• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Turning a corner into video - need advice - very lost (1 Viewer)

Overread

Hunting birds with a canon
Well I need some pointers!
I have decided to try for a wildlife film cameraman - or at least something along those lines as this is the way I am getting into it. I like wildlife and my stills camera, but there is just not the work in that line - most is teaching based with the odd sale of images, unless you can get onto a good earner with ones work and I don't think its that likley to happen. Film appears to have more of a work and comission based side to it - still not an easy market to get into by any means, but possible I think.

The thing is whilst I have an idea of stills cameras I have no idea about the video gear! So first off I need some recomendations as to possible video cameras to consider - digital line models suited to outdoor work and (here is the tricky bit) compatable with my canon EF lenses - I have spent a lot on my stills gear and I don't really want to abandon it entirly so a way of combining the two might be the best move. I know of the 5DM2 as an option and with wildlife a good amount of work would be tripod based anyhow - but I am sure that as its a stills camera first and a video second there will be some big compramises with using the video features - as well as the limitations on erganomics for handholding.

So far I have had the Canon XL1s recomended to me as a 2nd hand option - its certainly a more feasable saving price than the newer models appear to be retailing for and appears to be a solid choice, but the market is totally new to me so I really can't get much of an idea of what is what. It also might leave me enough cash to get my hands on a lens longer than 200mm

Another point to consider is cropping factor on the lenses - are video cameras full frame (with regard to stills photography) or do they use a smaller film size?

To those thinking I am jumping into the deep end I am currently looking at courses and I am trying to get onto a wildlife and media BA course if I can this year or next (I say this as I am applying late for this comming academic year).

Any advice would be very welcome - thank you
 
So far I have had the Canon XL1s recomended to me as a 2nd hand option - its certainly a more feasable saving price than the newer models appear to be retailing for and appears to be a solid choice, but the market is totally new to me so I really can't get much of an idea of what is what. It also might leave me enough cash to get my hands on a lens longer than 200mm

Another point to consider is cropping factor on the lenses - are video cameras full frame (with regard to stills photography) or do they use a smaller film size?

A subject I know very little about, but I do know that the Canon pro cameras that take the EF lenses have a crop factor of ~7x so even your 200mm lens will give you decent reach. The EF lens adapters have to be bought as an add on and don't come cheap (~£300 I think) but obviously give you a lot of options, a decent macro on one could be stunning.
 
I agree - before I made this choice I was eyeing a 5DM2 for the macro video world. Its also good to hear that they have a decent crop factor - makes things a little easier and cheaper!
 
Thanks both - I will check out that website and book Claymore!

As for the courses I have seen that one and a few others which operate on similar setups (weekend with a "pro" at a few £100) and my problem is that whilst they are a nice introduction and some let you play with some expensive and rarer gear - at the end of the day its still only an introduction and I just feel that I can get as much spending a few hours in a big video camera store and playing with a camera over a few days. I have not passed them up but I am trying to find ones that are more geared towards teaching and which show an interest in following things through after the intro days. (of course this is if I cannot get onto a degree course)
 
Transition from stills photography to video is an interesting subject, and an area I have explored a little in the past two years.

In your original posting you said that one of your reasons for moving to video is because of the potential commission work available. There is no doubt that the Canon XL1 you mentioned is a good piece of kit and can be got second hand at a good price, and you can learn to shoot great wildlife video with it. However, this is likely to be a competitive field and to have a reasonable chance of work here I fear you will need to go for high definition rather than standard definition kit. There is less second hand HD gear on the market although it's worth looking for the old-style Canon XL-H1 now that the new models (XL-H1S and XL-H1A) have come on the market. Unfortunately since the exchange rates went bad the price of a new XL-H1A has gone up from £3500 to over £5000. These cameras can be used with Canon EF lenses using an adapter although the 20x lens which comes with the camera is excellent. The magnification factor is large, as PostcardCV states. Another option would be to consider going for a DSLR with HD but the storage, controllability and audio capabilities are basic compared with a dedicated HD camcorder.

Regarding making the transition, it's a great idea to do a course. I wish I had the time - I have learned through mistakes and have a long long way to go before I'm proficient. I have now had a few months to get to grips with my HD camera, a Canon XL-H1A. My previous experience with video is limited, mainly videoscoping through a birding telescope. Here is my initial experience making the transition from still photography to video.

(i) TRIPOD. A tripod designed for a DSLR simply isn’t good enough for videography. It’s possible to get away with an unsteady support with a DSLR because of the ability to bang off a dozen shots in a couple of seconds – one of them is likely to come out reasonably well. With video, an unstable support is obvious, especially at full zoom, if the surface is not stable, or if there is any wind. I ordered a new tripod after my first day out with the HDV camera.

(ii) TRIPOD HEAD. It doesn’t matter too much if the head doesn’t move smoothly when setting up a still shot. It matters a lot with video. Jerky pan shots are horrible to look at and are inevitable with a cheap head. A good quality fluid head is a must, with a long handle to control the rate of pan / tilt. I had no appreciation that this makes as much difference to the quality of the end result as the camera itself.

(iii) LEVELLING. Again with stills, a non-levelled tripod isn’t a big deal and can be compensated for by the head. A level tripod is extremely important for videography otherwise sideways / panning movements will lift or drop the horizon.

(iv) MANUAL versus AUTO modes. Automatic modes can really work against you with video – again I hadn’t thought of it but using automatic mode ruined some sequences I shot of a large flock of starlings displaying before going to roost. The problem was that the flock were sometimes in the sky, against a relatively light background, and sometimes low to the horizon. As I followed the birds with the camera, the exposure continually adjusted to the frame content so the sky and foreground exposure fluctuated a lot to compensate. Also the autofocus tended to oscillate between the subject and foreground objects and I quickly moved over to manual focus. The lesson was quickly learned and the next day I shot in shutter priority – which brings me to the next point:

(v) SHUTTER SPEED. It matters an awful lot when panning to follow a moving target. Whereas with stills, a burst of relatively slow shutter speed shots may eventually capture a decent photograph of a bird in flight, it makes for a real blur with video. Day two with the starlings, I ran with far too slow a shutter speed resulting in no definition at all of the flock in flight (but actually some rather attractive artistic shots which will make for a nice introductory sequence – so all is not lost by experimenting). Day 3 was done in manual mode, much much better as full control over aperture and shutter speed gave the best result – sacrificing a bit of light for the sake of a fast enough shutter speed and some depth of field eventually worked well.

(vi) EXPOSURE MONITORING. It’s very difficult to judge whether exposure is correct using the viewfinder display. The zebra stripes overexposure feature really helps avoid overexposure. The same problem exists with video exposing for a white bird against a dark background as with stills – manual mode and overexposure monitoring works very well to avoid this.

(vii) BE QUIET! You are recording audio as well as video, and have to learn to be quiet – this includes not moving your feet on a noisy surface, breathing too loud near the mic, talking. Also best to secure any accessories, camera straps etc which might otherwise get blown around when windy and make a noise. To be honest it’s best to film alone or with someone who will keep quiet. I have already spoiled a few nice clips by talking while filming.

(viii) DUST. Dust on the front of the lens may not be too obvious on a still frame – it’s very obvious on video when the frame is moving, especially against a light sky. So keep the dust cap on between shots, and keep the objective clean – a skylight filter is probably the thing to use here. As with DSLR change lenses in as clean an environment as possible and use a blower to remove dust from the rear of the lens and from in front of the sensor.

(ix) SCENE SETTING AND MIXING THE SHOTS. Take a look at the Birdforum gallery pictures. Many of the photographs are of very high quality and a credit to the photographers. But look more closely at the thumbnail pages. Nearly all of the shots will be medium to close-up shots of the birds. The temptation is to shoot close all the time. But put together a short movie from 60 minutes of close-up footage and it gets monotonous. The mindset has to be different when making video – scene setting is important, so a mixture of wide, medium and close shots really helps along with video of interesting landscape, objects and non-target birds (i.e. birds which aren’t the main subject of the video) for cut-aways and bridging clips, opening and closing scenes.

(x) PRACTICE MAKES……. well, I have a long way to go! The above has been learned by taking the camera out close to home and filming whatever birds are around at the time. Better to make elementary mistakes on a practice run than when my real subjects – ravens, peregrines and green woodpeckers – start nesting in the spring.

Linked are two videos which illustrate some of the problems noted above. I have posted these as object lessons – they are clearly flawed but I had a whole lot of fun shooting them anyway:

Waxwings video: Waxwings at Tranent, East Lothian http://www.vimeo.com/2956808

The start sequence, of the flock in flight, illustrates the problems of an unlevelled tripod and the use of a non fluid head – very jerky panning and a horizon which isn’t horizontal. The unsteady tripod is betrayed during the slow zoom in on the birds on the wire and by wind buffeting shortly after. There are a few elementary composition errors too, such as the electricity cables cluttering the medium zoom shots of the birds on the bushes, and shot sequences that don’t run too well together because consecutive shots are taken against grey sky then blue sky (it was that kind of day!). Autoexposure results in underexposure of the birds against the blue sky. On the plus side, shooting a mix of wide angle and close in video makes the sequences more interesting than if all the shots were close in.

Starlings video: Starlings go to roost at Sherriffhall (v2) http://www.vimeo.com/3299467

This is the end result – I haven’t included low shutter speed shots. Still, you will notice a sloping horizon because of an unlevelled tripod in several places – looks horrible, doesn’t it! Also, at 18 seconds note the sky exposure changing because of the use of auto exposure mode, when following the flock along the horizon. Dust on the lens is obvious in the lower half of the frame during moving shots. I had some difficulty sequencing together close and wide shots of the birds coming into the tower as the sky exposures were quite different. And the final close shots illustrate the problem of noise when pushing the zoom to the limit in these very challenging dusk lighting conditions.

So these are my novice mistakes – I hope it's useful to hear about them.

Neil
 
Neil thank you ever so much for all that advice and your examples :)
you have certainly confirmed some of the things I have been picking up - such as tripods and tripod heads - makes the Gitzo photo tripods seem cheap in comparison - whilst also giving me new insight into areas that I had either not thought of or not even known about!
Its also good to see the lens on the camera in use - the 20* zoom is certainly impressive so that lessens the worry about getting closer to the animals (since I have read that DSLR lenses are not as sharp nor clear as the video lenses for video work - though that is something to experiment with I feel as well - I certainly intend to put my macro lenses to some use!)

As for your point with regard to the freelance market I do agree a more uptodate video camera would be the ideal, but as you say their prices are now very high (And were never cheap to start with). At this point in time I have at least 3 years if not more before I expect to enter the proper employment market so I feel that a cheaper video camera now which is easier to afford is the best rout - so that I can get the experience in. Then use the time I have to save and then invest in a highend camera at a later date - probably picking up the best accessories that I can along the way (like tripods and soundgear etc...) since they are cheaper and quicker to save for.
 
So these are my novice mistakes – I hope it's useful to hear about them.

Neil

Neil, I just wanted to say your post was very very useful to me too. My husband has been thinking of doing this sort of thing, purely as a hobby, for a while, and as I am a dslr user I was out of my depth in giving him advice about equipment and use of that equipment - although I quickly learnt from my searches that the equipment is pretty pricey!

That has been most useful and has confirmed my suspicions that he will be right out of his depth too.

I watched a couple of your videos and thoroughly enjoyed them, so thanks for putting the links to them up. I was very surprised (pleasantly) at the zoom to the waxwings.

I wish you all the best with your hobby, which I am sure will just get better and better.

Linda
 
I can't even begin to improve on most of the advice given here but I would cast a word of warning about 'home' HD cameras if you're thinking of trying to sell any of your footage to production companies (as opposed to uploading it to the web or generally for your own use). The 'HD' used on these cameras isn't the same thing as the HD cameras on which Planet Earth et al are shot - those babies cost upwards of £70,000 and generally speaking they are hired for the cameraman by the production company. The home camera HD setting can actually cause problems in professional editing suites as it has to be transferred to a standard format before editing. I would stick to a good quality standard definition camera and concentrate on building up your skills and then take it from there - you're absolutely right in that camera gear moves so fast that most of the pros hire kit rather than buy it anyway.

Hope this helps a bit and good luck

Bodger
 
Not sure if I agree with Bodger - it's true that Planet Earth and the like are filmed using very high end kit. But if you look closely (e.g. at the snow leopard footage - the cameras used are 720p, not even 1080p as are most good cameras nowadays. And the footage is wonderful, of course. For many nature documentaries, equipment such as the Canon XL range (HD or SD) are used and the quality of footage is excellent. These are broadcast quality cameras. It's worth checking out Wildlife Film News and you'll see what kind of equipment is used. http://www.wildlife-film.com/

I agree that it's good to learn technique etc using SD kit if you're on a budget. But in 2-3 years time I wouldn't be surprised if almost nobody will look at SD in terms of buying material.

Neil
 
Last edited:
Its horses for courses really. If you're just starting out, and filming stuff in the UK then the most likely place you can get your stuff on screen is in programmes like Springwatch. Various 'amateurs' make films for SW with things like a XL1, but the problem is that you cannot import tapes directly into an avid edit suite if they have been used with the HD option - they have to be transferred to a different format which costs time and money. XL1s are good in that you can switch to SD in the menu but its a faff. I think a lot of people are blinded by the HD label and don't realise that its not the same thing as you see on the TV. No-one in broadcast would call an XL1 a hi def camera. The only reason they would have used them for snow leopards is that they are more robust and lighter to cart for miles than a broadcast HD camera setup.

Bodger
 
Some good points, Bodger - yes in terms of resolution the XL-H1 series would be regarded as 'small format' HD by broadcasters (I guess you're talking about the XL-H1 series rather than XL-1 (which only records SD)). XL-H1 HD video can be imported into an AVID edit suite, it's done using Media Composer at 1080i 59.94. Depending what you want to do with the video it can be transcoded afterwards. Recording onto tape this is compressed HD (although the camera can capture uncompressed video onto a drive array) and not of the standard obtained by most broadcast systems.

The gear used for snow leopard footage wasn't Canon XL series, but the cameras were emblazoned with 720p HD. For much wildlife work portable gear will be used and other than for the blue chip BBC and National Geographic-type programmes recording is done by single or two man crews where portability is a big issue to get on location.

I agree that starting out, SD format is fine just now and Overread, starting out and on a limited budget, would learn his / her craft well in this way.

Neil
 
I do agree that pro end gear is the best for this kind of work - especaily for getting works into broadcast - but as Neil and Bodger say its better to have cheaper gear to learn on for the now than it is to wait several years to afford the pro end gear and then start learning. I can cut my teeth (as it were ) on the cheaper gear and learn the key skills - then once in a stronger position I can look to some proper financing for a pro end camera - maybe a longterm payment or even getting employment where the gear is loaned out to the cameramen.
Also I feel that a lot of hte important choices of features for these sorts of gear are very hard to impossible to make till you have experience of working with the gear - 300mm focal length means nothing to a new person starting photography - give them soem time shooting with different camera gear and that 300mm can start to get a real world understanding of what it means - then you can make the right choices on te expensive gear
 
Whatever camera you get, don't lend it to anyone! my father-in-law borrowed my XL2 at the weekend and dropped it! its totally ******!!!!! as you may guess i'm not very happy.
I told him to use my very solid tripod and he ignored that and put it on a flimsy Jessops special and hey presto BANG last time i lend anything
 
the other lesson to follow that one is to get some insurance cover for all the gear when out and about!

Luckily I'm well insured but still very annoyed:C;) I have spent a fortune buying Peli cases etc to protect all my gear and then this happens:C
I have cut his tripod up with my bandsaw which is best thing to do with the poxy pile of *****:eek!: He used it because it was lighter to carry than my tripod:-C
 
what - those things make handy flash tripods ;)
Good to hear you had insurance - I just hope they are not a pain in paying out and getting you a replacement!
 
Warning! This thread is more than 15 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top