Posted by Toby on 02/01/07 04:25

Video has a much more limited contrast range than film, and an entirely
different look. It is not only a question of dynamic range, but of frame
rate. Most video is shot interlaced for broadcast on a TV screen, and if
NTSC at a nominal rate of 30 fps, instead of film's 24 fps (in the US at
least).

You might consider one of the newest generation of prosumer camcorders such
as the Panasonic AJ-D100b, which allow shooting in 24 fps progressive mode,
which will simulate the look of film. Cameras such as this also have a cine
gamma setting to (supposedly) emulate the look of film. You have the option
of manual focus and iris, but neither are particularly responsive or easy to
use since they are electronic instead of mechanical. However, if it is a
question of setting up a fixed shot it would probably not be too much of a
problem.

All that being said, you should definitely rent whatever model you are
thinking of buying and see if the final picture quality meets your needs.
Having shot on both 16mm and video, I have yet to find a video camera that
really emulates the look of film. You will get better quality out of a
professional camera with 2/3" chips shooting a format such as Digibeta or
even DVCPro 50, but that gets very pricey very fast.

Another option to consider is a camera like the Sony Z1 that shoots HDV. I
am not familiar with them in their HD mode, but many people rave about them.
This camera does not have true 24P. I believe the new Sony V1 does have 24P
(someone?) but you are still working with those small chips...

I urge you to do some tests to determine whether the output look meets your
needs.

Toby
"blacklight" <contact@rent-a-cloud.com> wrote in message
news:1169849797.147729.289120@m58g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
> Our video ecard clips at www.rent-a-cloud.com are shot on 16mm film,
> then transferred to digital for editing - cumbersome and expensive. We
> want to change over to camcorders, but don't know which is the best
> for our needs. We live in a rural area where nobody has any knowledge
> in this field. And calls to Sony/JVC/Canon gave confusing and
> conflicting answers.
> Our Needs:
> 1) the camcorder must deliver the same image quality/detail as our
> existing clips show. Most are shot into extreme contrast light like
> skies and rising/setting suns.
> 2) the camcorder must have single-frame film mode as our clips are
> shot in stop-frame-motion technique.
> 3) the camcorder must have manual zoom and exposure controls.
> Question: whis is the cheapest camcorder to meet these demands?
> Sincere thanks for reply - Klaus Jaritz
> ps: Unfortunately, to ascertain the image quality required you would
> have to send some clips as ecards to yourself. It's free. Only then
> will you have a file (wmv) which opens across the whole monitor screen.
> Sorry for this bother.
>

[Back to original message]