videocam recommendation

[lhjz]

i need a videocam to film animals in the zoo
need one that has around 15-20x zoom
lens that has the ability to create nice DOF
have tried the consumers handycams, seems like most of them has very wide DOF which does not isolate the subjects with nice bokeh even using the biggest apertures
have also tried using DSLR like 5dmk2 and 500D
can achieve my reach and DOF as i hav 600mm but the problem is 5D2 does not have AF and 500D AF is way way too slow

very new to videography, so advice needed
thanks in advance!!

 

[Reportage]

depends how much you want so spend.

 

[Bamboopictures]

buy a Panny GH-1 instead please if you want DOF, good zoom etc and affordablity.

 

[lhjz]

cheapest that can get the job done will be best i guess
important thing is to get the job done
but lets say anything below 10k is acceptable as i will be selling it off once i finish the job
i need portability and ease of use, don't think i can afford to lug a massive equipment around

GH-1 is good but currently it has only 1 lens that can do continuous AF (14-140 = 28-280mm)
which is a little short in filming animals close up
i need 20x(600mm++) zoom range preferably

 

[doom102938]

Ok so your requirements are
1) Below 10k
2) Good bokeh
3) Fast autofocus
4) Not too bulky (Its rather subjective. Care to elaborate what does bulky mean to you?)

I would say that one of the top contender would be one of those professional fixed lens video cameras. Something like a Canon XH-A1(32.5-650mm 35mm equivalent), or a Sony EX-1.

However most professional videos are produced by extremely expensive manual focus lenses which allows for a thin depth of field. Manual focus is used because autofocus is unreliable(It can be tricked by high contrast backgrounds) and it allows you to control the rate at which the focus is being 'pulled'.

Advantages of a video enabled DSLR.
1) Sensor size(The video industry's full frame sensor or film is has the approximate area of a Canon 500D or a Nikon D5000. And that makes the 5D Mark II's sensor like some sort of super 35mm.)
2) Weight of the DSLR is a lot lighter than a professional video camera.
3) Lenses are cheap compared to comparable professional prime lenses.
4) Less ISO noise

However, there are advantages to use a professional video camera over a video enabled DSLR.
1) Manual control over video format and frame rates.
2) You can control the iris while you are filming.
3) Depth of field is very deep, thus it is harder to get out of focus shots.
4) Autofocus is adapted to focusing while filming.
5) Certain cameras allows multiple sound inputs.
6) Ergonomics.
7) Most fixed lenses has built in optical image stabilizer which is suited for videography

I would suggest a 5D Mark II and rent a 300mm F/2.8 or 400mm F/2.8. Learn how to use the manual focus to 'pull' the focus to where ever you want it to be. Results would be a lot more satisfactory as you are able to actually use a very high ISO (up to 12800 equivalent) without much ISO noise.

I myself is not a professional videographer, but lets just say i'm very interested in cinematography. I hope that my post provides you with some help.

 

[lhjz]

appreciate the feedbacks

actually i have bought GH-1 to tackle the nearer animals

still trying to decide what to use to shoot the closeup and far ones
actually i have tried 5Dmk2 with 300/2.8IS, will need lots of practice to get decent footages using MF, not easy when the animals keeps moving esp active ones like the primates
am curious why u recommend a fixed lens instead of interchangeble lens (XL2), mind sharing?
am actually planning to get XL2(no money to buy HD version, haha) as it gives me a 20x zoom, at least give me more reach with AF capability
and i can still use my tele lenses to get super close up if i really need to (no choice got to MF)

wonder if the 7D has better AF than the 500D, if so, thats is best liao.

 

[doom102938]

Hello.

What kind of video are you making? A commercial? A documentary? A feature film?

There are a few reasons why the XL2 probably wouldn't be the equipment for your job.

Firstly, the resolution is 720x576 in 16:9 aspect ratio as compared to the XH-A1's resolution is 1440x1080.

Secondly, you mentioned about bulk. Whilst the XH-A1 is only slightly lighter by 200g, it is considerably less bulky.

Thirdly, like you mentioned, while you can purchase an adapter to mount EF lenses on the XL2, there would be a crop factor of 7.2 in 16:9 mode, making a 70-200mm have an 35mm equivalent of 504-1440mm. A 28mm lens would have a field of view of around 200mm. Further more there wouldn't be any auto focus

Fourth, the back ground blur on either camera would not be comparable to a video enabled DSLR.

Fifth, The Xl2 is already 5 years old and has a 2 inch screen with 0.2mp resolution as compared to the XH-A1 being a 3 years old camera with a 2.8 inch screen with 0.21mp resolution.

Before you buy any of the video camera's try them out by renting or testing at a store. At 7k a pop, they are not cheap. Which brings us to the next point. A 5D Mark II cost about 3.8k body only. That leaves you with 7.2k for lenses. As the depth of field is too thin, you could always stop down the aperture by two or so stops and increase the ISO. This would give you a thicker depth of field which makes it easier to focus.

Have a good day.

 

[chanxj]

Been testing the Sony Z5 the couple of days. Performance in both low light and zoom is great. never tested bokeh though.

 

[Bamboopictures]

Maybe cheaper if you shoot through a telescope. Just use any consumer camcorder or even pocket camera with HD video function.
Alternatively use this
http://www.alibaba.com/product-gs/243959377/Telescope_Camera_Binocular_Camera/showimage.html

 

[lhjz]

thanks for all the valuable comments

in the end bought the XH-A1
hard to find XL2 and XL-H1 ia way too expensive

thanks again