[Nunberry]

Hiyiz! Sorry to be another of those 1-post members who reads the first 3 pages of the forum and then posts the same question every newbie asks - what camcorder should I buy? - but at the end of the day, you know you love answering!

I'm new to the world of digital camcordery, and looking to buy a miniDV camera in the 200-400 euro range (about £150-300 at current rates). I see a lot of comments about how most cameras in this range really struggle in low light, but how low are we talking? One of the first jobs this camera will be performing is recording a lot of drunk people at a wedding, and I want to ensure we capture plenty of embarassing moments but I'm worried that won't be possible. The venue is quite dark in places - like a cellar bar, what you might call "intimate lighting" except that it's a big room and (hopefully) no one will be naked in it.

My problem is that I can't try before I buy. Most B&M shops are well lit, and the ones selling at prices I can afford have staff that barely know what a camcorder is, let alone how it performs.

Can someone give me a handle on what I should realistically expect an average camera (say, the Canon M160, Panasonic Gs230 or Sony HC47E for arguements sake) in ordinary indoor conditions - eg. ranging from an average front room with 3 60watt bulbs in the middle of it to the dull grey of a high-ceilinged art museum to the gloom of a floor-lit church crypt converted into a cracking pub - the kind of lighting you encounter in normal life. I'm not saying I've invited Paris Hilton over for the weekend and I bought a blacklight or I'm off to hunt the Blair Witch. At what point does the camera decide Low Light becomes No Light?

Also, what does low light translate into on the camera - Do you end up with sequences of blank/black video, does it go all blurry etc etc. Are there any web resources you can recommend where I might see examples?

Oh yeah, and which camera should I buy?

[redsox_mark]

Your average living room as you describe it would be low light; approx 60 lux.

The bar would be very low light; more like 15 lux.

You can see some test charts of the MD160 (American version) here
http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content...erformance.htm

You will see at 60 lux (the living room) you start to see a lot of "grain", also known as video noise. You'll be able to see the people, but the quality won't be great. As the light gets less you get more and more noise and the image also gets darker. It won't go totally black unless there really is almost no light, but it will get progressively worse the less light you have.

If you aren't shooting widescreen then I like the GS230 best; for widescreen the MD160 by a hair over the HC47.

[MarkE19]

Low light for a camcorder can cause some or all of the following:
trouble with the auto focus - fucus hunts and never gives a good sharp image
the picture gets very grainy (aka video noise) as the cam boosts gain to try and get enough light
the shutter sped slows down causing moving objects to judder across the screen
poor colour reproduction with the picture getting close to looking black & white

What is low light? Well for most camcorders a normal living room with standard electric lighting will give some or all of the above. A dark pub will just make all the effects far worse.

Mark.

[Nunberry]

Thanks, assortment of Marks! That's exactly the kind of thing I'm looking for - putting a face on the Lux numbers, so to speak. Read through a few reviews on Camcorderinfo.com, Looks like most cameras will be pretty poor then in the kind of lighting I would expect to use them in most often. Not good news really. Although E-buyers have the Sony HC96E for just about a price I can afford (€395 at todays exchange rate), and it's low light performance appears to be far better than the others mentioned. Not sure if I want to commit to a life of buying Sony-branded accessories and selling a kidney to get a high-capacity battery, but thems the breaks.
Thanks again!

[senu]

While you seem to "get the jist". It is also the case that manufacturers claims on low light performance should be taken with a pinch of salt. And to be fair your intended use would challenge even the more capable ones. Camcorders love light, even more so than still cameras
The usable video footage is often much less than the manufacturer quoted low lux specifications
It is also true that low light performance is a lens quality ( fast lens) as well as the ability of the digital image processor and sensor to define the image without degrading it.
I have yet to see a consumer or "Prosumer" camcorder with such good low light ability as the Sony VX2100, due in part to its "fast" lens
It isnt "average" ( and it isnt discreet).
Lastly with all due respect, the camcorders you have quoted are budget models ( albeit capable ones) and low light ability seems to improve with "upping the budget"
Don't forget that if you do get a "usable" dark footage you can actually sort it in software