Recording Sound to a DSLR Camera vs Audio Recorder

How can you get the best quality sound for your videos? There are a lot of factors, and using an external microphone is one of the big factors. But another question that comes up quite often is, will a dedicated audio recorder improve my sound quality? I think it will in 95% of cases. Here’s a sample comparing the quality you get with a professional level lavalier microphone, the Countryman B6, recorded into a simple Zoom H1 audio recorder and recorded into a typical DSLR camera, the Nikon D750.

Now there are still cases where recording sound with your camera may be good enough. But if you want the best audio quality you can get, even a little $99 USD audio recorder is better than a $2000 DSLR camera.

Zoom F8 Officially Announced and Available for Pre-order

Zoom has been kicking butt in the indie audio gear front more and more as time rolls on.

One of the more interesting audio devices I saw at NAB earlier this year was a prototype 8 channel pro-level field recorder that Zoom had at their booth - The Zoom F8. It is available for pre-order at B&H Photo as of today.

This is an interesting move from Zoom. They've been a strong contender among indie film and video makers as far back as 2007-ish with the Zoom H4. That device was breakthrough in that it was a small, handheld stereo recorder with pro-level XLR inputs that ran on consumer AA batteries and was reasonably priced (around $400 or $500 as I recall). I had one for a short time. It was amazing. But it had some serious issues: The preamps didn't have a lot of gain (so using dynamic handheld mics wasn't very realistic), the preamps were noisy, battery life wasn't great especially when phantom powering mics, and the plastic build quality wasn't amazing. Also, that jog-dial thing you use to navitage through menus was not great. But still, it was a worthy start.

Then the H4n came a few years later with better build quality, slightly better preamps (though still noisy), and better battery life. Some of the issues remained. The premps were still pretty noisy. The jog-dial thingy was pretty much the same. Another good step forward from Zoom. They sold a lot of these and there are still tons in use today.

Then the H6 came in 2013. Even better build quality, much better preamps, good battery life and some nice features that Zoom has added with firmware updates (e.g., the ability to solo monitor channels while recording so that you can dial in levels). I recently had an H6 on loan from B&H for several weeks and was really impressed! There were a couple of things I didn't love about it, but they weren't total show-stoppers: I still don't love the jog-dial and while the new color screen is pretty, it is slow and very difficult to see outdoors and nearly impossible to see in direct sunlight. I'll have a review here on the blog in the next week or so.

The Zoom F8 looks like Zoom is aiming at taking some of the lower end pro market from the likes of Sound Devices though their field recorders are quite a bit more expensive (arguably for good reason). Here are the specs for the F8:

• 8-channel/10-track field audio recorder/mixer

• 8 discrete inputs with locking Neutrik XLR/TRS combo connectors

• Compact and lightweight aluminum chassis, weighing just 2 pounds (without batteries)

• High quality mic preamps with up to 75 dB gain, less than -127 dBu EIN, and +4 dB line inputs

• Support for up to 24-bit/192 kHz recording as well as 96 kHz, 88.2 kHz, 48k, and 44.1 kHz, plus 47.952 kHz / 48.048 kHz for HD video compatibility; 16-/24-bit resolution

• Accurate Time Code (0.2 ppm) I/O on standard BNC connectors; dropframe/non-drop formats with Jam Sync

• Three different power supply options: 8x AA batteries, external DC battery pack with Hirose connector, or 12V AC adapter (AA’s and DC battery pack not included)

• Automatic switching of power source from DC to batteries at user-defined voltage levels

• Dedicated gain control knob, 6-segment LED level meter, and PFL/Solo switch for each channel

• Phantom power (+48V/+24V) on every preamp

• Advanced onboard limiters for input and output

• High pass filter, phase invert, and Mid-Side decoder

• Input delay of up to 30 msec per channel / output delay of up to 10 frames per output

• Compatible with Zoom microphone capsules; optional extender cable enables remote positioning

• Dual mini-XLR (TA3) balanced Main Outs plus ⅛" stereo mini-jack Sub Out

• Dedicated headphone output (100 mW) with front panel volume control

• 2.4" full-color backlit LCD with monochrome mode

• Dedicated PFL display with viewable trim settings

• Dual SD/SDHC/SDXC card slots, up to 512 GB each

• Records in BWF-compliant WAV or MP3 file formats

• Support for extensive metadata (BWF and iXML); input time, date, project, scene number, etc.

• Built-in slate mic/slate tone with front panel switch

• Built-in tripod mount; camera mount adapter also included

• Use as an 8-in/4-out USB audio interface (@ 96 kHz)

• Free Zoom F8 Control App for iOS allows wireless remote control, file renaming, and metadata entry

Wow! The things that impress me most is that these new pre-amps come with +75dB of gain. There are three power options (8 AA batteries, Hirose connector for pro-level batteries like Anton Bauer, and an AC adapter). Zoom claims that the analog to digital converters have 120dB of dynamic range (SoundDevices clain 117 for most of their recorders and mixers). This is the first time that Zoom has reported the A/D dynamic range spec so it seems like they're serious about playing with the big boys. Timecode generator that can also be jam synced. Aluminum build. iOS mixer app that does channel metering, faders for each channel, and the ability to enter metadata! Limiter with adjustable settings for threshold, attack and release.

So yes, being the audio nerd that I am, I have one on pre-order and will have a review after it ships in August. :-)

I do have some concerns:

• The hardware pots (potentiometers) for each channel look really small and I'm not sure how robust they'll be. Mixing may be pretty tough relative to the SoundDevices and Zaxcom pro-level field mixers which have big knobs.

• Output only includes 2 mini XLR outputs for the stereo mix bus and 3.5mm for DSLR shooters. No camera return. Though to be fair, this is probably not a big deal for most indie filmmakers and is part of the reason that this device is so much less expensive than the SoundDevices and Zaxcom field recorder/mixers. To me, this is why it looks like Zoom is still very much aiming for indie film-makers, not higher end pros (who would need this option. On the set of serious productions, you'll typically need a feed for the director and the camera.

• That screen is still quite small and I'm interested to see how easy it is to see outdoors in the sun. Also, audio meters should never be underestimated. Only those which are large enough and have enough steps are truly useful when mixing and recording. That's a very small screen to fit 8 meters. But if the app is good, this can be overcome.

Those seem like reasonable trade-offs given the $999 price. It seems like they packed it with all the audio quality you'd get in the higher end recorders and mixers, but without some of the more sophisticated features that are only needed for higher budget productions (more routing and output options).

Can't wait to put it through its paces!

Random Thoughts on Buying Gear for Film and Video

Here are some random thoughts I wrote down some time ago. Maybe they'll help you and maybe they wont. But here's a sample of my thought process:

Notes first written sometime back in 2014, before I had my Panasonic GH4 and Shogun recorder and my iMac 5k:

What should I buy next for my filmmaking kit? Often I find myself distracted by all the cool gear available on the market. This is a problem in two ways: 1) I lose precious creative filmmaking time by endlessly researching gear and 2) I sometimes get my priorities mixed up and end up with the wrong gear, at least it is wrong from the standpoint that it doesn't help me solve my most pressing filmmaking issues.

Here are a few ideas that I've attempted to use to work through this dilemma…

First, I list out the problems that I'm trying to solve for my current or upcoming project. I don’t worry about priority yet, just all the issues that I need to or would like to solve. I avoid listing gear, just list the problems I need to solve.

- No 4:2:2 4K record capability

- Lack of stabilized movement

- Mediocre audio quality with indoor dialogue in particular, but also outdoor

- Difficulty getting colors right when color correcting/grading

- Framing issues

- Lack of energy in recordings

Next, work through the list and choose the one that will make the most difference or, in some cases, simply must be done first because of client needs.

In this case, I chose color—I seem to really struggle getting consistent color and can never seem to really tell what my video is going to look like because I don’t trust my two monitors…

Next, think it through, what is the problem if you think it through in greater detail?

I don’t trust that either of my monitors closely represent the standard color space, gamma, etc. where my videos and films will be viewed. When I see my finished videos on other peoples’ monitors or projectors or TVs, they look different than on my PC monitor. Where will they be viewed? Mostly on office computers and projectors and TVs. But mostly on PCs. However, it is most critical that they look their best on the office projectors and TVs (where they will be viewed by larger groups).

Can this be solved with my current gear?

Maybe, but I’m not sure. I have calibrated my Dell Ultrasharp 2413 with an X-Rite i1 Display Pro and that seems to help, but it often seems too saturated and doesn’t at all match my cheapo HP monitor. Calibrating in this way is not very effective, I learn, because we're using an 8 bit color workflow via a computer video card. If colors are way off, there isn't much space to move around to compensate. It will never be amazingly accurate.

What are the potential solutions?

- Invest in a color workflow that works via a video I/O device (different than a computer video card) which supports 3D LUTs and ideally, 10-bit color.

- Buy a modest reference monitor

Added notes June 2015:

I opted not to solve this problem for now. I'm now working mainly on an iMac 5k. It is NOT a reference monitor, I know that. Colorists would scoff and some might even totally discount everything I have to say from this point forward. But let me give some context.

My jobs don't pay all that much. There is absolutely, positively no budget for a colorist in 99.9% of my jobs. My clients don't expect exceptional color (sadly). So they get what they pay for - a decent quality internal video that has not been edited or graded on a reference monitor and may look decent but may not look great.

For the record, I don't just go all cavalier. I do use an

X-Rite i1Display Pro colorimeter

to at least get me into the parking lot of the right ballpark. But I am fully aware that calibrating through a computer video card that supports 8 bit is problematic and not anywhere close to reference grade.

I will keep at this until at some point I can charge more and can afford a reference monitor. Perhaps I can start serving a higher tier client base. I'm working on it. But this is a decent start and working with a "color calibrated" iMac has produced content good enough for low-end corporate gigs.

So that's the context. And that's a problem that I opted not to solve for now.

Another thought that I don't think occurs to a lot of people. Some gear is a better investment than other gear.

I think that most sound gear, microphones in particular, are much better investments than camera bodies. Hear me out on this, it isn't quite as absurd as it first sounds.

Of course you need at least one decent camera to produce a film or video. But cameras become obsolete very quickly these days. I counted the cameras I've had over the last 9 years and I believe I've had 7. That's almost a new camera yearly. At this rate, I barely have time to get well acquainted with my camera before it is upgraded. Some DPs are so awesome that they can pull that off and adapt to a new camera really quickly. But I think many of us indy guys that don't shoot all day long every day could benefit from a little more practice with our cameras. A year may be enough time for some, maybe not for others. I personally could probably benefit from more practice with my cameras.

Now consider microphones. How many of us own a $2,000 microphone? Not many is my guess. I certainly don't and I'm a self-professed sound enthusiast.

Back to cameras. How many of us own a $2000+ camera? I do and probably a lot more of us than those that own a $2000 mic.

Schoepps Collette Series MK41 Supercardioid Microphone Set

Now try an exercise: Choose a movie and watch one scene from the movie two different ways. On the first viewing, don't watch the visuals, just listen to the sound. Second time, just watch the visuals and turn the sound off.

Which had more emotional impact? Which was easier to follow?

I'm betting that in most cases, it is easier to follow and there is more emotional impact from the audio only experience. That's not always true and of course we all want stunning visuals and awesome sound. But if you have to cut back your budget a little on one to invest in the other, it might make sense for most of us who have skimped on audio gear to re-allocate our budgets a little and use more for sound and a little less for cameras. Don't get angry. Just think about it. It may not apply in your case but for most of us, I bet it is a valid point worth considering.

To be clear, I'm not saying you should spend thousands on audio gear and just work with a $500 USD camera with a kit lens. But on the other hand, I am suggesting that might help get you out of a creative slump in you're in one.

Of course lenses are also probably a better investment than camera bodies in most cases. So there's that to consider.

Zoom H6 Audio Field Recorder

But I think my next big, multi-thousand dollar investment is going to be either a mic or a good solid field recorder. And to make a step toward that goal, in the next few weeks we're going to have a look at the difference between $200 - $400 field recorders and a Sound Devices audio interface that costs $900 (and only has two mic inputs). To do this, I'm borrowing a Zoom H6 and Sound Devices USBPre 2 to compare with my trusty Tascam DR-60DmkII. I opted for the USBPre 2 because it is really a proxy for a Sound Devices 700 series field recorder that many pros use. It has the same preamps and analog to digital converters. So it should give us a good idea of what a $3300 Sound Devices field recorder or mixer would do for us.

Now before you cry, "But that's not a fair comparison!" I totally get that. I'm not trying to compare, really, just answer the question, "What practical benefits do you get when you use a pro level field recorder?" I'm guessing that the difference in audio quality is not worlds better. Probably a little better, but not night-and-day different. I bet reliability and routing options and flexibility and powering options and durability are better on the pro units. But we'll see.

Thanks for enduring my rambling thoughts. I'm not sure whether this has helped anyone aside from me so you're a good sport for reading through if you've made it this far!

Nikon D750: I Love It!

Last fall after I first bought and worked with the Nikon D750 for a while, I put together a review of it's video features. The response to that review has been really helpful to me because I learned that a lot of viewers thought I didn't much care for the D750.

Nothing could be further from the truth and let me be 100% clear: I love my Nikon D750!

I think the confusion came as I felt I had to explain why I bought a DSLR instead of the amazingly popular Sony a7S which is also a full-frame camera but with a mirrorless design. Oh, and the a7S can record 4K via its HDMI output. Oh, and it can also record S-Log.

Why would you go for a Nikon D750 instead of a Sony a7S, particularly when they are priced within a couple of hundred dollars of one another? I could have dropped the additional money without an issue at all.

And don't misread me when I give my explanation here. I love what Sony is doing, the direction they're heading. They are leading in a direction that is amazing - large sensor cameras and small bodies that ditch the mirror design of SLRs since the focus technology is at a point where that doesn't sacrifice anything. What's not to love about that?

But that's what made everyone think that I don't like the D750. I essentially said that it is a decent full-frame DSLR for video. Just decent. Not amazing. And I still think that is fair. The bitrate of the internal codec is relatively low compared to cameras like the latest generation Sonys or Panasonics. It is 1080p. It still doesn't have focus peaking. It doesn't do waveforms or false color. The footage it produces is good 1080. It is a totally workable solution for many types of shooters. Just not as much of a commitment to video from Nikon as I would like to see and that Sony and Panasonic are putting into their cameras. As a result, shooting video with the D750 is a good experience, but not as pleasurable as with my GH4.

When I'm going to shoot video and I have a choice between my D750 and Panasonic GH4, I'll choose the GH4 90% of the time as the main camera. It is a pleasure to use when shooting video and it produces lovely 4K footage. But there are 10% of cases where I'll choose the D750. Those are usually cases where I'll be doing an interview or talking head on location. Only the D750 allows me to blur the background like full frame cameras allow. The color it produces is great. It works beautifully with my Atomos recorders, both the Ninja II and Shogun. And in fact, with the Shogun, it becomes almost pleasurable to use (because the Shogun has all those video exposure and focus tools that make things so much easier and quicker). That setup gets a little bulky and isn't for everyone but it works well for interviews for me.

Now when it comes to shooting still photos and I have a choice between the D750 and the Panasonic GH4, I choose the D750 99% of the time. It is that amazing. Dynamic range on this camera is stellar. When I'm shooting still photos for weddings or portraits, the D750 is unrivaled in its ability to pull out shadow detail. That allows me to create stunning wide dynamic range type images in post. The focus is snappy, the flash eco system that Nikon provides is still pretty good (where are the RF transmitters, Nikon? That's one thing you're missing). The lenses available, both from Nikon and others, are top notch optically.

If I could only keep one of my cameras, I think I would keep the D750. Why? Because 4K is nice but not critical for me at this point. Paired with the Atomos Shogun, I have all the exposure and focus tools I need for shooting video. The large sensor produces amazing quality footage. On the still photo side, the GH4 is not bad, but not even in the same league as the D750 which is probably the best DSLR for the price on the market right now in most ways. Low light/high ISO performance on the D750, while not quite as amazing as the a7S, strikes the perfect balance of resolution (24 megapixel) and high ISO performance. That means this is an incredibly versatile camera.

And now, of course, it is priced at about $300 less than when I bought it last fall.

If I had to make the choice again today, I'd still choose the Nikon D750.

What Have I Learned This Year (about making films)?

Dave Dugdale over at LearningVideo.com had the clever idea to interview several of his friends and acquaintances at NAB on what they have learned over the last year. Dave and I met up for lunch while at NAB which was not our first time talking but first time meeting in person. He's every bit as genuine in person as you'd gather if you've been following his site and YouTube channel. And if you have't, he's certainly worth following. I'm also honored that he'd ask me what I've learned this year!

https://youtu.be/p3GRZ2WWWiU

Varavon Armor GH4K Pro Camera Cage

Let's me attach all my stuff and then it stays out of my way. Varavon has been producing some surprisingly quality gear in the last little while. Their Armor GH4K Pro camera cage was not the first cage dedicated to the GH4 (and GH3) to market, but in my tests, strikes a very good balance between price, quality, and features.

The unibody aluminum cage is very thoughtfully laid out with cutouts for all the critical controls and doors, includes an HDMI and mic cable retaining systems, and stays out of the way so you can focus on shooting.

Yes, I like it and am happy to make it my new cage for my Panasonic GH4.