Is the sound of the 20 Canon better than 10?

Dave Blackhurst · August 26th, 2007, 01:23 PM

Hi Kevin -
Along with the better video quality and low light, the 7 has mic and headphone inputs for "professional" use with wireless/other mics and audio monitoring. In normal daylight use and family type stuff with a video light, the 3 was just dandy, although I did find the 7 and the HV20 both were noticeably better when put side by side with the 3.

I think the HV20 video has a bit more "filmic" feel to it - I noticed the darker areas seemed to be less noisy in general on the HV20, so blacks look "blacker", and there's a bit more overall contrast, which tends to be appealing to the eye. I'll still say the HC7 has more overall detail in an identical shot, but to some extent it's not so contrasty, and so appears noisier - both are great cams, really... I just feel the HC7 is more camera overall, at a higher price point.

I really enjoyed the HC3 - lots of camera in a small package, which the HC7 and the HV20 both build upon and improve.

Kevin Carter · August 26th, 2007, 09:02 PM

thanks Dave:
I'm staying with the 3, as I mentioned in the other thread I discovered the jumpiness was from viewing on computer.

If I switched today, I'd lean to the 7 over the HV20. Have you tested the sound between these, on camera sound?

My guess is that I'll be with the 3's until AVHCD gets better and more editable. (maybe even stay with the 3's anyway -- really the only thing that kills me about AVHCD is the idea of not having to capture in real time anymore)

Dave Blackhurst · August 26th, 2007, 11:47 PM

Kevin -
on cam HC7 sound usable, HV20 not so much...

AVCHD intrigues me, but I'm not sure how many terabytes of storage you'd realistically have to have to archive if you do much shooting!

Kevin Carter · August 27th, 2007, 07:52 PM

thanks Dave:
you have tested the sony and canon models (hv and hdc and sony better sound?)

AVCHD takes even more Hard drive space than mini DV hd tape?

Dave Blackhurst · August 28th, 2007, 01:00 AM

Had both the HC7 and the HV20 - Sony had better sound and picked up less body/chassis noise.

Not more space, BUT since keeping your archive on tape isn't an option... it's got to go somewhere when you dump all those 1's and 0's, and you can only store so much on the camera. Sure the little cams are cool, but I think there are some issues of practicality...

Kevin Carter · August 29th, 2007, 01:44 PM

Dave, I think I read those cameras hold way more than 60 min of footage. which is all you need until you drag it over to your 500GB drives.

August 26th, 2007, 01:23 PM	#16
Dave Blackhurst Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Apple Valley CA Posts: 4,874	Hi Kevin - Along with the better video quality and low light, the 7 has mic and headphone inputs for "professional" use with wireless/other mics and audio monitoring. In normal daylight use and family type stuff with a video light, the 3 was just dandy, although I did find the 7 and the HV20 both were noticeably better when put side by side with the 3. I think the HV20 video has a bit more "filmic" feel to it - I noticed the darker areas seemed to be less noisy in general on the HV20, so blacks look "blacker", and there's a bit more overall contrast, which tends to be appealing to the eye. I'll still say the HC7 has more overall detail in an identical shot, but to some extent it's not so contrasty, and so appears noisier - both are great cams, really... I just feel the HC7 is more camera overall, at a higher price point. I really enjoyed the HC3 - lots of camera in a small package, which the HC7 and the HV20 both build upon and improve.

August 26th, 2007, 09:02 PM	#17
Kevin Carter Major Player Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: los angeles, CA Posts: 235	thanks Dave: I'm staying with the 3, as I mentioned in the other thread I discovered the jumpiness was from viewing on computer. If I switched today, I'd lean to the 7 over the HV20. Have you tested the sound between these, on camera sound? My guess is that I'll be with the 3's until AVHCD gets better and more editable. (maybe even stay with the 3's anyway -- really the only thing that kills me about AVHCD is the idea of not having to capture in real time anymore)

August 26th, 2007, 11:47 PM	#18
Dave Blackhurst Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Apple Valley CA Posts: 4,874	Kevin - on cam HC7 sound usable, HV20 not so much... AVCHD intrigues me, but I'm not sure how many terabytes of storage you'd realistically have to have to archive if you do much shooting!

August 27th, 2007, 07:52 PM	#19
Kevin Carter Major Player Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: los angeles, CA Posts: 235	thanks Dave: you have tested the sony and canon models (hv and hdc and sony better sound?) AVCHD takes even more Hard drive space than mini DV hd tape?

August 28th, 2007, 01:00 AM	#20
Dave Blackhurst Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Apple Valley CA Posts: 4,874	Had both the HC7 and the HV20 - Sony had better sound and picked up less body/chassis noise. Not more space, BUT since keeping your archive on tape isn't an option... it's got to go somewhere when you dump all those 1's and 0's, and you can only store so much on the camera. Sure the little cams are cool, but I think there are some issues of practicality...

August 29th, 2007, 01:44 PM	#21
Kevin Carter Major Player Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: los angeles, CA Posts: 235	Dave, I think I read those cameras hold way more than 60 min of footage. which is all you need until you drag it over to your 500GB drives.