Version: 2008
  • On GameSpot: $299 PS3 Slim and price cut announced!
Advanced Search
advertisement
advertisement
Click Here

Forum display:

Community Newsletter: Q&A: What are the differences in today's camcorders? Go HD or wait?

by Lee Koo (ADMIN) Moderator - 1/17/08 4:10 PM
advertisement
Post 91 of 109

My Advice: Wait till next year if you have the patience

by smjhunt - 1/11/08 6:18 PM In reply to: What are the differences in today's camcorders? Go HD or wait? by Lee Koo (ADMIN) Moderator

I found myself in a similar situation this year when my miniDV camcorder bit the dust (of course costing more to repair than replace).

I think the main decision point is whether to replace with something similar and cheap to tide you over (saving the money to go HD down the road) or to go HD right now. I carefully considered the latter but in the end decided to replace my camcorder with another miniDV for this year.

I got a very good, slightly used, current model Panasonic for under $100 on eBay that rivals my originally priced $1200 Sony that died. This will tide me over until the HD market matures a little more and is a small enough investment that it doesn't in any way impact my ability to buy what I want in an HD camera next year.

If you are going to replace with something similar and relatively cheap, I think miniDV tape is the way to go. The quality is very good and the hype over DVD and disk based solutions have made them a real bargain.

If you don't have the patience to wait, here is what came out of my investigation of option two: buying an HD camcorder now....

First, you will get better quality but only if you have an HDTV. If you do, you really only need 720p unless you have a very big screen (>60 inches) in which case you will want 1080. I find the motion artifacts on 1080i to be significant so when I do get an HD Camcorder I will hopefully be able to get one with good 1080p support.

Second, my experience with my 7 year old $1200 Sony, which works perfectly well except for a misfiring moisture sensor that basically prevents it from allowing me to record thus making it an expensive paperweight, tells me my next camcorder will have a minimum of moving parts. This eliminates tape based as well as DVD and HD based camcorders. So for me, my next camcorder will need to use SD or MMC cards as its sole storage medium.

Third, I would very much like it to have a docking station that serves to charge, connect to HDMI input on my tv and USB on my HTPC. It seems that we should be able to expect by now to move beyond the geek phase for camcorders where you must hook up ac adaptors, firewire cables and AV adaptors to work with the output. Currently, the only HD camera I know of that comes with a dock that does all this is the Sanyo HD1000 (more on it later).

Fourth, the biggest complaint I had about my Sony camcorder, besides those already mentioned, was its poor low light performance. I have recently archived all my vides to a hard disk and in the process got a chance to look at them again and see a clear pattern of noisy blotchy, poor contrast images under normal indoor light. Perhaps I will need to wait more than a year for this but at a minimum, I would expect my HD camcorder to have a sensor bigger than the 1/6" one my Sony has or at least to take advantage of all the signal processing improvements that have come since 1999 to do a better job in low light.

Fifth is cost. If you eliminate mechanical components (other than the zoom lens servo) it seems that you should be able to manufacture this ideal camera for significantly less than what vendors are charging for them today. I think this is because you are paying for the up front R&D expenses, typical for the early adopter. In another year or so, such camcorders will hopefully become more commoditized and their price start to line up better with their true manufacturing cost which I believe should be lower than the existing miniDV manufacturing costs.

A final word on the Sanyo HDC1000. When I put all my criteria against what was out there in the HD world, this camera came the closest to matching them. If I had decided to pull the trigger this year, I would probably have bought this one. But when I looked at it, my impression was that next year's model, if they listen to their current customers, will likely get all the kinks out of the design and hopefully bring down the price as well so better to wait. After all, I expect to keep my next camcorder for many years.

It will also be likely that AVHCD software and drivers will have become plentful making it easy to digitally manipulate the output. Right now, you are really a pioneer with this type of camcorder output.

Finally, I expect by that time that the major camcorder manufactures (i.e. Canon and Sony) will have competing products to further increase the value to the customer. This is already starting to happen with recent announcements but, in my opinion, it needs a year or so to really ready its potential.

Post 92 of 109

I have the High Def Sony HDR-Cx7 (AVCHD) Awesome!

by jmwren - 1/11/08 8:14 PM In reply to: What are the differences in today's camcorders? Go HD or wait? by Lee Koo (ADMIN) Moderator

it records on a memory stick pro...fits in the palm of your hand and is truly a no brainer. Everywhere I go people want it and start asking me about it, it's so small and easy to use with it's touch screen pull out display. I have two 4 gig sticks and never run out of space, I record in high def and play it back through the hdmi cable on my plasma and edit the footage on my PC (after loading it onto my computer) by using Ulead videostudio 11 plus...It can shoot widescreen photos (4 megapixels) while still recording live video, or you can with a touch of a button switch it to camera mode and record 6 megapixels all on the same memory stick. When you are done you just hook it up via usb and move the video and photos over, or (I have tried this too) just pop the memory stick out and pop it into the adapter that comes with the stick and pop it into your memory stick slot.. It says not to do it that way but it does work. Anyway I love my camcorder, it is totally awesome and the quality of the video will blow you away it is as good if not better than direct tv's hd channels. It's unbelievable to watch your children in true hd.. I wanted my memories to start now, not wait till they grew up, so now I back the original footage up onto dvd for future editing and do what I can with it now. We just bought a PS3 so now I can put these videos onto a regular dvd (thanks to Ulead Videostudio 11 plus) saved in hd or bluray format and play it on my PS3, I can also play the memory stick on the PS3 and download the video to it to watch. It's just so awesome. I paid $900 for it back in August 07.

Post 93 of 109

Definitely Go HD

by vchanpe - 1/11/08 8:59 PM In reply to: What are the differences in today's camcorders? Go HD or wait? by Lee Koo (ADMIN) Moderator

Let me share my experience as a first time camcorder buyer. My daughter was expecting a baby so my wife wanted a quality camcorder. I never had a camcorder before so I had to do some research. I shopped around and found a High Definition Canon HV-10 camcorder on sale at Amazon.com for only $599. Since I am a happy owner of several Canon still cameras, I decided to get it. The main reason why the Canon HV-10 was so inexpensive was because this model is several years old and it uses low-tech high definition DV tapes. The Canon HV-10 used to sell for $1000 but the price has dropped to $600. This turned out to be a good decision since I rather get a HD camcorder that uses high definition DV tapes than a standard definition camcorder that uses a hard drive or DVD. Getting a high definition camcorder with a hard drive would have busted my budget. A high definition DV tape has 62 minutes of capacity and I immediately capture the video with my Pinnacle studio 11 software on my PC. I then edit the video and burn the edited videos on DVD discs so I can play it for my family and friends. In my opinion, a DVD camcorder and a hard drive are not worth the extra expense since I always capture and edit my videos. My friends and family would definitely lose interest watching unedited videos. Since the videos eventually ends up on my PC, I didn't see the advantages of getting a hard drive or DVD camcorder. The video format is called HDV but once captured on your PC, my software program can convert it into MPEG-2 or avi format videos so the type of format was also not significant to me. Format differences may be significant to some video geeks but not to me since I just wanted to video tape my grand daughter in high definition video quality and then watch the video on a DVD player. The high definition quality will make a big difference when playing the video on a high definition TV. I don't have a blu-ray DVD burner on my PC yet but it is nice to know that I have high definition videos stored on my PC hard drive that I can later burn blu-ray DVDs once the price of a Blue DVD burner comes down. I am happy with my strategy of buying an inexpensive high definition camcorder that uses DV tapes. Bottomline: Put your money in a high definition camcorder and a video editing software program. Save money by not buying a HD camcorder with a hard drive or DVD burner. Capture the HD video onto your PC and watch the edited videos on burned DVD discs for now.

Post 94 of 109

choosing technology

by mykayl - 1/11/08 11:04 PM In reply to: What are the differences in today's camcorders? Go HD or wait? by Lee Koo (ADMIN) Moderator

i don't know your needs, but what i've learned from experience is that if you have commercial aspirations and sufficient funds, always go cutting edge, and if possible, bleeding edge. even if you spend a little extra money, it pays off in the long run with less upgrades as the technology progresses. everything has its cons, but the cons with bleeding edge tech are hardware and software concerns (e.g. bugs and incompatibility issues that usually come with timely fixes and/or configuration solutions), whereas the cons with stable convention are lower quality production that ends up costing a lot more in editing solutions and technician salaries. that may work for tv stations that don't want to waste time educating their staff on how to use new technology, but for small business in-house needs, the time, effort and risk is much more profitable.

something to consider is refurbished merchandise. sometimes you can get stuff that's top of the line, only paying what you would for budget products.

if you use a windows OS on a recently made machine, you could also consider switching to a linux OS. unlike microsoft and apple software products, linux is free, and since it's open source, developers are constantly releasing improvements--you get cutting edge/bleeding edge at no cost. with any of the better linux distros, you can download free editing software and save yourself loads of money. you may not be able to turn lead into gold, but with the proper editing software, you can greatly improve and enhance the quality of lower end media if you decide to opt for something a little cheaper. sometimes a gold painted rock is all you need to make people value your work as gold.

for example, i'm a musician; i'm switching to ubuntu studio because i can get studio freeware that's as good as pro tools, without having to pay hundreds of dollars. i can make my cheap bass guitar sound high end at no cost, and get sound files to beef up my recordings without having to pay for a synthesizer. i can record and produce an album for minimal cost, and for an equally minimal cost, i can sell it through mp3 sites. ubuntu studio also comes with graphic and video editing software and awesome 3D graphics courtesy of beryl and compiz fusion, so when i'm ready to shell out money for a camera, i can get into professional in-house video production as well, saving myself tons of money. of course i could install almost any linux distro and download that stuff from a repository, but ubuntu studio already comes with it, which will save me a lot of time and frustration of having to figure out what i'm going to need and seeking it out.

i also upgraded to a ZT affinity with a 3Ghz processor and 4mb L2 cache for $330, so with a 1Gb RAM upgrade that costs $20-$30, i'll have everything i need to start producing quality product. i sacrifice hard drive capacity (it's only 160Gb), but i have a WD 250Gb external drive to save my projects to if i rack up a lot of files. if i want to go bigger than that, i can find a 1Tb external drive for $100. what would that cost me if i used brand name hardware and proprietary software just so i could save a little time and frustration? thousands of dollars that i don't have. what will i end up spending once i start acquiring additional peripherals and recording media? less than $1,000.

good editing software can make even outmoded media look professional. if i can take an old video camera and produce a video that looks at least as good as what was getting play on Mtv back in the 80's, i'll be satisfied. even today, they still air videos that look like they were made by a small-town tv commercial production company (e.g. grainy, glossy lighting, bad color), so 80's quality video production is still a competitive edge for nationwide broadcasts. even if i don't go high end on the camera, i can still create a product capable of getting mainstream tv broadcast time. of course, i'm primarily interested in internet exhibition through youtube and myspace, so that equals an even greater advertising savings, with a higher profit margin.

so my advice to you is consider your budget, consider your needs, do your research, and get the most bang for your buck. not out of a single product, but out of your entire video production package. HD is great, and so is a camera with a hard drive, but who needs that for recording birthday parties, baby moments and family reunions? not even budget production companies are going that high tech; there was a wedding in my family not long ago, and the whole thing was recorded using 20 year old equipment. they put it on dvd, and it looks just fine.

unless you need it for commercial use, don't waste your money unless you can get the high end stuff for a huge bargain. my father bought my mother a $300 ipod bose stereo that doesn't even sound as good as my bookshelf stereo, when he could have bought her a surround sound system with an ipod dock for half that price. for half the money, he could have bought her something that had dual use and sounds immeasurably better, but he went for the shiny veneer. he could have even paid less; i just bought a 140 watt 5.1 surround to use for sound monitoring, and i only paid $75. with a little extra i could buy a cheap ipod dock to plug into it, if i actually felt i needed one. you can always find more for cheaper if you put aside the consumer hype and think in terms of total package. if it aint broke, don't fix it.

Post 95 of 109

Some reviews here....

by pj-mckay - 1/12/08 2:23 AM In reply to: What are the differences in today's camcorders? Go HD or wait? by Lee Koo (ADMIN) Moderator

http://gadgetshow.five.tv/jsp/5gsmain.jsp?lnk=501&featureid=349&description=Camcorders

This is a UK gadget show review. It's the hidden things that make the difference, and only a real life review can help. The Sony HD is pricy but is 'todays technology', and can take good snapshots without coming out of video mode. In addition it's got Infra Red which lights up night scenes, plus Image Stabilisation. Side by Side, real comparisons were very impressive. There may well be others but this would be worth considering as your reference point if you want quality, versatility, control and flexibility.

I'll be buying in a month or two and it's the spec I'll be using as a reference.

Post 96 of 109

Camcorder.

by henry Barnett - 1/12/08 5:00 AM In reply to: What are the differences in today's camcorders? Go HD or wait? by Lee Koo (ADMIN) Moderator

I purchased a Sony camcorder with a 60Giga HDD and took it to the Galapagos with me. It performed superbly. I also had my laptop and a small 80g external HD. Each evening I downloaded to the Laptop and copied to the Disk Drive. I have not yet emptied the Sony HD!! I would not get a camcorder with anything other than a HD I've done that before andf ended up with x number of cassettes etc. The quality is excellent, the lens too. It's small and can fit into a jacket pocket if you want ity too. I'd highly recommend it. I've never had any p^roblems with Sony.

Henry

Post 97 of 109

HD Playback

by prharper - 1/12/08 6:03 AM In reply to: What are the differences in today's camcorders? Go HD or wait? by Lee Koo (ADMIN) Moderator

I bought a Sony HDR-SR7 camera capable of recording in SD and HD to a built in hard disk. They have other models that record to flash memory. At first, I shot everything in HD mode. No problem on capturing video. Playback becomes the issue. Sure you can hook the camera to a HDTV with an HDMI cable to achieve true HD playback. What happens when you want to export the video (data) from the camera hard disk or flash memory?

That's where it gets interesting.

Recall the Betamax vs VHS days? Same thing going on with the DVD industry. There are two competing formats, Blu-ray or HD DVD. Manufacturers support one or the other, with the exception of one who plays both formats.

Sony for example, uses AVCHD. That format basically drives you to use the Blu-Ray format. In my example, the HD video was exported to the PC. I used the software provided with the camera to transfer to an external USB hard disk for backup and editing. Then used another software package, Pinnacle Studio, to edit and create a DVD. How many of us have Blu-Ray DVD burners today? Not many. If I wanted to share my HD video with family and friends, how many of them have Blu-Ray DVD players at home. My parents and grandparents do not. What most people do indeed have is a standard DVD player connected a TV. The common DVD players don't read / playback Blu-Ray discs or HD-DVD.

That basically forces me to use SD to record to DVD for playback on DVD. Sure, one can capture in HD format and convert to SD if needed. It takes software and time. Pricing of HD DVD recorders and players will come down and drive adoption of a format (Blu-Ray or HD-DVD).

Having the capability today to capture in HD is good. You can always downgrade (convert) to SD. You can't go the other way if your video camera only supports SD recording.

Not sure if that helps, but one should factor transferring the video to a DVD format and playback of that format. There is no one size fits all.

Post 98 of 109

Memory stick is better than mini dv or hard drive because..

by jmwren - 1/12/08 8:30 AM In reply to: HD Playback by prharper

A memory stick is small compact and safe to use. What if you drop and break your camcorder with a hard drive, what happens if the hard drive fails, what happens if the tape gets hung up. In order to save your movies from a mini dv format you have to play the whole tape in live time and have your computer convert it into your program, with memory stick it's just dragging and dropping a file as you would from any hard drive.

As far as editing I use Ulead Videostudio 11 plus, you can edit and output your avchd to high def format or sd format while saving the original file in hd, you can back the original file up on a dvd dl (dual layer disk) and save it for future when you get a bluray burner or hd burner. You can save it as an image file so when you are ready to burn it you just burn the image to disk, no need to rerender the file...You can also output your whole movie in bluray hd or hd dvd format to a regular dvd or dvd dl (8.4 gigs so more space for hd movies) All in all this is the best format, I did alot of research and found this was the very best solution, and the camara is so tiny and lightweight and best of all there are NO MOVING PARTS to break as you have in a mini dv or hard drive. Trust me, memory stick or any type of flash memory type (removable memory) is the way to go!!!

Post 99 of 109

Hybrid

by tinochan - 1/12/08 4:38 PM In reply to: Memory stick is better than mini dv or hard drive because.. by jmwren

Has anyone considered a Hybrid, a camcorder which can use more than one storage formats.

The 3CCD technology has not been mentioned enough either.

I’m considering the Panasonic SDR-H250, a 3CCD (in SD)camcorder that offers a choice of recording onto either internal HDD (Hard Disk Drive) or SD cards in addition to USB 2.0 for importing clips into your PC.
It's not aimed at professionals or even serious enthusiasts - it's aimed at ordinary users like me.

At the moment you can get great deals on SD camcorders, I think a 3CCD unit will give you a very good picture quality without going into HD and at half the price.

Post 100 of 109

3 chip camera resolution issue

by Steven W Rose - 1/13/08 3:43 AM In reply to: Hybrid by tinochan

Hi Tinochan,

I've been confused by the specifications of various 3 chip cameras at the low end of the hi-def market, such as the Panasonic AVCHD series. My confusion was based on the specifications of the imaging chips, which show resolutions of about 540K pixels each. This confused me because the way the video is recorded, the luminance signal is recorded at full resolution (in this case, allegedly 1920 x 1080 pixels), and each color is sampled at about 1/4 of that rate (for 4:2:0 sampling). So how do you make a full resolution image out of 3 standard definition images of different colors?

It appears that the answer is you don't! One approach is to offset the pixels of different colors from one another then use interpolation tricks to approximate the higher resolution, and I suspect that is what is being done in some "high definition" 3 chip cameras. However, this means you don't have samples of the true luminance value (or even green!) for each pixel of the high definition image, and that two thirds of the luminance pixels are interpolated best guesses.

This seems to be confirmed by the specifications of higher end three chip cameras, such as the Canon XH A1. In the Canon XH A1, each of the chips is specified as having full resolution, as one would expect.

I don't know how this relates to the true resolution of single chip cameras, but since they are typically subsampled from sensors of 3 megapixels or more, I'd expect them to compare very favorably in resolution to low end three chip cameras. Single chip cameras also have a potential advantage in sensitivity as well, due to optical losses of the beamsplitting prisms required by the 3 chip system.

I'd sure love some input on this, such as a pointer to images comparing resolution and color accuracy of 3 chip versus single chip cameras. My conclusions at this point are based on conjecture rather than empirical results.

Aloha,
Steve

Post 101 of 109

Either wait or go for the whole thing...

by b_in_austin - 1/12/08 10:59 PM In reply to: What are the differences in today's camcorders? Go HD or wait? by Lee Koo (ADMIN) Moderator

I'm not sure I would buy into the 3 options that CNET has decided are the best answers. If I were you, I'd either wait out another year and suffer with your Sony Hi-8, or go for the best HD + hard drive combo you can get from one of the major brands (Sony, JVC, Canon, Panasonic, ...).

By waiting, you get a year of more hardware advances and price reductions while the s/w world slowly adapts to HD. By avoiding a purchase of yet another DV tape type system or mini-DVD system, you will make your life so much easier it the future when you want to get those old "tapes" out and get them to a format that is more "up to date".

On that front, I just spent almost $400 converting a collection of VHS-C, Hi-8, and MiniDV tapes to DVD/digital files for long term storage and recall. I did this through a service as I could no longer find all of the devices and cables needed for some of the long-gone camcorders of yesteryear. While digital files are not immune to obsolescence, digital formats on disk media seem to have a much longer life (I have 14 year Microsoft Word documents that I can still read with my latest PC).

But if you can't wait, go for it all the way. HD may get a tad better (smaller, faster, cheaper devices), but you'll be fine for quite a while. Going "tapeless" is the future, whether it be a hard drive version or a smaller capacity flash drive.

And if that isn't enough on the advice front, if you are just doing casual videos of family, friends, and simple actitities, don't rule out a device just for quick videos. If that isn't in your phone, then it could be something like the little Flip video cameras. They are as easy to use as a point and shoot digital camera.

Post 102 of 109

SD card recording is great!

by txblue - 1/14/08 10:01 AM In reply to: What are the differences in today's camcorders? Go HD or wait? by Lee Koo (ADMIN) Moderator

I bought a Panasonic AV-100 about 5 years ago. It was small and fit in my pocket. It came with a 512M High speed SD card which held 10 min of MPG-2 video. Now I download my video very soon after taking so the 10 min was not a big deal to me - I mainly wanted to record my daughter's cheerleading competitions which last less than 3 min. I bought an extra 512 card about 2years later for a trip to Australia to give us 20 Min before having to download - and that was plenty - how many minutes of holding the koala bear do you reall want to watch later?
Now I can buy a 4G card for less than my 2nd 512, and that's almost an hour and a half of high quality video.

Best part of the SD card over a hard drive - it's easily replaceable - you can have mulitple with you and not take up lots of storage space - and the camera is SMALL!

Post 103 of 109

For What It is worth

by Threadbone - 1/18/08 8:08 PM In reply to: What are the differences in today's camcorders? Go HD or wait? by Lee Koo (ADMIN) Moderator

For what it is worth I think this reply is spot on. For all the mentioned reasons I bought a Canon HV20. Mini-DV Tape and has options for SD (standard digital video) in normal and wide screen plus HD (High Definition digital video) in normal, wide screen and 24 FPS option. I guess this way I am a little future proofed. I am working in SD at the moment for the reasons mentioned, not many programs can handle HDV but later on I hope to upgrade plus at the moment do not have a high definition TV.

I am amazed at the quality and am only dissapointed in the one drawback, the manual focus is not very practical. Also you can digitally convert the Hi8 material through the HV20 which is better in my opinion than capturing the hard way.

Post 104 of 109

"...digitally convert Hi8 material through the HV20?!"

by GlennFaigen - 1/18/08 9:57 PM In reply to: For What It is worth by Threadbone

Threadbone:
Clarification needed please on your comment below:
"...Also you can digitally convert the Hi8 material through the HV20 which is better in my opinion than capturing the hard way."

What do you mean by this?

Thanks,
Glenn

Post 105 of 109

Digitally convert Hi8

by Threadbone - 1/18/08 10:50 PM In reply to: "...digitally convert Hi8 material through the HV20?!" by GlennFaigen

Rather than capturing Hi8 analogue through a capture card you can use the HV20 to do the conversion to digital. Connect the output of the Hi8 camera to the headphone socket of the HV20 and the HV20 via USB or IEEE1394 to the computer the same way you would download digital video.

Remove the DV tape from the HV20, set the size to 4:3 and change AV-DV to ON and what you play from the Hi8 camera goes straight through the HV20 to the computer as DV. The quality I have achieved is better than any I have captured the analogue method via the capture card.

Forum legend:
Locked Locked thread
Moderator Moderator
CNET staff CNET staff
Samsung staff Samsung staff
Norton Authorized Support team Norton Authorized Support team
AVG staff AVG staff
Windows Outreach team Windows Outreach team
Dell staff Dell staff
Intel staff Intel staff
Powered by Jive Software