Equipment needed for creating content? - GoFuckYourself.com

inthestars · 03-15-2003, 02:09 AM

I want to start shooting my own pics and videos, what sort of video camera and still camera should I buy? Thanks..

Mutt · 03-15-2003, 02:18 AM

Nice digital still camera. Seems like most guys who want high quality photos are using the Nikon D100.

For video, unanimous support for the Sony VX2000 digital video camera.

I'm sure there are lower priced cameras that would be ok but if i think it's worth the investment to get as good equipment as you can afford.

UnseenWorld · 03-15-2003, 02:36 AM

Let me provide a little counterpoint to Mutt.

Bear in mind, I am one of the guys with a D100, but it's a recent purchase, and I produced a lot of very good content using Olympus C-series cameras (e.g., the C-2040, C-3040, C-4040). My lighting with that camera was of the "fill and bounce" variety (light from the camera's built-in flash mixed with light from an auxiliary flash bounced off the ceiling.

My friend Mutt is right if you have a big budget, but buying a Nikon D-100, a good zoom lens, and appropriate lighting will run you up to about $5000 (more if you want to go with a set of prime lenses instead of zoom lenses). By contrast, the Olympus C-4040 even with the auxiliary flash will probably run you $1000 or less.

2 megapixels is plenty for web work. Even with my D-100, the photos I put up are under 2 megapixels in size. My broadband images are 1200x900, which is 1.08 megapixels. 2 megapixels is the usual minimum for making 8x10 prints, but if you're just doing web work, a 2 megapixel camera would be plenty, though good 2 megapixel cameras are hard to find, and even relatively inexpensive digital cameras today start at about 3 megapixels.

I talked about the Olympus cameras because I used them myself. I'm sure Nikon, Canon, Sony, and several other manufacturers make cameras in the same price range at comparable quality.

I'm not much of a video person, but the connoisseurs will tell you you need a 3-chip camera. This is recommended, I'd say, if you're going to be selling VHS tapes or DVD's to be played back full screen. For 160x and 320x playback, I don't see why a 1-chip camera wouldn't do. And, I'd say shop for a 1-chip camera by price and features. Read the reviews. You definitely want image stabilization and control over white balance, but it's an unusual camera today that doesn't come standard with those features.

Feel free to ICQ me (48201505) if you want to ask any additional questions.

Mutt · 03-15-2003, 03:24 AM

How much is the Nikon D100 by itself?

Not sure because I'm not a photographer/videographer myself but it seems to me you really can tell a difference between video shot with a 1 chip camera versus a 3 chip. But maybe somebody who is good with lighting can squeeze out nice video from a 1 chipper.

The Other Steve · 03-15-2003, 03:48 AM

Don't overlook the Canon G series - they shoot stills and short bursts of video.

Mark the Pithy · 03-15-2003, 04:04 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by UnseenWorld

Olympus.

Olympus is great. Even the older digicam editions. The C-5050Z is a must if you are into digital photography, if only for personal use: it supports RAW and is a compact style format. All for $600.

The E-20 could be an option also @ $1200 for the kit. Check eBay.

Sony VX2000 for video. End of story. This cam is great. It's basically what you would get with a broadcast cam in 1995.

The going rate for rental is $150/day.

Paul Markham · 03-15-2003, 06:28 AM

It really depends on the market you are aiming at, quality or amateur. As you are asking these questions I will assume it's the amateur market.

The problem I found with the Olympus was it was slow, every five shots it wanted to stop and download from the camera to the disc. This is a pain when the shoot is flowing, it tends to frustrate the model.

The Nikon D100 is an excellent camera and the speed is fine, but the price with a good lens as Unseen pointed out is $3,000+

What he is wrong on is the lighting. You cannot get away from it strobe lights are the only way to go, about three with stands, umbrellas and a light metre will set you back around $1800.

Shooting digital with poor lighting will give you the worse effect. Relying on reflectors and the sun to shine is also not the way to go.

There is another aspect that no one has touched on and is the most important. What will the model think of you?

(1)
She turns up and sees a guy with the right equipment that he knows how to use. He's in control of the equipment and it costs money. Instant respect. He then shows he can do an excellent job with this equipment, by showing her the pics, and pointing out the way to get the best out of herself. The respect grows.

(2)
He has a bit of cheap equipment, which works right when it feels like it, the light is in control of him. The camera is never shooting when it should. He's taking pictures of her naked. Respect lost. She thinks he's a dickhead and it shows in her work.

Instead of you shooting a girl who thinks you are anice guy and a professional, she thinks you are an idiot that wants to just see naked females. What are the pictures going to look like?

BadBoyBill4281 · 03-15-2003, 06:40 AM

Canon XL1S for video very nice investment
Olympus E-10 or E-20 for stills

those are my 2 top picks
we use and never had a problem with
the Canon XL1S or the E-10
invest in a good light kit as well the E-10 produces very nice
images when an external flash/strobe is attached and
spotlighting is used. just my

03-15-2003, 02:09 AM	#1
inthestars Registered User Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: California Posts: 2,021	Equipment needed for creating content? I want to start shooting my own pics and videos, what sort of video camera and still camera should I buy? Thanks..

03-15-2003, 02:18 AM	#2
Mutt Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 34,431	Nice digital still camera. Seems like most guys who want high quality photos are using the Nikon D100. For video, unanimous support for the Sony VX2000 digital video camera. I'm sure there are lower priced cameras that would be ok but if i think it's worth the investment to get as good equipment as you can afford. __________________ I moved my sites to Vacares Hosting. I've saved money, my hair is thicker, lost some weight too! Thanks Sly!

03-15-2003, 02:36 AM	#3
UnseenWorld Confirmed User Join Date: May 2001 Location: Portland, OR, USA Posts: 5,279	Let me provide a little counterpoint to Mutt. Bear in mind, I am one of the guys with a D100, but it's a recent purchase, and I produced a lot of very good content using Olympus C-series cameras (e.g., the C-2040, C-3040, C-4040). My lighting with that camera was of the "fill and bounce" variety (light from the camera's built-in flash mixed with light from an auxiliary flash bounced off the ceiling. My friend Mutt is right if you have a big budget, but buying a Nikon D-100, a good zoom lens, and appropriate lighting will run you up to about $5000 (more if you want to go with a set of prime lenses instead of zoom lenses). By contrast, the Olympus C-4040 even with the auxiliary flash will probably run you $1000 or less. 2 megapixels is plenty for web work. Even with my D-100, the photos I put up are under 2 megapixels in size. My broadband images are 1200x900, which is 1.08 megapixels. 2 megapixels is the usual minimum for making 8x10 prints, but if you're just doing web work, a 2 megapixel camera would be plenty, though good 2 megapixel cameras are hard to find, and even relatively inexpensive digital cameras today start at about 3 megapixels. I talked about the Olympus cameras because I used them myself. I'm sure Nikon, Canon, Sony, and several other manufacturers make cameras in the same price range at comparable quality. I'm not much of a video person, but the connoisseurs will tell you you need a 3-chip camera. This is recommended, I'd say, if you're going to be selling VHS tapes or DVD's to be played back full screen. For 160x and 320x playback, I don't see why a 1-chip camera wouldn't do. And, I'd say shop for a 1-chip camera by price and features. Read the reviews. You definitely want image stabilization and control over white balance, but it's an unusual camera today that doesn't come standard with those features. Feel free to ICQ me (48201505) if you want to ask any additional questions. __________________ SIG TOO BIG! Maximum 120x60 button and no more than 3 text lines of DEFAULT SIZE and COLOR. Unless your sig is for a GFY top banner sponsor, then you may use a 624x80 instead of a 120x60. Last edited by UnseenWorld; 03-15-2003 at 02:38 AM..

03-15-2003, 03:24 AM	#4
Mutt Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 34,431	How much is the Nikon D100 by itself? Not sure because I'm not a photographer/videographer myself but it seems to me you really can tell a difference between video shot with a 1 chip camera versus a 3 chip. But maybe somebody who is good with lighting can squeeze out nice video from a 1 chipper. __________________ I moved my sites to Vacares Hosting. I've saved money, my hair is thicker, lost some weight too! Thanks Sly!

03-15-2003, 03:48 AM	#5
The Other Steve Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Sunny Queensland - perfect one day and better the next. Posts: 2,106	Don't overlook the Canon G series - they shoot stills and short bursts of video. __________________ Left intentionally blank ... just like my brain

03-15-2003, 06:28 AM	#7
Paul Markham Too old to care Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: On the sofa, watching TV or doing my jigsaws. Posts: 52,943	It really depends on the market you are aiming at, quality or amateur. As you are asking these questions I will assume it's the amateur market. The problem I found with the Olympus was it was slow, every five shots it wanted to stop and download from the camera to the disc. This is a pain when the shoot is flowing, it tends to frustrate the model. The Nikon D100 is an excellent camera and the speed is fine, but the price with a good lens as Unseen pointed out is $3,000+ What he is wrong on is the lighting. You cannot get away from it strobe lights are the only way to go, about three with stands, umbrellas and a light metre will set you back around $1800. Shooting digital with poor lighting will give you the worse effect. Relying on reflectors and the sun to shine is also not the way to go. There is another aspect that no one has touched on and is the most important. What will the model think of you? (1) She turns up and sees a guy with the right equipment that he knows how to use. He's in control of the equipment and it costs money. Instant respect. He then shows he can do an excellent job with this equipment, by showing her the pics, and pointing out the way to get the best out of herself. The respect grows. (2) He has a bit of cheap equipment, which works right when it feels like it, the light is in control of him. The camera is never shooting when it should. He's taking pictures of her naked. Respect lost. She thinks he's a dickhead and it shows in her work. Instead of you shooting a girl who thinks you are anice guy and a professional, she thinks you are an idiot that wants to just see naked females. What are the pictures going to look like? __________________ Blowout deal. 880 videos, 2,400 image sets, plus many RAW videos. $500. PM me for a deal. Skype Paulmarkham70

03-15-2003, 06:40 AM	#8
BadBoyBill4281 Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: May 2002 Location: West Palm Beach, Florida Posts: 616	Canon XL1S for video very nice investment Olympus E-10 or E-20 for stills those are my 2 top picks we use and never had a problem with the Canon XL1S or the E-10 invest in a good light kit as well the E-10 produces very nice images when an external flash/strobe is attached and spotlighting is used. just my __________________ ICQ#128496425 www.swinginglocal.com