I'm planning to shoot a short film and some of the scenes will be shot in some pretty rough terrain. With this in mind, I bought a Lowepro nature trekker backpack, thinking that I could pack a full size camcorder in it and hitch a couple of tripods to it.
I'm just wondering though, whether a full size pro or semi pro camcorder will stand this kind of treatment, whether they are too delicate to be transported in a backpack. To my mind, a backpack is more protective than a plastic case.
I might have to carry it maybe a couple of miles at the most, and the camcorder will be a VX2100e or a PD 170, in case the model makes a difference - in case some models are tougher than others.
Hi Snapper,
Firstly by "full size camcorder" I presume you're not meaning the VX or PD, but someting like DigiBeta or DVCAM (or the more recent HD equivalents)?
But to answer your question, yes... People have carried Sony DigiBeta (and similar) cameras to the extremes of the world... the top of the Himalayas and through the Amazon etc. So as to whether it will stand the treatment - the answer is of course they will if treated carefully.
Why use a VX2100 or PD170 though as they're only 4:3 and shooting 16:9 will look far better especially with landscape footage. By using out of date equipment you will immediately limit where it can be shown or how it can be distributed. Perhaps the very minimum you should be considering is a camcorder that uses the prosumer-level HDV format. There are lots of enthusiasts here that use that format and will be able to advise a suitable model.
Is that 'Backpacking with camcorder' or 'Backbreaking camcorder'.
I'd check your intended distribution to see if they have any technical/camera requirements (often relaxed though if situation, such as mountain climb, requires it).
It's better to get great shots with a small/flexible camcorder, than arriving 2 mins late with a heavier camcorder. Why 2 tripods?
Even my photography gear in my small daysac can be tiresome on a long days walk..or am I just getting old/unfit?
I'd try and keep the weight/bulk down, tripod is probably necessary, but smaller camera will probably enable smaller/lighter tripod.
Chrome, yes, meant the VX or PD - to me they are full sized camcorders. Thought they could shoot in 16x9, need to research this more. Re. the HD being preferable to SD, have looked at all the debates about this and more or less decided that SD will be ok for my purposes.
My wife has a Canon HV30, could use this for these rough terrain shots I suppose, just thought that something more 'professional' would be better. You know how it is when you're just starting out, you have a few fixations.
Dave, there won't be a crew, just me, my wife, and a couple of local people, amateur actors. The extra tripod would be for my wife. There are no mountains to climb, just sand dunes and marshland to cross. It's a great location, very surreal, it's just pleading for a film to be shot there.
In HD, my choice would be V1 or Z1, I might still go along this route.
There are no mountains to climb, just sand dunes and marshland to cross. It's a great location, very surreal, it's just pleading for a film to be shot there.
I'm intrigued ;)
Hey Bob, re. very surreal - lunar landscape springs to mind. Don't know if it's normal to see a location and plan to shoot a film\story there, probably not.
I've always had an eye for interesting locations, long before I became interested in film-making, but was probably regarding them as locations for a photo shoot, as I'm a freelance photographer and writer.
Have other ideas for stories\films, as well as this one.
small and 16x9 and HDV = Sony A1 to my mind, as long as the light is good.
friend carried one up mont blanc-type mountains with the army on maneuvers and got awesome footage, for the army.
my 2c