[Paul Cooksley]

Hi there

I did mention this in my thread below (re Sony and widescreen camcorders) but thought I would mention this aspect also here...

I am really tempted to get this camcorder. It has all that I am looking for (DV IN/OUT and AV IN/OUT) and seems to get fairly good reviews - all apart from low light recording - which seems to get absolutely slated in reviews I have read on the 'net.

What do you really think of this camcorder - especially the low light recording? I guess most camcorders at this price range will suffer somewhat in low light, but is it really that bad compared with other makes in this kind of price range? I mean, say you want to record generally indoors on a cloudy day during the day - what's it like?

Also: On this model, does it have the "flash" mode in the digital effects (I don't mean a stills flash - I know it doesn't have one of these) but I am talking about the thing where you can kind of slow the frame rate down and almost apply a kind of "film" look when playing back a tape?

Any help really appreciated

Paul

[IAmATeaf]

This is problem for most camcorders, from memory I think the Panasonic camcorders especially the 3 CCD ones fare even worse.

There are 2 night modes on the Sony, well there are on my HC39, Night vision and Night vision plus, night vision effectively changes the footage recorded into black and white but does result in quite a good recorded image, Night vision plus seems to make the CCD even more sensitive to light but at the result of coping with movement, pan the camera in plus mode and you'll get streaky/stuttery (sp?) type recording.

The above results were a bit of a shock to me as my previous Panasonic VHC-C camcorder was very good in low light so I decided to find out why. It seeem that as the resolution of the CCD is increased the effective light falling on each pixel sensor decreases as the pixel is smaller and there are more of them in the array resulting in very poor performance. I think I'm right in saying that this curses modern day digi-cams too as the makers strive to produce 7+mp cameras, these all suffer from noise at low light and high ISO settings whereas the 4-5Mp cameras used to perform OK.

[jomike]

I have the Sony DVD203 which I believe has the same CCD as the HC42. What I do when I shoot in low light (at night in a room lit by incandescent lights) is I switch the backlight function on. This opens the aparture and lets in more light, but doesn't make the CCD more sensitive, therefore reducing noise. Then in post production I "brighten" the picture by using the contrast/brightness filter. This results in washed out looking but less grainy footage. With DV AVI you might get better results than with the mpegs I work with in Womble.
I have to agree that the low light performance of this CCD is not great.

[IAmATeaf]

Originally Posted by jomike

I have the Sony DVD203 which I believe has the same CCD as the HC42. What I do when I shoot in low light (at night in a room lit by incandescent lights) is I switch the backlight function on. This opens the aparture and lets in more light, but doesn't make the CCD more sensitive, therefore reducing noise. Then in post production I "brighten" the picture by using the contrast/brightness filter. This results in washed out looking but less grainy footage. With DV AVI you might get better results than with the mpegs I work with in Womble.
I have to agree that the low light performance of this CCD is not great.

That's an interesting suggestion jomike I'm going to have a look at my camcorder to see if this function is available, TBH in my ignorance I thought that the backlit function was specifically for the LCD screen i.e. brightens just the screen when using it in bright sunlight.

[jomike]

The backlight function was designed for shooting a subject with bright light behind it. It opens the apature to get more shadow detail, at the expense of overexposing the bright background. Just remember to switch it off again, else everything gets overexposed, as I found to my cost!

Could you kindly tell me what is the low light performance on the sony hc42? is it color blotches all over the picture is it blue noise or is it looking more like sand grain and if so how obtrusive is it? Thanks

[laser]

I'll post some footage.

u are the best! thanks a lot!

[IAmATeaf]

Originally Posted by alogo

Could you kindly tell me what is the low light performance on the sony hc42? is it color blotches all over the picture is it blue noise or is it looking more like sand grain and if so how obtrusive is it? Thanks

Depends really on how low the light is, for indoor shooting I've found the image to be grainy. For outdoor shooting at night, you'll get almost nothing, turn nightshot on and you'll get a decent enough pic but it'll be in almost black and white.

what i meant is do you see any yellow blotches or any blue noise while you record? if the noise is fine grained then there is no problem as far as i am concerned even if i lose some color info. what i cannot stand is patches of color appearing allover my recording.

[Paul Cooksley]

Laser

Yes please - I'd be really grateful to take a look at some actual low light footage - so please do post it if you can

Cheers

Paul

[laser]

Just about to post the link. Waiting forthe upload to complete.

[laser]

Here is the link for the widescreen low light footage from a HC42E. The quality will be the same for a HC39E:

http://www.laserdiscarchive.co.uk/hc...en_footage.mpg

The download is a 24MB MPEG2 file converted in Pinnacle Studio 10.1.

Enjoy. Hope it will help you decide if this is the camcorder for you.

the world needs more people like you. at least we can know what we are buying not any more guesswork. Thanks mate!

i just watched the video. one word splendid! by the way have you read the review at camcorder info? (http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content...der-Review.htm)
i am asking because what you posted here is completely oposite to what camcorder info are saying! one word again maddenig! But a million thanks again because you have cleared some of my fears

[laser]

I'm quite surprised with their review as I don't get the blue noise patches like they describe, as can be seen from the footage.

Two points to note about the review:

1. It must have been written very soon after the HC42 came out. My camcorder was purchased in September, nearly 6 months later. Perhaps the camcorder has been improved by Sony.

2. The review was for the NTSC model. The footage uploaded is from the PAL version. Perhaps the greater resolution and PAL enoding reduces or elimintates certain artifacts seen on NTSC models.

I can only compare the low light footage to my Panasonic DS28 and I would say the HC42E is marginally better than the Panny.

Overall I'm pleased with the camcorder and have not come across any problems. The true widescreen recording is great on the plasma and this is were it scores in comparison to other non widescreen or pseudo widescreen camcorders.

I hope the footage has proved useful and will at least help you decided one way or the other whether it is right for you.

[Paul Cooksley]

Yes, to echo the others comments, thanks very much for that. The footage looks absolutely fine - nothing like the reviews I have read.

After seeing this, I am going to order one.

Cheers again

Paul

[laser]

No problem. Glad to be of help.

Incidently this is a URL for some normal footage recorded outdoor, with the intention of showing the widescreen capability of the HC42E/HC39E.

http://www.laserdiscarchive.co.uk/sa...en_footage.mpg

thanks again. Two questions however:

1) i take you filmed the train on a tripod, and i f that is the case...

2) Does the steadyshot function while you are filming in 16:9
By the way the video rocks! i'll go and buy one as soon as possible!

[laser]

Originally Posted by alogo

thanks again. Two questions however:

1) i take you filmed the train on a tripod, and i f that is the case...

2) Does the steadyshot function while you are filming in 16:9
By the way the video rocks! i'll go and buy one as soon as possible!

The train was filmed on a tripod. I prefer to film, where possible, with a tripod as it looks more professional when screening videos to others, the footage tends to look better on a large screen TV and the tripod tends to improves the PQ as the MPEG encoding does not have to work so hard if the background is static. Of course there are situations when filming handheld is preferable though.

The steadyshot function works with 16:9 and 4:3 modes. Although it is electronic as opposed to optical, its very good and is equally, if not better than my Panasonic DS28 with optical stability. The low light footage was filmed with steadyshot but the camera was being panned a lot, trying to follow the action but the picture is certainly not jerky and panning is quite smooth with horizontal and vertical motion.

yep! i totally agree and i thank you

[Paul Cooksley]

Laser

I think I asked this question earlier on, but just wondered if you know the answer...

With my current Camcorder - a Sony TRV120 (I think!) - a digital 8 camcorder, sometimes when I play back footage I used the 'flash' digital picture effect - on the lowest setting, which in my opinion, gives a kind of 'film' look to the captured footage.

I think the HC42 has the 'flash' option still, under digital effects? I just wondered if you know on playback, if you can activate this and therefore, give this kind of film look to the video ?????

Any help really appreciated

Thanks mate

Paul

[laser]

Originally Posted by Paul Cooksley

Laser

I think I asked this question earlier on, but just wondered if you know the answer...

With my current Camcorder - a Sony TRV120 (I think!) - a digital 8 camcorder, sometimes when I play back footage I used the 'flash' digital picture effect - on the lowest setting, which in my opinion, gives a kind of 'film' look to the captured footage.

I think the HC42 has the 'flash' option still, under digital effects? I just wondered if you know on playback, if you can activate this and therefore, give this kind of film look to the video ?????

Any help really appreciated

Thanks mate

Paul

I'll have a look on the camcorder and test it out and post the results for you to have a look at.

[laser]

Originally Posted by Paul Cooksley

I think the HC42 has the 'flash' option still, under digital effects? I just wondered if you know on playback, if you can activate this and therefore, give this kind of film look to the video ?????

I've recorded some footage using the digital effect 'flash'. You can download the footage for the link below.

http://laserdiscarchive.co.uk/flash_...mple_hc42e.mpg

The digital effect can only be activated in record mode. You can't apply it to previously recorded footage and play it back to the PC.

The footage is recorded at varying levels of effect i.e. 1%, 10% and 30%

It looks bloody awful at anything over 2-3%. I'm not really sure if this is what you expect but it might be a wise move to add effects like flash in post production!

Hope the footage is helpful.

[Paul Cooksley]

Laser

Thanks ever so much for taking the time and the trouble to shoot this and post it here - not many people would bother doing this, so I really do thank you - very much appreciated.

The 'flash' option I would only ever use at 1% (the others are really awful) - it's just that on some scenes I find the lowest setting seems sometimes to give a kind of filmic effect - you say you definately can't record "normally" and then playback the footage with this effect activated? I can do this on my old Sony, but never mind - it still seems a superb little camera - which thanks to your footage I will be buying shortly!

Thanks again

Paul

[laser]

You definately can't record normally and then add the digital effect in playback mode. I tried messing about for about 15 mins and even consulted the manual to double check.

The camcorder greys out the option to select the digital effects in play mode.

I see what you mean about a film look. I think it emulates the slite juddery effect you get when film is panned due to using 24fps.

I've had a quick look in Pinnacle Studio 10 and there is an effect which does the same thing and I would expect all the other editing applications would have the same digital effect as well.

[Paul Cooksley]

Laser

Oh right - didn't realise that there was something in Pinnacle that would do this... Do you use Studio 10? I was thinking of buying the Studio 10 or 10 Plus actually to get the chroma key effects etc..

If you use this, what do you think of it? I have read many review of it crashing regulary/freezing up etc... (I have studio 8 which came with my pc when new as a freebie and this keeps crashing on me!)

Cheers

Paul

[laser]

I do use Pinnacle Studio 10 or try to..... and also run Studio 9.4.2 on the same PC.

I started using Studio 7 and have upgraded as newer versions came out. The only reason I use Studio 10 is the MPEG encoding is quicker than Studio 9.

Over time I've got used to using the software and can edit pretty quickly. Studio 9.4.2 can be unstable and Studio 10 isunstable although Studio 9.4.2 (patched) is pretty much OK and I actually rarely suffer from a crash but it does happen occasionally. I have just installed the beta 10.2 patch for Studio 10 and it is improved the stability but it still runs like ****.

I'm trying to get away from Studio 9 & 10 and have been learning Pinnacle Liquid 6.1. Although from the same company you can't believe the difference in performance. Miles better.

Pinnacle Liquid has never crashed and even runs OK on my Centrino 1.7GHz laptop. Studio 10 struggles on a 3.06GHz P4 with 2GB RAM and 2 SATA 7200RPM HDD with 8MB cache.

The downside with liquid 6.1 is its a long learning curve and I've been reading through a book to learn the basics. In the not too distance future I hope to dump Studio for liquid 6.1. Incidentally the only reason I even tried Pinnacle Liquid was the software was free with a capture device.

I've also been toying with the idea of using Sony Vegas but I'll see how I get on with Liquid first as it really is very stable.

I tried to use Ulead Studio 9 but didn't like it. Found the interface and GUI quite cumbersome to use.

I'd be wary of using Studio above version 8. However most of the nice features are in versions 9 & 10.

I think the biggest problem for Studio 9 & 10 is trying to do too much at once. If you slow down and let the software and HDD catch up with one another it certainly helps the stability but it can be very waring.

[Paul Cooksley]

Laser

Thanks for your comments here about Pinnacle Studio ... You've really just confirmed what I have read, many times over.... I really want to stay with Pinnacle as I must confess to getting on quite well with it (well, when it's not crashing on me!) so I am not sure what to do about editing software now.....

I think I'll stick with Pinnacle Studio (I want to get version 10 plus) and just put up with the odd crash/freeze... Shame it doesn't seem more stable - you would have thought by now that the company would have sorted this sort of thing out? It seems to me that any other software (within a comparable budget) just doesn't seem as good for features?

Anyway, thanks for your valuable help and comments so far..

Gonna order the HC42 later this week - got some nice footage to go and capture shortly in las vegas and the Grand Canyon !!!!!!!

Cheers

Paul