SD9 vs HF100

daggad · 17-05-2008, 12:30 AM

I bought the SD9 initially and have used this one quite much. After seeing the good reviews on the HF100 i decided to sell the SD9 and give the HF100 a try.
I received the HF100 yesterday and have used it a lot since then playing with it to find the difference between the two.
This is my initial posting on this subject as I need to push the HF100 more and also learn to use it better, but this is my first impressions.

-The HF100 is big and heavy compared to the SD9. It also have a less appealing look in my view.
-The connections and controls on the SD9 where crazy, the HF100 is miles better.
-The SD9 has 25p and so does the HF100. Useless in both..

But here the real fight ends in a knockout as far as I can see it: The most important aspect of a camcorder is the image quality. And there is really no doubt. The HF100 is far superior to the SD9.
I expected to see equal footage in good light and better in low light on the HF100, but it beats the SD9 bigtime in all conditions I have tested it in !
A friend of mine said "Its like seeing the movie it in 3D !" when he saw the daylight HF100 footage. Fantastic !
In low light the difference is even greater. The HF100 does a very good job, and the menu can help getting it even better.
The SD9 is aweful in less then ideal conditions.

I will do some more testing, and promises to be honest in my postings. But so far.. seriously I did not expect the difference between the two camcorders to be so significant ! The HF100 is in another league..

webby · 17-05-2008, 12:49 AM

I checked out both these cameras before buying a HF100 - The Panasonic was just a toy compared to the Canon. The picture quality of the Canon was obviously superior to the Panasonic, but it is a fair bit heavier. But a lightweight compared to my old Panasonic DX110. I just need a 50" plasma, a PS3, and a new computer to do the editing!

lloydde · 17-05-2008, 11:56 PM

Thanks for the interesting initial review. It would be interesting to know what setting you are using on the Canon and the equipment you are using to view the video. Any issues with image stabilisation? Don't want much do I?

dave_bass5 · 18-05-2008, 4:18 PM

I find cinema mode fantastic for low light shooting. Even on the LCD you can see how much cleaner the footage is.
I find you can put back most of the contrast etc that you loose slightly by using Cinema mode in PP without getting all the noise that you would using standard mode.

I agree about the "3d look" of outside footage. I was knocked out last night when i played some of mine back on my 40" LCD. Its taken me a week to get to like and get used to my HF10 but now im happy with it.

I cant really see an everyday use for 25P but using it helps even more in low light shooting.

As for size. Ive no experience with the SD9 but i was at a wedding last week and was walking around with my HF10 in my suit trousers pocket. It bulged a bit (got some funny looks from the ladies ;-) but its still small enough to have with me all the time.

daggad · 18-05-2008, 11:27 PM

The image stabilizer is a little better on the SD9, but the difference is not that big a deal.
I have tested the low light caracteristics even more now and I am impressed. Really the difference between the camcorders is tremendous..

The different modes on the HF100 does something with the colours and white balance most of all. It is all about what you prefer to see yourself. Dont forget that the settings on the TV it is played back on is equaly important.
I like to play with the exposure control on it. I think for inspiring movie makers you can create greate clean dark scenes by filming in decent light and turn the exposure down.
What I do for finding the best settings is that i connect the camcorder via HDMI to my HD TV in the livingroom. Dim the lights down and see live what the different settings will do to the footage. This is much better then looking at the camcorders small LCD screen.

dave_bass5 · 19-05-2008, 7:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by daggad

Dont forget that the settings on the TV it is played back on is equaly important.

I also find that the footage looks much better no my TV than it does on my PC.
Ive was quite negative about the image quality for the first few days of owning my HF10 but most of that was based on PC viewing. I find on my Samsung 40" the images look better.
I still find the WB to be not great and yes, certain modes you cant adjust it but i find its quite easy to fix in Vegas.

numbercruncher · 19-05-2008, 8:37 AM

I was interested to hear your comments as I'm thinking of getting the SD9. The only issue I have with the comparison is that the HF100 is over a third more expensive (570GBP vs 420GBP for the SD9).

I could buy a lot of editing software/memory cards for the 150 quid difference....

Does the cheaper SD9 price compensate for the poorer PQ? Are there better 720p cameras for the same money?

redsox_mark · 19-05-2008, 9:13 AM

As mentioned earlier on this thread, low light performance is the one area where the HF100 performs better than the SD9. In bright light performance is comperable.

rhubarbe · 19-05-2008, 9:50 AM

I've so far resisted the temptation to buy an HF10/HF100 but I did have an SD9 and it didn't blow my frock up.

daggad · 19-05-2008, 10:56 AM

Yes the image is comperable to the SD9 in bright light or outdoor when it comes to sharpness. But the HF100 shows less compression artifacts and there is something with skin tones and detailing that really appeals to me on the HF100.
I have always been sceptical about the upscaling done from the small 3CCD chips in the SD9. And the resolution results from the CCI review shows that Panasonic has only been partially sucsessful with this.

I am sure you will be impressed with the picture quality Rhubarbe, but since you where not to happy with the physical handling of the SD9 (you are an upright camcorder fan

), then the the HF100 will be no better at all in that respect.

Dont get me wrong here. The SD9 is a great choice if you want the best portabillity for outdoor shooting. The battery life is better and as stated the image quality is quite good. And if you are on a tight budget then it is about one third cheaper than the HF100. But do remember that the SD9 need lighting. It is REALLY bad in low light. In my view useless.
I think the SD5 is the best choice if you want a very good camcorder for less money. If you can find this one for less then £350,- then it is a great buy. Almost equal to the SD9 and much cheaper.

numbercruncher · 19-05-2008, 11:43 AM

Thanks for the informed opinion, daggad.

Mr Lazy · 19-05-2008, 11:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by numbercruncher

the HF100 is over a third more expensive (570GBP vs 420GBP for the SD9)

My HF100 will have cost me 518.70GBP after I (hopefully) get the cashback via quidco. 5% discount code at play.com. So brings the price diff down to 100.

Quote:

I could buy a lot of editing software/memory cards for the 150 quid difference....

IMO it's a false economy. I guess it depends how important image quality is to you. Personally having heard what daggad and other's have said re the SD9 I'm soooo glad I waited for the HF100 and spent a bit more it's a lovely bit of kit.

daggad · 19-05-2008, 12:17 PM

By the way Rhubarbe: I got my HF100 from Computeruniverse. You need to claim commision from them soon...

rhubarbe · 19-05-2008, 2:31 PM

Alas, they know little of my work singing their praises.

gweaver · 21-05-2008, 2:23 PM

Daggad,

Thanks for raising this topic on the forum. I've taken the plunge and ordered a HF10. Saverstore.com are selling it for only £21 more than the HF100.

When it arrives and I've had a play with it I'll post my own opinion too.

Kind regards,

Gavin

daggad · 21-05-2008, 5:36 PM

Congrats Gavin !
I am sure you will be happy with your choice.

There is one thing that suprised me when I put my SDHC cards with SD9 footage on then in the HF100: The HF100 camcorder played back the SD9 files perfectly to my TV via HDMI.
I thought there was all different codecs the producers of camcorder used in the AVCHD compression. Something the SD9 problems on Sony Vegas has showed ?

redsox_mark · 21-05-2008, 7:12 PM

There are small differences in the AVCHD implementation between brands and models... but it depends on the software (or in this case hardware) if it can cope with them or not. Note the PS3 can play footage from every AVCHD cam (well I've never seen any reports of one that it can't handle). So the fact that the Canon can play the Panasonic footage isn't that surprising.

webby · 21-05-2008, 9:45 PM

On a similar subject, does anyone know if the recent panasonic plasmas with a sd card slot built in can play back a HF100 recorded sd card? Cheers

daggad · 21-05-2008, 9:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by redsox_mark

Note the PS3 can play footage from every AVCHD cam (well I've never seen any reports of one that it can't handle). So the fact that the Canon can play the Panasonic footage isn't that surprising.

Makes sense !
But why does the software struggle..?

akkers · 22-05-2008, 2:40 PM

The biggest problem I found with the HF100 is the handling. It is too light and difficult to hold and keep still. Further, the zoom button toggles across the cam unlike other cams I have used which have had rocker switches going down/along the cam. Also I have never used a cam with a LCD.

I have a lot of getting used to this baby now.