1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Doing video, what do I need

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by Evil ... Thy name is Orville Redenbacher!!, Jan 5, 2016.

  1. I'm out of newspapers.
    I have a Youtube Channel. I post videos there and link my website and FB videos to that.
     
  2. SFIND

    SFIND Well-Known Member

    Yes, it's Mac only. The people I was helping last fall used it.
     
  3. SFIND

    SFIND Well-Known Member

    Are you planning to use a camera for both stills and video? If you're only looking for video, I wouldn't get a DSLR, I would get a pro camcorder. Autofocus is better, you wouldn't have to worry about changing lenses for different scenarios, and you can use the viewfinder while shooting video (which you can't on DSLR). I can vouch for Canon's XA-30 line. Here's info on B&H. The older XA-20 (or probably the Xa-10 before it) would be nice for your purposes. I use a Canon G20 for video, which is a stripped-down XA-20.

    If you are going to make stills as well and want a DSLR for the ability to do both tasks, for Nikon (since you mentioned that brand in the OP) I would suggest either the D5500 or D750. D750 is FX (wider 35mm film equivalent field of view). I use the D750 as my main still camera and love it. The reason I suggest either of these over Doc's D7200 (DX, 1.5 field of view compared to FX) is because they have rotating LCD screens, which makes it a lot easier to see what you're doing when doing elevated or low shots. The D7200 is a nice body (I use it personally as my second stills body), but the option for a rotating screens would be very useful for video.

    You're right on in your other post about what you would need to get started. I would suggest investing in a good tripod as well -- there are many cheap ones of varying quality, but generally they don't last as long and aren't as sturdy.
     
  4. SoloFlyer

    SoloFlyer Well-Known Member

    If you're doing a lot of "action style" videography in your marketing work, then I would still recommend a true video camera, as it tracks motion and autofocuses much faster. Something along these lines - Canon XA10 HD Professional Camcorder 4922B002 B&H Photo Video

    However, if you're doing shots where the action within the scene is fairly sedate - still shots, interviews, people walking (not running), etc. - then you can go with a DSLR. If you want Nikon, I agree with SFIND's suggestion of the D750. If you prefer Canon, then I have to recommend the 70D. It's fantastic and even does a decent job of autofocus tracking, closer to traditional video camera quality.

    You'll also need a versatile lens, and the Canon 70D is being packaged with a really nice 18-135mm STM lens that would be perfect for both portrait style interviews and traditional b-roll. The STM lenses are ideal for video because they're all internal motors, so they're super quiet.

    Regardless of what you choose, you absolutely need to pick up external microphones. The onboard audio for any video camera and ESPECIALLY any DSLR is just not professional or good enough. If you're doing a lot of sit-down interviews, you might want to explore a lavalier microphone and pack. If you're doing a lot of walking/talking interviews and have a helper, you might want to go for a boom microphone. And if you're doing man-on-the-street interviews, you might want a traditional stick microphone. Or all three options.

    Finally, you'll also want to invest into a quality tripod. And if you're looking at a lot of indoor interviews, a small light kit is encouraged as well.

    As far as editing, I recommend Adobe. Adobe Premiere will do everything you need and Adobe products work on both PC and Mac. Plus, you have seamless integration between Photshop and Premiere. If you have a Mac and prefer Final Cut, it'll cost you $300. If you want the latest and greatest from Adobe, you can get the Creative Cloud version of Premiere for $19.99 a month or about $239 a year. Or, you can go cheap and get Photoshop and Premiere Elements 14 for $115 from Amazon. Elements is a scaled down version of both services, but it still lets you edit camera raw photos and do fairly decent video work. I've used both and have zero complaints.

    In short, sites like bhphotovideo.com and adorama.com should be your favorites. You might be able to find sales at other places. Beware of buying camera gear on Amazon; just make sure it's fulfilled by Amazon or from the manufacturer directly. Some third-party vendors are a bit shady.

    Here's a potential shopping list:
    Canon 70D DSLR with 18-135 mm STM lens - $1,299 from B&H
    Magnus tripod (converts to monopod for on-the-go shooting) - $89.95 from B&H
    Polsen Lavalier microphone - $22.95 from B&H (wireless are much more expensive, and this one goes right to the audio jack on the camera without an adapter)
    Rode VideoMic Pro shotgun microphone - $189 from B&H (worth it to have a back-up that captures all sound if the lav mic fails)
    Adobe Elements 14 Bundle (Photoshop & Premiere) - $115 from Amazon
    Basic Flashpoint light kit - $109.95 from Adorama

    Total cost - $1825 plus taxes and shipping.
     
  5. Vombatus

    Vombatus Well-Known Member

    Solo, is the Magnus tripod aluminum or is it made of a lightweight composite?
    Thanks!
    VB
     
  6. SoloFlyer

    SoloFlyer Well-Known Member

    Pretty sure it's an aluminum alloy. Has a rep for being pretty sturdy, so that's why I chose that one. I personally use a more expensive tripod made by Manfrotto.
     
    Vombatus likes this.
  7. I second the suggestion of Adobe Premiere over Final Cut for simply saving money. If my job was 100 percent video, I would prefer FCP. I'd recommend getting Premiere Elements and calling it a day.

    As for cameras, my old shop gave me a JVC GC-PX 100 to use. I liked it so much that I bought it to use with my new job. Can take still images, but its main function is video with a ton of options - including some slow-motion frame rates - and the ability to wirelessly transfer clips to your phone. Best Buy had a great bundle through a third party, which included an external mic, extra battery and more for the same price as just the camera. The camera and video editing software cost me about $1,200.
     
  8. Vombatus

    Vombatus Well-Known Member

    Yep. I'm a Manfrotto disciple also.
     
  9. Great help thanks! I really appreciate this.
    I'm not shooting a lot of fast action (sports).. Parades and water slides are pretty the extent of it. The majority of this stuff is stills, slow-moving things (traffic, shop keepers) and interviews.
    Do I need a shotgun mic?
    What about additional lenses? I never used more than one lenses shooting stuff (news, sports, video) for the newspaper, but .... again, I want this to be as slick and professional as I can get. Within reason $$.
     
  10. SFIND

    SFIND Well-Known Member

    A shotgun mic would work the best for those scenarios, it picks up directly what is in front with minimal pickup of sounds from the sides. The Rodes (like the one Solo linked to) are very popular and highly rated. I use a cheaper Audio-Technica shotgun.

    I see two routes to go lens wise. Ideally something like the Nikon 28-300 would be the best for video because that would allow you to use just one lens as you'd have all the zoom function you'd need with one lens. But it may not produce the best video quality in lower light because it has a smaller aperture. For the best quality, I would look at getting a cheaper prime like the 35 of 50mm 1.8, and then something like Nikon's 70-200 f/4 lens. A 24-70 2.8 would work very well for video, but that's more costly.
     
  11. SoloFlyer

    SoloFlyer Well-Known Member

    Evil, the Canon 18-135mm lens that I talked about is perfect for what you'd be doing. There is no situation that would require you to zoom much farther in while still doing video for what you're describing your job entails. Nikon has a similar lens.

    The versatility of that lens should have you covered. And if you're doing an interview in low light, then the light kit I mentioned would better serve you then plopping almost $1,000 on another lens.
     
  12. justgladtobehere

    justgladtobehere Well-Known Member

    The occasional ice cream truck. Maybe I'll expand into playgrounds.
     
    Vombatus likes this.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page