Filmmaking / Directing : I'm Back! by Bhavnisha Parmar

What is your budget for the new camera?

For the whole package, would say about a thousand pounds. Is that too ambitious?

Being ambitious is a good thing but relating the costs with the camera for decision making as to whether or not to purchase it should not be the only factor. You should know the vision of how you want to film the action prior to set time. This means you need to know what the camera is capable of and what all type of work you want the camera to do for the type of project level you are accustomed to doing. If your skills as a filmmaker, live action CCTV or internet podcasting directing and development is coming from lots of experience behind the camera usage then you should plan and purchase your cameras according to those skills. That doesn't mean that you can't decide to get a fancier one, it just means that you know what your minimum level of camera needs are to complete the filming of that project. If you feel comfortable about buying the camera and you know how to use most of the functions of that camera with a reasonable experience of expertise then purchase it with a little extra functionality so that your abilities can allow you to grow as you learn the camera's functions. If you are on a tight budget and is considered this camera then the choice is weighed between how soon you can make money with it using the level of know how and that cameras functions at a given rate of deadline. And always consider extra unseen costs like downtime due to the camera needing to be repaired. (This remains the question of, "Do you need a backup or possibly two cameras? Extra editing software? Insurance for your camera if it's for a business, etc...)

It's never so much the equipment but the person behind it ... A capable person can knit sweaters out of a devil's horns ... :)

Consider the lighting you expect to encounter in your film. If there will be dark scenes, you will want to get a camera that handles low light well, or invest in some lighting. I would also recommend getting a camera with interchangeable lenses. Although it's often assumed as a given to get a camera with more lens options, some people still use camcorders with a single - I advise against this, even if it is a cheaper option. There are camcorders and DSLRs that allow you to expand your lens inventory over time (personally I prefer Canon). A nice fast lens like a f1.8 50mm can be an inexpensive way ($100-200) to get rack focus shots for scenes that need it. That said, a basic kit lens that comes with your camera (typicially 18-55mm or 18-135mm or so) can work fine with most entry level projects and is more than adequate if you have reasonable lighting conditions. You will of course want a tripod, mic, etc. but honestly beyond that you are good to go. I've gone to some gigs with nothing more than a camera in hand and shot quite effectively. The additional stuff just adds production value, which may or may not be as high a concern starting out. If you are expecting to shoot relying on auto focus however, DSLR's are notorious for being a bit behind in this area. The 650D (T4i) had some auto focus but it would often drift or go way off at random. I have a newer camera (70D) where this is finally fixed to work as it should, and I'm quite pleased, but the body alone is $1300 so you may want to consider your budget. Otherwise prepare to manually focus your shots. It's really quite common. Beyond that, take your time to get familiar with settings and options on your camera. Much of a look and feel you are looking for will be in how you operate it, not the camera itself.

Bhavnisha, The first question I will ask is how much money do you want to spend? Many filmmakers with a limited budget start with a SLR because of the large sensor, interchangeable lens ability and ISO ratings well up in the thousands. The body only price of a SLR can run from about 500 hundred dollars to thousands of dollars. A good prosumer video camera could also be a good alternative. Let us know your budget and I can narrow the options.

First of all thank you for all your responses. I really appreciate them. For me having actually trained in acting my skills behind the camera are not very far developed. I have however been surrounded by camera crew and directors who have kindly shown me some of the ropes. I think what you have said William is really important. I need a camera that I can grow with. I also appreciate that if I day that this is all I have to work with then you will find a creative solution to a creative problem. My budget is £1000 for the body and any extras. I know that a portion of that will go straight on the body, but comments above about working with one lens is something that I would have to look into. I already have access to a tripod. So really would be looking for batteries/ lights/ lens/ mic for that price. In terms of the body I am looking into the Canon DSLR range, both from reviews from other people and what I have read up on. As for the mic, I have seen some good external ones I believe for around £120. This is as far as I have been able to get in my search.

Just to add, I was looking into the Canon 600D- priced at £490 with the 18-55 mm lens and the 75 - 300mm lens. Also say for example you were shooting for a full day doing interviews with people (this seems to be a time where the camera would be rolling the most) how many batteries are sufficient to have on hand? 3? Thanks

Hello, one thing you should keep in mind is your post-production work flow. If you're using a dslr for interviews are you going to use an adapter for your mic? Or are you going to record it on a separate device and sync it when you edit? People will forgive a bad picture but not bad audio. Before you commit to a camera, is there way you could rent a few different ones and see what you like? In the end, no camera is perfect. It's a matter of understanding what the camera can do to get the look you want on set and in post. It boils down to personal preference.

Hi Landis, thanks for your response. I am looking to use a separate mic and sync. And unfortunately the best thing I can do is go into one of the UK tech stores and have a little play, which is better than nothing. :) I will look into renting though this week. Thanks for suggesting that.

Go Canon C100 - C300. It's better than a DSLR - it has sync sound and it's pretty inexpensive.

how much is a Panasonic AC/90 in England? In the us it's about 2k for a whole kit. Which comes with a dolly, memory cards, mic, filters, and so forth. I would look into that one if you can afford it. Only if you are using it just for video. You can check on youtube about the camera so you can see shoots vs other camera. Low level light and such.

Also buy your stuff online because you will get a better price for the buck.

Here is a link you should check out. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jNYbrkFjFn4

Thanks for all that Stephen, looking into now! Also the bundle kit that you were talking about is £1300 in total here in the UK which is not a bad price overall.

Bhavnisha, I think Stephen is leading you in the right direction. You are on point Stephen. I have used the Panasonic HVX200 to film a full length film and Cannon and Nikon SLR cameras to do a short film that made it to Cannes last year. They all have their place but the Panasonic Stephen is talking about is made for video and the Nikon and Cannon are primarily made for still photography. I know people out there will say but you get the shallow depth of field, a huge chip, great low light capabilities with the SLR but they have a lot of shortcomings too. None of the SLR except the Nikon 7100 and the top end Cannon and Nikon have a jack for ear phones so you can not even hear what you are recording. We all know how important sound is, all the pros I know use a separate sound system when using a SLR which is a good solution but makes your whole operation more complicated and expensive. I can think of at least 10 other points that favor the Panasonic but this is already getting too long. For what you are doing a good prosumer video camera like the one Stephen recommended, is the way to go, it will give you more reliable results.

$1000 - you can probably find a guy with a package for that. I'd rent it and the operator.

I wouldn't make my camera choice based on the presence or absence of an audio jack - that's an audio decision. As far as I'm concerned, marrying the audio to the camera body makes things more complicated because all the cables have to lead back to it. What if you do a far away shot? Unless you are doing run-and-gun news-style footage, having the audio on-camera isn't that big of a deal. Even a cheap Zoom H1 ($99) is more convenient than trying not to trip on cables because they are "more convenient." When shopping for a camera, go for the LOOK you want, not the sound - that you save for your microphone and recording gear. Better low light performance, shallow DOF, a big chip are SIGNIFICANT pluses that directly impact the appearance of your film. While agree that sound is VERY important, I wouldn't sacrifice picture for it. That said, DSLRs are in a form factor that are not as handy for "run and gun" shooting like news and some guerilla shoots, because they don't have the grip in the same format. They are also weak in auto focus, but if you're going for a cinematic look, they are favorable. Another thing to consider (that is sort of half way between the two in terms of form) is the Black Magic Cinema series. Even the pocket cinema camera ($1000) boasts very impressive image quality at a quite reasonable price. You would need to use MFT lenses (which are quite affordable and effective) with the pocket version, but can go to a Canon EF mount if you go for the 2.5K or 4K versions, which is a nice bump up from DSLR. After that, you get into the range of cameras like the Red, Arri Alexa etc., but those come at a much higher entry level price point.

Marc raises an alternately valid point. Unless you plan to produce more and more films, your money can sometimes be better spent on a rental with a camera operator. They will bring gear you might not otherwise be able to afford, an array of lenses etc., and the skill and experience to use it. I've always taken the other path and bought gear, but this is a genuinely valid option and in some cases is the better choice to make.

Just a small plug...We've brought in one of the most respected gents in the biz, Mitch Aunger of Planet 5D, to teach a Next Level Webinar on just this subject. Mitch is simply fantastic. He'll also be doing a half hour (min) Q&A during the session. Here's some more info: https://www.stage32.com/webinars/The-Camera-Conundrum-Choosing-the-Best-...

Thanks Richard, just what I may need :) And thanks Brian for you input too. Having all these opinions, expertise and experience is allowing me to sharpen my needs and thus buy a more fitting camera. Stay with me on this one, I am a complete newbie... but I'm getting there slowly.

Please post what you ultimately decide to get. I'll be curious to know what your final decision was.

I will do Brian. No problem

-If you are buying a camera and are not a cameraperson, I would not recommend buying online. You want to go to a dealer or store so that if you have questions, you can get a human to help you in person. You want to develop a relationship with that dealer/store so that when you need repairs or maintenance, you have someone to help you get the repairs done and rent/loan you a replacement camera if needed. -If you are doing a production to sell to a network or distributor, you may want to get their camera specification sheet. I have heard in Canada that networks have specifications for format, aspect ratio and cameras, and do not accept materials not shot according to their specs. -1,000 pounds does not sound like a lot to me (but I am not a cameraperson). I would think you would want to get the camera, batteries, battery charger, audio mic, memory cards, card reader for a computer, as a minimum package and after that I would think you would have run out of money. -As a Sound Recordist, I would love to say get a sound person with sound package and record sound separately. I don't sense that you would have the budget to do this, so am suggesting that you record sound to your camera. It is cheaper, less complicated and you don't have to sync anything in post (of course the sound isn't as great when recorded on cameras, but it can be good enough). -The good thing about buying an inexpensive camera is that you will be able to get to know it faster. Then you can concentrate on directing and creative camerawork and not figuring out menu items, how to attach lenses, etc. -I've noticed that here in Canada, camerapeople don't buy cameras now. The separation between professional and consumer equipment is very blurred, so the choice of a camera is more complicated now than it used to be. The camera you buy now for a specific project may not be the best camera for later projects that you plan to do.