorry for the confusion. Not such a big difference though.

Interesting option using the NTG-1 with phantom power. But that would also work with the NTG-2, right? The only difference between the both is that one has phantom only and the other can be used with battery. Correct me if I am wrong. Sorry, I am just learning that I don't know anything about all that technical aspects of sound.

Sure, it is not even near to what you would call "good", but everyone needs to draw the line at somewhere, as long as it's just for fun. I had to scrape together 5k euros for a new car last year, so my budget is a bit more limited at the moment.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
Chicken Joe said:
I checked www.bhphotovideo.com and noticed there is no big price difference between the AT897 and the AT875.
Click to expand...

The difference I was making note of was not the pricing but the functionality; the AT897 and NTG-2 can use an internal battery to supply phantom power, the AT875 and NTG-1 both need external phantom power. Both the AT897 and NTG-2, for some reason, suffer from low output volume levels, which is another reason I group them together.

I don't claim to understand the pricing system at B&H. The AT875 is $190, the AT897 is $233 for a difference of $43. The basic kits (with the same accessories, no less) are $240 and $260 respectively, a difference of only $20. Doesn't make much sense, does it?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Alcove Audio said:
The difference I was making note of was not the pricing but the functionality; the AT897 and NTG-2 can use an internal battery to supply phantom power, the AT875 and NTG-1 both need external phantom power. Both the AT897 and NTG-2, for some reason, suffer from low output volume levels, which is another reason I group them together.

I don't claim to understand the pricing system at B&H. The AT875 is $190, the AT897 is $233 for a difference of $43. The basic kits (with the same accessories, no less) are $240 and $260 respectively, a difference of only $20. Doesn't make much sense, does it?
Click to expand...
Okay, now it is totally clear, thanks! I did not know this issue, but it is really an argument to choose the older NTG-1 and a bunch of battery packs for the recorder.

Regarding price, I think they hope you buy the "cheaper" kit, which might bring them a higher profit. I won't make my decision based on a price difference of 20 bucks, but maybe others do.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
As usual there's some amazing advice coming from Alcove here, I think you'll struggle to beat any of those suggestions for your sound kit.

I'm looking into similar sound packages and think the dual battery pack idea is a great one... I just wish that in the UK these things were easier to come by! The cheapest I can find one of those packs for comes to around $80, and don't get me started on the fact that a DR-100 goes for around $380...
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
The digital age has spoiled us in so many ways. Ten (10) years ago your only options for a "budget" sound kit would easily run $3k or more. That would be a Sennheiser ME-66 shotgun ($700), a Sound Devices or PSC or Shure mixer (around $1,200) and a Sony or Tascam DAT machine or Nagra reel-to-reel (around $1,300). Five (5) years ago a Marantz PMD 660 or a Fostex FR-2 were your only options for a digital recorder, and at about that time Rode and Audio Technica introduced their first budget shotguns. There were no budget blimps, softies, etc. for wind protection, and a basic boom-pole was around $500.

For visuals you were either stuck with a consumer camcorder without anything in the way of "serious" controls or something like a DVX-100.

Ten (10) years ago the only real option for a sound-for-picture DAW was a basic Pro Tools TDM system, starting at about $7.5k plus and an Apple tower at about another $3k. Final Cut was in its infancy, so for heavy duty editing work and AVID system was pretty much your only option unless you used a consumer product.

The computers themselves and storage space are about 5% of the cost they were back then.

So you can moan about the costs, but ten years ago you couldn't even think about doing serious indie film production without a serious monetary investment. For the most part you rented your field production gear and hired your post people or at least rented an editing room.

So count your blessings; for less than 15% of what it cost a decade ago you can be a filmmaker who owns their own equipment, and if you go really cheap you can do it for even less than that.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top