DSLR vs. Dedicated Video Camera

Hi all,

I'm brand new to this site, so please bear with me.

I just ran a successful Kickstarter project (http://kck.st/IOgXED) to fund a short documentary about the effects of climate change on the people of Andean Peru, and I'll be traveling there in the beginning of July.

Although I've done film work before, I've never done an entire documentary on my own and I'm relatively inexperienced when it comes to audio. I'm going to be buying equipment soon (having largely borrowed hardware from friends in the past) and I'm trying to decide whether to go with a DSLR, such as the Canon 60D, or a dedicated video camera, such as the Canon XA10.

Pros and cons as I see them:

- DSLR produces better video quality, but the shorter DoF makes it easier to mess up and have the subject be out of focus.
- DSLR essentially requires separate audio recorder, so I'd need to deal with having that set up properly as well. The audio is integrated with the dedicated video camera, so it would be one less thing to deal with.
- The field is moving towards DSLRs, so although it might be easier for me to use a dedicated video camera on this one, it would perhaps be wiser to start off the way I intend to end up (with DSLR). However, I don't want to do that at the cost of a poor film (because it winds up being harder to manage all the components of a DSLR setup).
- The 60D is about $900 and the XA10 is about $2000, but the DSLR setup would likely be more expensive due to the cost of lenses and a separate audio recorder.

There are, of course, many other considerations, but those are some of the main ones I'm thinking about right now. I would greatly appreciate any thoughts you have to offer on this choice.

Thanks very much!

- Johnny

DSLR image quality will out perform any other camera in that price range. If you're serious a out filmmaking, then learn how to use a DSLR and get what you need to make it work for you.

Built-in audio is going to be very limiting. Unless you're just trying to capture ambient sound, you'll need more than just the on camera mic, regardless of which camera you use.

What specifically are you going to be shooting?

Dave J

[Johnny Sullivan] "- DSLR produces better video quality, but the shorter DoF makes it easier to mess up and have the subject be out of focus."

"better" is kind of relative. I have a 60D, and a few real Panasonic camcorders. If you want that short DOF, "film like" result, you want the HDSLR. If you see yourself neededing more than 10 minutes in a shot, you may well go for the real camcorder. If you see lots of low-light shooting taking place, maybe it's back to the HDSLR.

[Johnny Sullivan] "- DSLR essentially requires separate audio recorder, so I'd need to deal with having that set up properly as well. The audio is integrated with the dedicated video camera, so it would be one less thing to deal with."

It's not quite like that. The HDSLR needs a good microphone.. your built-in is crap. A "real" camcorder also needs a good microphone.. its built-in is also crap, if perhaps ever so slightly less crap than the HDSLR. A unit like the XA-10 comes with an XLR module that integrates with the camera. My Panasonic HMC40 made that optional, but just as useful.

To get good audio into an HDSLR, you need to buy a mic interface module, and for a Canon, you need to run the Magic Lantern firmware to control it. An interface for pro-class mics like the Beachtek units cost about as much ($200-$300) as a separate recorder, so many HDSLR shooters just go for the off-camera audio because it's more flexible. On the other hand, the Canon HDSLRs will record uncompressed 16-bit/48kHz audio, while the XA-10 will give you only 16/48 compressed in the AC-3 format. So it's not quite correct to say the HDSLR can't do audio.

What you'll get here is the fact that HDSLRs are relatively clumsy. You can add on good audio, but the built-in is good only for multicam sync. The video is beautiful, particularly in low light, but the video features are clumsy - no autofocus (the 60D can focus on demand, but it doesn't do it running), short (~12 minute) video runs, no power zoom or easy focus pull, etc. HDSLRs are the choice when you really need the 35mm look or the really good low-light performance.

I do need that. I did a 3-cam shoot last month, a music concert, and the 60D video was annoyingly better than either of my Pannys. I had audio recorded on my H4n, and if it was more involved, I have a 16-channel field rig. But I'm not doing on location docs with this gear.

You need to try this stuff, seriously. You may like everything you hear about the HDSLR, but hate using it. In a studio, you can get around that, on location it'll drive you bats.. and unless there's another guy filming your story as a second doc, that's not useful. Or maybe you just "get" the HDSLR workflow. I'm using mine more and more when it applies, but I did spend decades learning conventional camcorders, from consumer 8mm through pro memory-card devices, and of course, the HDSLR. As great as the HDSLR is, it's also annoying here and there. I'd like another for concerts and shows, but if I did a doc again (my one serious doc, shot in 1994, was on horrible cameras, and my skills sucked compared to today, but I had the right topic... and sold over
4,000 copies on VHS and DVD).

-Dave

Hi,

If you're prepared to go through the learning curve, and know how to deal with the downsides of
DSLR's, you can actually get awesome images out of these inexpensive cameras. I just finished a feature-length documentary shot almost exclusively with a 7D and 60D.

If you're going to be working primarily with one microphone, then the Magic Lantern Firmware 'hack' will
allow you plug your mic DIRECTLY into your 60D or 5D [among others... not 7D, alas] - and you can MONITOR your audio, too!

http://vimeo.com/20978887

I've been using this feature a lot lately it's working out great for me.

For more than one mic, yes, best to use a Zoom H4N or Tascam to record your audio.

Wayne