What camera low budget can match the quality of hollywood..

old-skool · Apr 23, 2013

Looking to purchase a camera. My budget is around $10,000 and under. I loved how Skyfall looked and I was wondering if there is a camera under my budget that could get something close to that? I know that lenses are really what matters. I would be renting them most of the time so that should not be the problem. But I'm looking to invest in a good camera.

I was thinking about the c300. What do you guys suggest?

EuropeanDistributor · Apr 23, 2013

old-skool said:
Looking to purchase a camera. My budget is around $10,000 and under. I loved how Skyfall looked and I was wondering if there is a camera under my budget that could get something close to that? I know that lenses are really what matters. I would be renting them most of the time so that should not be the problem. But I'm looking to invest in a good camera.

I was thinking about the c300. What do you guys suggest?

The look of a movie is not just dependant of the camera, but the lenses, a skillfull cinematographer, lighting, set design, production design, acting, editing, sound design etc.

You can not achieve the look of Skyfall with just a camera.

Is the $10k your budget just for the camera? Do you own any other gear, like a tripod, steadicam, dolly, microphone?

The c300 body appears to cost around $14k new.

Do you have any experience with cinematography or shooting video?

TheArtist · Apr 23, 2013

The camera is just a tool, the lighting technique, set design, costume design and post-production treatment will have a HUGE impact of the final look.

But the BEST low budget camera is the GH2 and it can get quite close to a RED (when used properly and in favorable conditions).

rayw · Apr 23, 2013

old-skool said:
What do you guys suggest?

That a cr@p story shot on a B!tchinCam 5000 is still cr@p while a nice story shot on a GoodENnuff 100 with clean audio is much more successful commercially or on the festival circuit.

You can't tech your way out of a cr@ppy film.

Precisely WHAT about the C300 lends you to believe it is a technically good camera?
(Not that it isn't, it is, no argument. A better understanding of what you want to achieve is helpful in answering your question beyond "Yeah. It's good. Get the C300" and then send you on your merry way.)

What are some film titles (imdb.com) that have been produced in the budget range you're looking at?

jax_rox · Apr 23, 2013

Skyfall was shot on an Alexa Studio (~$200k) with Master Primes (~$20-30k per lens).

The c300 costs ~$16k for the body, which is out of your price range to begin with.

That said - the camera is but one cog in the film machine. You can get great looking stuff on any camera with any lens. Hollywood films look like Hollywood films because they have 200 people working on them, and huge budgets for lighting, grip, sound, production design etc.
Crafting a great looking scene with some great production design, complemented with really beautiful lighting shot on a 5D will look better than something with no production design and no lighting shot on an Alexa.

Skyfall is Roger Deakins and Deakins is a master of light. If you could light things like Deakins does, it wouldn't matter what camera you shot on, it would look freaking amazing.

gebo · Apr 23, 2013

Like others have said it's not the camera. It's you.
Do you have any experience? I would say start low with a Canon 600D/t3i or Panasonic GH2, and some lighting/audio gear. Make some shorts, learn and later think of a better camera.

:woohoo:

old-skool · Apr 23, 2013

jax_rox said:
Skyfall was shot on an Alexa Studio (~$200k) with Master Primes (~$20-30k per lens).

The c300 costs ~$16k for the body, which is out of your price range to begin with.

That said - the camera is but one cog in the film machine. You can get great looking stuff on any camera with any lens. Hollywood films look like Hollywood films because they have 200 people working on them, and huge budgets for lighting, grip, sound, production design etc.
Crafting a great looking scene with some great production design, complemented with really beautiful lighting shot on a 5D will look better than something with no production design and no lighting shot on an Alexa.

Skyfall is Roger Deakins and Deakins is a master of light. If you could light things like Deakins does, it wouldn't matter what camera you shot on, it would look freaking amazing.

I completely agree with what you are saying. I should've added more to the op. There are a lot of factors that go into shooting and I am fully aware of that. Lighting and lenses are a huge part! Couldnt agree more. But I was just simply asking on because I'm looking to upgrade my current camera. I had a t3i for about a year or so now. I'm just want to upgrade now.

Honestly love the red epic after seeing the quality (with the right lenses and lighting) it can pull out. And on top of that 4k, and raw format. But I'm sure everyone like me wish they get own that lol.

So I'm just looking to upgrade to something little more up the ladder. I usually rent the lenses, so I'm not worried about that because I'm fine with rental prices. I am still working on my lighting skills as well.

I just saw this yesterday and I absolutely loved it! Shot with Red/ Master Primes and Leica M Noctilux f/0.95 50mm lens.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-b4qMBKEN88

David.rhsc · Apr 23, 2013

old-skool said:
I just saw this yesterday and I absolutely loved it! Shot with Red/ Master Primes and Leica M Noctilux f/0.95 50mm lens.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-b4qMBKEN88

The beauty in that piece came from Tom Lowe, not the camera he used.

Unless you specifically desire to become a director of photography, spend your $10K on your film, not your camera.

If you *do* desire to become a director of photography, then you should already know that the camera is the least important part of the equation, and should spend your money accordingly.

chitoryu12 · Apr 24, 2013

This isn't a 100% answer to your film, but this video by Film Riot shows exactly how much of it comes down to pulling the most out of your camera, other equipment, and skill and creativity. They make something that can very easily compete with any quality web film with nothing but an iPhone, a special mount for it, the right app, and a knowledge of proper lighting and framing.

Don't take this as me saying "Just shoot it on an iPhone." If your cell phone was good enough for everything, we wouldn't have any cameras except phones. But it shows the gist of what we're saying: if you know what you're doing and you understand your camera, you can make something look good with relatively few restrictions. Film Riot later did a short film called Losses on a RED Epic, and the iPhone film looks similar in quality because they knew what they were doing. And the video I linked explains just HOW you can start to pull good work out of any camera, even a smartphone.