Camera for recording concert/opera performances

Hello,

I'm a baritone singer and perform concert/opera performances, mainly in medium-sized theaters and churches. To help me improve as an artist, and in hopes I'll have some samples to share online and get more gigs, I would like to begin video-recording my work. So far I have been using a Zoom H5 on a tripod for audio and am imagining using an articulating arm to add a camera to this setup.

B&H recommended Sony HDR-CX900, Canon VIXIA HFG30, or Panasonic HC-V750, and to me the Sony's sample footage has the most beautiful, vibrant, deep colors and detail, although in reality the audio quality is most important for my purposes. I believe I can't use a DSLR because of clip length limits.

What would you folks recommend for a camera I can "set and forget" at the beginning of my performances?

Many thanks for your thoughts!

Ben

Among those three cameras, I see three decision points you may need to consider:

1. Depth of field, dependent on sensor size.

2. Battery life, for length of recording.

3. Optical zoom extent, may be important for recording from back of auditorium.

I use an HF-G30 for similar purpose in church and auditorium settings. It has good depth of field and long record times >3 hours with the BP-828 battery. It has zoom 20x, and has always been sufficient for my needs.

The Sony would also work well, but has a shallower depth of field, this may not be a problem for you. It also has a 3 hour battery available. It only has a 12x zoom.

The Panasonic would have a deep depth of field, but there is only a 2 hour battery available. It has 20x zoom.

Be sure to get the Zoom H5 audio recorder as close to the performer as you can, you probably don't want to co-locate it with the camera. This will reduce room echo, audience noises, air conditioner and outside traffic rumbles.

Here's a video shot with the HF-G30 (front shots), Sony DSC-HX100V (Side shots) and a Zoom H4n actually in the middle of the performers.

bkazez said:

Hello,

I'm a baritone singer and perform concert/opera performances, mainly in medium-sized theaters and churches. To help me improve as an artist, and in hopes I'll have some samples to share online and get more gigs, I would like to begin video-recording my work. So far I have been using a Zoom H5 on a tripod for audio and am imagining using an articulating arm to add a camera to this setup.

B&H recommended Sony HDR-CX900, Canon VIXIA HFG30, or Panasonic HC-V750, and to me the Sony's sample footage has the most beautiful, vibrant, deep colors and detail, although in reality the audio quality is most important for my purposes. I believe I can't use a DSLR because of clip length limits.

What would you folks recommend for a camera I can "set and forget" at the beginning of my performances?

Many thanks for your thoughts!

Click to expand...

.

Both B&H and rlumpy have given you good advice here.


For indoor concerts, good low light performance would be important, and both the Sony and Canon would have an advantage there over this Panasonic.

If you really want a simple camera and use full AUTO, I would recommend the Canon over the Sony. I believe that its full Auto feature is more reliable, based on my experience.

The Canon also has edges in battery life and zoom range. But I have always personally found 10x and 12x lenses to be adequate for all but the most extreme needs. If you were in a really big auditorium and had to place your camcorder way in the back, then the 20x zoom would be a plus. But I have very rarely run into this situation with my shooting.

One area where the Canon definitely has an edge is in its audio features. For monitoring or adjusting audio levels manually, it is much easier to do with the Canon. But if you are going to be recording with a separate, standalone microphone, then that sort of does become an irrelevant issue.



For pure image quality, I think that the Sony does indeed have the advantage. But you may have to work a little more in fine tuning your settings in order to get it.


The other camera that the salesman should have recommended to you is the Canon Vixia HFG20, which is currently being closed out, and is available from B&H currently for only $839, a very substantial savings over the HFG30. Its primary limitations are that it only has a 10x zoom, and cannot record in 60p. However, since 60p is generally used more for outdoor recording, and recording sports, that really should not be an limitation at all. For the HF G20 can record in both 24p and 30p just fine.


So I would recommend that you consider saving yourself some money and getting the HF G20, instead of these other models. B&H won't make as much money, though, which is probably why their salesman did not recommend it.

Review of the Canon HF G20 by B&H:



More reviews:

http://camcorders.reviewed.com/content/canon-hf-g20-review-3

http://www.videomaker.com/article/15875-canon-vixia-hf-g20

.

Why no one mentions Panasonic HC-X920?

bkazez said:

Hello,

I'm a baritone singer and perform concert/opera performances, mainly in medium-sized theaters and churches. To help me improve as an artist, and in hopes I'll have some samples to share online and get more gigs, I would like to begin video-recording my work. So far I have been using a Zoom H5 on a tripod for audio and am imagining using an articulating arm to add a camera to this setup.

Click to expand...

Since you're already familiar with the H5, I thought you might be interested in the new Q8, which is basically a H6 with a wideangle camcorder or "GoPro" built in. You could use your existing H5/H6 microphone capsules, stereo or shotgun, depending on each location. Aimed at musicians and concert recorders in particular, and assuming that you have no video recorder in the premises, it might work for you, too. Even though as a video camera it's nothing special.

http://www.newsshooter.com/2015/04/03/zoom-q8-hd-video-four-track-audio-recorder-for-399/

Watch the embedded intro video, it tells the idea better than a simple blurb of text.

jpetermann said:

B&H recommended Sony HDR-CX900, Canon VIXIA HFG30, or Panasonic HC-V750, and to me the Sony's sample footage has the most beautiful, vibrant, deep colors and detail, although in reality the audio quality is most important for my purposes. I believe I can't use a DSLR because of clip length limits.

What would you folks recommend for a camera I can "set and forget" at the beginning of my performances?

Click to expand...

Apart from the Zoom Q8 (for audio quality & versatility), it depends on your budget and other preferences. Good quality video and audio in the same package usually costs some money.

Since you've not going to record rapid action, most of the 4K and other larger sensor cameras with proper audio inputs and better preamps might do as well. If you've got a grand or two to spare, cameras like the Sony AX100 and PXW-X70 come to mind. Or maybe even an older model, smaller sensor NX30 might work nicely. Depends again on your personal preferences.

But other than those, I won't be participating in the online acclamation.

My suggestion is to go and do your own research in the real world, try the cameras in your own hands, don't rely on pictures and comments online, and then just pick one that feels 'right' in your own hands. If the audio side is not ideal, you can always use your existing H5 for audio and sync the sound afterwards.

"The hard part of video is audio" has been repeated many times.

The microphone has to be placed near the source. There is no question about that. Using the H5 is a good idea, but you will have to develop the skill to synchronize the video and audio in editing software. If that is OK, this will be the most cost effective way.

If you don't want to develop the post processing skills, you will need to investigate plugging a mic into the camera. "Pro" quality requires so called "XLR" mics and wires to ensure against background hum. The camera needs to be able to accept XLR inputs.

If wires are an issue, you may want to look into wireless mics. Good ones can be pricy.

BillSprague said:

"The hard part of video is audio" has been repeated many times.

Click to expand...

Maybe it's hard. maybe they're both hard. I'd say it's not necessarily that hard, but it simply takes as much care and attention as the video side of things. Before and during the actual recording process.

I'm not sure whether you intended to reply to me in particular or not, since nothing I said above is in conflict with your comment here, and nothing in it contradicts what I said.

BillSprague said:

If you don't want to develop the post processing skills,

Click to expand...

If one doesn't want to develop any post processing skills, one might as well concentrate on watching other people's recordings in TV or in YouTube. Just saying.

But that, again, is yet another topic for a whole another thread, I think.

BTW, before we veer off too far off-topic, I for one would be curious to see or hear some samples of those opera performances, out of musical rather than technical curiosity.

I've heard there's a place (or places) in Italy, for example, where they hold open air theatre opera performances in the summer, and even the refreshment salespeople do their pitches with opera tunes, and the audience will respond the same way. Even though I'm not a big opera fan, I think it would be cool to participate in such a performance, (as a member of the audience, mind you), with a camera and a recorder or two.

Thanks so much for the perspectives, everyone! I love the image quality on the Sony AX100, but I feel like since higher-quality audio might make a bigger difference for my applications. People in my field will certainly be less forgiving over audio quality than video quality. Still, that AX100 is so tempting....

I'm curious to understand why the Sony HDR CX900 would take more manual setup: what kind of manual setup would be required to get great image quality? Is it necessary in general to shoot these concerts in manual mode, to avoid distracting potential exposure changes by the automated machinery? I don't think the Zoom Q8 is good for my needs, as it will be handy to be able to place the camera at the back of the hall and zoom in.

I am also curious about the audio setup. I already own a Zoom H5 that I was planning to use for audio recording, and I'm curious whether the line connection to the camera will create a loss of fidelity. For optimal quality, do I need to be connecting everything directly to the camera?

Thanks also for the recommendation for the HFG 20. It sounds as though the touch screen is super frustrating to use — is that definitely better in the HFG 30? Someone mentioned the Panasonic HC-X920 — sounds like it's not as good in low light, which is important for me.

Thanks again for the help!

Ben

bkazez said:

Thanks so much for the perspectives, everyone! I love the image quality on the Sony AX100, but I feel like since higher-quality audio might make a bigger difference for my applications. People in my field will certainly be less forgiving over audio quality than video quality. Still, that AX100 is so tempting....

Click to expand...

As for the audio, I don't think it's that bad with proper accessories and, the audio performance of any camera can be improved with an external recorder, which you apparently have already.

jpetermann said:

I don't think the Zoom Q8 is good for my needs, as it will be handy to be able to place the camera at the back of the hall and zoom in.

Click to expand...

I see. I assumed that you'd be placing the recorder and the camera to a place as close to the stage / performing area as possible. Or around the vicinity of the 'sweet spot' of the space. Every room has one. IMO that would make more sense than placing it at some place way back. Both visually and acoustically. Regardless of the camera.

jpetermann said:

I am also curious about the audio setup. I already own a Zoom H5 that I was planning to use for audio recording, and I'm curious whether the line connection to the camera will create a loss of fidelity. For optimal quality, do I need to be connecting everything directly to the camera?

Click to expand...

No.

Since you've tot the H5 already, and especially if you cannot place the camera at a convenient distance from the stage, using the H5 for master audio would be a no-brainer. Place the H5 close to the stage, record the master audio with it, and use the camera mic for reference audio only. Then sync the master audio track with the video footage while editing it.

That kind of set up would also allow the use of any camera, or even multiple cameras.

bkazez said:

I love the image quality on the Sony AX100, but I feel like since higher-quality audio might make a bigger difference for my applications. People in my field will certainly be less forgiving over audio quality than video quality. Still, that AX100 is so tempting....

Click to expand...

Hi Ben,

I am a musician-videographer, too, working and experimenting very hard for months. I just want to share my experiences.

If I had the money for the AX100 (and I hadn't the Sony A5100), I'd go not any further: I'd place the H5 (I have H5, H1 and Tascam DR-60D) very close to the stage. Synching audio with the video with Adobe Premiere Elements (PrE) is terribly simple and fun, if I have a few files to work with; if I have a hell lot of files to sync, it is still straightforward but not fun any more at all.

jpetermann said:

it will be handy to be able to place the camera at the back of the hall and zoom in.

Click to expand...

This/Your setup of "H5 near the stage, camera at the back of the hall", definitely, requires audio - video sync in PrE. There is no really meaningful workaround to avoid audio syncing in this situation.

jpetermann said:

I am also curious about the audio setup. I already own a Zoom H5 that I was planning to use for audio recording, and I'm curious whether the line connection to the camera will create a loss of fidelity. For optimal quality, do I need to be connecting everything directly to the camera?

Click to expand...

I have and use the H5 a lot. When I have the possibility to connect the H5 to the camera or Ninja 2, I do that, definitely. I record the audio on the H5 as well as line out to the Ninja 2.

jpetermann said:

low light, which is important for me.

Click to expand...

I'd definitely go for a low-light capable (sleek) MILC. Today far the best are the APS-C Sony A5100 or A6000 for the money.


I'd mount the brilliant SEL50mm/f1.8 (or similar) on the A5100/A6000. I'd record the entire concert with Atomos Ninja 2. I'd place the H5 near the stage, of course. This setup as seen here is fine only when the talent is close to the camera/rig.


Ninja 2 + A5100 is an excellent affordable combo for low light videos. I'd place the Rode NTG-2 close to the stage pointing to the talent, of course. The H5 can record 4 channels. The Ninja2 has two hot-swappable large batteries, the H5 can operate for hours on its two AA batteries. Since the A5100 does not record in this setup, its battery last for hours.

The Atomos Ninja 2 is required for MILC/DSLR videography, since video lenght is limited to 30 minutes on them. With an external recorder like the Ninja, this limitation can be eliminated.

If I had an extra 2000 for an A7S, of course, I'd go for that, but I think it's very hard to compete with A5100/A6000 on price per low-light performance. As a bonus, these cameras have no moire, no aliasing, which brilliant for an APS-C sensor. I have the option to improve low light capability with Metabones Speedbooster, not cheap unfortunately; I used one and it's absolutely phenomenal.

I guess it wouldn't be a problem to learn audio and video editing with PrE.

Miki

Nice recording!

bkazez said:

Thanks so much for the perspectives, everyone! I love the image quality on the Sony AX100, but I feel like since higher-quality audio might make a bigger difference for my applications. People in my field will certainly be less forgiving over audio quality than video quality. Still, that AX100 is so tempting....

I'm curious to understand why the Sony HDR CX900 would take more manual setup: what kind of manual setup would be required to get great image quality? Is it necessary in general to shoot these concerts in manual mode, to avoid distracting potential exposure changes by the automated machinery? I don't think the Zoom Q8 is good for my needs, as it will be handy to be able to place the camera at the back of the hall and zoom in.

I am also curious about the audio setup. I already own a Zoom H5 that I was planning to use for audio recording, and I'm curious whether the line connection to the camera will create a loss of fidelity. For optimal quality, do I need to be connecting everything directly to the camera?

Thanks also for the recommendation for the HFG 20. It sounds as though the touch screen is super frustrating to use — is that definitely better in the HFG 30? Someone mentioned the Panasonic HC-X920 — sounds like it's not as good in low light, which is important for me.

Thanks again for the help!

Click to expand...

Ben,

There is excellent software available that can automatically synchronises the sound, so I don't see that as the big issue here. That way you can use a GoPro, or any other camera you can think of, as long as they can take the same number of shots per second ;-)!

The Sony A7S is excellent for video, but the built-in battery will hardly run for hours, so you need an external power-source. Worth checking up, as its low light capacity is awesome!

Video of can almost be passive. In fact, if you can shoot with only one camera, it might be better to put a 4k GH4 on a tripod, with the 14mm f/2.5 or similar fast pancake, and shoot a static shot of the stage, then crop and track slightly when editing and export to 1080p. After all, theater audiences don't see zoom or close ups at all, and attention is directed by lighting or the voices and music.

Audio is the real challenge.

If there is a cardioid microphone near the front center of the stage, that helps, but beware:

1. If close to the orquestra pit, the instruments may overwhelm the voices at intervals.
2. If on near the stage floor, the sound of pounding feet, movement of chairs or props, or creaking boards will dominate. If Tosca falls to fate atop the mic, ka-wham.
3. If suspended above the singers, that may be good, but someone will still need to monitor the gain levels if the volumes are irregular, or if the singers are not always more or less near the center of the stage. Be careful the mic does not get snared or knocked away during stage setting changes.
4. Don't assume that anything might work, because of product specifications or people's advice, until you demonstrate that it does work.

Practice a few mock events before that trophy performance at Operalia, La Scala, or Carnegie Hall.

If the results disappoint, get some help from someone who recorded an opera successfully.

For audio you might be able to get a line from the house PA.

Nice setup, any issues with over heating with the Sony ? The A6000 is a sweet little camera.

Thanks for all the great replies, everyone! I wanted to add another option to the mix. A documentary filmmaker recommended I look at a small, good point-and-shoot like this one:


What do you people think?

Ben

bkazez said:

Thanks for all the great replies, everyone! I wanted to add another option to the mix. A documentary filmmaker recommended I look at a small, good point-and-shoot like this one:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-cybershot-dsc-rx100

What do you people think?

Click to expand...

That's a neat little camera, just out in a new version, with an even better sensor!

An Italian over at Nikon 1 Talk use a couple of Nikon V1 for shooting opera and ballet, as the camera is totally silent. Superb results, to say the least!

OK camera for video, as well.

Just my 2 cents,

I make video and sound recordings of opera and concerts on a regular basis. Here are a few tips you may find helpful:

-If you are looking for something to record your own performances (i.e. with no one around to track your movement or make real-time exposure adjustments), go with the largest-sensored camera you can afford- you'll need the dynamic range because of the constantly-changing lighting conditions on stage. On even the best cameras, hotter areas tend to blow out and darker areas tend to devolve into noise when the camera is set to handle exposure automatically. I've had decent results with a GH4 shooting in 4k, but its "P" exposure mode in video still goofs from time to time. The GH4 is the best thing I know of for this task, but it still kind of sucks. I really like the other poster's Atomos idea, and am keen to try it myself.

-Record sound from at least 1/3 of the hall's total distance from the orchestra pit, otherwise the vocal/instrument balance will be way off. The posters recommended putting the recorder near the stage most likely haven't tried this with opera, or don't see much opera. That may work beautifully with string ensembles, but orchestrated operatic performances have evolved of the centuries to be heard from a distance, and that's where the voices and instruments tend to blend most smoothly with the hall's acoustic. Professional opera recordings are high budget, multi-mic affairs, with each singer wearing a wireless lav in addition to mics near the stage and in the hall- everything is balanced in post. You won't get that result with a simple stereo recorder, so the best possible compromise is a slightly washy, but well-balanced recording from 1/3 to 2/3rds of the way through the hall. If the first balcony juts out near the stage, that is sometimes the best option.

I used to work on orchestral broadcasts with a Neumann SM69 stereo mic strung high up and
where you are suggesting and in line with the conductor. There would be a couple of spotter mics for the singer and 1st violin.
The American technique of lots of mics is overkill. After all the conductor is already `mixing' the performance.