HV20 Versus Sony HC1 compared: Low Light

[Vincent Tran]

Well, I got the HV20. I have had the HC1 since it first came out in late July, 2005. The HC1 is dying on me after many hours of useful taping. The only thing I was not happy about the HC1 is the low light performance. I have only had the HV20 for a couple hours, but here are my initial impressions:

1. Out of the box: This camcorder is significantly smaller than the HC1.
2. Build quality and looks: It looks CHEAP. If you took out the HDV lettering, it looks no different than the typical $300 dv camcoder you would see at Bestbuys. Compared to the HC1, the HC1 has killer looks!
3. Picture Quality: Connecting it to my Samsung 71" 1080p via hdmi, I can see that it may have better picture quality than my HC1, but since HD pictures are so nice already, I can't really say that it is significantly better. It just looks a bit sharper. If this was the only difference, I would not run out to buy the HV20...just not enough justification.
3. Low Light perfomance: Now this is what I was most nervous about...my worries are over. The HV20 KILLS the HC1 in low light performance. It is SO MUCH BETTER that even if my HC1 wasn't dying, I would still upgrade! I have 3 kids and so indoor pictures has to be good. Again, my wife and friends saw a significant difference in low light performance. This was at a shutter speed of 1/60 and normal family room lighting.
4.24p recording: I read up on all the info of 24p but have never experienced it so did not know what to expect. Well, in low light, if I switch over to 24p, the picture is even BRIGHTER! It's as if I moved the shutter speed up to 1/30 or 1/15. However, if you move or pan ever so slightly, the picture gets jittery as if I was taping regular HDV 60i with shutter speed of 1/15. However, if I just keep really steady, and just record my kids and wife eating at the table or something with minimal movement, the picture is ridiculously bright! I can see how useful this would be at say, a birthday party where the kids are at the table blowing out the candles! Bottom line, do not pan or record kids running with 24p.
5. Feel of the camcorder: I actually have no problem with it. Notwithstanding what another site said, I did not feel uncomfortable with the camcorder. I have small hands though, so may be that is the differentiating factor. However, the camcorder is so "fat" width wise, that if I just pick it up from the top, I feel as if I may lose grip and drop it. I wish it was a bit thinner.
Conclusion: Boy am I glad I bought this camcorder. I now look like I am carrying around some cheapo camcorder like the public in general now (maybe that is a good thing) as oppose to the nice looking HC1. If you have the HC1 and want to upgrade, specifically for low light, go for it.

[James Bresnahan]

As another long time HC1 user who traded in for an HV20, I am nodding at
all your points. I was also one of those HC1 owners who's camera had a problem with weak reds (which I had to always tweak in post), so I now love
to see the vibrant "Canon" reds recorded with the HV20. The HC1 does have
a beautiful, tank-like build in comparison to the Canons plastic shell.

I have been using 24p most of the time, even for my daughters soccer practice, and I personally find it controllable at 1/48 shutter. Maybe I'm a throwback
to the days of "This is the NFL" in the 70s.

[Fergus Anderson]

I think the 24p mode should be perfectly usable at 1/48 and above

[Vincent Tran]

I will try 24p at 1/48 then.

[Rob Katz]

james-

i adore that 70s film look. throw in some grain and u are on your way to making the 3rd grindhouse film!

i bet kid's soccer games never looked so good.

be well

rob

[Maximilian Friedrich]

"lowlight comparison HC1 VS HV20" Footage would be great!

[Glenn Thomas]

I just sold my HC1 to buy one of these also. Except it will be the PAL version and still doesn't seem to be available yet :(