bkyser Loc: Fly over country in Indiana

about 35 years ago, I used to work for a local TV station, and did some side work shooting weddings etc. Around 30 years ago, I moved to doing still photography of weddings, and seniors, etc.

I'm not wanting to do wedding videography again, but would like to add some video to my slideshow presentations, and maybe do a little video clip here and there for a blog or Youtube.

My question is, what is a decent, entry level digital recorder, or do you use the mic plugged into one of the cameras?

Years ago, I did some video of a couple of school plays, and at that time, the sound on the cameras was disappointing to say the least. I'm using a D-7100, D-7000, a few go pros, and a 1080p JVC camcorder.

My tests in a controlled environment with the 7100 and a shotgun mic weren't as horrible as the plays, but I'm concerned about results during a wedding or event where I can't control ambient noise as much.

Just wanting to know what you folks recommend. Like I said, I do have experience with video, and editing. In the old days, we always used a separate recorder, but technology has changed so much, I'm not sure if one digital source will be better than another, or not?

bk

Madman Loc: Gulf Coast, Florida USA

I purchased a used Nikon ME-1 for use on my D7100. I am satisfied with the results that I get, but my usage is very different than yours. All of my use up till now has been outdoors with use of the low cut filter. While Nikon describes the pattern as 'unidirectional', I would consider it to be a cardioid- not even a super-cardioid.

Years ago,I use to sell an inexpensive mic from Azden that was radio linked - it was designed for camcorders. One could put the mic anywhere it was wanted and record directly to your camera with the attached receiver. Perhaps something like that would suit your needs - I would expect that there are similar products out there.

Will be interesting to hear what you ultimately find that works best for you.

bkyser Loc: Fly over country in Indiana

Thanks, so to be clear, with the use of a good mic (mine is older, but pretty high quality) the digital recording built in the camera does a good job? I kind of assumed that the mic is normally the issue with sound quality as far as digital recorders.

I do have some wireless mic equipment as well, but the receiver would be a pain to hang somewhere on the tripod.

I figured if one camera did the sound, any others used would just be edited in.

To be honest, I love photo editing, and I enjoyed video editing back in the day as well, so I'm looking forward to doing it. The biggest issue is that there are only so many hours in a day. I need to relinquish some control issues, and let someone else do some of the editing as well. Hard to give up the creative stuff.

Bobspez Loc: Southern NJ, USA

For good sound I recommend the Zoom R16 8 track digital recorder at $400 new. I've had mine for about 5 years. It can be used with mics or with the built in stereo mics. Either way the sound is very good to my ear. All my youtube music videos were recorded with it. I also recommend Adobe Premiere Pro and Adobe Audition which are Adobe's video and audio editors. Both of these products work stand alone or together. I generally take my audio tracks, from the zoom recorder and put them on the timeline in Premiere Pro and sync them with the camera audio., then mute the camera audio. You can edit the audio right in Adobe Premiere (it pops open an Adobe Audition window). Adding some EQ, and echo can enhance the audio the same way Photoshop will enhance a photo. Or you can do edits of some unexpected mic hit or pop or drop or rise in volume. The Zoom gives you a good clean signal to work with. I don't use the Zoom as a daw because of the unavoidable delay in recording on a computer and listening to the signal on headphones. The delay will drive you nuts if you are recording live and listening to a 1/4 second delay in the headphones. But used as a stand alone recorder it is a good clean audio with no delay at all. What you hear in the headphones as you are speaking or singing is real time with no delay.

Madman Loc: Gulf Coast, Florida USA

A suggestion for hanging the receiver or other small accessories like the receiver for the remote shutter release is a bit of hook/loop tape (Velcro) on each piece and on the tripod. Cheap and easy. As far as the quality of the camera's built in recorder, I would think that for most applications it would be adequate. There is a tiny bit of hiss on playback, haven't tried to isolate it.

Reinaldokool Loc: San Rafael, CA

Low cost option Tascam DR-05, but with a better mic. Maybe a Rode NTG3 or, if you have the bucks a Sennheiser MKE600. You can get an L-bracket with two shoes, epoxy a foot on the Tascam and mount the microphone on the other shoe. Of course you'll have to sync the sound in post, but that's a good option at reasonable cost. I'm not fond of the low cost <$100 Rodes. They are not as good as a $30 mic I got from Amazon for a friend who had no money and no taste.

Azden has begun making a microphone that is getting good reviews. I haven't tried it. When I was deeply involved with ham radio, I bought an Azden 2 meter/ 440 transceiver. It was about 30% cheaper than the big boys. It really worked well and was well-made. Maybe irrelevant, but I may try one in the future.

Of course, in a pinch, you can mount the Sennheiser or NTG in a shock mount and plug it directly into the camera. Way better than the camera mics. Don't forget the deadcat. If you will be outdoors at all, it will improve the sound.

If you want a cheap Rode for a cheap price, let me know and I'll dig it out. But you may not be happy with the sound. Or you may be. Everyone is different.

bkyser Loc: Fly over country in Indiana

I have an older Rhode, much more than $100, with an isolation mount. I just couldn't remember the name when I first posted. Thanks for the information about the Tascam recorder, I will take a look.