For anyone curious to look at some XR520 AVCHD shots, including a couple of night shots, here's a throwaway 4 min music video I made from some test footage:
http://www.irondocvideo.com/Waikiki%20Flash%20Mainframe.html

Looks nice - wish I were there!

Those dusk shots are where the XR really shines, I'm finding I need to crank it back a bit in bright light (and even a touch in low light), but it does an amazing job, doesn't seem to need much "retouching" in post either.

Looked like you were all handheld? Noticed just a bit o' "rocking" - that's always tough to avoid with these little cams, though the Super OIS has been working for me so far...

Dave- Absolutely all handheld. I have an impossible time preventing that rotary motion when holding the cam out of normal position (up above the head, etc.)
If I had been doing an actual project I would use at least a monopod, but I was shooting casual test footage to check out the cam and the post workflow with Cineform/CS4.
Some shots were CC with Cineform First Light, but most were untouched. I had one hi contrast shot that was unusable due to overexposure, but generally I thought the exposure was reliabily in the range I needed. I do miss the zebras though.
I was definitely impressed with image quality so I put some of it over music & export to BR for the acid test. Looked great on HDTV.
I'm feeling pretty confidant that I can shoot the XR without much sacrifice whenever I don't want to haul a big cam. I was almost there with the SR-12, but had a lot of unusable low light footage- noise, soft image, etc. XR seems to cover the bases for now.

I too miss the zebras. I shot several shows with the XR500 as full stage unattended camera with AE at -4. My wife used the SR11 and I used my FX1 as the main camera. When stage went to black I think the XR500 had less noise than the FX1 which was of course on manual exposure so did not change but the XR500 would go to +18db !!!
I would love to see Sony make a more capable camera with these sensors. I was going to change my FX1 for a FX1000 but have now decided to wait and see what comes out in the near future. With Panasonic HMC150 and the new HMC40 Sony must surely do something in the tapeless area to compete.

Ron Evans

I would love to see Sony make a more capable camera with these sensors. Sony must surely do something in the tapeless area to compete.

Ron Evans

I'm dreaming that Sony will use this technology to make a PD-170 sized cam with a 1/2" single sensor, 25-35 mbs AVCHD or XDCam data stream, and pro level controls, picture profile configs like the EX1- a baby EX, in fact, except maybe AVCHD, recording to memory stick rather than SxS. That looks like maybe a sweet spot in the market for Sony- price under $4,000.
Keep dreaming...

I think we all are "dreaming" the same camera - if Sony wanted to do a little "market research", they could come here and just give the posts to the engineers! We've designed it already, they just need to actually build it!

I agree the XR500V finally hits the mark on low light, that made the upgrade nearly instantaneous for me - no question that it outperforms earlier cameras in that respect.

I"m in the same boat on a "big cam" - nothing quite hits... tapeless is a definite, no turning back for me, yet I'd like something a bit more "pro" in features than the XR500... and I can imagine what 3x the XR500 sensors or one big one could do for low noise/low light.

I"m just torn between the two things I expect Sony HAS to release to remain competitive - an Alpha DSLR-V and our "dream cam". Either one ought to do the trick for me, but wherefor art they?

I think we all are "dreaming" the same camera - if Sony wanted to do a little "market research", they could come here and just give the posts to the engineers! We've designed it already, they just need to actually build it!

I think JVC is aming for this sweet spot with the JVC HM100, but it's got 1/4" chips. I imagine Sony will see a need to respond. A single 1/2" chip in a similar sized cam might be a trump card.
RE big(er) cams in general: the EX1 is still the best buy on the planet for a genuinely pro cam. But, alas, it is bigger than it looks & is a bear to handhold.

very nice! :)

Nice video. Boy has wikiki changed since I was there, 78 to 82, stationed at Schofield Barracks. Spent allot of time at the barefoot bar on the beach. Starting to wonder if I shouldn't have bought 2 of these cams instead of the HMC150. Ahhh, memories. Thanks for the memories.

Sony Handycam HDR-XR520V Camcorder Review - Sony HDD (http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Sony-Handycam-HDR-XR520V-Camcorder-Review-36461/Low-Light-Performance.htm)

Strange the low light reults dont look too impressive on the camcorderinfo test yet most users say its great ? .

http://www.motionbox.com/videos/7a9ed9b01818e5c4f5
camcorderinfo talk rubbish at times

CCI almost always bags on the Sonys... and incorrectly. It takes time to learn a camera well enough to "review" it properly, and there are a few "subjective" considerations when it comes to image quality. I personally find murky, noisy renditions of "low light" to be annoying, but also want to be able to see detail, not just an image that has everything crushed down to "black" below a certain level.

I just shot some evening/night airshow footage at Miramar MCAS - un-be-freakin-lieveable what this camera can manage to do in low light. Every time I've shot in dusk/night conditions I've been impressed. I was able to get some pretty good footage of a nighttime Golden Knights parachute jump...

I have to agree with Dave. The XR500 is noticeably better than the SR11 and has less grain for the same conditions than my FX1. It makes my FX1 look like the lower cost camera a lot of the time. The main difference is the clear blacks and detail in the dark areas which makes the image stand out. I really wish Sony would make a more capable camera with this technology. I am waiting before changing my FX1.

Ron Evans

Sony is taking their time rolling out the "R" sensors - only other cameras that seem to have officially received the new sensor are the DSC WX1 and TX1 still cameras, little pocket cameras, with 720p video... not exactly the most useful considering the tiny form factor, but handy for a pocket camera.

I picked up a WX1 out of curiousity, and while it's good in low light (no where near the XR500 performance though), outdoors it tends to blow the highs rather significantly unless you adjust the EV. When adjusted, the pix look pretty good, and I could see it being usable in a pinch for video with a bracket or something so it isn't so small you can hardly hold it!

Sony really needs to get on the ball with the technology rollout - I think we are all waiting for an answer to the HMC150 and the JVC tapeless offerings. The XR500 is my "main" camera for the moment while I wait for either a nice camera in the TRV900 vein with the "R" sensor, or an Alpha DSLR-V... doesn't look like either is forthcoming anytime soon.

Still, the XR500 is plenty good, can't really complain too much about it considering, it's just that it shows what COULD be...

i own canon hv30 HDV an thinking to replace with XR500V, so have a few questions.

- HV30 don`t have full manual control, but has a manual dial. you switch to it and you can adjust exposure manually and lock it there + go plus or minus exposure (whic is essentially like manual exposure). does XR500V has something like that.
- will i miss something on HV30 when moved to sony XR500V :-)

For anyone curious to look at some XR520 AVCHD shots, including a couple of night shots, here's a throwaway 4 min music video I made from some test footage:
Waikiki (http://www.irondocvideo.com/Waikiki%20Flash%20Mainframe.html)

I've noted this in another thread but the title of this one is very applicable and hopefully Robert won't mind me adding a pointer to some CX500V or older cam film which helps demonstrate what the cam can do.

If you go to YouTube and search on ThomasAlexHD you'll find some CX500V clips I uploaded specifically to show performance in some real-life low-light situations. The actual decision to upload anything came after I saw the quality of the stabilization after a day trip to places I'd filmed before. So some of these clips will show the difference between the HC7 in 2007, a CX12 late last year, and a new CX500V. I have to wonder if we're going to look back on this type of video in five years wondering how we could stand it back in the "old days".

Speaking of that, I have some home movie film literally from the 1940s on, shot by my grandfather, my father, and then me starting around 1994. Maybe I'll post a series of clips just to show people five or so generations of home video quality. We've come a long ways in 65 years...

I agree. The SR-12 low light shots I used in a travel doc a year or so ago look completely unacceptable now.
Here's a short video from footage I shot with the XDCam EX1- three 1/2" CMOS chips, 7 lbs of camera.
Ironman 2009 (http://www.irondocvideo.com/IM%202009%20Flash%20Mainframe.html)
The first 1-2 minutes and the last couple of minutes have several low light/night shots. They don't really look hugely better than what the tiny XR520 seems capable of, at least at the level of web distribution.

I am very happy with my SR11. I took this whole video with only headlights and campfires to light the night... When I showed the clips to people at the dunes they were amazed at how much it picks up. Dumont at Night is one of the trickiest things to pick up with video. Most just turn out looking like headlights passing in the night.

Dumont Dunes Thanksgiving 09 on Vimeo

Next time I go out I will make sure to get some EX3 video for comparison. I have some online but it was using ultra slo shutter and wouldn't be fair. I find the biggest difference between the EX and the smaller camera is the EX will look HD in nearly any lighting while the SR11 for example looks more standard definition as the light starts to go away. Still very nice though!

I have other night video of the EX but there are street lights so again not really fair.