[Floob]

I'm hoping someone could help me narrow my choice of camcorders down.
This will be my first camcorder.

It seems as though HD is the way to go, and I like the idea of portability, so:

- HD
- Flash Memory
- Good UI
- Easy to link and edit on PC

Budget is max £1,000

I dont need all singing all dancing, as I wont be using it professionally or anything, just holiday clips and youtube type usage.

I liked the look of the Sony TG3E until I saw this review:
http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/15/s...corder-review/

So maybe I should be looking at Canon or Panasonic? The SD100?
Or maybe a HDD or MiniDV camcorder is a better bet?

Thanks for any pointers.

Floob.

[A n d r e w]

You don't say when you need it by, so assuming you've got a bit of time I think the best thing to do is to track down a few contenders and try them out: handle them, shoot some video, navigate through the menus. There's no substitute for up-close-and-personal experience!

Your budget certainly gives you plenty of scope. The Sony HDR-SR11 or -SR12 which record high definition video to harddrive and / or SD card and the Canon HF10 which records HD to SD card only are some of the best in class. Canon's successor to the HF10, the HF11, should be out in the next month or two. These are all around the £650-£700 mark (with another £100 or so for a spare battery, some SD cards, a case etc.).

They're AVCHD cameras, so not necessarily "easy" to edit on PC unless you bought your PC in the last couple of years i.e. it has at minimum a Core 2 Duo processor.

By the way, youtube makes a hash of video, in my opinion. There are now sites which allow you to upload less compressed files which look better and do less to destroy the quality of HD footage. Vimeo.com, for example (there are others).

Andrew.

[redsox_mark]

That's good advice from Andrew; also don't be put of the TG3 from one review. Much of the negative about that review is related to the AVCHD format (which the other choices also have). The quality of the TG3 is very good.

Yes the SR11/SR12 or Canon HF10/HF100 may have a slight edge in video quality, but it is hard to spot.

And there are always new models around the corner. Canon HF11 has a higher bitrate; will that actually help? Panasonic SD100 (which is nearly here), is well featured, with a focus ring and a viewfinder; quality should be good too, but from early reviews probably no better than the Sony SR11/12 or Canon HF10/HF100.

[Floob]

Thanks very much for your replies guys.
As I am a camcorder newbie I was wondering if you could help with the following:

- You say they are AVCHD cameras, should I look at a different type that would be better for my casual usage?

- My PC is AMD X2 4800, with 2GB ram. Will I be able to edit AVCHD video files with this ok?

- In terms of 'easy' editing, I mostly mean is there software available that I dont need to take a degree befoer I can use easily I wont want advanced editing function, just copy, paste, fade etc...

- Are there any obvious pros / cons with HDD over flash memory, (besides the capacity) or are they much of a muchness?

- The Panasonic SD9 seems good, as this is 3CCD - and I am unsure if the others are?

- Is 45min to 1 hour the standard for most camcorders of this quality?

You are right, there is no rush for me to get this, so maybe I should check out some local shops.

Thanks for the Youtube advice, I guess the main advantage of putting a video on YouTube is the larger audience it has the potential to get.


I see you say the HDD Sony models and the Canon HF may have slightly better video quality, but I think I would prefer the mobility of the TG3, especially as I am new to this.
Its a shame that memory sticks cost so much more than SD cards.

Thanks again for all your help.

Floob.

[A n d r e w]

Originally Posted by Floob

- You say they are AVCHD cameras, should I look at a different type that would be better for my casual usage?

AVCHD is a format that records to SD card or harddrive and is fast becoming the standard for consumer high definition video. The other format is HDV (recorded to tape): the Canon HV30 and Sony HDC-HC9 are the only consumer (sub-£1000) HDV cameras left.

- My PC is AMD X2 4800, with 2GB ram. Will I be able to edit AVCHD video files with this ok?

It's a dual-core machine, so yes - in principle. Dual core is considered the minimum for AVCHD editing. Apart from actually having a go at it, though, it's difficult to say precisely how it'll handle. But on paper it looks okay. The graphics handling of your PC is also part of the equation. There are a lot of variables when it comes to PC architecture, and really the only way you'll know for sure is by trying.

- In terms of 'easy' editing, I mostly mean is there software available that I dont need to take a degree befoer I can use easily I wont want advanced editing function, just copy, paste, fade etc...

Someone else might be able to help here. I'm a Mac user. We get iMovie for basic video editing.

- Are there any obvious pros / cons with HDD over flash memory, (besides the capacity) or are they much of a muchness?

Capacity, really. Means you can shoot for hours before worrying about dumping your clips. But you can dump from SD card to a PC and free up memory that way, too. If you opt for card only, obviously you'll want to buy a few cards to get your going, and this will become more of an issue if you're going away on holiday.

One "con" (for some people) for HDD is the obvious: harddrive dies, camera is stuffed.

- The Panasonic SD9 seems good, as this is 3CCD - and I am unsure if the others are?

The Sony and Canon AVCHD cameras use CMOS sensors, as does the Panasonic HDC-SD100. Sony and Canon use a single middle-sized sensor, and Panasonic (with the SD100) a "3MOS" design (you guessed it: 3 CMOS sensors). It remains to be seen what advantages the 3MOS design will have on light sensitivity: at present the few reviews there are have been mixed. The Sony HR11/12 and Canon HF10/100 are reported to be better in "low light" (indoors with less light than, say, and 100W bulb) than the SD9. Really, the design differences vis-a-vis sensors are endlessly debatable. But the move is towards CMOS. Sony and Canon have been using CMOS for a few years. Panasonic has stubbornly been the 3CCD stalwart, but they've jumped ship it seems with the new SD100.

- Is 45min to 1 hour the standard for most camcorders of this quality?

This depends on the "bit rate" at which the camera records. A bit rate of 17mbps will mean about 30 minutes to each 4Gb card or equivalent. 8Gb for an hour. And so on.

Andrew.

[hotchef]

i have just read this , when i was about to buy the SR12, i noticed a new panny, SD100. its out 16th i go on hols the 18th,

i liked my old panny DS77

but is it worth the gamble of release and also the high start price?


any views

thanks

[newbie1980]

Originally Posted by hotchef

i have just read this , when i was about to buy the SR12, i noticed a new panny, SD100. its out 16th i go on hols the 18th,

i liked my old panny DS77

but is it worth the gamble of release and also the high start price?


any views

thanks

I don't think (and don't take my word for it, just what i've been reading) it will be better than the SR12, at best it will be equal. The big pro is that it is HDD and memory cards that are non-sony

but if i am not mistaken, it will be at least 100 quid more expensive than the SR12?

[redsox_mark]

The SD100 doesn't have a HDD, though it's sister model the HS100 does.

The SD100 is £799 at the Panasonic eShop. The HS100 is £899 That is the full "list" price, once it is out expect web prices to fall to 70-75% of that.

For comparison, the Sony SR12 full "list" price (at the Sony online shop) is £1039.

So no, I don't expect either the SR100 or HS100 to be more expensive than the SR12. They should be cheaper. (Though not if you have to pay full list price).

[zeroice]

just another thought if it's between the Sony or the Canon/Panasonic: memory stick vs sd cards You might already (like myself) have plenty of SD cards around which is why i don't want to really get the Sony and invest again in flash cards.

[Floob]

Originally Posted by zeroice

just another thought if it's between the Sony or the Canon/Panasonic: memory stick vs sd cards You might already (like myself) have plenty of SD cards around which is why i don't want to really get the Sony and invest again in flash cards.

Thats true, I would much prefer an SD card system. But the Sony looks so cool.....

[newbie1980]

Originally Posted by Floob

Thats true, I would much prefer an SD card system. But the Sony looks so cool.....

i too am a sucker for sony

[PS3 Tag, Luggs]

Originally Posted by newbie1980

i too am a sucker for sony

So what on earth d'ya buy a Wii for ?

[newbie1980]

Originally Posted by PS3 Tag, Luggs

So what on earth d'ya buy a Wii for ?

for the missus

[Floob]

Can someone expand on these negative points?

Cons:
no DV-in so you can't use it to record,
HD clips can only be captured on a Intel Mac

http://www.macworld.co.uk/procreativ...?reviewid=2560

[A n d r e w]

Originally Posted by Floob

Can someone expand on these negative points?
no DV-in so you can't use it to record

Ain't many consumer HD cameras around with an input allowing you to record back to internal media. E.g. the Canon HV30 allows this. None of the AVCHD cameras do (though some people have found methods of copying edited files back from proprietary editing software to the camera's SD card and playing it from the the camera: this is discussed on a thread somewhere on this forum, I think - haven't heard of anyone trying this with the TG3). Anyway, not much of a negative, really, because there really are hardly any cameras which offer "DV-in".

HD clips can only be captured on a Intel Mac

HD video is processor-intensive and an Intel Core 2 Duo or equivalent is required to edit it nimbly. On Apple Macs with Power PC processors (e.g. G4, G5) one can use third-party conversion software for the AVCHD files, but editing is another question. An Intel Mac is recommended.

HDV is a little less processor-intensive.

Andrew.

[Floob]

Thanks very much for that.
I'm very tempted with the TG3.

[skaeley]

Have you checked out the Sony HDR-CX11E/CX12E ?

Just bought one and it produces some great HD video, easy to use and feels a lot more solid than a HF10.

Sanjay

[PS3 Tag, Luggs]

Onething nobody is saying ! The HS9 records in 5.1 with it's 5 mic's, it's bling !!

[senu]

Originally Posted by PS3 Tag, Luggs

Onething nobody is saying ! The HS9 records in 5.1 with it's 5 mic's, it's bling !!

Or gimmicky , if it cannot be kept on edited video

[PS3 Tag, Luggs]

Originally Posted by senu

Or gimmicky , if it cannot be kept on edited video

what do you mean ? tape ?

[A n d r e w]

Originally Posted by PS3 Tag, Luggs

what do you mean ? tape ?

I think he means that 5.1 surround isn't supported by almost all (in fact probably all) editing software. It's down-converted to standard stereo.

[senu]

Originally Posted by PS3 Tag, Luggs

what do you mean ? tape ?

No, whether tape, SD card HDD or memory stick, the 5.1 audio may not be preserved if the video is edited and reencoded

5.1 audio is great .. off the camera but preserving it for use in editing software and playback after editing is far from assured
As such Im not too hot on it as a "must have"

Originally Posted by Courtaj

I think he means that 5.1 surround isn't supported by almost all (in fact probably all) editing software. It's down-converted to standard stereo.

Thanks that is what I meant
Even those which ( as advertised) can "create" 5.1 from stereo, do not preserve the recorded audio as captured

[PS3 Tag, Luggs]

Originally Posted by senu

No, whether tape, SD card HDD or memory stick, the 5.1 audio may not be preserved if the video is edited and reencoded

5.1 audio is great .. off the camera but preserving it for use in editing software and playback after editing is far from assured
As such Im not too hot on it as a "must have"

Thanks that is what I meant
Even those which ( as advertised) can "create" 5.1 from stereo, do not preserve the recorded audio as captured

If the cam's 60 gig or SDHC card, (Pana HS9), was burnt to Blue Ray, on a media center PC with a blue Ray rewriter would the 5.1 not follow through to the disc and be usable on play back on the PS3, in Blue Ray with 5.1 audio ?

I think so !!

Why would they then install 5 mic's on the cam if when you down loaded it/burnt it, to Blue Ray disc, it went back to, dare I say it, good old "Dolby stereo" ?

[senu]

Originally Posted by PS3 Tag, Luggs

If the cam's 60 gig or SDHC card, (Pana HS9), was burnt to Blue Ray, on a media center PC with a blue Ray rewriter would the 5.1 not follow through to the disc and be usable on play back on the PS3, in Blue Ray with 5.1 audio ?

I think so !!

Why would they then install 5 mic's on the cam if when you down loaded it/burnt it, to Blue Ray disc, it went back to, dare I say it, good old "Dolby stereo" ?

You missed one important thing : "Edited"
Not everybody wants to play raw footage
The post was about the fact that the 5.1 audio is fine until you want to edit the video ,
So for anyone who would want to consider editing thier footage, 5.1 audio as recorded may have a limited appeal