[dandoro]

I browsed the internet for the last few days and I decided to stop on these 3 models: Sony TG3, Canon HF100 and Panasonic SD9.
I want a very good stabilization, as I usually like to shoot when I am walking. Also I'd like to shoot most of the time in 50i, as I understood that the slower rates of frames per second gives an interrupted image, and I want a smooth, continous image. Also, I want a clean image, free of those motion artifacts. And not forget a decent battery life (at least 40-60 minutes). The manual controls, the low light sensitivity and other suff doesn't look too important to me.
So, please reccomend me one of those 3 cameras, taking into account all those important factors I mentioned. Thank you in advance!

[senu]

Originally Posted by dandoro

I browsed the internet for the last few days and I decided to stop on these 3 models: Sony TG3, Canon HF100 and Panasonic SD9.

Good choices

I want a very good stabilization, as I usually like to shoot when I am walking. Also I'd like to shoot most of the time in 50i, as I understood that the slower rates of frames per second gives an interrupted image, and I want a smooth, continuous image.

This would be the case than with all of them.

Also, I want a clean image, free of those motion artifacts.

There is no guarantee that this will not happen until the AVCHD technology
matures even further as it used quite robust number crunching to achieve good rates . The cuurent generation of camcorders are better but at the consumer level, complete freedom from motion artifacts is an aspiration

So, please reccomend me one of those 3 cameras, taking into account all those important factors I mentioned.

The Sony SR 10-12 are better than TG3 if costlier.
Otherwise with your shortlist none of the 3 is lacking

[dandoro]

I was thinking to buy the Panasonic SD9 though. Because it is the only one which has a CCD sensor. The other two models have a CMOS sensor, and I heard that there are a lot of rolling shutter problems regarding those camcorders type. What do you think?

[senu]

Originally Posted by dandoro

I was thinking to buy the Panasonic SD9 though. Because it is the only one which has a CCD sensor. The other two models have a CMOS sensor, and I heard that there are a lot of rolling shutter problems regarding those camcorders type. What do you think?

In theory CMOS rolling shutter is a " problem"
In practice you will struggle to find it in ordinary disaplay such as you will be showing your footage
CCDs are not free of artifacts
I have a CMOS and 2 3X CCD camcorders . The CCD one are beter but they are almost 1 1/2 to 2X the cost so they are better not just because of the sensor
FWIW Camcorders like Sonys EX1 ( £3500) or even the RED ( £15000) use CMOS and even Panasonic new consumer models Sd 100 and HS 100 have 3mos ( Cmos X3)
This is not to say any is free of rolling shutter effect but it is to a degree, there are workable solutions but it is a work in progress and in critical Hollywood type movies they would use what does the job best
On the consumer front, there is no escaping CMOS and given the no oof happy owners of the Sony and Canon models I dont think it is a dealbreaker
Maybe if I had a huge Movie budget for a Blockbuster I might avoid CMOS where rolling shutter might be an issue
Otherwise at this level it is somewhat less significant , but get the SD9 by all means . it is a well sorted camcorder.

[dandoro]

Thanks for your advice, mate! But I'm really stucked now between Panny and the Sony, because I find the Sony's design very appealing, but I think that the Panny is a better camera overall though everybody is praising the Canons...

[senu]

Originally Posted by dandoro

Thanks for your advice, mate! But I'm really stucked now between Panny and the Sony, because I find the Sony's design very appealing, but I think that the Panny is a better camera overall though everybody is praising the Canons...

Simply put, the Sonys are highly rated the Canons just minimally less so and the Panasonc least
However the TG3 for all its appeal is not really better than the SD9 as much as te SR 11- 12 are
I would buy withmy pocket .. not what "they " are saying as they are all good , justthat these comparisons will inevitiably be made and you need to beware of brand loyalty coming across as fact

[dandoro]

So, on a scale from 1 to 10, how would you rate each of these 3 models, taking into account my needs (priorities) which I mentioned before...?

[senu]

I would actually suggest that if possible go to a shop and hold them and have a play
That may be more beneficial than any ( however well intended and meant) 1-10 rating
The fact is that none has it all and althoughi n terms of absolute video quality the SR11/12 may get a 10 while the canons Get 8.5 then Panasonic sd9 7.5 and the TG3 7, you may not notice any difference in a 42" TV HDTV on footage taken on a good sunny day. The "better ones may cope in more challenging shooting situation which you might never use them in
The "how does it feel in my hands" factor might negate these scores and your pocket may decide the cost differnce is not worth any supposed superior score ( and you would be right)
I don't think it is in your interest to purchase solely on the basis of reviews no matter how unbiased they are intended to be
Dont spend too much: the differences in quality are (IMHO) not often reflected in price differential and the SD 9 may cost less because it has been replaced but that would not account for a £300 cost difference in build and video quality terms compared to say the SR12

[tianuk]

Originally Posted by senu

I would actually suggest that if possible go to a shop and hold them and have a play
That may be more beneficial than any ( however well intended and meant) 1-10 rating
The fact is that none has it all and althoughi n terms of absolute video quality the SR11/12 may get a 10 while the canons Get 8.5 then Panasonic sd9 7.5 and the TG3 7, you may not notice any difference in a 42" TV HDTV on footage taken on a good sunny day. The "better ones may cope in more challenging shooting situation which you might never use them in
The "how does it feel in my hands" factor might negate these scores and your pocket may decide the cost differnce is not worth any supposed superior score ( and you would be right)
I don't think it is in your interest to purchase solely on the basis of reviews no matter how unbiased they are intended to be
Dont spend too much: the differences in quality are (IMHO) not often reflected in price differential and the SD 9 may cost less because it has been replaced but that would not account for a £300 cost difference in build and video quality terms compared to say the SR12

I'm going for the HF100 :-D

[KrispE]

I was going to put up a pretty similar post today. I'm after my first camcorder and after reading reviews and this forum and a quick play in currys, I've short listed these 3. My biggest worry though is 'normal' indoor perfomance with just daylight or with the room lights on. I want to use the camcorder for filming my 8 month old son and don't want lots of 'noise', (I spent £400 last year on a panasonic 12mp camera and the indoor photos were so bad I ended up putting it on ebay). I'm not expecting perfect quality from any of this camcorders indoors, but want my other half to be impressed when displayed on our 37" plasma, (she is not too keen on me spending too much on the camcorder.) Prices vary from £366 for the SD9 to £500 for the canon. I like the feel of the TG3, (£400), but worried I'd buy it more for looks and size than performance. So is the indoor 'lowish light' performance different enough between these three to justify the price differences and in which case which would be most recommended?

[senu]

The real differences in low light performance exist , but may not be enough of a deal breaker if the cost difference is big.. is the answer
All of them love better light

Also a 12Mp Still compact was always going to struggle . Even for DSLRs ( whose sensors are bigger and pixels ( photosites) much larger. 12Mp seems to be the sweet spot. Beyond that Low light noise becomes an Issue .
That is why Canons 50D is being compared unfavourably to the 40D

[dandoro]

What about the interrupted image when panning and moving around the HD cameras? I saw many HD footage from many HD camcorders and I saw that the recordings are very bad from this point of view. I'd like to obtain a smooth, continous image when moving the camera around... There is any way to obtain such thing from an HD camcorder? Some people told me that if the movie is shot in 50i, then it should be no problem, because of the faster frame rate, but I saw some clips in 50i form various camcorders, and the results seem to be more or less the same - the image is interrupted, is not continous...
Any ideas, or explanations?

[A n d r e w]

AVCHD and HDV format camcorders exhibit this problem. Solution: limit camera movement: use pan and zoom sparingly. AVCHD camcorders in particular excel on a tripod but handheld results vary. The implementation of good optical image stablization by the manufacturer helps.

[senu]

True
HDV exhibits this perhaps less than AVCHD but neither is as good as SD DV for avoiding " jaggies " with panning ( at least on consumer camcorders)

It is due to the the way they produce video and the intense compression that needs to happen in real time as the recording is being made
The answer
Avoid panning, or do it very slowly
or
Use DV ( SD)

[dandoro]

Originally Posted by senu

True
HDV exhibits this perhaps less than AVCHD but neither is as good as SD DV for avoiding " jaggies " with panning ( at least on consumer camcorders)

It is due to the the way they produce video and the intense compression that needs to happen in real time as the recording is being made
The answer
Avoid panning, or do it very slowly
or
Use DV ( SD)

I was not refering only to jaggies. The most annoying is that when moving the camera around, the objects from that image seems to move too fast for the human eye. For example when panning around the camcorder, the houses from the right to left from one specific image, seems to move too fast, so I can't see (retain) any detail of those houses...

[senu]

Originally Posted by dandoro

I was not refering only to jaggies. The most annoying is that when moving the camera around, the objects from that image seems to move too fast for the human eye. For example when panning around the camcorder, the houses from the right to left from one specific image, seems to move too fast, so I can't see (retain) any detail of those houses...

Ghosting is the word
Notwithstanding the definition it occurs for the same reason.. and is a limitation of technology. It varies from camcorder to camcorder, better in some , worse in others
It can also be dependent on the monitor you are using to view the footage

[dandoro]

I was thinking that maybe there is one camera which is better in showing a continous movie (not with "hiccups"), to be able to catch all the details from one image when paning and moving the camera to one object to another... Does such an HD camcorder actually exist? Which is better?

[senu]

They all have it to some extent. From barely perceptible to noticeably annoying but I think it is far less of an issue with most current models

My ( limited) experience with testing the Canon HG10 and Sony Sr 11 shows that is is less of a problem than with earlier models and may be hard to find in slowly panned footage
Also Tape models like the HV 30 certainly exhibit it far less and with Older but more Higher end Prosumer one like the FX1 it is all but non existent unless you look for it and deliberately try and "create " it
What is more objective here is the need to pan very slowly ( if at all needed) which ever camcorder you use
What I also found is that it may also dependednt on Playback decodong and display
On a very decent spec PC you may not notice it as its presence relates to the PC trying to playback hard to decode video ( such as consumer Hi def ( esp AVCDH is)
I found tha on a modest PC, (P4 3.0Ghz) Panned AVCHD material converted to HDV looked far better with respect to artefacts on the same footage

Also testing playback smoothness of identical footage (panned) from both Sony SR 11 AND Canon HG10 via the PS3 , I found that a Sony bravia LCD 40" displayed the footage smoothly whereas on a 46" Samsung 100Hz High spec LCD , playback was a little less smooth. Blu ray playback on both are excellent
Hi def camcorder have evolved a lot there is however also some AF lag compared to SD
My personal feeling is that they are a work in progress and current models, though not perfect are a delight to use in most ways, They are an improvement of earlier models in this sense
The moral seems to be that one always need to use kit knowing thier quirks ect
HTH

[chrishull3]

Originally Posted by senu

They all have it to some extent. From barely perceptible to noticeably annoying but I think it is far less of an issue with most current models

My ( limited) experience with testing the Canon HG10 and Sony Sr 11 shows that is is less of a problem than with earlier models and may be hard to find in slowly panned footage
Also Tape models like the HV 30 certainly exhibit it far less and with Older but more Higher end Prosumer one like the FX1 it is all but non existent unless you look for it and deliberately try and "create " it
What is more objective here is the need to pan very slowly ( if at all needed) which ever camcorder you use
What I also found is that it may also dependednt on Playback decodong and display
On a very decent spec PC you may not notice it as its presence relates to the PC trying to playback hard to decode video ( such as consumer Hi def ( esp AVCDH is)
I found tha on a modest PC, (P4 3.0Ghz) Panned AVCHD material converted to HDV looked far better with respect to artefacts on the same footage

Also testing playback smoothness of identical footage (panned) from both Sony SR 11 AND Canon HG10 via the PS3 , I found that a Sony bravia LCD 40" displayed the footage smoothly whereas on a 46" Samsung 100Hz High spec LCD , playback was a little less smooth. Blu ray playback on both are excellent
Hi def camcorder have evolved a lot there is however also some AF lag compared to SD
My personal feeling is that they are a work in progress and current models, though not perfect are a delight to use in most ways, They are an improvement of earlier models in this sense
The moral seems to be that one always need to use kit knowing thier quirks ect
HTH

Samsung tvs the 19" lcd hd i had in my editing room had the worst picture i have seen,it conked out after two months and the replacement bush cheapie is a class above pq wise.
panning without at least a good monopodi found testing 10 cams at homejaggies on my own big boy showed up as much as the other 9[oh all right other 3 if the pana mini dv is included.

[senu]

If you refer to the Samsung 940MW , it was rather a let down despite excellent paper specs ( I have one still)
However the 47" model is in a different class its the LE46F86BD. Ironically its 100Hz motion plus tech is meant to remove ghosting from panned camcorder shots
My Phillips LCD (Cineos with ambilight ect ) is OTOH ace. The Sony Bravia's are deservedly well respected too
But you make the point: Handheld and fast panning is always a and best avoided where possible no matter which camcorder you use

[dandoro]

I watched some more samples from HF100 especially, and I have the same impression, when panning the camera, the film is "jumping", but it's not a rolling shutter kind of issue. And I think it's not ghosting either... Any idea?

[senu]

Its called AVCHD trailing
Notwithstanding the specific name , it is a manifestation of the current maturity of the codec ( or standard) in current consumer kit

[dandoro]

Like in this video (http://www.vimeo.com/1032148) for example - when panning the camera from left to right or from right to left, the film seems to be jumping, it's not continous... Can this be fixed somehow? There is any current HD camera which doesn't have this problem?

[senu]

Originally Posted by dandoro

Like in this video for example - when panning the camera from left to right or from right to left, the film seems to be jumping, it's not continous... Can this be fixed somehow? There is any current HD camera which doesn't have this problem?

Are you sure it isnt your PC?
Also it may be ( if edited) dependent on how it was output

[A n d r e w]

Originally Posted by dandoro

Like in this video (Lovebirds on Vimeo) for example - when panning the camera from left to right or from right to left, the film seems to be jumping, it's not continous... Can this be fixed somehow? There is any current HD camera which doesn't have this problem?

Vimeo - or indeed Flash video on the web generally - isn't a good benchmark for this because of its low frame rate of 15 frames per second: you're just not going to get smooth motion at 15fps, period.

Andrew.

[dandoro]

It is not my computer's fault. Here it is another example Canon HF10 fast movement test on Vimeo. The video is interrupted, it is not continous, it jumps... Andrew, are you sure that all the videos posted on Vimeo are converted to only 15 fps? This is the cause of the interrupted motion?

[A n d r e w]

Well, it didn't "jump" for me, but I accept it's not smooth (you'd be best served by letting Vimeo download the clip before trying to play it, by pressing play and then immediately pausing, and resuming playback when the progress bar indicates the the clip has downloaded fully - otherwise you're likely to have momentarily interrupted playback anyway). AVCHD is going to do this when you try panning that quickly. Like any format, it has its limitations. And once you go from 30 or 25 frames per second to 15 (for Flash video) the situation is made that much worse.

So the bottom line is that the conversion to Flash (15fps) is not the cause of the lack of smoothness, but it does exacerbate it. AVCHD is not the cause, either. Rather, it's shooting technique that pushes the format beyond what it's capable of (i.e. rapid movement, fast panning) that is the cause. If you want good results, you have to work within the format's limitations. Either that, or spend a small fortune buying DVCPRO-HD or a professional broadcast camera, and editing rig to match.

Andrew.

[senu]

Originally Posted by A n d r e w

AVCHD is not the cause, either. Rather, it's shooting technique that pushes the format beyond what it's capable of (i.e. rapid movement, fast panning) that is the cause. If you want good results, you have to work within the format's limitations. Either that, or spend a small fortune buying DVCPRO-HD or a professional broadcast camera, and editing rig to match.

Andrew.

That is as accurate as it gets but in a sense AVCHD ( as currently evolved ) is the cause as in the format is being asked to do the "impossible "
This is what Ive been trying to say , perhaps rather less eloquently then you have.
The other alternative is to use SD tape ( which has it so much less) but even at that that rapid fast movt and panning are not good video technique and are only sparingly used even with Pro kit

As an aside , when I was trialling the HG10 , I deliberately panned very fast ( as I never would in real life) and playback via the camcorder LCD was fine.
It was most definitely not smooth on the PC or played on an HDTV via the camcorder making me wonder if the camcorder electronics had not compensated somewhat

[A n d r e w]

Originally Posted by senu

This is what Ive been trying to say , perhaps rather less eloquently then you have.

I'm flattered, but would point out that I spelt results "results" . . . . I'd go back and edit it out, but now you've gone and quoted me it's a bit late. A good result, indeed!

[senu]

Good result then...?


PS: ( Ive used the spellchecker..)