Cameras for video productions

lindenengineering

Well-known member
Guys
I am looking for some advise from you camera buffs , if any of you exist on this forum web site.

Essentially I/We are needing to make training videos and technical investigation records of vehicle sub system and components in 4K formats. The sort of thing that might be suitable for YouTube video uploads and our in house training programs etc etc.

Having been a long time Canon nut I have not bothered too much with the old Canon SLR cameras but the Cannon camera SL2 seems to fit what we need to achieve in both budget cost and content value.

Any comments & advise are appreciated.
Dennis

as a point of reference I have added this YouTube segment that covers a lot of these types of cameras
D

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J8seYS4e1xI
 

asimba2

2016 4cyl High Roof 144
Most any camera these days will take high quality photos and videos. You may find that you need a camera with manual focus so the lens isn't hunting while you're recording, or really good auto focus depending on what you're doing. Having good audio will be more important than video quality for training videos so be sure the camera has either a mic input so you can use a hotshoe-mounted external mic or a lav mic on your collar. Better yet is to use an external audio recorder, something like a Zoom H1N to record the audio, which you will then sync up with the video when you edit. The latter of course requires some video editing software as well.

Just some things to think about.
Ken
 

OrioN

2008 2500 170" EXT
Up here in Vancouver I can't throw an avocado pit without hitting a film crew.

I've notice that high-end cell phones are being used predominantly to 'document' the film shoots.

For the most part they are on tripods, with addons like remotes, external mic's, battery packs.

So, if you already have a $1500 iPhone 11, you're almost there...
 
Last edited:

autostaretx

Erratic Member
One of the (not) unspoken chunks of advice for videos is ***buy a very good microphone** and surround it with a fluffy wind filter sock.

Many of the "techie" YouTube channels have "what we use" episodes. ... and many have multiple cameras (some good for background wide shots, some for close-in work).
((if i can find some of my fave's i'll add a further note with links))

--dick
 

glasseye

Well-known member
The LAST thing you need is 4K. (Unless you're intending these videos to run on Netflix) :bounce: 4K compounds by four times every production problem from principal photography (the shoot) to delivering the show to YouTube. HDTV resolution (2K) is more than enough.

Shooting 4K for YouTube videos is like having a Sprinter that does 150 mph. Fun, maybe. But expensive, difficult to implement and, ultimately, useless.

Consider this: 90% of what you've been seeing in the theatres for all those years is 2K. Only recently have cinema screens displayed more than about 2,000 pixels in the horizontal direction. That's what "2K" is.



OK, gang, listen up. Repeat after me: "SOUND IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN PICTURE"

Go on, say it out loud. Listen to yourself as you're saying it. It's true. And this from a cinematographer with lots of Hollywood credits. (me) And from someone who's made hundreds of training films and documentaries. Ain't bragging, just sayin'

SOUND IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN PICTURE. If you can't understand what's being said, the whole exercise is a waste of time.

For much of what you're intending, the picture quality from a phone is good enough. IF you can find a way of holding it steady. There are few things more annoying than shaky footage. One of them is shztty sound.

A tiny camera has one singular advantage over a big one: It can get into tiny places. Like on top of the bell housing where the crankshaft position sensor lives. :rad: That leaves you with enough room under there for the tech doing the work, the camera guy shooting the video and the lighting hardware making it all visible.


A direct connection from the camera to the microphone is nice, but not always necessary. Many training films are shot in what's called "voice over". The words (narration) are recorded separately from the video and installed into the show in the editing process. If you intend the narrator to be speaking on camera (called "sync sound"), the process becomes more difficult, unforgiving, slow, expensive and complex. For that reason, historically most docs and training films use sync sound sparingly.

In that case, you usually DO need a direct connection from mic to camera, either wired or wireless. You also obviously need an input on the camera to accept this connection. Phones lack this. Cheap camcorders frequently do have this vital port. You can record the on-camera sound separately, but this requires more time and expertise in editing to marry the two media together later.

I have a good phone camera - a Google Pixel 3. It's pretty good, but takes pretty careful handling to keep it steady enough to hand hold. I'm no longer good enough at this, as you'll see in the accompanying video. However last summer I came upon a scenario that just begged me to play with my new toy. So, when it presented itself, I just started shooting. This whole thing was shot in less than an hour, entirely on my phone.

If I'd been using a "proper" camera, I might not have gotten away with this shoot. Usually, as soon as you bring out a camera, everything changes. But in this case, nobody noticed, nobody cared. It was just "some guy with a phone". This is an amazing new freedom for film makers.

Anyway, here it is. This is not great film-making, it was shot just for fun as a camera test, but it actually turned out pretty well, considering the prep time. ie, zero, and the camera budget. :bash: This is a 1K, highly compressed version.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7uaGFLhbJs&feature=youtu.be
 

OrioN

2008 2500 170" EXT
The LAST thing you need is 4K. (Unless you're intending these videos to run on Netflix) :bounce: 4K compounds by four times every production problem from principal photography (the shoot) to delivering the show to YouTube. HDTV resolution (2K) is more than enough.

Shooting 4K for YouTube videos is like having a Sprinter that does 150 mph. Fun, maybe. But expensive, difficult to implement and, ultimately, useless.

Consider this: 90% of what you've been seeing in the theatres for all those years is 2K. Only recently have cinema screens displayed more than about 2,000 pixels in the horizontal direction. That's what "2K" is.



OK, gang, listen up. Repeat after me: "SOUND IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN PICTURE"

Go on, say it out loud. Listen to yourself as you're saying it. It's true. And this from a cinematographer with lots of Hollywood credits. (me) And from someone who's made hundreds of training films and documentaries. Ain't bragging, just sayin'

SOUND IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN PICTURE. If you can't understand what's being said, the whole exercise is a waste of time.

For much of what you're intending, the picture quality from a phone is good enough. IF you can find a way of holding it steady. There are few things more annoying than shaky footage. One of them is shztty sound.

A tiny camera has one singular advantage over a big one: It can get into tiny places. Like on top of the bell housing where the crankshaft position sensor lives. :rad: That leaves you with enough room under there for the tech doing the work, the camera guy shooting the video and the lighting hardware making it all visible.


A direct connection from the camera to the microphone is nice, but not always necessary. Many training films are shot in what's called "voice over". The words (narration) are recorded separately from the video and installed into the show in the editing process. If you intend the narrator to be speaking on camera (called "sync sound"), the process becomes more difficult, unforgiving, slow, expensive and complex. For that reason, historically most docs and training films use sync sound sparingly.

In that case, you usually DO need a direct connection from mic to camera, either wired or wireless. You also obviously need an input on the camera to accept this connection. Phones lack this. Cheap camcorders frequently do have this vital port. You can record the on-camera sound separately, but this requires more time and expertise in editing to marry the two media together later.

I have a good phone camera - a Google Pixel 3. It's pretty good, but takes pretty careful handling to keep it steady enough to hand hold. I'm no longer good enough at this, as you'll see in the accompanying video. However last summer I came upon a scenario that just begged me to play with my new toy. So, when it presented itself, I just started shooting. This whole thing was shot in less than an hour, entirely on my phone.

If I'd been using a "proper" camera, I might not have gotten away with this shoot. Usually, as soon as you bring out a camera, everything changes. But in this case, nobody noticed, nobody cared. It was just "some guy with a phone". This is an amazing new freedom for film makers.

Anyway, here it is. This is not great film-making, it was shot just for fun as a camera test, but it actually turned out pretty well, considering the prep time. ie, zero, and the camera budget. :bash: This is a 1K, highly compressed version.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7uaGFLhbJs&feature=youtu.be
You were on my street and didn't inform me you were coming? :shifty:
 

OrioN

2008 2500 170" EXT
This is from my Samsung Galaxy S5. Overcast day, default settings, hand-held, only a slight sharpen applied post process.

Remarkable bokeh considering the source, settings and algorithms.

Months later I sold my $10k worth of DSLR gear on ebay. My backpacks are now 20 lbs lighter.



20170511_150755-900.jpg




.
 
Last edited:

asimba2

2016 4cyl High Roof 144
Phones take wonderful video. The problem is often storage. I was constantly having to stop what I was doing to dump the footage onto my computer in order to have enough storage to continue filming. This is the biggest reason I moved away from the phone.

I also had to constantly remember to put my phone in airplane mode and turn off wifi, otherwise all my notification sounds ended up in my video.
 

glasseye

Well-known member
Phone storage can be an issue, but it's easy to manage. The drums video was originally one long continuous take. 12 minutes, 1.8GB. Picture and sound. The phone has about 40GB of space for media.

Much of a tech video is close ups. Fasteners, wires, connectors, diagnostic screens, etc. Orion's snail image is a perfect example of how good phones can be, especially at close up stuff.

I shot these frosty leaves the other day with both my $$$ DSLR on a tripod with a $$$ macro lens and with my phone. On screen, I can barely tell the difference between them. It takes a large print to reveal the phone camera's shortcomings.

The same goes for video. It's just astonishing how good these phones are.

IMG_20191030_150022-Pano 1175 px.jpg
 

glasseye

Well-known member
Here's Nautamaran installing the filter on Frito's tranny. Same phone. Available light.

IMG_20190923_114539 1024 px.jpg
 

sikwan

06 T1N Can
Having been a long time Canon nut I have not bothered too much with the old Canon SLR cameras but the Cannon camera SL2 seems to fit what we need to achieve in both budget cost and content value.
I'm going to recommend the Canon M50 since you're a Canon guy. The SL2 does not have 4K (not that you need it, as some have mentioned).


My important factors (including the ones mentioned before):
1. Sound.
2. Fast autofocus.
3. Compact.
4. Lens interchangeability.


The M50 should give you what you need, but pay attention to the sound and autofocus.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCJwRXdLRPY

Autofocus works better in HD than in 4K, but editing or even uploading 4k is a pain and not advisable. With your budget, you could get a good tripod and directional mic and still be under $1500.


I'm partial to the Sony A6400, but that's only because I'm already invested in lenses.
 

autostaretx

Erratic Member

glasseye

Well-known member
Truth be told, nearly any camera can shoot good video nowadays. :cheers:
 

glasseye

Well-known member
That "Lume Cube" is a very cool little piece of kit. Thanks, autostartx! I might just get me one of those. :bow:
 

Top Bottom