Quote:
Originally Posted by haggy I have read a lot of reviews and many threads on this site but none directly compare them. Closest is simplydv's review of the HF11 V the SD100. |
The HF11 records at a higher bitrate than the HF10 / HF100, but in general terms they're pretty comparable, so that review is probably fairly relevant, if it has anything to say about sharpness, light-gathering, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by haggy would be using it indoors mostly and probably on auto mode. |
The consensus is that the HF100 is hard to beat indoors or in "low light" situations.
Quote:
Originally Posted by haggy 3 small MOS V 1 larger and other differences are dificult to imagine in practical terms. |
3 small chips aren't going to beat one medium-sized chip in light-gathering abilities. The HF100 is your best bet there I think. Panasonic's TM300 has larger chips (about 1/4-inch), though still smaller than Canon's CMOS.
Quote:
Originally Posted by haggy And the SD20 with one small MOS isn't that a step backwards from the SD9? |
Yes. Some reviews have found picture quality in low light to be worse on the SD20 than the SD9, which was never great to start with (though adequate considering its price).
Quote:
Originally Posted by haggy the grey/silver/gunmetal finish really doesn't do it for me. Why is it not black like the rest. |
The cynics among us used to argue it was because Canon wanted the style-conscious to pay more for black livery (i.e. HF10 in black vs. HF100 in grey). But now Canon seems to have decided grey is good, and the colour-price equation doesn't seem to work any more.