Version: 2008
Advanced Search
advertisement
advertisement

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
Click Here
Post 16 of 109

A reasonably priced camcorder with a future

by Steven W Rose - 1/4/08 9:14 PM In reply to: What are the differences in today's camcorders? Go HD or wait? by Lee Koo (ADMIN) Moderator

Hi Russ,

I'll start with a short answer followed by an elaborate justification. I would recommend a Canon HV20 with an external firewire hard drive recorder. This is based on owning and enjoying a Canon HV10, Sony HC3, Sanyo HD1, Canon TX1, and Aiptek A-HD high definition camcorders, and miscellaneous SD cameras.

There are many measures of quality, but one of the most basic is resolution. Here are some picture size approximations for reference: SD 480I = 720 x 480 pixels, or about 350K pixels per picture (two interlaced fields); 720P = 1280 x 720, or about 1 megapixel per picture; and 1080P = 1920 x 1080, or about 2 megapixels per picture (1080I requires two successive fields for one picture).

And here are the pixel rates per second for various common formats: SD, 10 megapixels per second, 30 complete pictures; 720P30, 30 megapixels per second, 30 complete pictures; 1080I, 60 megapixels per second, 30 complete pictures; 1080P24, 48 megapixels per second, 24 complete pictures.

Interlaced standards imply that a picture will be reproduced using two interwoven fields, the first consisting of the odd numbered lines, the second of the even numbered lines. Most cameras expose each field separately, 1/60 of a second apart, which means that moving objects in the image won't line up when a picture is composed from the two fields. The benefit is that when they are shown as video, they produce a smoother moving image. Progressive standards imply that the entire picture is exposed at one time, as it would be on film. 1080P24 is supposed to emulate the appearance of film, as film is typically exposed at 24 frames per second.

We'll use this information below.

The first consideration in your choice of equipment should be the value of the content over your lifetime. It takes little more effort to shoot good video using HD formats versus SD formats, but results in pictures with three to six times the resolution. As resolution standards increase in the future, they will have greater value than SD video of the same content. It doesn't matter if this is personal or professional video, the same rule applies. The cost of the equipment is far less important than the time and effort you will spend using it over its life, and the content you will produce -- go for the best results.

Within the HD camcorders you are considering, there are four predominant compression formats: MJPEG (Canon TX1, JVC), HDV (HV20, others), MPEG-4 (Sanyo, Aiptek), and HDAVC (really MPEG-4 AVC, aka h.264). Real AVC requires lots of horsepower, and current implementations leave room for improvement, as one might expect in the first generation. HDAVC cameras typically record to hard disk or flash media.

MPEG-4 is generally for flash media cameras, such as the HD1 and A-HD. It allows 720P30 high definition recordings around 4 gigabytes per hour with acceptable quality, although quite a bit short of HDV quality. This is necessitated by the current capacity and data rate of flash memory cards. Memory cards still cost about ten times as much as DV tape for the same storage capacity, so you will probably want to erase and reuse the cards. Just be sure you have made two copies to different storage devices before erasing the original.

MJPEG is a format that offers easy editing, much like DV format (each picture is compressed individually). However, it eats memory like crazy (Canon TX1 uses about 8 GB/hr). And the difficulty of editing MPEG formats which share information from picture to picture is only a problem for the guy who has to write the editing program -- for you, there should be no additional burden.

MPEG-2, which is the basis for HDV, is well understood, and although it isn't as efficient at compression, produces an excellent image. HDV compression puts an hour of high definition content on a one hour DV tape, the same as a standard definition DV camera. HDV editing tools are common. DV tapes are inexpensive enough that it makes sense to never erase them, keeping them as your archive instead.

Speaking of media, DV tapes store about 12 GB for about $4. Flash memory is down to about $5 per gigabyte, and hard drives are around twenty cents per gigabyte to forty cents per gig for tiny drives. While hard drives are remarkably reliable, when they fail, their entire contents is gone. With video tapes, only the section affected by the failure (e.g. crinkling) is lost. When video is captured to a hard drive, it is ready to plug into a non-linear editing system immediately, avoiding the "real time" (1x) transfer of content from tape to disk before editing can begin. An ideal capture medium in terms of reliability, cost, and workflow is a removable hard drive.

But wait -- none of the consumer camcorders have removable hard drives! So you have to take the camera out of service in order to edit the content of its hard drive, or at least transfer it to another drive before editing, since you'll have to erase the contents of the camera's fixed hard drive before continuing to use it!

What makes a lot more sense is to use an external hard drive, capturing simultaneously to DV tape for archival purposes (copy 1) and to the disk (archival copy 2), which can then immediately be used for editing. Unfortunately, external firewire disks (with controller intelligence to be able to download) are remarkably expensive -- about the cost of a portable computer. So -- use a portable computer! Run an editor with a built-in capture program to record the content as you shoot. If you record it to an external hard drive, you can hot swap drives in the field for immediate editing.

The Canon HV20 is about the best quality, most versatile HDV camera available (according to reviews from owners at Amazon, NewEgg, CNet, etc.). My HV10 has been very pleasing, and the HV20 offers both 1080I and 1080P24 recording formats. It is said to have an actual 1920 x 1080 sensor (many HDV cameras are 1440 x 1080), with reasonable sensitivity and noise. It has an external mike in, and a headphone output (it is very important that you monitor your audio while shooting).

So that is the basis for my recommendation. However, I also recommend that you get an Aiptek A-HD (about $120 on sale) to play with, so you'll know what is coming. I have always associated Aiptek with gimick cameras that were fun but low quality. The A-HD is a real surprise in quality and low noise, and you can afford to give an HD Camcorder to your children! It seems to readout the video sensor in real time, so that if you pan quickly vertical objects tilt. Getting good audio is difficult. You'll need a tripod. But by and large, it is really cool. It can even record an NTSC video input (with audio) and work as a portable video (or MP3) player.

I've carried the HD1 (pocket sized) or the TX1 (even smaller) at all times for a few years. The world's finest camera setup won't do you any good if you don't have it with you when an opportunity presents itself. The 720P30 format is just fine in this context. The A-HD could also serve in this capacity.

By the way, great video requires great audio. Small portable recorders with good microphones (such as the iRiver IFP 7xx and 8xx series sold as MP3 players, or the Zoom H2) have crystal controlled timebases, just like your digital camera. As a result, the audio can be synchronized during editing and (as long as all devices remained rolling during record) they should remain in very good sync. You can sprinkle recorders in areas where you expect interesting audio, and once everything is rolling, clap once in front of the camera so you can line things up later. In this way, you don't have to be dependent on the camera's mike, or worry about dragging around the external microphone wire while you shoot. And you are not limited to the single channel of audio a wireless mike typically provides. If you get a wireless mike, remember you want a lightweight, battery operated receiver (most come with clunky AC powered receivers).

Although your camcorder will be great for handheld shots, please also get a decent tripod, with a quickly removable camera mount (and a spare platform), with "fluid head". The fluid is a viscous dampling fluid, which almost guarantees all of your camera moves will be smooth. A jerky tripod is almost useless for a video camera. Also, when you shoot on the tripod, turn off the image stabilization which will otherwise produce strange lagging movement effects.

Please remember when you are shooting that camera moves and zooms are like fonts on a page -- use too many and you distract from the content by calling attention to the camerawork.

So the answer, although it can be boiled down to a rational choice of equipment, is not intuitive. First, the cost of the equipment will be of far less importance than the value of the content; second, great video requires great audio; and third, great video requires great attention to lighting.

One last thing: Please back up your media, both locally and on distant servers. There are services which specialize in this, but with a little effort, you can use private space on a shared Internet host that is readily accessible but secure. Hosting space in a distant city can cost as little as $6 per terabyte(!) per month, but guarantees that any local catastrophes won't destroy your family picture and video collection. And if you wish, you can also set up your own website in the public space.

Whatever you choose, Russ, I hope you have a blast.

Aloha,
Steve

Post 17 of 109

Simultaneously recording to tape and laptop

by sfraibe2 - 1/13/08 1:50 PM In reply to: A reasonably priced camcorder with a future by Steven W Rose

Steve,

As a follow-up, I am indeed interested in purchasing an HV 20 and simultaneously recording to my laptop and to tape. If this in fact posssible, what happens when the tape stops recording after 60 minutes? Can I continue to record to the hard drive while changing tapes?

Thanks

Post 18 of 109

Simultaneously Recording - tape and laptop

by sfraibe2 - 1/13/08 2:27 PM In reply to: A reasonably priced camcorder with a future by Steven W Rose

Thanks for your answer. To follow up, I am strongly considering purchasing the HV20, and being able to simultaneously record to my laptop and tape would be very helpful. Do you know for certain if this is indeed possible with this camcorder? If so, what happens when the tape stops recording after 60 minutes? Can I continue to record to the hard drive while changing tapes?

Best
Steve

Post 19 of 109

Can firewire recording continue while tapes are changed?

by Steven W Rose - 1/14/08 10:29 AM In reply to: Simultaneously Recording - tape and laptop by sfraibe2

Hi Steve,

Great question! I only have the HV10, but I'll give this a try in the next couple of days. I would expect some sort of interruption, but we'll see.

Aloha,
Steve

Post 20 of 109

Firewire download continues during tape change

by Steven W Rose - 1/14/08 1:51 PM In reply to: Simultaneously Recording - tape and laptop by sfraibe2

Hi Steve,

I had a chance to test sooner than expected. I used the capture app in Sony Vegas Studio 6 on my portable (I think it was the first version to allow HDV capture). With the HV10 turned on in the Camera position, output was immediately available via Firewire, and was unaffected by starting and stopping the tape (aside from the chime sound on the audio track from the camera's mike -- best to turn off the beep!).

When I ejected the tape, the capture screen on my portable turned blue and said something like "camera stopped". I reinserted the tape and closed the lid and the image resumed. However, on reviewing the capture file itself, it continued to record the camera's output during the tape change!

An important consideration for this type of use is the ability to change tapes with the camera mounted on a tripod, since you intend to continue to capture video during the change. The HV20 scores on this count, as the mechanism opens from the top. The HV10 opens from the bottom, as do many DV camcorders, and would require a special adapter and some contortion to change the tape while tripod mounted.

Another consideration is audio. Even with the beeps turned off, the camera mike will pick up the noise of the tape eject mechanism. Please see my earlier post about using external recorders such as the Zoom H2, and synchronizing in post. And please remember if you buy a wireless mike, that you'll need a small battery operated receiver if you intend to be able to move freely with your camcorder. Otherwise you'll be tethered to a large, AC powered receiver by the audio input cable, and might as well have used a wired external mike.

Aloha,
Steve

Post 21 of 109

Thanks-More Helfpul Info on Simultaneous Recording

by sfraibe2 - 1/14/08 5:42 PM In reply to: Firewire download continues during tape change by Steven W Rose

Thanks,

This is extremely helpful, and I do not know how else I could have found out this information.

To add to this thread for those interested in a dual option of simultaneously recording to tape and a hard drive, I have learned that OnLocation (by Adobe) advertises that it enables one to simultaneously backup to tape and record/view on a computer screen. I also found out that another interesting alternative is to use a Focus FS-4Pro HD external hard drive, which you can attach to your HDV camcorder while simultaneously backing it up to the hard disk. The information can then be painlessly transferred to your computer. This option costs from 600-1500 dollars, depending on the size of the hard drive that you choose (40 mg - 100 mg). There are also some other portable hard disk options available as well, including from Sony and Citidisk, but from what I've learned it seems like the Focus is the most reliable (relative to the Citidisk) and widely available on various formats (the Sony is limited to Sony cameras, and possible specific types).

In sum, it seems (at least in terms of my own needs) that using HDV, while simultaneously backing up to both tape and a hard drive makes the most sense, as I do not believe AVCHD is ready for prime time (not allowing for easy editing, and sometimes not even easy viewing) and does not provide the same piece of mind in terms of archiving and redundancy to prevent the loss of data. On the other hand, transferring tape simply takes too long and one is limited by the 60 min length (or 80 min, if you choose this option) on mini dv and hdv tapes. An hdv format with a backup to a hard drive combines the best of all worlds, and (for my money, anyway) is the best tradeoff for the getting the highest quality recordings, ease of use for editing and transferring data, and piece of mind in terms of ensuring information is safely archived.

Post 22 of 109

"Great video requires great audio" - Steve Rose

by boris.klyushnik - 1/14/08 12:50 PM In reply to: A reasonably priced camcorder with a future by Steven W Rose

Thak you Steve for your remarks and avices on audio.
In many papers, fomus discussions etc. the topic of sound quality is ignored.
I have a lot of noises with Canon-HV20E, and almost perfect audio recorded with Panasonic NV-GS400. Both with buid-in mikes. Regarding the sum of (video+audio)quality I'd prefare Panasonic NV-GS400.
My question is: May I stick the Iriver digital MP3 player (as recored) onto my distand lecturer hoping to synchronize my DV with
separatelly recorded audio?
Thank you in advance,
Boris Klyushnik
boris.klyushnik@tversu.ru

Post 23 of 109

Synchronizing separately recorded audio

by Steven W Rose - 1/14/08 4:05 PM In reply to: "Great video requires great audio" - Steve Rose by boris.klyushnik

Hi Boris,

I haven't tried synchronizing over extended durations, but so far it has been easy to synchronize external recorders with video. This requires that the audio and video recorders remain rolling at all times after they have started, and that the audio recorder not be in "voice activated" mode. Also, because some audio recorders have variable speed playback, make sure that it is playing at 100% of the recording speed.

To be appropriate for this application, the recorder must have a stable (crystal controlled) timebase. But it doesn't have to be adjusted, because you will be playing back on the same device and any fixed error will be compensated! If you record a musical instrument with the recorder, such as a single high note on a piano,and the pitch is accurate when you compare the playback with the instrument, then the recorder should be fine. The only time I'd anticipate a potential problem would be if the recording was done at a very different temperature than the playback, since inexpensive timebases may change frequency slightly with temperature.

Once you have downloaded the soundtrack(s) and the video to the editor, you will be able to compare their lengths. If they don't match, it may be possible to stretch or shrink the length of the audio to fit. This probably won't be necessary, since both the camera and the recorder(s) are running with crystal timebases.

In the old days, when everything (including VCR video sync!) was determined mechanically, it was necessary to have some sort of elaborate mechanical synchronization mechanism among multiple recorders. Now, you can have multiple recorders running in different audio and video hotspots, synchronize their tracks in the editor, and do your edit just like you were directing a multicamera live shoot -- except you get to go back to make adjustments.

Interestingly, in your application, if the lecturer is far away the audio pickup on the camera will not be synchronized with the video! For example, if the lecturer is 100' away, the sound will be delayed by about 1/10 of a second (speed of sound is about 1000' per second). Having a recorder at the lectern will allow you to synchronize a much higher quality soundtrack with the video.

This brings up the need for a signal that can be used to synchronize the video and audio tracks in the editor, such as the clapboard commonly associated with movies. An informal approach is just to stand in front of the camera with both devices rolling and clap! You'll want a short impulse sound that can be easily matched with the frame showing the action.

I hope this works for you. If your iRiver is a 7xx or 8xx its external audio input can be used for an external stereo mike if you wish -- there is an option in its menu to change the input sensitivity from line to mike. Also, you will probably want to turn on AGC unless you can test and set the input level before you shoot. It is always a disappointment when your separately recorded audio turns out to be distorted. Other recorders may have similar options.

Aloha,
Steve

Post 24 of 109

Getting great audio

by Jamfan55 - 1/15/08 2:59 AM In reply to: Synchronizing separately recorded audio by Steven W Rose

I've got a Panasonic miniDV cam with a built in zoom mic. I mostly record live music, and several people (non-musicians) have commented on the high quality of the sound. On the other hand, my musician friends have complained about the low end bass distortion, which I assume is due to the zoom mic. To me, it's a very minor issue, especially when compared to the substantial reduction in crowd noise I get when I use it.
Anyway, I've been wondering about recording with a line in from the soundboard, which I believe would eliminate all the crowd noise (except what comes through the mics), but I'm worried about the quality of the sound mix, and it being out of synch with the video. Is this latter a valid consideration?

I wouldn't mind a wired external specialty mic, mounted on the coldshoe, if I could find them and get accurate assessments of their performance before I buy. But sellers, and even the manufacturer's specs, don't tell you everything, just what THEY want you to know.

Hey, judge for yourself (shameless plug):
www.youtube.com/TheJay55
(all videos dated before 2007 are converted from analog)

Post 25 of 109

Getting great audio from a soundboard

by Steven W Rose - 1/15/08 4:26 AM In reply to: Getting great audio by Jamfan55

Hi Tom,

A professionally mixed feed should give the best possible sound, as long as the input levels match what your camera expects. What you would want on the camera is a line level input, but most have only a mike level input which would require a significant pad (attenuator) to reduce the line level to mike level. Also, some external mike inputs are mono, I suspect, so you would also want to mix the two channels (after attenuation to prevent messing up anyone else using the feed). Or the mixer may already provide a mono output. The pad should be at the camera end of the line to prevent noise pickup.

There will be no synchronization issue, as there should be little or no latency of the audio through the board and it effectively puts your audio pickup right by the instruments.

The pad for each feed would be something like a 2000 ohm resistor in series with the feed, followed by a ten to one hundred ohm resistor connected to the 2000 ohm resistor and ground. The signal to the camcorder mike input comes from the junction of the two resistors and ground (across the ten ohm resistor). The 2K / 10 ohm combo should knock a 1 V line signal down to about 5 millivolts. Everything should be shielded.

If your camera has adjustable audio levels and some sort of audio level indicator, ask the board operator to provide a 0 dB tone on your feed, and adjust the camera so that it is also at 0 dB indicated. If you wish to be conservative, set your camera level a little bit low. Then leave it up to the board operator to monitor and adjust levels during the performance -- the result will be much better than camera AGC or trying to do it yourself while shooting. It should give you the cleanest possible mix, with the greatest dynamic range, and the board operator becomes your audio guy.

If one of the musicians is also operating the board, definitely set your camera level three to six dB lower than the board, since their attention will be divided. Also, if your camera has a limiter function (versus AGC), it would be good to turn it on.

The position of the camera level controls should be between 1/2 and 3/4 of maximum if the attenuator values are correct. If the setting is lower than 1/2, use a lower value for the smaller resistor, e.g. 20 instead of 10 ohms. If it is higher than 3/4, use a higher value. The idea is not to overload the camera, but also not to have to crank up the camera audio gain so far that it introduces noise.

Finally, if your camera has a headphone output, you should use it. Otherwise, if a cord gets disconnected or intermittent, you won't know it until you play back the video. And a band video without sound ...

Aloha,
Steve

Post 26 of 109

Thanks Steve!

by Jamfan55 - 1/22/08 4:08 AM In reply to: Getting great audio from a soundboard by Steven W Rose

That clears up a lot of things (though I may need someone to translate it into "common english for the technically illiterate", lol).
This is just a hobby, and I'm a low budget hack. I'm not making anything on it, and it's only intended to help out my friends until they can afford to make something better. Recorded audio alone is fine, but video is the next best thing to being there
I find that most live music where soundboards and stacks are used are pretty much mono - everything together is coming out of each speaker, and I'd expect the same through the line.
I'd also expect that, somewhere between my PC and the TV's speaker system it would be converted into at least "simulated stereo"
Just getting a feed line is enough of an imposition, I certainly couldn't expect them to mix my sound too. Since using the line limits my vantage to either being near the board or using lots of duct tape to keep people from tripping over the cords, adjusting the feed myself isn't stretching things too much.

To everyone else, sorry for taking this so far off-topic. Seems it's inevitable with popular discussions and, as others have noted, sound quality seems to be a subject that's often overlooked when discussing video.

Tom

Post 27 of 109

HD

by w0by - 1/4/08 9:53 PM In reply to: What are the differences in today's camcorders? Go HD or wait? by Lee Koo (ADMIN) Moderator

I would recommend getting one that records onto a hard drive. It's way nice to be able to just hook it up to your computer, download the files and edit them as you please. Note that if you get a hard drive recording camcorder - with high definition - the files will be very large and there aren't many programs that will even support editing the video - or the sound.

Post 28 of 109

Go for the best features

by Rontyne - 1/5/08 1:04 AM In reply to: What are the differences in today's camcorders? Go HD or wait? by Lee Koo (ADMIN) Moderator

As a former filmmaker (that's filom, not just video)and one-time owner of a high-end Sony mini-DVD system, i would opt for an HD recorder, straight onto Hard Disk.
The reasons are quality, flexibiilty, and build: inserting and removing tapes does not do your machine much good.
If you choose a three-CD version - that is, dedicated hardware for each of the thre primary colours ( red, yellow, blue) which, with black and white, make up all other colours - then you will not go wrong.
The next thing to consider is the lens: if you can get a manual focus, this will improve things immeasurably, and if you can get a variable zoom - one that is swappable with other lenses - than you are onto a winnner.

Make sure the operating buttons are clear, logical and distinct, even if in the rain, cold, on a rush and in other extreme circumstances. Makt certain the menus are likewise clear and easily configurable.

You could ask vendors for trials: why spend more than $2000-3000 based on a viewing fo less than five minutes: would you do that with a used car or oven? No, well in that case take yout time and don't be impressed by sales pitches.

Ask vendors for the names of other customers, and seek their opinion ( especially if the system is high-end and represents an investment: try to find sites where video clips show which cameras were used in production. Read reviews you respect ( I always look at PCPro magasine and their handy A-list, wiht their regular articles on productino, software and digitalisation).

Finallym, think about the editing system and software you will be using, and how your PC/Mac capacity will affect image and sound dexterity. Yes, don't forget about sound, microphones and effects: these are the basic "grammars" of film language, alongside the visual. Ignore them at your peril.

Post 29 of 109

Do you edit your video or just store it and view now an then

by dan herrman - 1/5/08 8:10 AM In reply to: What are the differences in today's camcorders? Go HD or wait? by Lee Koo (ADMIN) Moderator

DVD video is very difficult to incorporate into and editing platform. If you just record and pulll out to watch this could work for you.

Hard Drive recording is limited in that you probably need to offload your footage to antoehr hard drive and if say you are on a long vacation that becomes a bit of an issue

Mini DV is cheap convinient in that you can carry unlimited number of the small tapes with you and they are generally the format used by most prosumer and hobbyist types out there

HDV versus any other format is a clear winner. If you own or plan to own a HDTV then I am sure you will appreciate seeing your videio in a format that is as good or even better then the HD signal you receive from the satellite companies or you cable companies.

Camcorderinfo.com does a very good job of ranking the current camcorders on the market and in detail describes the pros and cons.

From my standpoint it is HDV and MiniDV. The price is now under $500 for a Canon HV10 and the Canon HV20 is now under 1000 and woks as good as some of the prosumer models/

Ebay has many Sony HDR-HC1's for under 500. Camera of the year in 2005!

Post 30 of 109

camcorders

by jock a - 1/5/08 10:05 AM In reply to: What are the differences in today's camcorders? Go HD or wait? by Lee Koo (ADMIN) Moderator

I had a Sony Hi-8 camcorder and gave it to my brother in law in Australia who isn't in to all this newfangled technology, but he is quite happy with it. Anyway I now have a Sony DCR, which uses a smaller tape with digital qualities, and a HDD camcorder which uses no tapes at all. The beauty of the latter is that the picture quality is far superior. I don't think you should bother with HD until you wait and see if HD is going to take off. The HDD camera, I think, would be the best one to take over the role from the old, and much-loved, Sony Hi-8. Happy shooting!
Jock A

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