1000$ HD work flow?

[Larry Horwitz]

Glad to help, Milutin, and also good to hear the Corel/Ulead VSX2 works well for you.

Given your computer hardware and preference for tape, then HDV is the format for you. I personally like the Canon HV20 and HV30 very much, and own the HV20. You will get very good results for well below your $1000 budget.

Good luck!

Larry

[Steve Mullen]

Originally Posted by Bruce Foreman

... very few folks I know are falling for the Blu-ray thing,

If Blu-ray comes down quite a bit more in price ...

Best Buy Drops Blu-ray Player to $99 The Insignia brand now retails for $199 and comes with a $100 coupon book.

[Milutin Labudovic]

i would like to update my question since christmas buying is very close.

storage and avhcd processing power is clear to me but bh photovideo has good sales and Sony HDR-SR12 120GB is very interesting to me.

why avhcd - because i want also good picture quality, good low light, very practical stills and ease of use for the camer, and this in the newest camera that i can afford, so i figure...?
some how makes me sense since it is very new camera, that all mistakes from the past are now fixed and the only problem for me that i see is avhcd format.

somehow i trust sony. but it is based on very little knowledge.

few cameras in have in mind.

1.) Sony HDR-SR12 120GB - 850$
+ optical stabilization
+ modern
+ probably very good in low light
+ new model
+ ?
- artifact in avhcd (are thoose things realy like they say in internet tests, or nothing to worry about in practice)
- hdd storage space for films
- it will be bumped camera (every day work in newsgathering), so i don`t know how is hard disk prepared to it.
- ?

2.) Canon VIXIA HV30 HDV Camcorder - 549$

+ SuperRange Optical Image Stabilization (is there a difference between canon and sony in this field)
+ mini DV
+ price
+ can be bumbet to a normal point :-)
+ newest model (but still maybe old?)
+ ?

- very litlle photo resolution (only 3.2 mp), i dont like it, but if video camera is wow i will manage to swallow that.
- low light worse than sony or i am wrong?
- old
- ?

3.) Sony HDR-HC9 HDV Camcorder - 829$

+ almost all like in upper canon
+?

- old model
- only 3.2 native photo resolution
- ?



-low light i need at most, a lot will be shoot in the "lifestyle" maner, and in day light my phone is OK (a joke, but a bit true :-)
- ease of use is also an essence
- smart focusing
- better optical image stabilization sony/canon
- dv is a prefered one, but if sony sr - 12 kick bottoms, will swallow everything.
- maybe 3.2MP stills is enough for me (but need qualty photos. i ahve seen on fliker day light photos from sr-12, but not in full resolution and it is enough for me)), so we can exclude this. i recon, if i really need dicent photo quality can on some oquesion bring also photo camera to a shoot (bit would like ti avoid that). my paper can handle 3.2 easily if they are ok in low light.


nobbish questions, but i am going in the end to drain my own money.
so experienced can help me guide in on chance shopping :-). also a link where i can compare stiils from camcorders would be fine. in full res if possible. i`v googled but found almost nothing in full res.

thnx

P.S. i know they are ntsc :-)

[Dave Blackhurst]

I can comment on a few points -

IF you have sufficient computer horsepower available, or can downres to SD after downloading, the SR11/12 would be my choice (SR11 prices aren't much above HV30, only 60G HDD, but plenty for most - you SHOULDN'T be storing footage on the camera HDD ANYWAY!!!!)

Generally speaking the HDD has pretty decent shockproofing, and it has a drop sensor, so the probability is that anything that would take out the HDD would also take out the camera... you CAN use MS Duo media even if the HDD goes out, leaving you a "flash memory" cam with 4 or 8G MS Duos.

Cameras, CODECS, sensors, software, etc are ALWAYS being improved upon or changed - dont' let "new" sway you one way or the other - unless you're an intense pixel peeper, it's hard to see the differences between the generations of cameras. It's there, yes, but 98% of people will never see the differences unless you explain them in great detail.

AVCHD artifacting is something I haven't had a problem with except for strange things in the NLE previews (vegas pro no less... but lower res preview works fine for me anyway, until they tweak it out) - final renders are always good for me, maybe I'm just lucky. But I can say that I see a lot of footage on the web that was obviously not fully optimized or processed correctly, and it's not the fault of the gear, it's the nut behind the keyboard...

HC9 has higher res stills than the Canon, IIRC 6+ Mpixel? You'll need flash if shooting stills in low light, and the on cam isn't the best in the world. While you may be able to get acceptable low light results with the video (I'd still recommend a light), if you shoot stills simultaneously the stills won't look so good.

In good light the Stills from the Sony HC9 and SR11/12 are adequate for many purposes, a good pocket still cam would probably beat them, but I've shot some pretty impressive stills from the SR11. I tend to think of the SR11 and CX12 (and their predecessors) as good all around "family fun" knockabout cameras, and if you know what you're doing, you can get "pro" results from them. Not perfect, but pretty impressive considering. Again, you're basically talking a "98%" solution - it's enough of the way there that most won't notive the 2% shortfall...DD

I wasn't thrilled with the Canon OIS, I feel like the Sony is better, but with any small handycam format, be prepared to stabilize the camera if you want usable footage. movement is the enemy of ALL HD.

FWIW, I like the bigger LCD of the SR11/12 too, although if your eyes aren't too bad the small screen works. I've reached that magic age where reading glasses are a companion... and fine work requires one of those funny magnifier headsets - small screens aren't fun.

I detect that you are going back and forth trying to decide the "perfect" solution - relax, you're not going to find it... ANY rig you spec out and buy will be obsolete in short order, so it's beter to flip a coin or whatever past a certain point.

Personally, I made the jump to HD with the HC1, never looked back, although it was a steep learning curve and the early days of editing HDV were ugly. I hesitated with the AVCHD stuff after reading a lot of negatives, but bought a CX7 on a whim for something to stick in a pocket... again, haven't looked back and have to laugh sometimes when I think about the headaches of tape... yes, tape has plusses too, but SS media/HDD worked a lot better than I anticipated.

I'm waiting for an affordable prosumer cam worth bothering with that's tapeless... maybe this year... and it probably wouldn't be as compact! You can do far worse than the SR11, and hard to find "better" for most situations. But the HC9 and HV30 arent' bad either, so the final wod of advice is get SOMETHING, start shooting!!

[Milutin Labudovic]

Originally Posted by Dave Blackhurst

I can comment on a few points -

IF you have sufficient computer horsepower available, or can downres to SD after downloading, the SR11/12 would be my choice (SR11 prices aren't much above HV30, only 60G HDD, but plenty for most - you SHOULDN'T be storing footage on the camera HDD ANYWAY!!!!)

Generally speaking the HDD has pretty decent shockproofing, and it has a drop sensor, so the probability is that anything that would take out the HDD would also take out the camera... you CAN use MS Duo media even if the HDD goes out, leaving you a "flash memory" cam with 4 or 8G MS Duos.

Cameras, CODECS, sensors, software, etc are ALWAYS being improved upon or changed - dont' let "new" sway you one way or the other - unless you're an intense pixel peeper, it's hard to see the differences between the generations of cameras. It's there, yes, but 98% of people will never see the differences unless you explain them in great detail.

AVCHD artifacting is something I haven't had a problem with except for strange things in the NLE previews (vegas pro no less... but lower res preview works fine for me anyway, until they tweak it out) - final renders are always good for me, maybe I'm just lucky. But I can say that I see a lot of footage on the web that was obviously not fully optimized or processed correctly, and it's not the fault of the gear, it's the nut behind the keyboard...

HC9 has higher res stills than the Canon, IIRC 6+ Mpixel? You'll need flash if shooting stills in low light, and the on cam isn't the best in the world. While you may be able to get acceptable low light results with the video (I'd still recommend a light), if you shoot stills simultaneously the stills won't look so good.

In good light the Stills from the Sony HC9 and SR11/12 are adequate for many purposes, a good pocket still cam would probably beat them, but I've shot some pretty impressive stills from the SR11. I tend to think of the SR11 and CX12 (and their predecessors) as good all around "family fun" knockabout cameras, and if you know what you're doing, you can get "pro" results from them. Not perfect, but pretty impressive considering. Again, you're basically talking a "98%" solution - it's enough of the way there that most won't notive the 2% shortfall...DD

I wasn't thrilled with the Canon OIS, I feel like the Sony is better, but with any small handycam format, be prepared to stabilize the camera if you want usable footage. movement is the enemy of ALL HD.

FWIW, I like the bigger LCD of the SR11/12 too, although if your eyes aren't too bad the small screen works. I've reached that magic age where reading glasses are a companion... and fine work requires one of those funny magnifier headsets - small screens aren't fun.

I detect that you are going back and forth trying to decide the "perfect" solution - relax, you're not going to find it... ANY rig you spec out and buy will be obsolete in short order, so it's beter to flip a coin or whatever past a certain point.

Personally, I made the jump to HD with the HC1, never looked back, although it was a steep learning curve and the early days of editing HDV were ugly. I hesitated with the AVCHD stuff after reading a lot of negatives, but bought a CX7 on a whim for something to stick in a pocket... again, haven't looked back and have to laugh sometimes when I think about the headaches of tape... yes, tape has plusses too, but SS media/HDD worked a lot better than I anticipated.

I'm waiting for an affordable prosumer cam worth bothering with that's tapeless... maybe this year... and it probably wouldn't be as compact! You can do far worse than the SR11, and hard to find "better" for most situations. But the HC9 and HV30 arent' bad either, so the final wod of advice is get SOMETHING, start shooting!!

everything said, and understood.
thank you indeed.

thread closed

:-)