Best Camcorder for Filming Hunts for YouTube?

[sierracharlie338]

I'm leaning that way due to cost and my low level of "youtubing" but I'm still looking into others.

I hear ya bud


Sierracharlie out…

[Puncher51]

I gave up waiting on the next video and just ordered the Panasonic 981. They have it for $647 now pretty much everywhere you look. It was $799 listed everywhere before that. We’ll see how it turns out. I decided that even though I may not need the 4K now, I may want it in the future.

[Smart]

I gave up waiting on the next video and just ordered the Panasonic 981. They have it for $647 now pretty much everywhere you look. It was $799 listed everywhere before that. We’ll see how it turns out. I decided that even though I may not need the 4K now, I may want it in the future.

who is they?

[Puncher51]

B&H, Amazon, Adorama, etc.

[Smart]

B&H, Amazon, Adorama, etc.

Thank you!

[Puncher51]

Thank you!

I was about to order it for $799 and decided to wait a week, thankfully they dropped it to $647 over that time frame.

[hopedale]

Great video, but dang, I don't need to spend anymore money.

I watch both videos and was just looking at the GroPro 7 at Cosco yesterday.

And congrats on the milestone.

[Michael]

Sorry for the delay in the follow up video. New house, holidays and hunting trips have me behind.

Real quickly some of the reasons I mentioned you may prefer 1080 over 4k for YT videos:

1. Large file size - fill up memory card and HDD on computer. If, like me, you store all original footage on hard drives, you'll be adding hard drive space frequently. The good news is that HDDs are relatively cheap.

2. Editing 4k is cumbersome. It will tax your computer's resources, including CPU and RAM. I ended up spending over $3K a few years ago to build a 4K editing machine that would handle the files.

3. Similarly, some editing software handles 4k better than others. If you start stacking clips on your timeline or adding effects, color corrections and/or color grades it can really slow down your editing efficiency. It can also take much longer to render your finished video, and of course the resulting file will be larger and take longer to upload to the web.

4. Most cameras have fewer and lower frame rate options than 1080. The VX870 only shoots 4K at 30fps (the 981 offers 24 or 30 fps) while you can shoot as high as 120 or 240 fps on the 870/981, respectively. (Shooting higher frame rates provides MUCH smoother slow motion.)

5. Most viewers aren't watching YT videos in 4K. Over 70% of my channel views are on mobile devices or tablets. 19% of views are from computer - I'd guess that significanltly less than half of those viewers are watching on 4k monitors. Less than 10% of views are on a TV, and again I'd guess the majority of those aren't 4k.

There are some advantages to having a camera that will shoot 4k ("future proof" your camera, ability to crop or add motion to to 1080 timeline, better video quality for the few that do watch 4k, etc.) but is it worth the extra cost? IMO, not for most people.


Hopefully I'll get the next video to elaborate on these reasons sometime this week.

[Michael]

I've been having conversations with another TBH/YT creator. We've been comparing the VX981 to the VX870 and the only differences I can really see are the frame rate options (981 adds a 24fps option and a 240fps option). Very negligible differences. I'm not sure the current price difference between the two models.

Edit: With the current discount on the VX981 at B&H it's cheaper than the VX870.

[Smart]

Sorry for the delay in the follow up video. New house, holidays and hunting trips have me behind.

Real quickly some of the reasons I mentioned you may prefer 1080 over 4k for YT videos:

1. Large file size - fill up memory card and HDD on computer. If, like me, you store all original footage on hard drives, you'll be adding hard drive space frequently. The good news is that HDDs are relatively cheap.

2. Editing 4k is cumbersome. It will tax your computer's resources, including CPU and RAM. I ended up spending over $3K a few years ago to build a 4K editing machine that would handle the files.

3. Similarly, some editing software handles 4k better than others. If you start stacking clips on your timeline or adding effects, color corrections and/or color grades it can really slow down your editing efficiency. It can also take much longer to render your finished video, and of course the resulting file will be larger and take longer to upload to the web.

4. Most cameras have fewer and lower frame rate options than 1080. The VX870 only shoots 4K at 30fps (the 981 offers 24 or 30 fps) while you can shoot as high as 120 or 240 fps on the 870/981, respectively. (Shooting higher frame rates provides MUCH smoother slow motion.)

5. Most viewers aren't watching YT videos in 4K. Over 70% of my channel views are on mobile devices or tablets. 19% of views are from computer - I'd guess that significanltly less than half of those viewers are watching on 4k monitors. Less than 10% of views are on a TV, and again I'd guess the majority of those aren't 4k.

There are some advantages to having a camera that will shoot 4k ("future proof" your camera, ability to crop or add motion to to 1080 timeline, better video quality for the few that do watch 4k, etc.) but is it worth the extra cost? IMO, not for most people.


Hopefully I'll get the next video to elaborate on these reasons sometime this week.

Great explanation Michael. I think I’m gonna roll with 1080 after that. Even with a new laptop coming, I think 1080 will work better for what I’m going to do and work better with what I have to work with. .