Should I go for the Sony HDR-HC3 (newbie)

richman

Standard Member
Joined
May 17, 2004
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
Points
5
Hi,

I'm on the verge of buying my first camcorder (baby due early next year) and I'm getting rather overwhelmed by all the information out there - I've looked at www.camcorderinfo.com etc. If anybody could help answer my (very) newbie questions I'd be really grateful.

Ok, the stuff I've considered:

1. Format - Mini DV tape vs HDD

I'm fairly computer literate, so the idea of recording directly to a hard disk appeals to me, but much of the material I have read implies that the quality of recording to HDD is worse than that done to Mini DV tape because the MPEG2 compression that is inevitably used. I'm not sure what (if any) compression is used with Mini DV tape. I don't imagine I'll do loads of editing, but the option to do easily basic stuff would be nice.


2. High Definition vs Standard Definition

It would seem logical to go for High Definition as it won't be that long before this is the predominant resolution for TV.


3. Size, ease of use etc

Both my wife and I would be using the camera and we'd rather go for something small, light and fairly easy to use.


What is confusing me:

I had almost decided to go for the Sony HDR-HC3 (it certainly satisfies point 3 above) but I now read that despite recording to tape, it actually uses MPEG2 compression. Furthermore, although it's described as High Definintion, in this thread

http://www.avforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=419297

it appears that HD-DVD and BD-R will not support the combination of resolution and refresh rate that this Sony model uses.

Now I may well be missing something - as I say, I am absolutely new to this - but IS there any camcorder currently available that

a) can shoot High Definition video AND be compatible with future High Definition discs
b) does not lose quality by using MPEG2 compression
c) is small and fairly easy to use

My brain is starting to hurt, and I could really do with some advice!

Thanks,

Rich
-----
 
Hi,

I'm on the verge of buying my first camcorder (baby due early next year) and I'm getting rather overwhelmed by all the information out there - I've looked at www.camcorderinfo.com etc. If anybody could help answer my (very) newbie questions I'd be really grateful.

Ok, the stuff I've considered:

1. Format - Mini DV tape vs HDD

I'm fairly computer literate, so the idea of recording directly to a hard disk appeals to me, but much of the material I have read implies that the quality of recording to HDD is worse than that done to Mini DV tape because the MPEG2 compression that is inevitably used. I'm not sure what (if any) compression is used with Mini DV tape. I don't imagine I'll do loads of editing, but the option to do easily basic stuff would be nice.


2. High Definition vs Standard Definition

It would seem logical to go for High Definition as it won't be that long before this is the predominant resolution for TV.


3. Size, ease of use etc

Both my wife and I would be using the camera and we'd rather go for something small, light and fairly easy to use.


What is confusing me:

I had almost decided to go for the Sony HDR-HC3 (it certainly satisfies point 3 above) but I now read that despite recording to tape, it actually uses MPEG2 compression. Furthermore, although it's described as High Definintion, in this thread

http://www.avforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=419297

it appears that HD-DVD and BD-R will not support the combination of resolution and refresh rate that this Sony model uses.

Now I may well be missing something - as I say, I am absolutely new to this - but IS there any camcorder currently available that

a) can shoot High Definition video AND be compatible with future High Definition discs
b) does not lose quality by using MPEG2 compression
c) is small and fairly easy to use

My brain is starting to hurt, and I could really do with some advice!

Thanks,

Rich
-----

Surely you want MPEG2? Camcorders using MPEG4 (to squeeze an adequate amount of time onto hard disks) actually give poorer picture quality at the moment. I'd personally stick with MPEG2.

MPEG4 doesn't necessarily give better quality than MPEG2. It is all to do with bit rates. MPEG4 is generally adopted to reduce data rates, and given tha MPEG4 encoding/decoding is relatively new, picture quality can suffer. For example, MPEG4 is used for Sky HD, but Sky and the BBC have found that they have needed to increase dates rates well above what they initally expected to give good picture quality. It's very early days with MPEG4.
 
Thanks for the reply. I'm not actually wedded to the idea of recording to a hard disk, but I would like as good quality as possible, which is why I queried the use of MPEG2. Are you saying that there are cameras that use higher quality compression than MPEG2 (MPEG4?), but that they wouldn't record to HDD?

I'll be honest, I'm not entirely clear about moving image compression.

Rich
-----
 
I'm not sure what (if any) compression is used with Mini DV tape.

DV has it's own compression format, it is intra-frame only, compressed about 5:1. It is far less compressed than MPEG2.

It would seem logical to go for High Definition as it won't be that long before this is the predominant resolution for TV.

I agree.

Both my wife and I would be using the camera and we'd rather go for something small, light and fairly easy to use.

Pretty much all the consumer camcorders these days are pretty small. I would call the HC3 small. The Canon HV10 is a bit smaller.

What is confusing me:

I had almost decided to go for the Sony HDR-HC3 (it certainly satisfies point 3 above) but I now read that despite recording to tape, it actually uses MPEG2 compression. Furthermore, although it's described as High Definintion, in this thread

http://www.avforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=419297

it appears that HD-DVD and BD-R will not support the combination of resolution and refresh rate that this Sony model uses.


MPEG2 compression doesn't mean poor quality. HDV uses MPEG2 at a bitrate of 25 Mbps - that's 2.5 times the rate used on today's DVDs. The other HD Camcorder format, AVCHD (used on the Sony SR1 and others) is more highly compressed MPEG4.

As for that other thread - the issue is High Def DVD players are new, just coming out now. I'm hopeful that by the time they become affordable for general use (not only players but recorders and discs) this support will be there.

The beauty of HDV is you can shoot your baby in high definition. Today, you can use this to make ordinary standard definition DVDs (which will still look very good).. but later you can reissue that high def footage on high def DVDs (we hope).

You can also play the high def straight from the camcorder, or from a PC in a number of formats.

IS there any camcorder currently available that

a) can shoot High Definition video AND be compatible with future High Definition discs
b) does not lose quality by using MPEG2 compression
c) is small and fairly easy to use


a) is a bit unclear as the players are still in flux, but we expect eventually this will be resolved.

b) they all use compression; MPEG2 or MPEG4 are used for consumer HD today.

c) the HC3 and Canon HV10 are both small and easy to use... the HV10 a bit smaller. HC3 is (DxHxW, in cm) 13.9 x 7.8 x 8.2. HV10 is 10.6 x 10.4 x 5.6.
 
Are you saying that there are cameras that use higher quality compression than MPEG2 (MPEG4?), but that they wouldn't record to HDD?
-----

Today you have HDV (tape) camcorders, they use MPEG2.

Then there is AVCHD, this uses MPEG4, and for media there is DVD and HDD, and announced but not yet available, SD memory cards.

As Mark800 said, MPEG4 isn't better than MPEG2. It is a format that allows more compression; in terms of quality the Sony HC3 (HDV) and SR1 (AVCHD) are almost identical, with the HC3 having the slight edge.
 
I'm going for the HC3 and I have the same reason, a baby due early next year. The excuse I gave the wife is that when we watch videos in the future our kid will be asking why the quality looks so bad if we keep our SD camcorder.

I'm not going with an HDD camera because what do you do when it's full and you're not at home to dump what you have, I'm sticking with tapes for now so I can change it when it's at the end.

I also chose the HC3 as it's got better low-light shooting than most others, something to bear in mind when shooting indoors and the sun is shining through the windows (most of the time!)

As for it being compatable with HD formats (HD-DVD and Blu-Ray), "so what" is all I can say, with current SD MiniDV camcorders you cant dump them straight onto a disc and expect them to play in a DVD player, I always edit my videos anyway so will just render out at 1920x1080

I think the HC3 is perfect for me (maybe not for everyone), I have my PC hooked up to my HDTV via HDMI, my blu-ray burner is arriving any day so the HC3 will fit into my setup just right, and I'll mess with it all over Christmas so I know what I'm doing when the baby arrives

The only thing that swayed me away from the Canon is low light performance
 
I've had the HC-3 for a week now, sure its costly in comparison to the 200 quid camcorders you can buy today, but more than worth the premium. (My first Sony camcorder, an 8mm cost me £900 in 1990!, so 651 for the HC-3 puts that into perspective).

Took some footage at the weekend in bright sunlight and from HDMI to my Pioneer 436 XDE Plasma looked excellent.

I much prefer the idea of using DV-Tapes to HDD, as I just purchased 10 from Amazon for 15 quid delivered. These allow you to take your footage in High Def and not have to worry about processing them for years. If you have a HDD, you must clear it out eventually, so what do you do with the footage? Dump off to DVD-R I suppose.

It takes pretty good stills too. And you can take stills *whilst* recording to tape.
 
As for it being compatable with HD formats (HD-DVD and Blu-Ray), "so what" is all I can say, with current SD MiniDV camcorders you cant dump them straight onto a disc and expect them to play in a DVD player, I always edit my videos anyway so will just render out at 1920x1080

I mostly agree with you here - certainly in the context of should one buy a HC3 or not - I wouldn't want the discussion about HD-DVD/Blu-Ray putting anyone off getting one.

And you are right of course that with DV you need to convert to MPEG2 today, though at least in that case they have the same 720x576 resolution.

With HD-DVD/Blueray - as HDV uses MPEG2, and they support MPEG2... as HDV is 1440x1080, it would be better if they could support 1440x1080 HDV. In a nutshell that's what that other thread is saying. In fact HD-DVD already does but only 60i; you really want to avoid having to convert the framerate.
 
Thanks for all the replies, they've really helped and things are much clearer now.

I guess the main thing I need to consider is the format. Saving to a HDD is convenient, quick to transfer to a PC etc, but doesn't offer the flexibility of tape, where spares in a pocket could be a god send. That said, a good portable storage device may provide a solution.

Saving to tape offers the flexibitly of backup etc, but transfer is very slow. Hmmmmm...

I think I need to compare the Sony HDR-HC3 and HDR-SR1 models. Anybody done this already?

Rich
----
 
I think I need to compare the Sony HDR-HC3 and HDR-SR1 models. Anybody done this already?

Rich
----

Start with this review
http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Sony-HDR-SR1-Camcorder-Review.htm

It is very detailed and they make comparisons with the HC3.

In summary, they give a slight edge to the HC3 for picture quality, but prefer the SR1 overall due to additional features on the SR1 (mic input, manual focus ring, etc)

Note that today there is no editing support for the AVCHD format that the SR1 uses. Sony Vegas will support it in an update to Version 7 expected in the spring.
 
I too have a baby coming early next year and want to get a HDV cam - after assuming I would go for the HC1 or HC3 for ages I have recently been blown away by the quality fo the HV10 from Canon. It does lack HDMI which is a shame but with the PQ as it is I can't ignore it.
 
I too have a baby coming early next year and want to get a HDV cam - after assuming I would go for the HC1 or HC3 for ages I have recently been blown away by the quality fo the HV10 from Canon. It does lack HDMI which is a shame but with the PQ as it is I can't ignore it.
don't know if you read my post above, but if you're shooting indoors (which most people do most of the time) then the HC3 is better (unless you have studio lighting in your house)
 
don't know if you read my post above, but if you're shooting indoors (which most people do most of the time) then the HC3 is better (unless you have studio lighting in your house)

As per the reivew on camcorderinfo this is true, but neither is going to be that impressive indoors if the light is poor. (see comments from a new HC3 user on another current thread).
 
Got the HC3 two weeks ago. Quality just blows anything away that I've seen. It's a great camera and my wife uses it too.

Would thouroughly recommend it to anyone between the novice to home professional levels.

Nice thing is it reads all our old DV tapes too!
 
As per the reivew on camcorderinfo this is true, but neither is going to be that impressive indoors if the light is poor. (see comments from a new HC3 user on another current thread).

I am aware of the reviews stating the low light issues with the HV10 but the samples I have seen from the HV10 in low light seem fine - in fact the HC3 samples I have seen seem worse? Am I right in thinking the HV10 has a larger cmos sensor?
 
I have an HV10 and low light performance is nowhere near as bad as the camcorder info review leads you to believe.
 
I have just recently purchased the Sony HDR-HC3 and am now confused as to what tapes to buy! Noticed in previous posting someone buying 10 tapes for 15 quid from Amazon for this camcorder but surely these aren't HD tapes? I assumed you had to use HD tapes? Would there not be a big loss in quality if using standard tapes? Never used a camcorder in my life!
 
no high definition is recorded to DV tape using mpeg2 compression.
You lose no quality by recording to tape - its just a storage medium. The footage is 1080i at 25mb/s
 
"HD" tapes are simply higher quality DV tapes.

There have "always" been ordinary DV tapes (perfectly good), and more expensive master/pro quality ones. There is absolutely no difference to the quality of your recordings whichever tape you use. The only difference is that the master type tapes are less prone to dropouts (which are rare anyway).

With HDV, as it uses a 15 frame (generally) GOP structure, if you get a dropout you could lose 15 frames vs. 1 for DV. In other words, a dropout with HDV is more serious. For this reason (and also to make more money) Sony and others created a range of master quality tapes promoted as HDV tapes.

Most consumers shooting HDV are using DV tapes. If you can afford it and want to minimise the chance of any dropouts you can buy HDV tapes.
 
I have just recently purchased the Sony HDR-HC3 and am now confused as to what tapes to buy! Noticed in previous posting someone buying 10 tapes for 15 quid from Amazon for this camcorder but surely these aren't HD tapes? I assumed you had to use HD tapes? Would there not be a big loss in quality if using standard tapes? Never used a camcorder in my life!
I see you did your homework before splashing out then?!
 
do you mind if I ask how much you paid for the HV10 and where from?

I got it for £849 from Equipment Express - this was one of the first places to get them in stock and I felt it was worth paying this as they gave a free Canon bag and a 2 year warranty.
 

The latest video from AVForums

Is 4K Blu-ray Worth It?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom