HD Camera for the non-pros

[Jerry]

17MHz is compelling; when is the 25MHz versions due out? Any other bits that may make it worth waiting??

I have not looked at the AVCHD cameras, except the big Panasonic version.
Now, that did look good.

My next move will be to something along the lines of the EX-1 or EX-3.
If Canon comes out with something like that, I will probably lean that way.
If that tells you something.

[Ron Evans]

Remember that AVCHD is a VBR encoder so the 17Meg average will reach peaks of over 20 now with my SR11. With it set at the 1920x1080 mode I see anywhere from 9 to 21 Mbps.

Ron Evans

[Fred Dwyer]

The Rode videoMic seems a very popular choice among Canon HV20/30 users. Haven't used it myself, but expect to order one. It's about $150. Better price than the Senheiser, wonder how the performance of the two compares. Has anyone here compared the two? Edius is a great tool, but it can't magically turn poor sound into good.

[SoundFreak]

AVCHD is a VBR encoder from 9 to 21 Mbps.

I was always in the understanding that the 17Mbps was absolute peak, judging from the info on the various sony spec pdf's.

Having seen the AVCHD 17 Mbps quality and artifacts, the choice of the older HDV format with the low cost archive (Mini DV tape) was a no brainer for me.

Maybe next round will be for the AVCHD format with 25 Mbps or higher data rate ................. Hmmmmm !

[SoundFreak]

Just some additional info

I came from a canon handy cam to a sony HD simply because of the inferior build quality of canon products.

I mainly use it as family cam, in other words, it always runs on full auto.

Compared to canon the picture quality is less and the audio (build in mic) is far better.

The HD sony handycam is build like a tank but has much more problems with washed out whites (full auto mode) than the canon HD or SD cams.

Not found a good work around in Edius for that yet.

When in manual mode the picture is great, a tad difficult to handle due to it's small size, but workable.

Due to the wide variety of users in my house hold the camera shoots 98% in full auto and is, compared to the SD canon a bit disappointing.

[bseidner]

Is AVCHD the right choice then? Alternatives??

Given the goal is HD, is there something between a HDR-V1U ($4000) 3 element camera and these? Most of the AVCDH cameras are single chip, about $1000 and very small which is nice for the above average consumer. But is there a 3 chip camera in the $2000 range that is better in color saturation, ability to handle a nice mic, good low light capabilities, . . . I had one suggestion for the Sony HC-9 which is not a AVCHD camera; are there others??

[tingsern]

I think you have to define what your requirements for the HD Camera first? For example - How important is low light ability to you? What are you using the camera for? Weddings? Wildlife? Is low temperature (-20 deg C) ability a requirement for you? Once you have all your requirements in mind, then you go out and look for cameras that fit them. Then you look at price - can you afford them? If you can't, look at your requirements again - can I compromise on a certain requirement so that the price can be lower? You got the idea?

[Ron Evans]

I was always in the understanding that the 17Mbps was absolute peak, judging from the info on the various sony spec pdf's.

!

I had a SR7 where the highest quality was at 15mbps and a SR11 that is supposedly 16mbps. Viewing an AVCHD disc in my PS3 the SR7 disc shows anywhere between 9 and 17 on the data display with average closer to 15.5. The SR11 disc will similarly show this same range with the odd burst closer to 20 and as I said I did see once 21 on the display at a clip transition so could have course been something to do with the PS3!!! Clearly though for the Sony SR11 in 1920x1080 at nominally 16mbps it spends a lot of the time above that value, any movement will send the data rate to 17.5 with the average being closer to 15.8 on the set of clips I just viewed.
I like my SR11 for the money it produces a really nice picture. At this price point nothing is going to be perfect. A lot of the time the SR11 gives my FX1 a run for the money at close to 1/4 the price.

Ron Evans

[SoundFreak]

I had one suggestion for the Sony HC-9 which is not a AVCHD camera; are there others??

I wish there are others but in this price rage nothing much available.

Btw, I have the HC9 and it is not that good in low light, lots of grain, colors become a bit dull, but the biggest issue is focus hunting and when sharp contrast in low light, often not able to focus at all.

As a family cam o.k. nothing more than that.
I just happened to test the camera yesterday for the first time in a hotel ballroom during a set up of a show.

Lots of brights things around, like 6 x 10000 ansi lcd projectors, 24 units 1200 watt moving heads, par cans etc. and lots of dark spots, the camera had it real tuff.

For the show I used a P170, the only thing I have that works in that environment.

AVCD / Mpeg2, in this price range it's all the same, far from perfect ........

[Stereodesign]

The reliability and ruggedness of the range of cameras Sony market as suitable for Pro use is well documented. If you read the user account stories on the sony.biz website (www.sonybiz.net) there is plenty of evidence of the HDV cameras from the A1 up being used for serious projects on Everest in the Gobi desert etc and the users all report that they functioned faultlessly.

[SoundFreak]

The reliability and ruggedness of the range of cameras Sony market as suitable for Pro use is well documented

Very true, this the the #1 reason I moved away from Canon, #2 is the Battery, expensive but Ooooh so lasting (NP-FH100).

there is plenty of evidence of the HDV cameras from the A1 up being used for serious projects on Everest in the Gobi desert etc and the users all report that they functioned faultlessly.

Also true, nowadays almost anything is "respected" as "pro", as long as it justifies the lower production budget.

A HC9, SR12, A1, they all work well under "perfect conditions", As you stated above, at Gobi desert (very bright light), mount everest (again very bright light), the night scene's are mostly done in the Super night shot (infrared) otherwise the single chip handy cam won't hack it !

Don't get me wrong, I love my HC9 (tested the A1 - not worth double the $$) but when you do wedding shooting, dinner time, indoors, better get NEATVIDEO to clean up all the noise / grain.

For wedding etc. you need something like a Z1 or higher.
If a Z1 is Semi Pro, the A1 surely is not .........

[kwshaw1]

Given the goal is HD, is there something between a HDR-V1U ($4000) 3 element camera and these? Most of the AVCDH cameras are single chip, about $1000 and very small which is nice for the above average consumer. But is there a 3 chip camera in the $2000 range that is better in color saturation, ability to handle a nice mic, good low light capabilities, . . . I had one suggestion for the Sony HC-9 which is not a AVCHD camera; are there others??

In the $2000 range for those criteria, your best bet is probably a used Sony FX1. I have two of these which I use for everything from weddings to stage shows, and they work surprisingly well for the price. In low light you have to push the camera to its limits to get good results, but it's a step up from the $1000 HD cams in this regard.

I also have a Sony HC1 which I use for "b roll" and family video, and love the small form factor for that. Haven't tried the AVCHD cameras yet but an dubious about the editing workflow, which appears to be more time-consuming than HDV. I can see an advantage to a drive-based camera with long recording times, but other than that AVCHD seems like a hassle for anything beyond direct playback.