Video cam for recording kids concerts then trans to DVD

[SeaNile]

I've been asked to video concerts since the person who used to do this is leaving. I'll have the ability to set up a tripod in the back, about 50' from the stage. It's at a local School of Rock and typically the concerts are recorded and then transferred to DVD for the parents.

Anyway, being a total newbie to this I am thinking of offering to do this. My experience is limited to an iPhone which is pathetic. This needs to be a simple operation but I'm willing to spend about $1,000-$1,500 or so for a decent setup. I'm thinking of an external mic, tripod and the camera itself. Not including odd things like SD cards, etc.

Suggestions for a good camera, maybe 4k that will take really good video and audio? Lots of low light, different lights flashing, smoke machine....the real deal for these kids.

TIA.

 

[qtu]

I like the Sony AX100

 

[John Koch]

I've been asked to video concerts since the person who used to do this is leaving. …

What camera did that person use? Might he or she be willing to sell (or even donate) the camera to continue shooting video of the same concerts?

If your viewers care only for DVD format (720x480 resolution), and the shots are all "static" using a camera that never pans or zooms, then 4k is more than you need. It would also require a hefty PC to edit. What is your current hardware spec?

A used AX100 might work fine. No need to pay full price. There are good HD camcorders made by Canon, Sony, or Panasonic that sell for under $1,000. The ax53, which can shoot either 4k or HD, often sells used on eBay for under $700. You can get a (very lightly) used Panasonic TM900 for under $500. If you shop carefully, you might find a used Lumix G7, with 14-42 kit lens, for under $600, which you could complement with an OK external mic can be found for under $100.

if the stage is well-lit, there should be no anxiety about low light performance. If the performances involve lots of weird and flashy light effects, the result will be weird and flashy regardless of the camera used. A $500-$1,000 camcorder should have auto-exposure adequate to adjust to spot-lit solo sequences, but not if the contrasts are extreme as a moon at night. Experiment before any final performance.

To avoid focus drift or hunting, you may want to select manual focus and set it to optimize at the median distance of the stage action. If you ever need or want to zoom in on particular performers, you might want to check out an entry level Canon DSLR with dual-pixel AF and a STM lens.

The viewers may care more about the audio than anything else. If the concerts are all very loud rock performances, the camera is only 50' from the action, the camera's on-board mics might work fine. If any instruments or voice are acoustical and un-amplified, you might need to experiment with external or remote mics.

 

[SeaNile]

Thanks for the feedback and suggestions. The person who recorded these concerts used a very small camcorder from about 1999...seriously. I appreciate the effort and time to recording the kids but the finished DVDs were dreadful.

I'm looking to step up the game a little and at least get a decent camera with stereo mic from Rode?

I'll start looking around tonight for options. And yes, all shots will be static from the back.

Here a look at a video so you have an idea of the venue.

 

[uncle dunc]

...I'm looking to step up the game a little and at least get a decent camera with stereo mic from Rode?

Look into a Zoom recorder. It wouldn't cost much more than a good stereo mic, and the Zoom has a built-in stereo mic. You could mount it on your tripod or put it closer to the stage for better sound. The problem with micing from the back of the room is the added room sound. The bass builds up and it sounds muddy. If the Zoom was in the front row, with one of the Zoom's stereo mics aimed at a PA speaker and the other aimed at the stage, it might sound a lot better. Plus, the Zoom records audio at 24 bit. Cameras record audio at 16 bit. It makes a big difference.

If you really want to be popular with your audience, augment your one static camera with handheld iPhone footage from the front row, or even from the wings of the stage. As long as you capture the beginning of the song, it's not hard to sync up the video from the second camera. You just look at the audio wave forms from each video (and from the Zoom) and align the spikes where the song starts. It really helps of you can capture the drummer counting off the song with his sticks. They make a very obvious spike in the audio wave forms.

Other second (or third) camera options would be the $200 Yi, (GoPro style) that works great mounted behind the drummer, or enlist band members to use their smart phones mounted in holders on their mic stands. Just remind them to shoot horizontal video, not vertical video.

From my limited experience with cheap consumer camcorders, I would not get a Canon. I had both a Canon and a Panasonic, and the footage from the Panasonic looked much better.

If you could also use a camera, check out the Panasonic GX85. It's a mirrorless camera that will shoot 4k video with no time limit, other than the battery and SD card. Generally speaking, you can get close to 90 minutes of 4k recording with one battery. The downside of Panasonic mirrorless cameras is their autofocus. It works fine for photos, and for setting focus (or using touch focus on the screen) but the continuous autofocus for video is erratic. For your use - a static shot from the back of the room - you could set it to manual focus, touch the screen to set the focus point, and you're good to go.

The advantage of a camera over a camcorder would be better low light performance, but if you need to shoot more than 90 minutes at a time, you'd either need a camcorder or an external battery for the GX85 to extend its shooting time. You can also get an AC adapter for the GX85. We mention the GX85 because it's one of the few budget 4k cameras with no time limit on 4k video. Most cameras have a 30 minute time limit for video, or even less, or they overheat before they even reach 30 minutes.

The G7 is another good 4k camera from Panasonic, but it has a 30 min limit for video, it writes sequential files 4 gb in size (rather than one long file like the GX85) and it has no in body image stabilization. The GX85 has great IBIS, but if you want to use the viewfinder for outdoor, sunny day shooting, it's useless for left-eyed shooters.

 

[SeaNile]

Wow, never knew the zoom was an option. I remember the basic model from about 7-10 years ago?

The Q8 looks like a slam dunk, compact, easy to use, stereo mic, etc. Love the idea of adding other camera angles but not sure how I cam pull that off right away. Certainly something I want to add!

Recommended program to edit these videos and match up the audio?

Thanks again!

 

[Jon555]

I've been asked to video concerts since the person who used to do this is leaving. I'll have the ability to set up a tripod in the back, about 50' from the stage. It's at a local School of Rock and typically the concerts are recorded and then transferred to DVD for the parents.

Anyway, being a total newbie to this I am thinking of offering to do this. My experience is limited to an iPhone which is pathetic. This needs to be a simple operation but I'm willing to spend about $1,000-$1,500 or so for a decent setup. I'm thinking of an external mic, tripod and the camera itself. Not including odd things like SD cards, etc.

Suggestions for a good camera, maybe 4k that will take really good video and audio? Lots of low light, different lights flashing, smoke machine....the real deal for these kids.

TIA.

Is there a sound mix output you can just get or are they just playing through separate amps? If you are recording the audio at your shooting location a shotgun mic (Rode Videomic Pro or similar) might work well.

Also how dark is it, a mirrorless with a larger sensor might be better if it's not that bright?

Luckily good video AF isn't going to be an issue, as you'll want MF to avoid AF getting distracted by flashing lights.

Also how long do you need continuous recording for? If it's long you might need external power of some sort.

If you want a shot 20' wide at 50' you'll want a focal length about 90mm in 35mm equivalent terms (adjust depending on desired width). If you want to zoom in/out (doesn't look so good most of the time and needs AF) then it's more complicated.

Stage shows are usually described as EV7, maybe EV8, so for 1/60th and ISO 200 you're looking at f2 or maybe f2.8.

aperture = sqrt((time * 2^EV * ISO) / 100)

...so sqrt((1/60 * 2^7 * 200) / 100) = 2.06

EV:
6: Brightly lit home interiors at night. Fairs, amusement parks.
7: Bottom of rainforest canopy. Brightly lighted nighttime streets. Indoor sports. Stage shows, circuses.
8: Las Vegas or Times Square at night. Store windows. Campfires, bonfires, burning buildings. Ice shows, football, baseball etc. at night. Interiors with bright florescent lights.
9: Landscapes, city skylines 10 minutes after sunset. Neon lights, spotlighted subjects.

Really depends on how exact the 50' is and how wide/close you want to go. Also the lighting. Plus really need to be careful get the audio levels correct or have good automatic adjustment.

As camcorders have been covered I'll suggest something else to think about:

* Used Panasonic GH4 with used 35-100mm f2.8 mk 1 lens (the mk 2 is out so should help with pricing). Videomic Pro. Plus Battery grip and spare battery if need to record for a while.

* I also considered a Sony RX10 mk III or IV but wasn't sure about the recording time and the menus are a pain.

 

[uncle dunc]

Wow, never knew the zoom was an option. I remember the basic model from about 7-10 years ago?

The Q8 looks like a slam dunk, compact, easy to use, stereo mic, etc. Love the idea of adding other camera angles but not sure how I cam pull that off right away. Certainly something I want to add!

Recommended program to edit these videos and match up the audio?

Thanks again!

The Zoom Q8 has a wide angle lens. You'd need to place it fairly close to the stage.

B&H Photo has the GX85 with two lenses - a 12/32 and a 45/150 - for under $600. The 35mm equivalent for those lenses would be 24/64 and 90/300, although if you're shooting in 4k there's a crop factor that brings the stage closer. In other words, if the 45/150 brings you too close to the stage shooting in 1080p, the 12/32 shooting in 4k would change the 32 at the long end of the lens to more like 36 or 38.

For ideal sound recording, you'd get a 4-channel Zoom recorder, use two channels for a direct output from the audio mixer and two channels for the stereo mic.

The best free editor is DaVince Resolve, but it's got a learning curve, and might be overkill for your needs. It's a full-featured video editor used by professionals, but they probably get the $300 version that unlocks some features not available in the free version.

Adobe makes - or used to make - a beginner video editor with Elements in the name. You might be able to find a copy on DVDs that would run on your system. The latest Adobe full featured editor is Premiere, available via a monthly subscription. There are other low end video editors, but they all have their limitation or bugs that may or may not hinder your workflow. You might even be able to get by with the video editor that comes pre-installed on your computer.

 

[TXDego]

What are DVD's?

 

[Jon555]

What are DVD's?

They're a form of streaming content where you also need an envelope and stamp... there are some latency issues... it's country-specific...

 

[Jon555]

Wow, never knew the zoom was an option. I remember the basic model from about 7-10 years ago?

The Q8 looks like a slam dunk, compact, easy to use, stereo mic, etc. Love the idea of adding other camera angles but not sure how I cam pull that off right away. Certainly something I want to add!

Recommended program to edit these videos and match up the audio?

Thanks again!

The Zoom Q8 has a wide angle lens. You'd need to place it fairly close to the stage.

B&H Photo has the GX85 with two lenses - a 12/32 and a 45/150 - for under $600. The 35mm equivalent for those lenses would be 24/64 and 90/300, although if you're shooting in 4k there's a crop factor that brings the stage closer. In other words, if the 45/150 brings you too close to the stage shooting in 1080p, the 12/32 shooting in 4k would change the 32 at the long end of the lens to more like 36 or 38.

I think those lenses are a bit slow for a m43 sensor, plus IMHO you probably want the G80/85 not the GX if you're going cheaper and Panasonic (i still think a used GH4 is a better bet). Also the GX8x battery life may not hack it.

For ideal sound recording, you'd get a 4-channel Zoom recorder, use two channels for a direct output from the audio mixer and two channels for the stereo mic.

Depends if you keep stopping and starting recording, where syncing it all up gets complicated (speaking as someone who used to recommend external recorders before VLogger friends explained the issues). I think for this sort of "all in front of you" stuff if you can't get a feed from the mixing console use a shotgun...

The best free editor is DaVince Resolve, but it's got a learning curve, and might be overkill for your needs. It's a full-featured video editor used by professionals, but they probably get the $300 version that unlocks some features not available in the free version.

I use Resolve Studio, but Power Director is much simpler or if you have a Mac then FCP or even iMovie.

Adobe makes - or used to make - a beginner video editor with Elements in the name. You might be able to find a copy on DVDs that would run on your system. The latest Adobe full featured editor is Premiere, available via a monthly subscription. There are other low end video editors, but they all have their limitation or bugs that may or may not hinder your workflow. You might even be able to get by with the video editor that comes pre-installed on your computer.

 

[uncle dunc]

I think those lenses are a bit slow for a m43 sensor, plus IMHO you probably want the G80/85 not the GX if you're going cheaper and Panasonic (i still think a used GH4 is a better bet). Also the GX8x battery life may not hack it.

The G85 is $900, the GX85 is $600. It sounded like the OP was looking for budget alternatives. I agree the G85 would be a more desirable camera, but for a static shot where you don't need a good viewfinder, the GX85 footage would look pretty much the same as G85 footage. The big difference would be the coverage gap between the 12/32 lens and the 45/150 lens of the GX85 versus the 12/60 lens of the G85. It's possible the ideal lens for his shoot would be 40mm.

It's true that the Panny kit lenses don't have low F-stops, but if the 45/150 would work, it would be at its widest aperture at 45mm. Or, if the OP gets serious about video and photography, he could pick up a used 40mm or 45mm prime with a low F-stop for a couple hundred bucks. Regardless, I would think footage from an M4/3 camera at F4 would still be better than cheap consumer camcorder footage. A used GH4 would also be great, but can you get them for $600 with a lens?

For ideal sound recording, you'd get a 4-channel Zoom recorder, use two channels for a direct output from the audio mixer and two channels for the stereo mic.

Depends if you keep stopping and starting recording, where syncing it all up gets complicated (speaking as someone who used to recommend external recorders before VLogger friends explained the issues). I think for this sort of "all in front of you" stuff if you can't get a feed from the mixing console use a shotgun...

I agree an external recorder adds an extra step for vloggers who aren't concerned about sound quality, but for recording live music, the Zoom would be preferable because it has better preamps and it's recording at 24bit. 24bit means more headroom, and eliminates the need to squash the audio with the camera's limiter circuit. A mono shotgun mic could also work, but a good one is expensive, and it'll be in mono. A stereo mic placed correctly would sound much better.

It also might be possible to blend a PA feed recorded on the Zoom with the audio recorded by the camera mic, (or if the camera is by the sound board, route the PA feed into the camera and place the Zoom near the stage to record using the stereo mic) but syncing issues could come into play on longer segments, since it's likely the Zoom and the camera audio could drift enough out of sync to create phasing issues, which can make the audio sound thin and "swishy". Also, not all cameras can accept a line level signal on their stereo mini jack input, and not all mixers can output at -10db. The pro standard for mixers is +4db on XLR connectors, but if there's a pair of RCA "tape out" jacks, they would be at -10 and compatible with a camera that includes a "line input" option in it's preamp menu.

Bass is the hardest musical element to get right on a live recording. When I can, I'll dedicate a channel on the Zoom to bass, either miced or a DI or channel insert, and if recording tracks are limited, I'll take a mono PA send for the other channel.

I realize my advice is generally overkill, but I'm taking the long view, assuming the OP may eventually end up at a place where getting good sounding audio is a given, not a lucky accident.

ETA: The GX85 doesn't have a mic input jack, the G85 does. Oh well, the OP will learn soon enough, capturing quality audio and video can be a money pit, but what else should we be doing with our money?

 

[Jon555]

I think those lenses are a bit slow for a m43 sensor, plus IMHO you probably want the G80/85 not the GX if you're going cheaper and Panasonic (i still think a used GH4 is a better bet). Also the GX8x battery life may not hack it.

The G85 is $900, the GX85 is $600. It sounded like the OP was looking for budget alternatives. I agree the G85 would be a more desirable camera, but for a static shot where you don't need a good viewfinder, the GX85 footage would look pretty much the same as G85 footage. The big difference would be the coverage gap between the 12/32 lens and the 45/150 lens of the GX85 versus the 12/60 lens of the G85. It's possible the ideal lens for his shoot would be 40mm.

It's true that the Panny kit lenses don't have low F-stops, but if the 45/150 would work, it would be at its widest aperture at 45mm. Or, if the OP gets serious about video and photography, he could pick up a used 40mm or 45mm prime with a low F-stop for a couple hundred bucks. Regardless, I would think footage from an M4/3 camera at F4 would still be better than cheap consumer camcorder footage. A used GH4 would also be great, but can you get them for $600 with a lens?

For ideal sound recording, you'd get a 4-channel Zoom recorder, use two channels for a direct output from the audio mixer and two channels for the stereo mic.

They said $1000-$1500 and I think a used GH4, 35-100 f2.8 and shotgun mic should be doable for about that money (assuming they have a tripod). I'm in the U.K. so not sure the best places to look in the U.S. but (ignoring the cheapest ones) saw a GH4 on E-Bay for $699 (with VLogL), a 35-100 f2.8 (mk 1) for $520, the battery grip for $50 so add new battery for $60 and Panasonic DMW-MS2 switchable Shotgun/Stereo Mic for $183 (eBay again) gives $1512 (plus a memory card). It really depends on how much of a step-up they want to be from the last incumbent. Also learning-curve issues should be considered on an event that's only happening once - sometimes very simple = got the shot; best = oops, missed that setting.

Depends if you keep stopping and starting recording, where syncing it all up gets complicated (speaking as someone who used to recommend external recorders before VLogger friends explained the issues). I think for this sort of "all in front of you" stuff if you can't get a feed from the mixing console use a shotgun...

I agree an external recorder adds an extra step for vloggers who aren't concerned about sound quality, but for recording live music, the Zoom would be preferable because it has better preamps and it's recording at 24bit. 24bit means more headroom, and eliminates the need to squash the audio with the camera's limiter circuit. A mono shotgun mic could also work, but a good one is expensive, and it'll be in mono. A stereo mic placed correctly would sound much better.

I think VLoggers do care about sound quality to a degree, although it varies. IMHO poor audio has a more negative effect than a lot of poor video, unless the video is out of focus (which AF and lights cycling to bright can do for you).

The GH4 pre-amps are really quite good, except the early ones had an issue with the Videomic Pro when it was very quiet if you cranked the gain (I don't believe an issue with the Panasonic Mic, or generally for this type of work).

I'm not arguing against an external recorder except I think it might be more than the OP is after. This may well be true of the GH4 too. A RX10 III for $1298 (inc memory card) plus a microphone (?Sony ECMXYST1M? know nothing about it) might be simpler and the lens is fast. Also the IV is out so used RX10 IIIs should be cheap-ish as people upgrade. The Menus are a pain though.

https://www.sony.co.uk/electronics/handycam-camcorders-microphones-speakers/ecm-xyst1m

A G85 with the kit lens is another option, although the lens is slower than I'd like.

It also might be possible to blend a PA feed recorded on the Zoom with the audio recorded by the camera mic, (or if the camera is by the sound board, route the PA feed into the camera and place the Zoom near the stage to record using the stereo mic) but syncing issues could come into play on longer segments, since it's likely the Zoom and the camera audio could drift enough out of sync to create phasing issues, which can make the audio sound thin and "swishy". Also, not all cameras can accept a line level signal on their stereo mini jack input, and not all mixers can output at -10db. The pro standard for mixers is +4db on XLR connectors, but if there's a pair of RCA "tape out" jacks, they would be at -10 and compatible with a camera that includes a "line input" option in it's preamp menu.

Bass is the hardest musical element to get right on a live recording. When I can, I'll dedicate a channel on the Zoom to bass, either miced or a DI or channel insert, and if recording tracks are limited, I'll take a mono PA send for the other channel.

I'll happily concede you have way more experience of this than I do (although I do record live music from time-to-time). I suggested the Sony partly as I particularly like the auto-gain on my RX100V for recording stuff that's ear-splittingly loud and just there in front of you (I ran across a surprise gig yesterday, although had the GH5).

I realize my advice is generally overkill, but I'm taking the long view, assuming the OP may eventually end up at a place where getting good sounding audio is a given, not a lucky accident.

ETA: The GX85 doesn't have a mic input jack, the G85 does. Oh well, the OP will learn soon enough, capturing quality audio and video can be a money pit, but what else should we be doing with our money?

I hope we're being helpful...

 

[uncle dunc]

They said $1000-$1500 and I think a used GH4, 35-100 f2.8 and shotgun mic should be doable for about that money...

If I was shooting live music with a $1,000-$1500 budget, I'd get the GX85 with the two lenses for under $600, and a G7 with the 14/42 lens for under $500, and use the iPhone (possibly with a telephoto clip-on lens) for the third, roving camera. If the OP wants to use a mic attached to the camera, I'd use the G7 body for that, since it has a mic input.

I'd put the 45/150 lens on the lead singer for a portrait view, and the other camera on the wide shot, using the 14/42 if the 12/32 isn't long enough. With this basic three-camera setup, the OP would only have to keep track of the 30 minute time limit on the G7 and restart it accordingly. (The shooter would probably have to stop and restart the iPhone to get around the time limit, but as long as the beginning of the new song is captured, it's not hard to sync up the video in the editor.)

The drawback to the G7 (besides the 30 minute time limit for video) is the fact that it does not have in body image stabilization like GX85 or G85 has. Panny mitigates this shortcoming by offering optical image stabilization on some of its lenses. For tripod-mounted cameras, IBIS and/or OIS are supposed to be turned off, so in this one shooting scenario, image stabilization would be irrelevant.

The OP would still have money left over for a Zoom to record good audio.

I hope we're being helpful...

More information helps lead to better decisions. For this one particular shooting scenario, this would be how to get the best bang for buck and most interesting end product. Spending the entire budget on one camera might pay off in the long run if the OP plans on expanding to other avenues of video, but for this one particular shooting scenario, it would be throwing away half the budget.

The other issue of buying into the Panasonic line is autofocus. It's pretty much useless for video. In this one shooting scenario - cameras on tripods shooting subjects that stay in place - you don't need AF, but if one expands into other avenues of video, a more expensive Sony camera could be a better choice because the autofocus is more reliable. Even then, one would need to research which Sony cameras have good AF for video and don't overheat.

The issue of batteries is easily solved via the $18 AC adapter route, or if the OP doesn't need to shoot more than 90 minutes at a time, the stock batteries fall within that range. Or, one can pick up an external usb battery pack to use in conjunction with a DC coupler (fake battery) to extend shooting times. If I'm expecting to be shooting for longer than 90 minutes, I mount the external battery to the tripod via a velcro strip. They're good for 6 to 8 hours or more and generally cost less than another factory battery for the camera.

If the OP does go the multi-camera route, a good approach would be to transfer the wide view camera to DVD (or Youtube as an unlisted link) and let the subject choose a song or two for the multi-camera edit. Doing a multi-camera edit of an entire one hour show could be a very time consuming process.

When dealing with young performers, these videos could be priceless in the sense that they're capturing a moment in time that will never be repeated. In that sense, going all out with a 3-camera shoot could really add value to the process - not necessarily monetary value, but value to both the musicians and the videographer. And, if a parent wants a multi-camera edit, it wouldn't be unreasonable for the videographer to let them know how much time it would take, with a modest price attached to that time. Parents love spending money on their kids.

(Considering that, with this budget, there would still be money left over, I'd add a $200 Yi camera behind the drummer. You can thank me later. )

 

[Jon555]

They said $1000-$1500 and I think a used GH4, 35-100 f2.8 and shotgun mic should be doable for about that money...

If I was shooting live music with a $1,000-$1500 budget, I'd get the GX85 with the two lenses for under $600, and a G7 with the 14/42 lens for under $500, and use the iPhone (possibly with a telephoto clip-on lens) for the third, roving camera. If the OP wants to use a mic attached to the camera, I'd use the G7 body for that, since it has a mic input.

I'd put the 45/150 lens on the lead singer for a portrait view, and the other camera on the wide shot, using the 14/42 if the 12/32 isn't long enough. With this basic three-camera setup, the OP would only have to keep track of the 30 minute time limit on the G7 and restart it accordingly. (The shooter would probably have to stop and restart the iPhone to get around the time limit, but as long as the beginning of the new song is captured, it's not hard to sync up the video in the editor.)

The drawback to the G7 (besides the 30 minute time limit for video) is the fact that it does not have in body image stabilization like GX85 or G85 has. Panny mitigates this shortcoming by offering optical image stabilization on some of its lenses. For tripod-mounted cameras, IBIS and/or OIS are supposed to be turned off, so in this one shooting scenario, image stabilization would be irrelevant.

The OP would still have money left over for a Zoom to record good audio.

I think that's quite different to what they said they wanted though - one camera on a tripod. Also I'm really not sure they want to be syncing audio in post. However that's just my impression and hopefully they'll pop up and let us know.

I hope we're being helpful...

More information helps lead to better decisions. For this one particular shooting scenario, this would be how to get the best bang for buck and most interesting end product. Spending the entire budget on one camera might pay off in the long run if the OP plans on expanding to other avenues of video, but for this one particular shooting scenario, it would be throwing away half the budget.

I like the faster lens as this seems a non-pro (pro-ish?) show and so maybe not the light level you might get.

The other issue of buying into the Panasonic line is autofocus. It's pretty much useless for video. In this one shooting scenario - cameras on tripods shooting subjects that stay in place - you don't need AF, but if one expands into other avenues of video, a more expensive Sony camera could be a better choice because the autofocus is more reliable. Even then, one would need to research which Sony cameras have good AF for video and don't overheat.

The issue of batteries is easily solved via the $18 AC adapter route, or if the OP doesn't need to shoot more than 90 minutes at a time, the stock batteries fall within that range. Or, one can pick up an external usb battery pack to use in conjunction with a DC coupler (fake battery) to extend shooting times. If I'm expecting to be shooting for longer than 90 minutes, I mount the external battery to the tripod via a velcro strip. They're good for 6 to 8 hours or more and generally cost less than another factory battery for the camera.

If the OP does go the multi-camera route, a good approach would be to transfer the wide view camera to DVD (or Youtube as an unlisted link) and let the subject choose a song or two for the multi-camera edit. Doing a multi-camera edit of an entire one hour show could be a very time consuming process.

When dealing with young performers, these videos could be priceless in the sense that they're capturing a moment in time that will never be repeated. In that sense, going all out with a 3-camera shoot could really add value to the process - not necessarily monetary value, but value to both the musicians and the videographer. And, if a parent wants a multi-camera edit, it wouldn't be unreasonable for the videographer to let them know how much time it would take, with a modest price attached to that time. Parents love spending money on their kids.

(Considering that, with this budget, there would still be money left over, I'd add a $200 Yi camera behind the drummer. You can thank me later. )

 

[erichK]

I've been asked to video concerts since the person who used to do this is leaving. I'll have the ability to set up a tripod in the back, about 50' from the stage. It's at a local School of Rock and typically the concerts are recorded and then transferred to DVD for the parents.

Anyway, being a total newbie to this I am thinking of offering to do this. My experience is limited to an iPhone which is pathetic. This needs to be a simple operation but I'm willing to spend about $1,000-$1,500 or so for a decent setup. I'm thinking of an external mic, tripod and the camera itself. Not including odd things like SD cards, etc.

Suggestions for a good camera, maybe 4k that will take really good video and audio? Lots of low light, different lights flashing, smoke machine....the real deal for these kids.

TIA.

For what you are doing, my own experiences, recording dozens of concerts, suggests that the Panasonic G85 and 45-175 power zoom might be good choices.

The G-85's much-larger-than-camcordersensor-size works well for low light and also in reducing noise that the harsh contrast stage lighting often provides. The fully swivelling LCD is, in my experience, essential. It allows you to raise the camera as high as needed, to shoot from an angle, etc. The G85 also provides 4K, usable WiFi control (though this can choke up when used with 4K), continuous recording beyond the usual DSLR 30 minute limit, decent battery life - or a dummy battery and AC adapter available for about $30 - and a fairly intuitive user-interface.

Power zoom is the only way to zoom smoothly, if you must zoom, and since you are filming from the back of an auditorium, the optically-decent 45-175 should be wide enough, and provide enough reach

Id also recommend the vatiable-angle-shotgun Rhode Videomic Pro over a separate audio track. The quality is quite decent for the stuff you'll be doing, this mic has the blessing of turning itself on and off as the camera is, and even some pro videographers find post-synching a PITA. Always works well in theory, and usually for the first few edits, but can often pose problems with multiple ones.

Add good tripod with a decent pan head. Doesn't have to be superlight (which can actually make it too easy to jarr, even knock over, but should go quite high to get over audience heads, hats and hairdoes. (I use and Manfroto O55 and MVH500AH)) And you're ready to shoot some great video.

My own background: I started trying video when Olympus (who had actually made it possible, then failed to implement it with their ineptly marketed E-330) finally added it to their last Four Thirds dslr, the E-5. Then did much more, because micro Four Thirds OM5ii, with its image stabilization and a compact power-zoom lens, made it possible to shoot surprise events, - even when riding my bike. Street celebrations and concerts, buskers, happenings. Got to recording public concerts, when allowed, for friends who couldn't attend, then my pianist wife's (classical solo and chamber music, which is MUCH more demanding, for matrimonial as well as technical reasons. (Two tripod mounted cameras and one in hand, fancy crossed mics on a monster stand etc, etc,)

 

[SeaNile]

I love all the options but really need to KISS. The DVDs from the previous shows aren't good at all so at least I won't be compared to professional. The one camera Zoom q8 seems so easy, almost too easy.

I do like the idea of a multi camera shoot/edit for at least a song or 3. Usual concerts are about 20-23 songs and 2-2.5hrs long. Stopping between songs is not an issue other than the musical director talking about about the song and a particular kid on a song. I wouldn't want to leave that out as the parents are pretty proud of these kids. But, I also don't want to hit record and 2.5hrs later hit off. That makes for a long and boring DVD.

I'm not good at all with lenses and all the different settings within the camera. Total newbie here.....

 

[TXDego]

I was going to mention this sooner, but everyone else was throwing you some awesome ideas, my suggestion is the easy peasy idiot proof suggestion.

Buy an LX10/15 they are $500, shoots 4K, has IBIS, lens built in, no changing lenses, has a great aperture f1.4-f2.8, so you can shoot in very low light, and over all just stupid easy to use and puts out great video. I own this camera and use the heck out of it, probably more than my super expensive cameras that can do video and slice bread. Only downside is no mic jack, so you either have to use in-camera mic or use remote mic like others had suggested on the other cameras and sync it up in post which is fairly easy.

 

[uncle dunc]

... Usual concerts are about 20-23 songs and 2-2.5hrs long...

Well... that simplifies things. You'll need either a camcorder or camera that will record 2.5 hours without stopping. Most consumer camcorders will do that, and some of them will run off of the AC adapter that plugs in to charge the camera.

I know there's no limit to the 4k recording time of the GX85, and according to a post on this forum, a 128gb sd card will hold just a few minutes under 3 hours of continuous footage shooting 4k in MP4 format. Theoretically, the G85 would do the same, and with a mic input jack, the cost would be comparable to a gX85 plus a Zoom. I still don't think the audio quality is going to be very good from the back of the room, but if it was acceptable before, I suppose it would be acceptable now.

With a single camera running for 2.5 hours, you could shoot random iPhone footage on a gimbal to augment it... or actively run the camera/camcorder and zoom in and out to make the single-camera shoot more interesting. The issue with that would be autofocus, which would probably negate any Panasonic mirrorless options and push you in the direction of getting a consumer camcorder. Their autofocus is generally better than Panny's, mainly because the camcorder sensor is smaller, giving you more depth of field, which makes focusing errors less apparent.

The problem with actively running a single camera is, if you're not familiar with the song, and you're zoomed in on the singer when the guitar solo starts on the other side of the stage, it looks bad. Ideally, the band would give you a simplified chart of the song with indications of who's doing what when, but I don't see that happening with 25 different bands. That's the beauty of a multi-camera shoot - you always have the option of defaulting to the wide view or the telephoto view if the roaming camera misses a cue.

 

[Off The Mark]

Firstly, I would listen to Uncle Dunc about audio options.

Secondly, if it were me, I think I would get TWO HD cameras with good low light (and of course, no recording limit, no overheating), as opposed to one 4K camera.

I would set on camera up in the back of the room for the wide shot (similar to the video you linked to), and take another camera and from a slightly different angle, zoom in on the vocalist / guitar player / whoever is taking a solo.

I think Uncle Dunc mentioned using an iphone as a second camera and that isn't a bad idea. I would prefer something that had a zoom lens, but as they say, choosers can't be beggars.

Just don't know if you can get two HD cameras that are good in low light and audio gear on your budget.