Camcorder aperture range for filming on the layout

[47137]

I am pondering buying a new camcorder, and I want to buy something suitable for use with my layout - currently 1:87 scale models. I might move to a larger scale one day but I doubt I will move to anything smaller, my eyesight isn't as sharp as it was.

 

Now - when I take stills using my DSLR (Fuji s5 Pro) and a 28-55mm zoom lens, I am usually using an aperture between f/11 and f/22. And I am wondering, what range of apertures, especially what minimum aperture, should I be looking for in the spec sheet for a camcorder? For example, the Canon XA-11 shuts down as small as f/8 but I have no idea what kind of depth of field this will give me.

 

I mention the XA-11 because it includes a physical control allowing me to adjust the aperture. I don't think I could cope with having to go into a menu to adjust such a fundamental thing. Also there are XLR connectors for a mic if I venture outdoors with it.

 

- Richard.

 

[Oldddudders]

Actually, these days most still cameras take pretty good videos, including 4k. And many interchangeable-lens DSLRs or mirrorless cameras would enable you to dictate the aperture in use. 

[PenrithBeacon]

I use a Panasonic FZ200 bridge  camera. It's an obsolete model now but there's really no reason why any bridge camera won't do the job. You will have to play with the settings to get what you want though.

ASA on auto, shutter priority is what I use, but there is no reason why other methods won't work 

Edited March 27, 2021 by PenrithBeacon

[47137]

I have got to stop thinking in terms of 35mm film. Suppose a camcorder has a 1/3 inch sensor and a focal length of 6.7 mm equates to a "standard lens", the DoF table looks like this:

It is easy to understand why the camcorder manufacturer doesn't bother to give you an aperture smaller than f/8.

 

I must also remember I have complete control of the lighting on the layout. If the camcorder is using an automatic exposure programme, then if I throw more lux at the subject a camcorder is going to shut down its aperture until it asks for a ND filter.

 

- Richard.

[4630]

@Oldddudders makes very good point above. 
 

If you’re used to using a Fujifilm S5 Pro for stills, as you mention, it might be worth looking at updating to something like Fujifilm’s X-S10.  That, together with careful lens selection, would allow you to get the best of both for stills and video. 

 

Fujifilm cameras, IMHO, are pretty good with video these days, although I’m sure other camera owners would say the same about their chosen brands too.

 

For reference, I use a Fujifilm X-T4 and X-T30, although most of my recent videos have actually been taken using an iPhone with an external mic.

Edited March 28, 2021 by 4630
to add a bit.

[PenrithBeacon]

I forgot to mention in my earlier post that you really need a tripod with a fluid head. The tripod to keep things still,  the fluid head for non-sticky panning. It doesn't need to an expensive heavy duty jobby. 

https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B07TYWNH6N/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_fabc_AWRSMZREGRSBNDWD67SZ?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1

[4630]

I’d agree about the use of a tripod and all the better with a fluid head if someone is serious about doing video work.

 

I would point out though that the tripod on Amazon that you’ve linked to doesn’t actually have a fluid head - just a plain vanilla 3-way swivel and tilt.  

Edited March 28, 2021 by 4630

[47137]

I am slightly ashamed to say, I have five tripods. The most recent acquisition is a Manfrotto one with a fluid head, and this will be fine as long as the camera is outside the layout.

 

I have read (but I do not "know"), a video camera with an integral lens can include firmware to compensate for deficiencies in the lens. So it can correct for barrel distortion for example. And this appeals.

 

I am spending the afternoon with a Panasonic DVX100B, which is fabulous but native 4:3, and my Panasonic TZ90, which claims to do all kinds of things with video but its menus could make me go mad. (Or at least madder). The DVX came bundled with the tripod and a very nice microphone, all for £120 through a seller on eBay, so it is something of a bargain but it is far too big to place onto the layout. This layout is 62 inches long and in an alcove.

 

I'm wanting to persevere with the TZ90 a bit longer, see especially if I can fix its exposure so it doesn't simply adjust its exposure and focus when a loco runs out of the frame. I could stand it on the tracks, maybe hold a mirror behind the LCD to compose the frame. But the menus really are difficult, to me anyway. I've only ever used it as a point and shoot camera.

 

- Richard.

[PenrithBeacon]

2 hours ago, 4630 said:

I’d agree about the use of a tripod and all the better with a fluid head if someone is serious about doing video work.

 

I would point out though that the tripod on Amazon that you’ve linked to doesn’t actually have a fluid head - just a plain vanilla 3-way swivel and tilt.  

Oh dear, sorry.

[47137]

I spent about three hours with the cameras yesterday afternoon. My overwhelming conclusion is, a 2018 compact produces clearer footage than a 2005 semi-professional 3CCD machine. Mostly because the compact is recording HD.

 

I haven't conclude much more about apertures (irises?) and DoF. Perhaps, with a video of a moving train, it is only really necessary to have the train itself in focus. The softness of the background isn't as important as it is for a still photograph when I am trying to make the model look as realistic as I can.

 

- Richard.

[PenrithBeacon]

1 hour ago, 47137 said:

I spent about three hours with the cameras yesterday afternoon. My overwhelming conclusion is, a 2018 compact produces clearer footage than a 2005 semi-professional 3CCD machine. Mostly because the compact is recording HD.

 

I haven't conclude much more about apertures (irises?) and DoF. Perhaps, with a video of a moving train, it is only really necessary to have the train itselThe in focus. The softness of the background isn't as important as it is for a still photograph when I am trying to make the model look as realistic as I can.

 

- Richard.

The more recent camera will have a very much better lens. 

You won't get much in the way of depth of field with close ups. Does your camera have a macro setting it will useful

[47137]

2 hours ago, PenrithBeacon said:

The more recent camera will have a very much better lens. 

You won't get much in the way of depth of field with close ups. Does your camera have a macro setting it will useful

The TZ-90 has macro settings for still photos. It also has a close-up capability for video - it will focus down to a few inches - but I think this engages automatically. It is a very adaptable little thing really, and I use it for lots of photos where my DSLR would need a flash gun to get a result.

 

- Richard.

[PenrithBeacon]

That will work on the video setting too 

 

[Oldddudders]

We have come to rely upon autofocus as the answer to the proverbial maiden's prayer. And it is. In the latest cameras, it will focus upon the eye of a subject and follow that - some now even do that for animals. But it isn't what I believe professional film-makers use. They have someone called a focus-puller adjusting focus manually as the subject-to-camera distance varies, and it is a skilled job. Out-of-focus highlights, known as bokeh, in the background to a train video sequence don't bother us a lot, so that may not be an issue, but leaving it to the camera may not always be the answer. A camera that offers manual focus as an option may sometimes be better. 

 

As far as the aperture on a lens is concerned, and the OP's Canon XA-11 example, which 'only' shuts down as small as f/8, the problem is diffraction. With very small sensors, the point below which the picture looks worse due to this occurs earlier as the lens is stopped down. Against this has to be balanced the much greater DoF available with the short focal-length lenses used in compact cameras. 

 

Not video, but I have to point out that there are two fine stiil photographers who regularly show their excellent results on RMweb - Andy Y and Tony Wright. The former uses a compact camera, the latter a full-frame (35 mm format equivalent) DSLR. Very different techniques but each delivering quality results. The rest of us would do well to see what can be done with the photographic kit we own. 

[47137]

The small focal length would explain to me why most of my lenses stop down to f/22, only my macro lens stops down to f/32 and only my medium format lens stops down to f/45.

 

I agree entirely about trying to do more with the photographic kit we own. I think my most sensible recent purchase was a small LED panel light. This is my second of these. They make composing shots so much easier than trial and error with flash; and they seem pretty much essential for video work on small models.

 

- Richard.

[47137]

This is a still from the TZ-90, the camera was keeping track with the loco as it ran from right to left:

 

If you can imagine some scenics, the DoF is probably just right to make an impression of a train in its surroundings.

 

(The black bars are letting my 16:10 monitor frame a 16:9 picture).

 

- Richard.