Leaderboard

Wrote up a little guide for people new to this and looking to buy their first recorder. And is the way I see the world of low budget recorders is they're ranked like this (starting from worst/cheapest to best/expensive): Tascam DR22WL / Zoom H1 (I'd suggest skipping right over this tier of recorders! But hey, my first ever short film I did years ago was with a chinese shotgun running straight into a Zoom H1!! :-o Shocking but true... everyone starts somewhere!) Tascam DR60D mk2 (the DR60D mk1, before the mk2 came out, is what I myself started out using for no budget shorts as a budding location sound recordist) Tascam DR70D (the *minimum* I'd recommend for a location sound recordist, even if you're just a student / no budget guy. Although in desperate cases, you could scrape by with getting the DR60Dmk2, but doing the opposite and stretching for an F4 is very worthwhile. Certainly, I could travel back in time I'd just have gone straight for the Zoom F4 from the starts! *Except* the F4 didn't come out until a few years later... you live in a very lucky time with so many wonderful options to choose from!) or Tascam DR680 (these can be found at bargain prices secondhand, which is what I did before I then later on purchased a Zoom F4 once that came out & I spotted an F4 at a good price) Zoom F4 / Zoom F8 / Sound Devices MixPre6 (I skip right over the MixPre3, as the MixPre6 is very similar yet does so so much more at only a relatively small extra cost. Also I regard the three of F4/F8/MixPre6 as all on broadly the same level to each other, just varying slightly from each other in one area or another that ones might have a small lead over the other one. This is the tier where I'd see you're now reaching the semi-pro level) Sound Devices 633 / Zaxcom Maxx / Sanosax SX-R4+ (finally you have now got up to the "industry standard" when it comes to recorders people use for small shoots, especially when mixing from the bag. If you're doing this full time as your job or hiring someone who is, then likely this is what is being used. Either that or similar gear, or even something better above this) And if you considering ones priced above those last three.... you're surely doing this full time as a sound recordist and getting a healthy income from that, so why are you asking us here on Frugal Filmmaker? ha! :-P But yes, tonnes and tonnes more options exist at the higher end as well! Finally, if you're considering something in the budget range within what I just covered, but isn't one of those that I mentioned, then it probably is *not* a good idea to buy if you're intending to be a location sound recordist. Something else only might *maybe* make sense if you've got in mind some other purpose for it, such as perhaps you want to record a band in a studio (which has very different needs / constraints), or you're the rare exception which proves the rule, or you are getting lucky finding some amazingly priced deal which can make an otherwise bad purchase decision then make sense if "the price is right". For instance I didn't include the Roland R88, as I feel it is extremely poor value for money in 2017! However.... there was a time at the end of 2016 when the Roland R88 got a huge price drop because it was being discontinued. Even with that massive price drop, the Roland R88 probably still wasn't a smart purchase vs the Zoom F8, but the big drop in price at least made the R88 a somewhat competitive option worth mentioning in a round up of all the various choices. However, that sale is now long since ended, and the prices I see on eBay for a Roland R88 is even higher than what you used to be able to buy it new from B&H Photo! Clearly those eBay sellers are dreaming. Anyway, that was just one example which might have been applicable but isn't now, so I don't rule out the possibilities of something like that perhaps popping up again in the future especially if you very keenly look around for secondhand deals. But for over 95% of people reading this, that won't be applicable, and just stick to going with one of the main ones I mentioned earlier. http://ironfilm.co.nz/which-sound-recorder-to-buy-a-guide-to-various-indie-priced-sound-recorders-in-2017/

Not sure why people are so confused by this article... Maybe it's just a reflection on EOSHD's demographic. Clearly more videographers, hobbyists, and people that shoot MOS material/b-roll. Incredibly useful suggestions, IronFilm. Been meaning to pick your brain on audio for a while, so this saves me some effort. Would love to see another topic/post on what mics to pair with these sexy recorders, and maybe even some pointers on boom/lav technique. Keep up the good work!

Yeah..... if you're using a Zoom H1, then you're not a production sound recordist. Which is the perspective I'm writing this from. (and from that perspective, *any* of those which I mentioned will make up a very small sized kit indeed! Size truly isn't a concern here, even the biggest and heaviest, the Zoom F8, is still a shockingly tiny sound recorder! Arguably it is too small) If you have a Zoom H1 then you're probably a solo videographer grabbing some ambiance (or using it as a "poor man's wireless lav" in the groom's coat pocket, as I often used my Zoom H1 with a cheap lav mic), or a musician, or a busy executive using it as a note taker, or a journalist, or any of a bunch of other uses than a production sound recordist (still, not a terrible thing to keep around in your bag for in a pinch. I often have a DR22WL or H1 tucked away in my bag). Sorry, again this is totally irrelevant just like the size question. As I'm not discussing microphones, but recorders. Tonnes of indie filmmakers (yes, even amateurs who have no intention about ever making a dime from this) might spend five thousand dollars on their camera kit (heck, just a 5D mk4 plus 2x f2.8 zooms will eat all that up & more! And that is before you count tripods/gimbals/lights/batteries/media/etc). So thus I'll be totally unapologetic in suggesting that just perhaps a person could spend half that on a super ultra basic sound kit? Although yes, if you're someone who has gone ultra low budget and is shooting with a secondhand Panasonic GH2 with some adapted old Nikon lenses, then sure I reckon have your boom op use a Tascam DR60D with Sennheiser ME66/K6 (with Rode WS6) and a Samson C02. That could be an appropriate matching budget level (well... sort of! You're likely still spend way less on sound than on the DoP's kit!), and is why I did mention the Tascam DR60D mk2 as an appropriate starting point for the very budget constrained. For sure, just like how there are still people out there doing little corporate videos with a Canon T2i. Doesn't mean we should be recommending that is a level to aspire to! No, I'm trying to showcase some of the better options (just like why in the camera side of things people talk about say the Panasonic G80 or the URSA Mini Pro, or any of the zillions of others out there!). Bringing a bit more balance back to the discussions :-) Rather than only the focus on cameras. As sound is half the film!

I figured I should start sharing some of the work I do as part of my day job. This is a little documentary of the local Art Walk that I shot and edited. G7, CinelikeD, 12-35mm 2.8:

Okay, Jon @jonpais and Glenn @mercer, It is starting to materialize. I will reshoot my exercise as a shortfilm end of August. It is going to have a vampire in it. Not sure, if shooting with G6, GX85 or renting a GH5. My GX85 is still depending on just one battery. No good:) Maybe this time using the luxury of a BCam.. Dreaming

Yeah, if BM dropped the price to $500, I would buy my 3rd Pocket and keep it this time. Or maybe a Micro summer price drop would be nice.

I will always throw the Marantz PMD661 into threads like this. No question Zoom's has got the market cornered with their name and features. And I will say their pre-amps have gotten consistently better over time (I was down with Zoom for a minute. Had the original H4 and then the H4N), but they still don't have sh*t on the 661. Basically if audio quality is your priority then imho the Marantz PMD661 (Version 1 or 2) is a hugely slept on option (unless you need more than 2 XLR mics). I think it's mostly because it came out before the indie/DSLR revolution, but the PMD661 is still kind of the standard in the public radio broadcast world where audio quality is really all that matters (it's the standard recorder at the CBC in Canada, and I know This American Life and other PR shows swear by it). Anyways, just my 2 cents but the PMD661 (for what you get in pre-amp quality, IN/OUT options and overall sound quality) is hugely slept on in the indie video world, and available used nowadays for $300 easy (just sold one of my units for that price). AND if you're lucky enough to get one of the OADE Mod'ed units, you're taking that thing to a whole other level. https://www.oade.com/digital_recorders/hard_disc_recorders/PMD-661MODS.html It's also bigger than a lot of the newer recorders out there, but realistically I don't see how it's size is really an issue beyond the optics of it being `bigger than' as opposed to it actually being big.

The Tascam DR-10CS/DR-10L is even smaller. It only records mono, but I like using it for lavs or shotgun mics which are mono anyway.

Welll.... that is one way to misinterpret it and put a massive negative spin on the situation! All they're doing is further expanding the range of D750 that they're accepting back. That is *not* the same as a recalling it for the 3rd time. This is extremely generous of Nikon! If only other manufacturers could have as good customer service as Nikon has..... do we ever hear about Sony offering a recall for the overheating a6300? (just to pick out one Sony camera, but really, it could apply to ***ALL*** Sony cameras! They've all had some issues or another with them) Clearly Nikon is being a good corporate citizen here, is head and shoulders above the others. Yet people repay Nikon by ripping into it? Sad. The Nikon D750 still stands strong as arguably the best choice DSLR for stills in its niche (i.e. the $1.5Kish all rounder FF DSLR).

Hello! I would like to share my work done with GH5 + FM Lens (Kowa inside) and russian taking lenses. Musicvideo is still under work but here is promo clip for upcoming video. Will post it here soon when it's complete.

Here's another short documentary in a series I did for work--this time on airbrush artist Craig Fraser. Shot mostly by me on the G7 with 12-35mm, with a couple of shots on the Canon 7D with the 16-35mm (Straight on static interview shot and the time lapse shot)

Up thread you mentioned that 1080p from the GX80 isn't as good as the 1080p from your G6... why is that? Don't they share the same avchd codec and bitrate? As far as the GH5 is concerned, maybe the FW update will be released by then and you can shoot in 1080p 10bit all-i at 200mbps in 24p and 60p. As of now, I don't think the 1080p is 10bit... but I could be wrong. CineLikeD is pretty simple, it seems exposing anywhere between -1/2 stop to +1/2 stop, depending on your shot, yields good results. I'm sure with a couple hours of tests, you'll work it out fairly quickly. Btw, I know Panny is in your name and all, but if you get a chance, you should test out the Olympus E-M5 Mark ii. It has better IBIS than the GX80 and a solid all-i mov codec in 1080p. The colors seem more organic than Panasonic as well... but I only had one for an afternoon. @PannySVHS

I say rent the GH5... with your color skills, you could probably get a ton out of a GH5. Also, with it being the new, hip camera, the GH5 could help to eek out some views. good luck with it, I love vampire stories.

Really proud of this little short produced for the my rode reel challenge. If you like it PLEASE press the vote button: https://www.rode.com/myrodereel/watch/entry/3500

Starting on a budget I'd not look at any of the suggestions to be honest - here's my take; Best sounding starter sound recorder IME is the tiny Sony PCM-M10 which can take self powered mics via the 3.5mm jack. Can be mounted on a hotshoe, 2 AAA batteries last for ever, tiny put in your pocket take anywhere recorder you will still keep even when you buy more expensive gear. When you have saved up for better phantom powered mics then the best and cheapest option is to get hold of a used Fostex FR2LE - it's pre amps are not far off the SoundDevices 7 series i.e if you can't get good enough sound for your film with it then it's not the fault of the recorder. ( sometimes wonder why I upgraded......) Spending a bit more or simply an alternative would be a SoundDevices mixer pre to combine with a Sony M-10. Beyond this you are really getting into the realm of being a dedicated sound recordist and we are not even talking about the real tools of sound - the microphone.

I'm with you all the way on this one - I've had the Marantz PMD661 for many years now, it's hands down excellent & still is. One option people haven't thought of, if you're on a budget, is to get an old analogue field amp & then plug it into a small digital recorder - you'll get the the benfit of professional grade Limiters, Pre-amps etc... & you'll be recording to digital. Also, when/if you ever get to use a camera with XLR sockets, you can just plug straight into the camera & get perfect sound for editing. Personally I'd think long & hard about getting something from ZOOM or TASCAM - you're buying into a name & not quality. SONY doesn't appear anywhere here but they do some good small recorders, but probably not as cheap as Z or T. Sound Devices have been at the top for some time & it doesn't look as if anyone will ever catch them - if you can afford it, don't look anywhere else. On a budget, you can get your hands on their analogue 2 channel field mixer (about £200-300), it'll be small & then you can get a small digital recorder to go with it - professional grade at a really decent price! As far as mics go, old doesn't mean bad: you can pick up a Sennheiser K3 or K6 power module & then add an ME series Mic capsule (£200-300 for both) - again professional quality. I've recorded plenty of sound from an analogue field mixer into the apparently hopeless Mic input of BM Pocket & got excellent results - everything is handled by the field mixer & then the camera just acts as a digital recorder.

Mauri's fully assembled lens package with customized engraving. Check out Mauri's amazing work at: http://www.mauridgaliano.es/

Yeah, unfortunately and probably stupidly, I will go for smaller and discrete every day of the week over large and cumbersome, but I am shooting literal no budget films, where I don't have a sound guy. It needs to be simple and small, something I can attach to an L-Bracket with a small shotgun but can also do double duty as a pocket recorder for a lav. I started with an H1, but found it to be poorly built and not really that small, so I ended up with 2 Olympus LS7 field recorders. I'm sure they aren't the best but for what I need they work pretty well and the onboard mic is actually pretty good for foley and ambient sound... probably because they are marketed towards nature recordings. I am interested in the Tascam 10L recorders... they seems to be a great size with decent specs... how are they rated on the Ironfilm scale? But this is a great article and something to think about as I grow equipment... thanks for posting it.

A reduction back to 499 indefinitely would be nice.

Zoom H6 is what I am using but will probably upgrade to SD mixpre 3 or 6. Really depends on your clientele but much of the time I just use a juicedlink direct in unless it's a sit-down interview. The people I work for usually do the audio and they are still using the original zoom h4!!! (And a cheapo no name wired lav!). They seem to be doing great with their clients too! The moment you start using a backing track the subtle nuances that cost $$$$ to record go out the window and completely unnoticed to most clients on the low to mid end. If you are doing corporate interviews it's amazing how low on the totem pole you can go with your gear before anyone notices. I am not advocating for cheap or expensive gear, just saying the requirements are vastly different depending on what you are doing. From what I've read the old dr-680 does great as well, although the SD stuff will really make life easier with the actually decent headphone and camera returns. The lineouts on the zoom and tascsm stuff aren't as good. Can't wait to get the mixpre!

Well, in my limited use so far of the GH5, connected to a Sennheiser AVX with MKE2 lav mic going through the DMW-XLR1 XLR Microphone Adapter, the audio seems both clear and loud... even in noisy environments. I cannot say that noise has been a problem. So perhaps there is something wrong with the OPs settings, or a problem with the gear?

Thanks! I've actually been working with Hectic Films since 2005 but this year the founder/director started a commercial production business and has been paying me to edit and shoot stuff full time. I shot all of my stuff on a cheap regular generic 32" slider from ebay.

I've used Leeming's LUT with both the GH4 and now the 5...it's for both CineD and VlogL and it gets them to the same color space....comes with a settings manual and his follow up support is ridiculously good for what he charges...the big advantage is that CineD is a better choice for shooting high ISO and Vlog of course for higher DR...he calls it a LUT to get you to a point to begin your grade, but I do little to the image once applied...most the guys on DVXuser use his Luts for shooting professionally with their GH cams...he developed the first (for GH4) over a period of months with several members and through tweaking...testing and feedback, really tapped into the enormous pottential these cameras have...could not recommend it highly enough for the Pannys.

If you look more closely at DXOMark measurements (the graphs) the D5 has better dynamic range from about 3200 to 51200 than the 1DX II. Which is more important (low ISO or high ISO dynamic range), can be argued depending on the application. Typical sports shooters are shooting publication ready jpgs in the camera which mean their dynamic range is limited at that point in practice even if they once in a blue moon get the chance to use low ISO. Furthermore the tonal range (number of tones that can be separated from each other and noise) and color sensitivity (number of color values that can be distinguished from each other and noise) are greater in the D5 across the 100-25600 range than in the 1DX Mark II. For me these are very important measures of the smoothness of tones and colour gradations especially if the contrast is increased in post they determine how well the image's tonal and colour integrity hold up. To decide on which sensor is best for a given application, one needs to look at the shooting conditions and what kind of post-processing / look is preferred for the final image. The D5 isn't the ideal camera to shoot in direct sunlight due to its lower base ISO dynamic range; that much is clear. On the other hand, the 35mm full frame camera which has the best base ISO dynamic range is also made by Nikon: the D810. So they have solutions for this situation also, just in a different camera. The D500/D7500 sensor allows fast reads for high fps use, which the D7200's sensor (which scores better on dxomark for low ISO metrics) is apparently not well equipped to do. However, many users of the D500 report that they find the high ISO image quality to be better in the D500 than in the D7200 and the color neutrality is held across a greater range of ISO settings than in previous cameras. This is also true of the D5. So there are characteristics of the new sensors which are missed by dxo's overall scoring (which is mostly based on low ISO performance and ignores large parts of the elevated ISO measurements) but appreciated by photographers who use these cameras. In dxomark's graphs, the D7500 has better dynamic range than the NX500 at every ISO setting but the difference is pronounced from ISO 400 to 25600. DXO weight their overall score heavily on base ISO results which is usually not what people are using in practice unless they work in the studio or are tripod based landscape photographers. I think there is useful information in DXOMark data but you have to go into the graphs in the Measurements tab to access it. I think the cropped 4K (which is the same actual pixels crop as is used in Canon's 4K capable DSLRs) is used because it requires less processing and produces less heat than doing a full sensor read and resampling the images to 4K. I don't think it's a question of who makes the sensor so much. If they wanted to they could make a full frame 4K camera but it would cost more and most Nikon users are focused on still photography and only need some video capability on the side for occasional use. I realize you are interested primarily in video and would like Nikon to do better in that area. I am sure this sentiment is shared by many, however, Nikon's history is in still photography and they remain primarily focused on that. Users who have greater priority needs in video tend to congregate to other brands. Since Nikon is working on a full frame mirrorless camera I would expect that they will implement some form of phase-detect focus sensors in the main image sensors and at that point there will probably be more interest in using Nikons for video. But at present it seems that all the optimization that Nikon do is to get the best still image quality possible for the applications expected for each particular camera.

Honestly, if my grading ever looks pastellic... it's a mess up... either due to my bad skills or lack of calibrated monitor. If it ever looks good, it is probably accidental and I will not be able to replicate it. If it looks bad, it was accidental and I can replicate it every time...

Really enjoying some Contax Zeiss on my two NX's. Particularly the CZ 100mm f/2.0 gives a punchy, lovely image.