Hi all

Hoping you guys can help me.

I'm looking to make a pretty quick purchase on a HD camcorder. I want an AVCHD format with a HDD and full 1080p recording.

I've been reading the extensive views on camcorderinfo.com (a lot of the tech stuff was sadly meaningless) of the following models...

Panasonic HDC-HS9 & Sony HDR-SR11

The Sony SR11 is potentially slightly out of budget, but looking at the comparison chart here there doesn't seem to be much difference between the 11/12 models and the HDR-SR10. The Canon HF10 which is mentioned a lot in comparison to the Sony models on Camcorderinfo.com is also sadly slightly too much.

Being a complete camera noob will the Panny HDC-HS9 or Sony HDR-SR10 suffice? My fiancee and I want something to start capturing our forthcoming wedding celebrations and lives going forward.

Any advice on which to model to go for would be great. I currently have a 720p Panny Viera TV which at some point I am going to upgrade. Does this need to be taken into consideration with the model of camera I buy? I would want to link it to my Onkyo receiver to playback on the display.

The Sony seems to be a better choice with CMOS lense instead of CCDs, touch screen and better auto features for noobs. Camcorderinfo.com also has quite a few gripes about the Panny's joystick, port and mic layout and other stuff.

Thanks in advance!

bump - Need to purchase something today/tomorrow really so any advice would be great!

[A n d r e w]

All of the cameras you've mentioned have received positive comments from AVForums members. Spend as much as you can afford, as within reason the more you spend the better the camera you'll end up with.

If you're sure you want an AVCHD camera, you'll want to make sure you have some way of viewing and possibly editing the footage: you can connect camera to TV but if you want to share with friends and family you'll need some way to get your video onto DVD. A Core 2 Duo processor and 2Gb RAM are recommended as bare minimum for manipulating AVCHD clips.

I'm not sure whether any of these cameras record "true" progressive (you mention 1080p). The SD9, SR11, and SR12 have progressive shooting modes, but others might want to comment on whether the cameras output progressive video. An HDTV will handle interlaced video though, so it's really a moot point whether you need progressive or not. They all shoot up to 1920x1080 resolution.

It sounds like you're pushed for time, which can be a bad thing when it comes to camcorders. You really need to try them out in the flesh, as it were, to know which is the one for you. Ease of handling is as important as feature set and specs. Reviews are all well and good as a general guide, but they contain plenty of subjective opinion and yours may well differ.

Best of luck,
Andrew.

Thanks for the reply mate, can anyone clarify the resolution peice for me? If they have progressive modes surely they will output progressive video?

My PC is Core 2 Duo with 2GB Ram so thats fine.

[Mr Lazy]

Originally Posted by AddictedAndy

The Sony SR11 is potentially slightly out of budget, but looking at the comparison chart here there doesn't seem to be much difference between the 11/12 models and the HDR-SR10.

I've read on these forums that apparently the 11/12 have slightly improved lenses and electronics over the 10 (though whether or not most people would notice the difference is another question). Perhaps do a search for previous posts on the 10.

The Canon HF10 which is mentioned a lot in comparison to the Sony models on Camcorderinfo.com is also sadly slightly too much.

Did you mean HG10? The HG10 is a hard disk model, the HF10 is flash memory. dixons.co.uk currently have the HG10 at £475, though it will soon be replaced by the HG20 and HG21.

Originally Posted by Mr Lazy

Did you mean HG10? The HG10 is a hard disk model, the HF10 is flash memory. dixons.co.uk currently have the HG10 at £475, though it will soon be replaced by the HG20 and HG21.

Interesting, I wasn't aware of this. The final page of the reviews on camcorderinfo.com deal with comparisons and they compare the Sony model to the HF10.

Does anyone know why the HG10 is cheaper than the HF10? Assuming its the same model but with an internal HDD shouldn't it be more?

[Mr Lazy]

Originally Posted by AddictedAndy

Does anyone know why the HG10 is cheaper than the HF10? Assuming its the same model but with an internal HDD shouldn't it be more?

The HG10 could be considered a previous generation model - it's been out for a 'while' now. Plus, as I said Canon will be releasing two new hard disk models in the next month or so, so I would assume Canon will withdraw the HG10 before long. It's not the same model, though I'm sure they probably share some electronics.

[A n d r e w]

The HF10 has a slightly smaller CMOS sensor than the HG10 (1/3.2" vs. 1/2.7") but a higher maximum record bitrate (17mbps vs. 15mbps).

No doubt there are other differences. I may be suffering delusions but I believe the stills resolution on the HF10 is greater.

Probably best to compare the spec sheets side by side to work out the differences.

Both models are coming to the end of their cycle. The HF11 (already released in the US and Japan) will replace the HF10.

Originally Posted by Mr Lazy

The HG10 could be considered a previous generation model - it's been out for a 'while' now. Plus, as I said Canon will be releasing two new hard disk models in the next month or so, so I would assume Canon will withdraw the HG10 before long. It's not the same model, though I'm sure they probably share some electronics.

found this...

The HG10, is a black sheep in terms of architecture. With an LCD-mounted navigation wheel, advanced rocking Zoom lever, and extendable viewfinder,the HG10 holds the Royal Flush over the HF10’s Ace High. However, it’s a different story under the hood. The HG10 is equipped with the same 1/2.7-inch CMOS chip found in the HV20, but it has a 15 Mbps maximum bitrate. On the HF10, Canon slimmed down the CMOS chip to a 1/3.2-inch, but changed the processing and upped the bitrate to 17 Mbps. The HF10 offers the closest image to an HV20 and HV30 (Review, Specs, Recent News, $0.00) you can get, along with 24P and 30P frame rates. The HG10 has a poorer baseline performance, and only 24P as an alternate frame rate, which we found virtually unusable in tandem with that version of the AVCHD compression. These are both good camcorders, but there’s something about the compact HF10 that gives up hope for the future—a future where AVCHD runs up to 24 Mbps.

I think I really need a better understanding of bit rates and frame rates. In the name of a quick buying decision I'm leaning more towards the Sony models for better low light images and userability. The panny seems to score low here.

[A n d r e w]

It's also worth noting that the Canon HF100 is an HF10 without the built-in flash memory. But you can buy an additional 16Gb SD card for much less than the difference in price between the two.

The price difference between the HF100 and the Sony SR11/12 might make a difference to your decision.

By the way, I own an SD9 so can't exactly be considered an objective observer for that reason, but much of what is said against the SD9 I take with a grain of salt. Sure, it's not astounding in "low light" but with 1/6" chips who'd expect it to be? Camcorderinfo's reviews are among the best out there, but they can't tell you which camera is going to give you the best results in your particular set of circumstances.

Which is why I'll repeat myself at the risk of boring you: try before you buy.

Andrew.

Originally Posted by Courtaj

Which is why I'll repeat myself at the risk of boring you: try before you buy.

I really appreciate your comments mate, not boring me at all. Unfortunately I'm not going to have time to do this.

Are you happy with your SD9?

[A n d r e w]

Originally Posted by AddictedAndy

Are you happy with your SD9?

Yes - for the money.

Now were money no object I'd go for the HF100 or the Sony SR12 (probably the Sony) but I was on a budget of about 400 quid when I went shopping. The other factor in my decision (apart from size, a front on which the Panasonic wins hands down unless you factor in the Sony TG3 which is even smaller) was the rapid change in AVCHD camcorders this year, which made me think I'd probably be looking to replace whatever I bought in two or three years' time anyway, assuming the SD9 gets the kind of frequent use to warrant an upgrade.

Bottom line is, it'll do for now. Picture quality, good enough. Handling, good enough. I'm not inspired to go into raptures about it, but I think it's pretty cool. I've said it before and I'll say it again: she's a tough job, finding the perfect camcorder.


EDIT
I'm guessing you're not a Mac user, but in terms of a user-level comparison of the kinds of camcorders you're considering, it might be worth reading through this thread. It starts out as a comparison of the SD9 and the Canon FS100 and ends up as a relatively enlightening comparison of the SD9, HF100, and SR11/12 (as one of the contributors actually bothered to do a three-way comparison).

Originally Posted by Courtaj

Yes - for the money.

it might be worth reading through this thread

Off to check it now, thank you so much for your help and advice!

[senu]

Dont sweat the small stuff over bitrates;
Higher bitrates mean less compression and in theory, better video
In reality.. I would not use that as a benchmark as "better video" is th result of a good lens sensor and digital processing electronic , not just encoding bitrate

Also dont lose any sleep over frame rates and Progressive, the difference they make in practical terms is debatable

The "old" HG 10 was the darling of reviewer less than 6 months ago..
So reviews and perception of qulity should be viewed in the right context. All of the current crop will have something to offer, be guided by your budget ..

Lastly your 720p HDTV is not a determinant of which camcorder you get
The rest you already have from other posters
Good Luck

Thanks so much for everything just a couple of quick (hopefully) questions...

I've decided on the Sony (HDR-SR10/HDR-SR11), but price is really important and there is quite a steep gap. I just need to justify the difference in spec between the difference in price and what this will mean to the picture quality, which is after all the most important thing to me.

According to the product comparison the only difference's are...

Image Device: Size: 5.0 CMOS instead of 3.1 CMOS (11/12 models). Is smaller better then?
Number of Pixels Gross (K): 2360 pixels instead of 5660. How much difference will this make

Then there are pixel counts 'Act Camera Mode' Act Memory Mode'. Not sure what that is? but they are different from 10 to 11/12.

Also specific differences in 10 from 11/12 relating to Lens/Zoom and Stills? Again I'd like to know how much this will affect the picture.

mic and headphone jacks are not included but not an issue, the LCD screen is larger in the 11/12 models and you get the viewfinder but again thats no big deal for me.

lol, am I such a noob that the HDR-SR10 will more than suffice my needs?

[A n d r e w]

Originally Posted by AddictedAndy

Image Device: Size: 5.0 CMOS instead of 3.1 CMOS (11/12 models). Is smaller better then?

Not usually. The size of the CMOS chips is actually 1/5" (one fifth of an inch) in the SR10 and 1/3.1" (approx one third of an inch) in the SR11/12, which makes the SR11/12 CMOS chip the larger of the two.

Number of Pixels Gross (K): 2360 pixels instead of 5660. How much difference will this make?

The general consensus seems to be that the SR11/12 has the sharper image. Part of this may be down to the larger number of pixels crammed on to the sensor chip, in addition to improved imaged processing.

Then there are pixel counts 'Act Camera Mode' Act Memory Mode'. Not sure what that is? but they are different from 10 to 11/12.

This probably refers to the difference between the number of pixels physically wired in to the CMOS chip, and the total number of pixels produced by the camera's image processor: the latter is usually larger, though I'm generalising and don't know the specific details about resolution for the Sonys. But note that the marketing information lists the stills resolution for the SR11&12 as being 10 megapixels, while the CMOS sensor is less than 6 megapixels. Obviously some image processing going on there.

Also specific differences in 10 from 11/12 relating to Lens/Zoom and Stills? Again I'd like to know how much this will affect the picture.

Hard to answer without knowing precisely which differences you're referring to, but (1) differences in zoom power don't affect image quality (so long as we're talking about optical zoom, not digital zoom); (2) the SR11/12 has better still photo resolution than the SR10.

mic and headphone jacks are not included but not an issue, the LCD screen is larger in the 11/12 models and you get the viewfinder but again thats no big deal for me.

These things may not matter much now, but they may down the road some. Your call there, naturally.

am I such a noob that the HDR-SR10 will more than suffice my needs?

I don't have any personal experience of the SR10, but there are plenty of contented SR10 owners out there, so quite possibly, yes. It sounds to me like it's going to come down to a budgetary decision for you, and only you can make that call.

Andrew.

Thanks for the reply mate and the time you took to explain eash of those! Not really worried about stills so going with the 10

Thanks to everyone else for their advice!