1. Join Now

    AVForums.com uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Almost decided - Need advice

Discussion in 'Camcorders, Action Cams & Video Editing Forum' started by Newbie99, Nov 8, 2004.

  1. Newbie99

    Newbie99
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    I have narrowed my decision down to two cameras, the Cannon Elura 65 & the Panny PV GS120. I have listed below my top concerns from most important to least.

    Video Quality
    Audio Quality
    Picture Quality (Still Photos)
    Low light Conditions
    Image Stabilization
    16X9 Video


    Video Quality:
    I know all the specs on the two cameras, however I have been getting one opinion vrs another when I talk to the sales reps. Which camera has the best video quality? (Specs - Cannon 1CCD, 1/4.5 -inch CCD, 1,300,000 pixels (effective pixels on the Cannon are 690,000.00 Pixels - tape & 1,230,000 Pixels - Card. The panny is 3CCD's, smaller CCD size, 3X460,000 Pixels, (effective pixels are 870,000 Pixels - Card (Video) & 840,000 Pixels - Tape (Pictures)).
    When one looks at the specs, it looks like the Cannon has the better of the two...

    Audio Quality:
    According to some users, the Panny has better audio (mainly due to the fact, that it does not pick up the camera noises plus the audio zoom function on the panny). Does anyone have experience with the two & can shed some light on this?

    Picture quality:
    I assumed that the Cannon did as it has a slightly higher Pixel count (1.3 Mega vrs 1.2 mega (panny)). Then I saw a shutter speed spec that stated the Cannon at 1/2000 per second & the Panny at 1/8000 per page... Is there a difference between a page vrs a second or is this a typo? With that being said, which camera has the better picture quality (or would it be so close on a 4x6 picture that one would not really notice?)

    Low Light:
    I will be doing mostly home video (we are expecting our first child in December). According to most, the cannon has a problem with this. I therefore understand that the Panny is better... Any comments?

    Stabilization:
    From what I have read, the Panny is not as good as the Cannon for Stability. Is there much of a difference (with zoom & without?) that would sway me from one to the other (keep in mind, this is not my main concern here).

    16X9:
    From what I have read, both have the 16X9 Option. I think the Cannon has the true 16X9 & the Panny just stretches the image to accomodate the 16X9. I am not sure - anyone know?

    I am hoping that one of you has experience with both cameras & can shed some light on your opinion on what one is better. If not, any suggestions would be helpfull. From there I will make my decision.... Thank you.
     
  2. Nick T

    Nick T
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    16x9

    On my Sharp VLZ1H it just adds a black strap on the image. And with playback you can take it off.

    Have you thought about actual filming and the viewfinder swivelling ?

    That's one of the reason I bought my camera.

    Nick
     
  3. Newbie99

    Newbie99
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    No I have not... I am not sure what you mean by this...
     
  4. Origin

    Origin
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    3 CCDs are always better than one! That's why all pro cameras have 3 CCDs (usually 1/4" or bigger).

    I own a Panasonic MX500, which has 3 x 1/6" CCDs. Every review said that low light performance wasn't as good as some other cameras, but I have never had a problem at all. I have filmed perfectly acceptable footage in lighting conditions where I would have long given up with my old SLR film camera. In normal lighting conditions the 3CCD picture is superb.

    Don't get hung up on comparing the specs, as you simply can't compare pixel counts on a 1CCD and a 3CCD camera. The way the available pixels are interpreted will be different, and the fact that a 720x576 frame of PAL DV video amounts to only 414,720 pixels proves that all those extra pixels don't go straight into making a better picture.

    Image stabilization on my MX-500 is superb, and I believe the 16:9 mode (never used it myself) is a 'true' 16:9 mode using extra pixels, not just a cheap truncation job!

    Try the www.simplydv.co.uk forums for the best advice...
     

Share This Page

Loading...