Assessment of the HF10 vs the SR12

[Ken Ross]

Originally Posted by Steve Mullen

I explained WHY one needs an F-stop read-out. Diffraction reduces sharpness when -- with a 1/3-inch chip -- the F-stop becomes smaller than f/5.6 -- for red the blurring start below f/4. You seem to be suggesting that I should forget everything I know as a videographer just because I'm shooting vacation videos..

Once you've taken as much video as I have with the SR11/12, please report back to me about this reduced sharpness. I haven't seen and it's not an issue. I've shot in all types of light. You need to look at each lens as a separate entity and not generalize across the board. Just as we know the CA issues with some of Canon's prosumer lens, the same issue isn't seen on cams such as the HV10 or HV20. Each lens is different my friend. I've viewed all my footage on a 60" 1080p plasma, not a small computer monitor. As a result I'd be able to spot lens issues. The problem your describing was something I saw on my Sony FX7, but not the SR12. Additionally, you'll reach a point with the Canon where you will still need a neutral density or polarizing filter to avoid this. You can raise the shutter speed and then get your dreaded strobe issues, or reduce the shutter speed and fall victim to your soft image.

Originally Posted by Steve Mullen

I explained why one must be able to control shutter-speed. Just because I pick-up a tiny camcorder should I give-up any notion that by setting the shutter-speed to 1/60th the shots out of the window of my car will look perfect rather than stroby? Why should a photographer who knows how to shoot give-up what they know just because the camera is small and cheap?

The fact that the Canon offers both options in a camera that is both smaller and cheaper proves there is no inherent reason Sony couldn't have these features. Yet, you point the finger at me as wanting too much. Seems to me that Canon's long experience as a maker of still cameras tells them that these functions are critical to a CAMERA.

The fact is that strobing to the degree you're mentioning is only seen under certain conditions and certain subject movements. Rarely do I see this as an issue. Your posts come across so anti-Sony and pro-Canon, again I sit here and scratch my head why anyone like you would buy an SR11. You knew all these issues going in and yet you still bought it. There was another guy on another forum that did that and I predicted accurately he would return his (also bought his at Costco). Everything he reported on the Sony was negative despite the fact that user error and sheer ignorance was responsible for almost all his issues. If I felt like you or he, I would never touch the Sony with a 10' pole...or any camera I felt that way about.

Originally Posted by Steve Mullen

You see -- the things you knock about the Canon can all be fixed either with more light or fixed in post (CC). The features that are missing in the Sony are not fixable.

Yeah, the guy I spoke of above always said that too. But you see Steve, you are 100% wrong about being able to 'fix in post'. First off, why SHOULD someone be forced to 'fix in post'. What if I don't care to correct colors that should have been correct in acquisition. Ah yes, it's the Canon so we can forgive it. The fact is that Canon's colors are so wrong at times you can stand on your head and spit nickels and you won't get correct color in acquisition or in post. Anyone that's done extensive editing knows there is NO substitute for getting the color right during the capture phase. Every videographer has 'screwed up' at some point in his career and knows very well that some blunders can't be properly corrected in post. Some color inaccuracies can be corrected and others can't. They can be made to look better but they still won't be right. I did extensive A/Bs with both the SR12 and the HF10 and there was simply no comparision in the accuracy of colors. The same was true with the hyped contrast that Canon has given the HF10. Their weird gamma causes the HF10 to easily blow out highlights whereas the Sony is much more resistant to that. To force me to 'fix in post' something that most consumer cameras can get right from the start (INCLUDING the Canon HV10 and HV20) is utterly absurd. Fixing anything in the world of HD is time consuming and unnecessary for something like this. And, to boot, there is nothing that can be done for blown highlights. No zebras on the Canon, but you'll give it a pass for that too. Talk about yet another professional feature that's missing on the Canon and present on the Sony. Tell me how you accurately adjust your exposure Steve without zebras? Again my friend, a little objectivity please.

Originally Posted by Steve Mullen

A camera is a camera -- not a computer. It is crazy to try to navigate down three menu layers to do a WB. And, WB is something one MUST be able to in any MIXED illumination situation! No AWB can know what YOU want the scene to look like.

In fact, the menu system will be impossible to use in the bright sun because you won't be able to see the screen. And, you can't use the VF because it's turned-off. And, I don't know how you can TOUCH the screen multiple times while shooting and not shake the camera.

Hmm, interesting, the Sony's higher resolution, larger LCD can't be seen in bright light but the Canon can? C'mon Steve, you need to try a little objectivity. It's interesting that you give the Canon yet another pass for not even having a viewfinder. Talk about not having something ANY camcorder should have. Yikes! Oh, and try to make adjustments with the Canon and not shake THAT camera! The fact is Steve that BOTH cameras will shake when you do this. It's really a bit silly to point the finger at just the Sony.

Originally Posted by Steve Mullen

Bottom-line -- I don't even need to shoot with the Sony to know it will have problems in many very common situations: bright sun, rapidly moving cars, mixed lighting. Are you really saying it's asking too much to expect to have the OPTION of taking control of a CAMERA in these very common situations.

As I said Steve, I haven't seen these problems to nearly the degree you seem to think they will happen. You've drawn your conclusions before you pressed the 'record' button. Once again we sit here and ask "why did this guy get a Sony when there's not much he likes about it. A camera like this (the Canon OR the Sony) should be able to produce excellent video by simply hitting record. The fact is that cams like these are used for events that happen quickly and are not often repeated, spur of the moment happenings. They are used where one does not have the time to go through many manual adjustments. In this area the Sony simply does better than the Canon in capturing those 'once in a lifetime events' when one simply doesn't have the time to worry about the color or the exposure for which the Canon needs to be babied.

You see Steve I have both Canon and Sony...I've got no grudge against either company and I have both of their HD cameras. I tried both the HF10 and SR12 and found the SR12 simply produced superior video that didn't need to be 'fixed in post'. Would I like more manual controls and dedicated buttons on the Sony? Sure. But the Sony for me is the best of the current crop, producing what to my eyes looks like the most accurate color and best dynamic range.

Originally Posted by Steve Mullen

You see the issue isn't as you say my wanting a "professional" camera. It's that a "professional" expects ANY camera -- even one aimed at consumers to function as all cameras have always function. There's a reason why the 35mm cameras your grandfather or great grandfather used to take vacation pictures and baby pictures had these controls. There's a reason why he was proud of his skills. Can you really be proud of something a computer does for you?

This is a wee bit of an exaggeration Steve. There ARE plenty of manual controls on the Sony including zebras and bias controls lacking on the Canon, get over it already! Your beloved Canon has no zebras and no viewfinder. Last time I looked these were found on virtually every prosumer cam I've ever seen. As you would say "Sony used them so certainly Canon could have....why not?" It cuts both ways when you show some degree of objectivity my friend.

The other thing that seems to elude you is that videography and photography express their art in composition...not just the presence or absence of computer controls. All the manual controls in the world won't get you the proper composition Steve. Give me the guy that knows what he's doing and I'll give him a 'dumb camera' like the Sony and he'll constantly produce superior results to the guy with all the manual controls in the world but no sense of art.

Originally Posted by Steve Mullen

Sony has made the decision that folks today are so much dumber than than their parents that there's no need for these controls. Canon has not made this decision. Now, it seems to me there is a clear choice to be made.

But there you are buying the Sony to 'objectively' test it. Okeedokey. I'll make the same prediction I made with the other guy who 'objectively' tested it. :)

[Steve Mullen]

Basically you are saying that somehow a $1,000 Sony consumer camcorder is so smart and well designed that it eliminates the need for manual controls. (Zebra doesn't control anything!) And, you are saying your one day test PROVES your claims.

You may be 100% correct, but you are asking folks to believe that somehow Sony has repealed the laws of optics and that somehow Sony's shutter doesn't work like any other cameras shutter. Or, put another way, you are asking me to reject what I know about how cameras work by saying YOU don't see any problems. And, you are saying your one day test PROVES your claim. You've got to know that subjective tests test the viewer more than they do a camera.

You seem unwilling to assume that had you used both cameras for a month AND really learned HOW to use the Canon you might have come to a very different conclusion. You made your decision in a few hours in a very limited set of conditions, posted a review, and now defend it. You made no tests of 24p or 30p (because you don't like how they look) and dismissed Cine gamma even though every posted pix shows it to look better. You didn't even consider that Canon was aiming for a look with deeper shadows and reduced highlights because many folks believe it looks more like film. I may not like that look either, but when I review a camera I do so in the context that other folks want/need different looks.

Bottom-line you didn't review the camcorders. You compared camcorders only based upon what YOU need and HOW YOU want to work and the LOOK you want. That's not a review. It takes a month of experience to write a professional review of one camera. Several months to compare two cameras. That's why pro reviewers get paid for their reviews. It requires the objectivity you casually dismiss as a waste of time.

I'm not biased in favor of the Canon as you claim. How could I be as I've not used it yet? I only mentioned the Canon to prove Sony had a choice. Size and cost did not force Sony to not put in manual controls. I fully expect I'll have a long list of stupid Canon issues -- like no VF. And, I'm not biased against the Sony either.

Why not relax and let someone share their take on a camcorder even if it conflicts with your opinions?

PS1: I shot indoors with sun coming in windows and blue skylight coming from other windows. A classic MIXED light situation. The Sony AWB was NOT accurate. (It was too blue) Only One-touch was. This is exactly what I predicted in my previous post. So already I know I can't trust AWB and I know a three deep menu system is going to be a bitch to use in the field.

PS2: The AF seems as good as the V1/FX7 and if this proves the case, that is a huge PLUS for the Sony.

PS3: Why would Sony put OPTIONS only on the screen. If you turn-off Display, you can't get to the Options. And, why not have only one OPTION menu -- in Movie Mode -- come-up with six most used in-field functions: Focus, Spot Focus, Exposure, Spot Exposure, WB, and SLO-Mo. There should be ONE toolbox under the Home menu. This is a major departure from the excellent menu systems in other Sony cams.

PS4: Now matter how accurate the exposure and WB, every clip needs to be CC to make them match other. That's why CC is such a big part of production. Just like EQing and mixing audio.

[Wacharapong Chiowanich]

I suspect that Sony may have done a good market research on the target buyers of their consumer cams. The findings may have indicated most of their prospective buyers i.e. soccer moms, parents of kindergarten kids, students on school breaks etc. couldn't care less about strobing, constant changes in exposure or depth of field or slightly soft images because of lens diffraction. Or they may simply have not seen them in their videos.

A good business decision therefore was obvious, making svelt-looking camcorders void of unsightly control knobs or buttons, shifting exposure be damned!

Some questions remain, though. If the majority of casual users value simplicity of use above all else, why companies like Canon, Panasonic, JVC, Sanyo and the rest keep offering consumer cameras with physical controls on similar sized bodies e.g. Canon HF10, HF100, HV20, HV30 or most Panasonic and JVC models. Could it be that their target users are more knowledgeable or they have just done a poor research?

Wacharapong

[Tom Roper]

When did they remove the zebras from the Canon? My HV10 has them...

[Steve Mullen]

Originally Posted by Wacharapong Chiowanich

I suspect that Sony may have done a good market research on the target buyers of their consumer cams. The findings may have indicated most of their prospective buyers i.e. soccer moms, parents of kindergarten kids, students on school breaks etc. couldn't care less about strobing, constant changes in exposure or depth of field or slightly soft images because of lens diffraction. Or they may simply have not seen them in their videos.

A good business decision therefore was obvious, making svelt-looking camcorders void of unsightly control knobs or buttons, shifting exposure be damned!

Some questions remain, though. If the majority of casual users value simplicity of use above all else, why companies like Canon, Panasonic, JVC, Sanyo and the rest keep offering consumer cameras with physical controls on similar sized bodies e.g. Canon HF10, HF100, HV20, HV30 or most Panasonic and JVC models. Could it be that their target users are more knowledgeable or they have just done a poor research?

Wacharapong

What a wonderful question! I think you got at the point I'm struggling with. Despite my beating-up on Sony, Ken is right, I really don't care about these issues MOST of the time.

But, Sony does include other features like Spot Exposure and Focus that seem to indicate they DO think their customers want to take control. Why not shutter-speed?

Remember in one of my first posts I speculated they may use a Program to control exposure. Here's how they work. They start at 1/60th second, and as light increases they DON'T change the iris. They gradually change exposure TIME. When the TIME gets to some value -- typically 1/250th or 1/500th -- they decrease Iris 1-stop, and reset time to 1/60th. This, process repeats until they get to 1/250th or 1/500th at f/8. This gets them about a 9-stop range.

Note how this makes f/8 the last resort. Ken may have never shot in bright sun on top of a mountain with new snow.

When you lock the shutter at some value -- you restrict control to just the iris. Because the iris is mechanical, it is far less accurate than adjusting exposure time. So, to support rapid and accurate exposure -- Sony doesn't allow locking the exposure.

One solution is to offer a mode where the limit is 1/125th. This can be used in conjunction with a Program starting at 1/30th. I wish Sony had provided this mode just like the SLOW SHUTTER Mode.

A work-around is to find one of the special modes. For example, SPORTS biases speed to to 1/250th. Perhaps, there is a mode, that biases speed down.

Another is to add an ND filter. Of course, you need to carry several ND filters. :)

PS: I notice there is no flicker filter option.

[Dave Rosky]

Originally Posted by Wacharapong Chiowanich

I suspect that Sony may have done a good market research on the target buyers of their consumer cams.

Of course, Canon, Panasonic, and JVC have also done marketing research. I wouldn't say they have done it poorly, just differently, with perhaps a different goal in mind.

All manufacturers try to differentiate their products, and having designed products for various companies (not cameras) their feature choices usually reflect both the marketing research as well as their own values. Of course, cost matters, so features get traded off against each other for a given price point.

For example, Sony has decided to eliminate some manual features and instead put the money into something else, perhaps build quality, which most people seem to think is better on the Sony

For the buyer in the consumer camera class, this all usually means that no one camera has every feature they might want, so you weigh them and pick the combination that works best for you.

What's important here is that different photographers/videographers value different characteristics and features. That's why Sony, JVC, Panasonic, Canon (and others) can all successfully sell cameras. If one particular model was right for everyone, the others would all go out of business really fast, which they haven't.

[Wacharapong Chiowanich]

A couple times when I was on vacation with my family I brought along my FX-1. My wife asked what (on earth) all those buttons and knobs on the camera were for. Didn't know what to say so I told her that believe it or not, these buttons and knobs just made my shooting easier, which they really did. I also told her I could have brought "the small one" (HC-1) but that would have made my life very hard with all the poking and squinting at the screen just to get some decently shot video. I could have gone full auto on THE SMALL ONE but then again this was just as easy to do on THE LARGER ONE.

How do you guys normally manage this?

Best
Wacharapong

[Ken Ross]

Originally Posted by Steve Mullen

Basically you are saying that somehow a $1,000 Sony consumer camcorder is so smart and well designed that it eliminates the need for manual controls. (Zebra doesn't control anything!) And, you are saying your one day test PROVES your claims.

I didn't say that Steve. What I did say was the zebras give you the means to correct the tendency to over-expose as in the Canon. The other thing I'm saying is that I would still prefer a camera with less manual controls that produces a better picture than one with more manual controls. Additionally, I'll prefer the camera that can be corrected in post as opposed to one that at times will get the color so wrong, you'll never get the color quite right.

Originally Posted by Steve Mullen

You may be 100% correct, but you are asking folks to believe that somehow Sony has repealed the laws of optics and that somehow Sony's shutter doesn't work like any other cameras shutter. Or, put another way, you are asking me to reject what I know about how cameras work by saying YOU don't see any problems. And, you are saying your one day test PROVES your claim. You've got to know that subjective tests test the viewer more than they do a camera.

Again I didn't say that. Please read above. As for subjective tests, I had the camera for more than one day and during that time it didn't take a whole lot of analysis to see that colors are wrong. We all know what the color of a sky is (not magenta). We all know the color of objects we encounter every day and when those objects aren't depicted properly. We also know when highlights are clipped. There isn't a whole lot of subjective analysis required Steve. No camera should force its user to TRY to correct these issues in post. Nope, I'll take the camera that does these basics better and yet still provides me with adequate manual control as well as some controls missing in the cam that doesn't do as well IMO.

Originally Posted by Steve Mullen

You seem unwilling to assume that had you used both cameras for a month AND really learned HOW to use the Canon you might have come to a very different conclusion. You made your decision in a few hours in a very limited set of conditions, posted a review, and now defend it. You made no tests of 24p or 30p (because you don't like how they look) and dismissed Cine gamma even though every posted pix shows it to look better. You didn't even consider that Canon was aiming for a look with deeper shadows and reduced highlights because many folks believe it looks more like film. I may not like that look either, but when I review a camera I do so in the context that other folks want/need different looks.

You forget the fact that I have the HV20 don't you? Same controls Steve. I am very very familiar with the camera and its controls. You are correct however that I don't like the look of 24p or 30p. Just as you complain about the 'strobing' of the Sony in bright light, so I complain about the stuttering in 24p or 30p. There's no way around that my friend. You have your preferences and I have mine. Yes, I don't like the look of cine and I tend not to like the look of any videocamera that's 'pretending' to look like film. I've yet to see one that can do it anywhere near convincingly. Hopefully you're not now telling me what to like and not to like. You've already told people what controls they 'need' and don't 'need'.

Originally Posted by Steve Mullen

Bottom-line you didn't review the camcorders. You compared camcorders only based upon what YOU need and HOW YOU want to work and the LOOK you want. That's not a review. It takes a month of experience to write a professional review of one camera. Several months to compare two cameras. That's why pro reviewers get paid for their reviews. It requires the objectivity you casually dismiss as a waste of time.

Golly, I must have missed the part where I claimed I was a professional reviewer! Steve, your going from silly to absurd. ANY reviewer has biases...yes, even professionals! Shocked? You shouldn't be. Humans, all humans have biases and those often leak into what is supposed to be 'objective' analysis. It happens in the news and it happens in reviews. But hey Steve, you seem to have come up with your 'review' on the Sony before you even hit the RECORD BUTTON!!!! Now that's pretty funny!!

Originally Posted by Steve Mullen

I'm not biased in favor of the Canon as you claim. How could I be as I've not used it yet? I only mentioned the Canon to prove Sony had a choice. Size and cost did not force Sony to not put in manual controls. I fully expect I'll have a long list of stupid Canon issues -- like no VF. And, I'm not biased against the Sony either.

Why not relax and let someone share their take on a camcorder even if it conflicts with your opinions?

Since everything you've said about the Sony is negative and everything referenced about the Canon is positive, I think it's safe to assume you are biased my friend. I've got a more legitamite right to make comparision since I at least owned both. I still OWN a Canon HV20 subsequent to having traded from a Canon HV10. I now own the SR12 too. I simply keep the cam that produces the best picture to my eyes. And you seem to forget Steve that I often use the phrase "IMO". That means "In my opinion".

Originally Posted by Steve Mullen

PS1: I shot indoors with sun coming in windows and blue skylight coming from other windows. A classic MIXED light situation. The Sony AWB was NOT accurate. (It was too blue) Only One-touch was. This is exactly what I predicted in my previous post. So already I know I can't trust AWB and I know a three deep menu system is going to be a bitch to use in the field.?

As I've said several times before, you knew this but still went ahead and 'bought' the camera. Why?

Originally Posted by Steve Mullen

PS2: The AF seems as good as the V1/FX7 and if this proves the case, that is a huge PLUS for the Sony.

PS3: Why would Sony put OPTIONS only on the screen. If you turn-off Display, you can't get to the Options. And, why not have only one OPTION menu -- in Movie Mode -- come-up with six most used in-field functions: Focus, Spot Focus, Exposure, Spot Exposure, WB, and SLO-Mo. There should be ONE toolbox under the Home menu. This is a major departure from the excellent menu systems in other Sony cams.

PS4: Now matter how accurate the exposure and WB, every clip needs to be CC to make them match other. That's why CC is such a big part of production. Just like EQing and mixing audio.

Every camera maker makes decision that anyone can quibble with. No camera is perfect Steve. Why did Canon leave out a viewfinder? I've read many people saying they would never touch the Canon or any cam that lacked a viewfinder. You complain about this and that with the Sony in the field, tell me how you'll use a camera with NO options for anything but an LCD??

As I've contended before, the Sony will need far far far less color correction in post than will the Canon. Even in post there will be times (more times than the Sony) that you will simply be unable to adequately correct the Canon.

Again, I'll choose the camera with less manual controls (but still possessing some missing in the other camera) that produces a better, more accurate picture than the one with more controls. And yes, that's my opinion. To answer your question in your last post Steve, no, I haven't shot on top of a mountain with freshly fallen snow. But I have shot at the beach during an air show and saw no softening or any other lens anomolies. Just clean, razor sharp video.

[Chris Hurd]

The caution flag is out -- drivers are advised to ease up and proceed with care.

Let's not get personal, folks. Please keep it technical. Debate the idea, not the individual.

Thanks in advance,

[Chris Hurd]

Originally Posted by Tom Roper

When did they remove the zebras from the Canon? My HV10 has them...

Unfortunately the Canon VIXIA HF100 and HF10 flash memory cameras do not have zebras.

[Dave Blackhurst]

Really the debate is between...

A. a camera with a lot of artificial intelligence that seems to do a pretty good overall job, getting colors correct under most circumstances but allowing options to adjust, getting exposure correct with good lattitude and options to allow adjustment, and fairly reliable focus, with options to allow adjustment...

B. a camera with more manual tweaks, that also does a pretty good overall job, but colors are a bit "off" (I owned an HV20 for plenty long enough to decide I did not like the rendition of certain colors, particularly reds and certain greens, blues and purples... and others report the same "opinion"), getting exposure correct, but requiring alternate modes to do it well, and missing some key indicators (zebras), and spot on iAF with limited access to adjustment...


I find that a cam that gets a more accurate, clean, usable shot that I can almost leave alone in post or alter as I wish makes the most sense to me. I've found that with the SR11, I don't feel the "need" to try to make the footage look right in post - and that's a strange feeling when one is used to having to "tinker" to get the video to look like what you THOUGHT you shot... I hope that makes sense - it's the best explanation I can come up with.

If I WANTED a color shift, I can do that in post, if I want to blow out the footage, I can do that in post, focus... well, that's got to be right, and a bigger screen and a VF help to be sure that is OK while shooting.



Perhaps the REAL debate here is over how much "fix it in post" is required by a given camera...

I think what the guys who have shot with the SR11/12 are saying is that it just requires less tweaking to look great - images are clean, sharp, and look accurate - hard to argue with THAT. I think all of us would jump at a camera with comparable IQ and a few manual features added in... but that's not how it comes out of the box, so we accept the "limitations" along with the RESULTS. That's how it is with technology.

Maybe next year Sony will grace us by unlocking a few more features the way they did with the HC9... And I would be shocked if there were not a couple more new product announcements - there's no way Sony is going to let Panasonic steal all the thunder with the 150... IMO anyway.

[Ken Ross]

Dave, I agree 100%. I think another key issue worth repeating is that this cam will be used in many 'spur of the moment' shots when we don't have the time to tinker with shutter speeds, lens opening, white balance etc. It's those shots that you must take in an instant or lose them forever. This is the area that the Sony excels.

When I do a shoot professionally, I have the luxury of time in setting everything right. Such is not the case when we use these cams for 'fun'. As you say, I want the option of doing what I want in post, not the necessity.

[Dave Blackhurst]

I think this is at least part of the point. Does one criticize the materials used in an oil painting? The brushes? The canvas? NO, one looks at the end result. Does one look at a classic movie and say it must not be good because it was shot with old outdated technology? Does the Beatles stuff done on a 4 track become invalid because it wasn't done on a 48 track digital workstation?


It's far too easy to get caught up in the tools and specs and so on and forget that the ultimate question is "did you get that shot"? If you have a small camera of satisfactory quality and captured the moment vs. not getting it because your big camera with lots of buttons was too much trouble to drag along... Are you going to sit there and critique the shot because the camera wasn't quite "perfect"... or be glad you captured the moment?

Sure, if you're talking "serious" productions, these li'l guys might be a bit short on features for some things... but it's the operator, not the camera, and these are amazing little tools for the $.

Just like when word processing became "common" and EVERYONE could be an author... you'll get both good results and drek depending on the nut behind the lens! Some of those results will be for no more than the amusement of family and friends, others shared over the web for 15 seconds of fame, and who knows, maybe some will lead to something much more.

[Steve Mullen]

I think you are forgetting four things that seem obvious to me:

1) I did NOT BUY the SR11. I have it from Costco for 90-days. If they had the Canon in stock, I would have brought it home first. So quit asking why I bought something and then criticize it.

2) One can tell a lot about a camera LONG before shooting with it. I already know the Sony menu system is a mess. I don't need to walk around in 100-degree heat to figure this-out! And, I build a list of tests to perform BEFORE I go outside and shoot. Given the heat and dust storms right now in LV -- I may not shoot for a week. So what?

3) I have already said that if I had the Canon -- at this point in the process I might have a longer list of "problems." Quit attacking me because I have different views than you.

4) AUTO Image quality is NOT the most important thing in the world. IMHO, what's important is the best image quality a skilled shooter can get using the controls provided by the camera.

Or, for the person who MUST shoot in 24p, the camera that delivers the best quality in 24p. Pushing 60i quality is of no value to them.

Or, the camera with the best ergonomics. I already feel the SR11 strap -- which is too low -- cutting into my hand. I already find my thumb not resting on the trigger-button. I already realize the zoom control not falling under my fingers. A camera that feels lousy doesn't get used. (And, don't bother telling me the Canon is even worse. I'll deal with the Canon when I have it in hand.)

I know folks who bought the lesser known JVC HD7 because they could shoot weddings with a "pro" looking camcorder. They can't show-up with the same camera the bride's father has. These shooters know that 99% of those who view the wedding DVD videos will find the video shot in HD with ANY camera to look great. They know the key is what they can say in the sales pitch. THREE CCDS sound better than ONE CMOS.

In the end -- I may not keep either one. I may feel the better VALUE is the Pana AG-HNC150. Or, maybe I'll wait until SD card prices fall. Walmart had 4GB (1 hour) cards for $60. When the price falls to $20 -- I can use cards just like tape. At this point HD-based camcorders make no sense TO ME.

[Chris Hurd]

Originally Posted by Steve Mullen

IMHO, what's important is the best image quality a skilled shooter can get using the controls provided by the camera.

Sure that's important, but a skilled shooter isn't who the camera is made for, so it should come as no surprise if those controls aren't there (or are there only partially). These camcorders are designed to produce the best possible image quality in the hands of an *unskilled* shooter -- that's the target market for this kind of camera. In other words, I don't think a skilled shooter should realistically expect to find much in terms of available controls on something like this.