Greetings,

This is officially my first post... after using this site for so many answers, I finally have a question of my own.

I do web based productions, and with the recent trend of HD video on the net, I'm trying to put my SD ways behind me and "reach the next level". This is both good and bad because my live streams will remain compressed, but if I move to HD, I can have a better final product.

I'm an advanced PC & Camera user who uses Sony Vegas for nearly 90% of my editing.

Without bogging this post down with details that don't particularly matter... I'm looking for advise on HD Camcorders based on some criteria. I feel like I've spent a good 15 hours researching the same cameras over and over, so I'm hoping to get some experienced thoughts and suggestions.

So based on the following - Which HD Camera do you feel can fullfill my needs?

- Edit in Sony Vegas with little to no conversion (if I can pull files directly off my camera, I would probably be in heaven)
- Use a Black Magic Intesity Pro to capture live video via HDMI (so HDMI or miniHDMI would be a necessity)
- Record in 1080p (but do I really need this?) for the best "end product" I can get at a reasonable price
- I have lighting, so I will expect to not encounter low-light conditions but would be a bonus if the camera did reasonable with it

My price range is pretty flexible right now, but most of the camcorders I was looking at ranged from about 600-1000. I've been looking at mostly Sony, Canon, and JVC... but maybe there is a brand I'm missing? Panasonic?

Thanks in advance!

[senu]

Originally Posted by djWHEAT

So based on the following - Which HD Camera do you feel can fullfill my needs?

- Edit in Sony Vegas with little to no conversion (if I can pull files directly off my camera, I would probably be in heaven)
- Use a Black Magic Intesity Pro to capture live video via HDMI (so HDMI or miniHDMI would be a necessity)
- Record in 1080p (but do I really need this?) for the best "end product" I can get at a reasonable price
- I have lighting, so I will expect to not encounter low-light conditions but would be a bonus if the camera did reasonable with it

My price range is pretty flexible right now, but most of the camcorders I was looking at ranged from about 600-1000. I've been looking at mostly Sony, Canon, and JVC... but maybe there is a brand I'm missing? Panasonic?

Yes
I don't think 1080p is essential but if it is available and Vegas supports it why not?
And I would Put JVC behind Sony, Canon and Panasonic ( not in any particular order)

None of the brands have produces any disappointing camcorders especially in the last 6 months and the difference are purely aesthetic. rather than any significant video or audio quality differences
There are of course 2009 models which are yet to be reviewed but the only possible queries would be on low light abilities which are not a problem iif you have your lighting sorted
Also I have reservations about your editing without " conversion"
For web use why do you need the Full uncompressed AVCHD signal.. will Vegas be able to handle it? ( I think it might)

And for output for th e web it willl be downconverted to a web friendly format so why start ou with such high quality any way?

Originally Posted by senu

Yes
I don't think 1080p is essential but if it is available and Vegas supports it why not?
And I would Put JVC behind Sony, Canon and Panasonic ( not in any particular order)

Good to know. I've read a few things about Canon's and they seem to be well liked here. Still struggling a bit for which one would ultimately have the most benefit in my setup.

Originally Posted by senu

None of the brands have produces any disappointing camcorders especially in the last 6 months and the difference are purely aesthetic. rather than any significant video or audio quality differences
There are of course 2009 models which are yet to be reviewed but the only possible queries would be on low light abilities which are not a problem iif you have your lighting sorted

I guess I'm at that time of the year where I could ultimately wait and look at the newer models, but I know many of them don't even hit till April (maybe). I think the more I keep reading, I really don't need much more than 720p as it is - so the newer models may not accomplish anything I don't already have access too. Not to mention a higher price tag.

I feel like I have my lighting sorted. I'm sure an extra watt or two can never hurt, but I feel like I'm sorted here.

Originally Posted by senu

Also I have reservations about your editing without " conversion"

Ahh, my bad, I didn't quite get it out right the first time. I meant, will I be able to just pull files off my camera and throw them on my timeline. Versus actually going through a 1:1 capture process. I suppose it's a silly question considering these are all HDD cameras, but I was unaware whether or not any used proprietary compression Vegas couldn't handle.

Originally Posted by senu

For web use why do you need the Full uncompressed AVCHD signal.. will Vegas be able to handle it? ( I think it might)

And for output for th e web it willl be downconverted to a web friendly format so why start ou with such high quality any way?

I wouldn't mind making a high quality Blu-Ray of things I shoot, but in all honesty, I think 720p is going to be my benchmark for source and web published material.

I'll not likely use the Full Uncompressed AVCHD signal, but I can't help but think it would be nice to have.

Does that narrow my search down at all? Or is it still a toss up, and more a preference of brand and features?

[freemonkie]

Originally Posted by djWHEAT

Ahh, my bad, I didn't quite get it out right the first time. I meant, will I be able to just pull files off my camera and throw them on my timeline. Versus actually going through a 1:1 capture process. I suppose it's a silly question considering these are all HDD cameras, but I was unaware whether or not any used proprietary compression Vegas couldn't handle.

Vegas is quite capable of working with native AVCHD files which is what most newer consumer HD camcorders record in (as opposed to HDV).

However, even if you have a very high spec machine, you will not get a fast, responsive editing environment working natively with AVCHD as it requires a lot of computing power to decode it. Most people transcode to an intermediate that will occupy much more disk space but will allow you fast, responsive editing.

If you absolutely don't want to use an intermediate codec, then you may want to consider an HDV camcorder which are capable of very good picture quality too - they are tape based though so it's more hassle to get footage onto your editing machine in the first place.

If I had the budget and the luxury of time, then I personally would opt for the canon hf s10 that is due out this year but it may not be the best fit for your needs.