# Is it really bad to shoot a feature film on a camcorder?



## harmonica (Mar 6, 2014)

I was thinking of doing it but everyone is not on board with me on this decision acting like it's completely unprofessional, especially when their is so much access cheap DSLRs.  The problem I have with DSLRs is that it's difficult to get a deep depth of field with lower light cause of the larger sensors that they have compared to camcorders.  It's not a problem indoors, where you can light to f8 or f11, but outdoors at night, even in downtown, you still have to open up real wide, to get enough light, and that causes shallow DOF.  I find myself liking to move the camera, and use a steadicam quite often, so I cannot focus pull at the same time, especially during scenes with lots of movement, and if you are doing a thriller or suspense movie, like what I plan on shooting, their is going to be a lot of movement and action.

But is everyone right and deep DOF camcorders, are the antichrist of filmmaking, even if you use one with interchangeable lenses to get better shots, and have a good lighting person, etc?


----------



## Gavjenks (Mar 6, 2014)

Camcorders generally have much better focus tracking than DSLRs for action. They're made for that. DSLRs are made for stills. So for action? Yes a camcorder will work a helluva lot better than a typical DSLR.
Now if you really want a professional film, you probably shouldn't be using either. They make real movie cameras, like the RED system, designed to shoot movies. They're very expensive though.

A recent innovation however that might address your problems is the Canon 70D, which has a system that allows every pixel in its sensor to participate in autofocus in a way that makes its focus tracking much superior to a normal DSLR. I haven't had a chance to play with one (they are always turns off at stores when on display for some reason! And I'm too lazy to ask. GRR), but you should look into it.

As for the sensor being "too big" that's a bit confusing. You just need different focal length lenses to shoot from the distance you want. Not a big deal. Worst case scenario just shoot the thing wider than you want and crop it in post. Draw a rectangle on your focusing screen with a sharpie if you really need to, lol.

(You also want parfocal lenses for video - ones that maintain focus as they zoom, which most DSLR lenses do not. Ones that have fixed maximum apertures are more often parfocal, but not always. Gotta look up individual lenses and check)


----------



## harmonica (Mar 6, 2014)

Okay thanks.  I want to make a feature film of a thriller script, but unfortunately it's microbudget so will have to use a cheaper camera, than the RED or something like that.

I will look into the Canon 70D.  Well when I say too big, here's what I mean.  I helped a guy work on his feature, and his camcorder had a lens that could open to f1.8, but everything was sharp.  Four people in focus at different distance, and you could read street signs at night behind them even.  He said he would need a 35mm adapter to get shallow DOF, if he wanted that, cause his lens does not do it, no matter how open it is.  He said it was his sensor being 'small' that enabled it to have such deep DOF, wide open.

But for my current DSLR (I have the Canon T2i right now), there is no lens that can open to f1.8, and be that sharp. When I say the sensor is too big, I am not talking about distance and having to crop, I am talking about too big, as in there is shallow DOF in the image where as smaller sensors have deep DOF, without having to light a night outdoor scene really expensively bright in order to get deep DOF.  So their are lenses for DSLRs that will give you the deep DOF look wide open unfortunately.  I would only open wide for mynight shots, but that's where some of the action is too.  As for cropping the image, I loose pixels that way and everyone and I figure the more HD a movie is, the better.  Plus in my experience so far, distribution companies want HD very much.


----------



## Derrel (Mar 6, 2014)

See: *Blair Witch Project*


----------



## Gavjenks (Mar 6, 2014)

> But for my current DSLR (I have the Canon T2i right now), there is no lens that can open to f1.8, and be that sharp. When I say the sensor is too big, I am not talking about distance and having to crop, I am talking about too big, as in there is shallow DOF in the image where as smaller sensors have deep DOF, without having to light a night outdoor scene really expensively bright in order to get deep DOF. So their are lenses for DSLRs that will give you the deep DOF look wide open unfortunately. I would only open wide for mynight shots, but that's where some of the action is too. As for cropping the image, I loose pixels that way and everyone and I figure the more HD a movie is, the better. Plus in my experience so far, distribution companies want HD very much.



The only reason bigger sensors give you shallow depth of field is simply because in order to frame the same shot, you have to walk closer with the bigger sensor. Then the distance is what changes the DOF.

If you were to literally take your focusing screen out, draw a smaller rectangle on it with a sharpie the size of your friend's camcorder sensor, and then frame your shots in that rectangle and crop the resulting video in post processing to that size, you would get the same effective DOF at f/1.8 as you do on your friend's camcorder. OR just use f/1.8 lenses that are longer in focal length compared to your friend's camcorder (the actual real world solution you'd want)



Also more pixels isn't necessarily better if they are tiny pixels. Smaller pixels = MORE NOISE in low light. And unless they have world class glass in the camcorder, the smaller pixels probably aren't even actually resolving more detail anyway.



*If you give me a specific brand and model of camcorder you are considering, i could advise you much more accurately about the differences.*


----------



## harmonica (Mar 6, 2014)

Okay thanks.  What if I am looking for a distributor and a lot of them tell me they will not distribute a movie that is not shot in HD?  I only think this will happen cause everytime I search for fillmmaking jobs, the first thing the adds say is that you must have an HD camera.  Everyone seems to think anything below is unacceptable, so I wonder if this will cause your movie to not get distributed likely?  Good thing to know about the glass.  That's why I would want a camcorder with interchangeable lenses.


----------



## Gavjenks (Mar 6, 2014)

The Canon 70D I mentioned can do full 1080p HD (1920x1080) at up to 30 frames per second, and minimum qualifying HD (1020x720) at up to 60 frames per second.
Which isn't terribly uncommon. Even my pretty old, entry level rebel T2i can do the same.
I'm sure pretty much all camcorders do too

The movie industry standard is 24 FPS, and if you're shooting a super fast paced action movie, you might benefit from 30 or more if you want absolutely no strobing effect. But probably not a big deal to anybody if you stay at 24, or 30.


----------



## minicoop1985 (Mar 6, 2014)

I happen to know one of the videographers who shot this movie:

King of the Strippers (2014) - IMDb

Known him for quite a while through a car forum. I also know that a large portion of that movie was filmed with a Canon 7D and a Tamron 17-50 f2.8. It's not for everyone, in all honesty, but for him it works, and they got some incredible quality video out of that rig. I'd prefer a camcorder, personally-the focus tracking part is quite a boost.

The 70D can supposedly autofocus in movie mode, even using phase detection. Some goofy sensor tech splitting each pixel or something.


----------



## harmonica (Mar 6, 2014)

Okay thanks.  However other DSLRs are slow on autofocus, so it would have to be just as good as a deep focus camcorder or just as good as a human focus puller in order to focus at the right times and all that.  As for frames per second I just prefer the 24fps look, nothing too fancy.

Is their any advantage to buying a 70D, over a camcorder with a smaller sensor, but with interchangeable lenses, since focus seems to be good both?

Do you think that deep DOF can hurt a movie though?  So many filmmakers are using DSLRs so I assume that shallow DOF is the reason, and that deep DOF must be really hated in the industry for DSLRs to be so popular, and maybe I would be hurting a feature to shoot with a camcorder.  Do you think so?


----------



## Gavjenks (Mar 6, 2014)

camcorders aren't as good at all as human focus pullers, so I'm not quite sure what your requirements are if you're equating the two.


----------



## harmonica (Mar 6, 2014)

That's true, it was dumb of me to do say that.  But a lot of DSLRs are slow on autofocusing and that can hurt your movie, if the camera cannot focus on the action in time.


----------



## Gavjenks (Mar 6, 2014)

Dunno man. You probably just have to bring a friend to a camera store or Costco or Best Buy or wherever has some camcorders and a 70D, and have them run around and do some roudnhouse kicks while you try to hold focus on them.


----------



## timor (Mar 7, 2014)

Dslr are fine to shoot video. My gosh, that's the look:
http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_kxpb58VWqM1qb4njgo1_500.jpg
It is crazy, what they have to change it into good video recorder.
Focusing usually is done by hand.


----------



## harmonica (Mar 7, 2014)

Yeah.  It's just when I am shooting guerilla style, a steadicam is the best way to go, and unfortunately, I cannot pull focus while using one.  That rig in the picture is actually very interesting.  Are you suppose to pull focus with that while carrying the camera over your shoulder?  Perhaps a shoulder system is better than a steadicam if you can pull focus, but I am quite tall, which means I would have to squat if using a shoulder rig, or the footage will look like a bit of a high angle.


----------



## Gavjenks (Mar 7, 2014)

I am guessing the idea is that a little focus puller runs around next to you and pulls while you aim and operate the camera, with the above setup.

Considering that the cameraman is hidden behind a huge hood and can't see the focus pulling marks, yet they still have a big white dial for focus pulling marks, it does not look intended for one person.


----------



## harmonica (Mar 7, 2014)

Oh okay.  When shooting action shots, it is difficult to pull focus at f2.5 or wider on a DSLR.  Especially when running while following actors, or doing a running tracking shot on a still person from far away, you cannot tell what is in focus, even with a focus puller running next to me.

I also noticed that I posted this thread in the film forum when I mean to in the video forum.  Sorry about that.


----------



## timor (Mar 7, 2014)

DSLR Video Rigs
UrbanFox.TV Blog: DSLRs rigged for video Gadget show
And THIS is interesting show:
[video=vimeo;36557953]http://vimeo.com/36557953[/video]
In any case, internet is full of that.


----------



## timor (Mar 7, 2014)

This one is more serious:
[video=vimeo;9737352]http://vimeo.com/9737352[/video]


----------



## BobaPhil (Mar 8, 2014)

If you can, check out the documentary SIDE BY SIDE, hosted by Keanue Reeves. It's a fantastic study about the 'death' of film in the movie industry and how so many makers are shooting on digital, including lots of students who shoot with DSLR cameras now. 

I still work with old cine film/home movies and found it all exciting, yet sad, that film is being used less and less.


----------



## grafxman (Mar 9, 2014)

I have about 500 video clips on my flickr pages. Most of them were shot either a Canon 7D or Canon 6D. Shooting video with a DSLR is frankly a pain in the you know what. Yes you can buy all manner of extra attachments to make things easier but it still doesn't hold a candle to a camcorder such as this one:

Canon XA20 Professional HD Camcorder 8453B002 B&H Photo Video

It has an astonishing stability system that is far better than any DSLR stability system. It's an "active stability system" that, as near as I can tell, automatically crops the edges of the scene slightly so the scene stays completely steady even though you might be walking with it. DSLR video is fine if the camera is on a tripod or some sort of a stabilizer gadget is used but for any sort of serious video I would break out a decent camcorder. The only reason I bought the XA20 was for it's night video capability. Here's a few clips:

Armadillo crosses the road | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
nice little garter snake | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
marsh rabbit munches grass | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

It will shoot green or black and white IR video. It also takes some pretty decent still photos. If I was shooting a feature film with DSLR camera I would have to have a studio for most of the shoots and a tripod with wheels that I could roll around like the Hollywood folks used with film cameras. It would just be so much easier and quicker with a camcorder like the Canon XA20.


----------



## harmonica (Mar 9, 2014)

Okay thanks.  It doesn't seem that that camera can change lenses though and I am stuck with the one lens option.  Is their any draw backs to this lens?  I would also like to do some fast zoom shots in the action sequence I plan on shooting like those really fast zooms you see in older movies like The Wild Bunch.  If the camera comes with a built in zoom lens only, can it do that?


----------



## grafxman (Mar 10, 2014)

Here's the specs for the lens from the hyperlink I provided:

35mm Equivalent: 26.8 to 576mm (28.8 to 576mm with Dynamic IS)

That's more zoom power than any DSLR lens ever made. If that's not enough oomph for you, Canon makes a pretty decent 1.5 teleconverter that screws into the front of the lens. Since I shoot wildlife I bought it too. Although when you zoom back you start getting vignetting so I would recommend you hold off on buying it unless you're sure you need it. You don't need to take my word for how great this camera is, just read the reviews and study the specs. It has 3 seconds of continuous pre-record. It has remote control that allows to control it remotely. You could set it up very close to the action and control it remotely. Zoom speed can be set to variable, constant (with 16 levels), fast, normal or slow. I suspect this camcorder will do much more than you will ever require of it. You can use a button on the camcorder body for fast zoom and a button on the top of the handle for slow zoom. You really should watch the video at the hyperlink I provided.


----------



## runnah (Mar 10, 2014)

This is the one I use when I am not using my 5D MKIII.

Sony HXR-NX70U NXCAM Compact Camcorder HXR-NX70U B&H Photo Video

It's certainly "easier" to use. Focus system is better and form factor is much better. Although compared to my 5D the video color and the DOF is not as great.


----------



## grafxman (Mar 10, 2014)

If you're still wondering about the XA20, take a look at this review:

Canon XA25 Professional Camcorder Review | Videomaker.com

The XA25 is the exact same camera except for an additional coax output.


----------



## harmonica (Mar 11, 2014)

Okay thanks.  I watched the videos, and saw the night capability.  Is the night mode always in black and white?  When it comes to the zoom I want to do, here's an example of how fast I want it, at 1:38 into the clip, when it zooms back from the woman's face:


----------



## grafxman (Mar 12, 2014)

I don't know if it will go that fast however you should be able to speed things up in the software. I use Corel's VideoStudio X5 which doesn't cost much. The interface is a little difficult to figure out but it's very easy to speed up or slow down a clip. IIRC without having to dig through the manual, I think the camera will do both the green as well as black and white night video. You can probably find a bunch more videos on youtube if you search for XA20 or XA25.


----------



## harmonica (Mar 14, 2014)

Okay thanks but I can't speed it up footage, without the actor looking like he is moving fast.  You can speed up a zoom if the actor is still and it won't be noticeable but I want to do a fast zoom when an actor jumps, the jump will be sped up as well.  Maybe I can zoom just before the jump and have it work out while shooting.  I was thinking about what was said on here about how if you crop the footage, you can make your sensor smaller, since you are only using a smaller section of your sensor, therefore giving you a deeper DOF.  I didn't want to crop my sensor since I would be loosing HD.

But what if I shot my project in a 2.75:1 aspect ratio? It's pretty widescreen for today's standards, but it will give me more deeper DOF to use, and I don't mind the epic look of it. That way, I can still retain HD quality for hopeful distributors, cause it's an HD movie, just super widescreen.  Will distributors and film festivals mind a movie as wide as Lawrence of Arabia by today's standards, or would they have a problem  with it?


----------



## grafxman (Mar 14, 2014)

I'm afraid you're asking questions beyond my video experience level, I suggest you go here:

Videomaker.com

Sign up and ask your questions in their forum. I'm sure all your questions can be answered there. Sorry I can't help more.


----------

