I'm thinking to replace my xm2 to a new sony hc1 or hc3.
I make two things:
- nature videos (outdoor, lot of light)
- and wedding videos (indoot, poor light)

If i can sell my used xm2, maybe i can buy this new hdv.
I know low light performance is not so good. How would compare to xm2?
In wedding i need more light? (I have 2x500W)
Where can i find sample video in low light?
(the sunny video looks beautiful)

Pros:
-clear hd pics when outdoor or have enough light
-3 sec 200fps recording with hc3? (flickerfree superslow!)
-new cam, maybe not have problem in 2-3 year :)

Cons:
- Bottom loading tape
- little zoom button
- no av in
- little, light, not so stable
- not so professional looking

What do i forget?

I might be wrong, but I think the hc-3 is a top loader. The hc-1 is a bottom loader. I have the Hc-1 and used a gl-2 several years ago. The image on the hc-1 is substantialy sharper and more detailed them the gl-2. Also, if you want 16x9, well that's its native format for video. The hc-1 has no where near the low light capability of the gl-2, but the hc-3 is suppose to be better in this regard, but probably still not up to the GL-2 in low light capability:-).

HC3 has more accurate red color reproduction, but it lacks many controls of the HC1/A1. HC3 has no headphone/mic jacks, and it has no focus or zoom rings. It also does not have a lens hood, I believe.

HC3 is 30mm while HC1/A1 is 37mm.

HC3 low light is better than the others.

There are plenty of differences you can read up here.

I think for your purposes, a HC1/A1 would be better than a HC3, but I have no idea how it compares to your camera now.

I personally can tell you that the HC1/A1 would be a great step up from the GL2, but when it comes to low light, I have no idea on the performance as I've only seen ones in Best Buy and well-lit sections of NAB '06. From what I could tell, it looks like a good on-camera light will help just as much as it does for the GL2, a lot.

However, I'd only recommend the A1 because the HC1 lacks certain controls that the GL2 would have, such as manual exposure settings, if I'm not mistaken.

Yes, the hc3 is top loader.

"The image on the hc-1 is substantialy sharper and more detailed them the gl-2."
I make wedding videos with 2 cam: GL2 and my friend's Sony Z1.
When i watch the final dvd, my GL2 pics looks sharper, Z1 pics is a little
blurred. (even when i convert to DV from the Z1 hardware or in post with Edius)

thx

Yes, the hc3 is top loader.

"The image on the hc-1 is substantialy sharper and more detailed them the gl-2."
I make wedding videos with 2 cam: GL2 and my friend's Sony Z1.
When i watch the final dvd, my GL2 pics looks sharper, Z1 pics is a little
blurred. (even when i convert to DV from the Z1 hardware or in post with Edius)

thx

You must be doing something wrong, because that is not my experience.

I shoot weddings with a 35mm cinema camera and my GL2. And in the final product of the DVD, my GL2 is always sharper. =)

Kind of surprised the whole bottom loading issue still comes into play since there is an adapter (very nice by the way) out there for $25. This should be eliminated as a con at least for choosing which to get.

Kind of surprised the whole bottom loading issue still comes into play since there is an adapter (very nice by the way) out there for $25. This should be eliminated as a con at least for choosing which to get.

What adapter are you referring to and where do you get it?

You must be doing something wrong, because that is not my experience.

Where can i post those dvd? :) What can i do wrong, when the cam convert the signal to DV and i capture through firewire?

> the HC1 lacks certain controls that the GL2 would have, such as manual exposure settings, if I'm not mistaken...

Um...sorry but I think you are mistaken. The HC1 has manual exposure control (except when in 'cinema mode' which is crippled version of Cineframe24 on the A1).

Ah, yes, that's right Graham, it was just with the Cinema mode. My bad. =)

Think A1

I presume you use external microphones to record sound. H3 only allows Sony mics. H1 is better, but for pro use (I consider anything that you get paid for pro) the A1 will be the best in the long run.

Where did you read that the HC1/HC3 can record 3 seconds of 200fps video!?

What other camcorder on the market have those abilities!?

http://media.sonyhdvinfo.com/media/hc3/HC3SlowMotion.mpeg

http://pixinfo.com/hirek/2006-03-23_259206
"normál üzemmódban másodpercenként 50, míg lassított üzemmódban 200 mezőt jelent. Egyszerre három másodpercnyi felvétel készíthető így,"

Its hungarian so i translate:
in normal mode 50 field is recorded but in slow mode this means 200 field.
3 sec video can be made.

I found the english link:
http://www.cinenow.com/uk/view-press-release-384.html

Where did you read that the HC1/HC3 can record 3 seconds of 200fps video!?The HC3 can do that, not the HC1.
It's 120frames-per-second for a max. of 3 seconds (NTSC version).
Only downside really is dramatically reduced resolution, but it's still a pretty clever feature.

So, again the low light question:
i have 2x500W halogen lamp for wedding evening.
This is just enough for XM2/GL2 to produce video with following settings:
shutter 1/50
F 1.6
Gain: 0db
So, the picture is very sharp and absolutly free of noise.

I'm afraid.
What can do in this situation the HC1? Gain up to 9db? And the picture will be noise? :(

Max. aperture on HC1 isn´t much worse at f1.8.

Doubt HC1 will give 9dB gain in a situ where XM2/GL2 will give 0dB.
Can't see any reason, optical or electronic for such a big gain differential.

Maybe 0.5stop = 3dB.