Compare Sony HDR-HC1 with Canon XLH1 at DVinfo.net

Harry Brennen · September 16th, 2005, 12:06 PM

I know, i know frnds its unfair

but was just wondering if someone cud compare these two

Sony HDR-HC1 and Canon XLH1

The whole world knows abt the quality of Canon optics, but Sony, they have the best technology. Canon borrows the technology from them(even high end Nikons... phew..)

The new Canon XLH1 is an art, a piece to fiddle with, on the other hand Sony HDR-HC1 is small, exceptional for daily use.

So why cant we have a discussion/comparison on whats good on this Sony and the new Canon

Lets explore this frnds, and your valuable technical knowledge is appreciated !

Bill Pryor · September 16th, 2005, 01:29 PM

I don't think it's meaningful to compare a single chip camera to a 3-chip one. Comparing the Z1, on the other hand, as well as the JVC, should be useful. But it can't be done until they're all on the market and readily available.

Chris Hurd · September 16th, 2005, 01:49 PM

Agree with Bill. I just don't see the point, either. Those are two completely different camcorders.

Nick Hockings · September 16th, 2005, 02:11 PM

Clearly there are a lot of people who will want to know the pros and cons of each of the new compact high def cameras. Alternative outputs (P2, HD-SDI...) and choice of recording decks/drives/live capture cards will also be very important.

If we establish a standard set of tests, then as members get hold of one of these cameras they can shoot comparable footage and post the results. Comparability is the key here, so conclusions can be drawn from the differences.

Some things like resolution test cards could be put on the site as pdfs to be printed out and used by the lucky owner of a new camera. Colour test cards would be affected by the end user's printer, so we could use some international packaging (eg beverages) to standardize them. Various classic problem shots could be included:fast pans, individual fast objects, low light and high contrast shots....

Marco Leavitt · September 16th, 2005, 07:40 PM

I absolutely think that a comparison would be helpful. Comparisons between low-end and high-end equipment are made all the time. That's how people are able to determine the tradeoffs between between price and performance, and then pick what best fits their needs. Almost certainly the new Canon is going to look way better. I do think though, since hardly anyone has seen footage from thhe XLH1, and it's doubtful that comparison footage taken in controlled, identical environments even exists, it seems like the wrong time to be asking this question.

Heath McKnight · September 16th, 2005, 08:33 PM

I volunteer to test:

1. HD10

2. FX1/Z1

3. HD100

4. HC1

5. XL H1

with Jon Fordham, of course. Last Sunday, we tried to test the HD100, but the batteries kept dying, and we were outside at a park. So we worked with the Z1 and FX1 for some 24p conversion tests.

heath

Harry Brennen · September 21st, 2005, 01:08 PM

Thank you every one for the wonderful response.

I can see every one writing off Sony, well.. yess the people out here belongs to the best in class, so i dont argue on that.

BUT, just because Sony is a CMOS its not bad. CCD need not necessarily be always the best.

Yes you have far more superior option in Canon, but lets see the footage and then start on it.

Heath McKnight · September 21st, 2005, 02:03 PM

CMOS isn't bad--a 3 CMOS chip camera would be nice.

BTW, why plunk down $9000 on the XL H1 when NO ONE has even used it. It's all just speculation right now, and you can't make a decision off of that.

If you need a camera today, I'd recommend the FX1 or Z1, because they've been out for nearly a year, and have been proven by many to be a nice camera(s)--in my opinion, they're the same thing, just the Sony Z1 has more than the Sony FX1.

heath

Ash Greyson · September 21st, 2005, 02:11 PM

I dont think it is a valid comparison either. 6 times the price and countless other factors make it silly IMHO. Like comparing an 8oz hamburger to an 8oz prime steak. HC1 is a consumer HD cam, HLH1 is a professional HD cam. You dont pay for resolution only, the issue is CONTROLLING the image and capturing the dynamics. The HC1 might work in an environment where you cant have a big camera but that is situational and not a real comparison.

ash =o)

Chris Hurd · September 21st, 2005, 02:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harry Brennen

I can see every one writing off Sony...

...just because Sony is a CMOS its bad.

Excuse me, Harry, but please refrain from making comments like this. Nobody here is "writing off" the HC1 and nobody is saying CMOS is bad. The point is only that the HC1 and XL H1 are two completely different camcorders for completely different markets. Other than HDV they really don't have a lot in common. If I were to put effort into comparing the XL H1 with anything, it would be with other camcorders that are near to it in class. I would prioritize a Canon XL H1 to JVC GY-HD100 comparison as being much more relevant and beneficial. Hope this helps,

Dave Ferdinand · September 21st, 2005, 02:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harry Brennen

http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content...0-compared.htm

Cheers

That chart is useful but it won't show you the difference in picture quality and different setups...

As to comparisons I have to say that comparing HC1 with the XLH1 is like comparing the GS400 with the XL2. Let's be realistic and admit that cost is a huge factor and if you can afford the XLH1 you won't really be considering the 1 CMOS Sony camera will you?

I think the biggest battle will be HVX vs XLH1 and Z1 vs HD100.

Anyway, if anyone has the chance to shoot with all prosumer HDs it's always welcome...

Harry Brennen · September 21st, 2005, 02:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave Ferdinand

I think the biggest battle will be HVX vs XLH1 and Z1 vs HD100.

i agree to that.. COMPLETELY..

Stephen L. Noe · September 21st, 2005, 10:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harry Brennen

Thank you every one for the wonderful response.

I can see every one writing off Sony, well.. yess the people out here belongs to the best in class, so i dont argue on that.

BUT, just because Sony is a CMOS its not bad. CCD need not necessarily be always the best.

Yes you have far more superior option in Canon, but lets see the footage and then start on it.

Yo, Harry. Go out and shoot something worthwhile to you, edit it and grow. If your needs outgrow an HC1 then move to another camera. The HC1 is a very nice camera.

Sometimes these comparisons go way over the top. People that discuss the pro's and con's are (a lot of times) expanding their knowlege of the field as well as explaining why something is better than another. In the end we make a choice and go shoot.

Nobody is writing off the HC1. Let's see some creativity with it.

September 16th, 2005, 12:06 PM	#1
Harry Brennen Tourist Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 4	Compare Sony HDR-HC1 with Canon XLH1 I know, i know frnds its unfair but was just wondering if someone cud compare these two Sony HDR-HC1 and Canon XLH1 The whole world knows abt the quality of Canon optics, but Sony, they have the best technology. Canon borrows the technology from them(even high end Nikons... phew..) The new Canon XLH1 is an art, a piece to fiddle with, on the other hand Sony HDR-HC1 is small, exceptional for daily use. So why cant we have a discussion/comparison on whats good on this Sony and the new Canon Lets explore this frnds, and your valuable technical knowledge is appreciated !

September 16th, 2005, 01:49 PM	#3
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,368 Images: 513	Agree with Bill. I just don't see the point, either. Those are two completely different camcorders. __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

September 16th, 2005, 02:11 PM	#4
Nick Hockings Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Sussex, UK Posts: 29	Can we organize a set of tests for_all_the new models? Clearly there are a lot of people who will want to know the pros and cons of each of the new compact high def cameras. Alternative outputs (P2, HD-SDI...) and choice of recording decks/drives/live capture cards will also be very important. If we establish a standard set of tests, then as members get hold of one of these cameras they can shoot comparable footage and post the results. Comparability is the key here, so conclusions can be drawn from the differences. Some things like resolution test cards could be put on the site as pdfs to be printed out and used by the lucky owner of a new camera. Colour test cards would be affected by the end user's printer, so we could use some international packaging (eg beverages) to standardize them. Various classic problem shots could be included:fast pans, individual fast objects, low light and high contrast shots.... __________________ Nick Hockings

September 16th, 2005, 08:33 PM	#6
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	I volunteer to test: 1. HD10 2. FX1/Z1 3. HD100 4. HC1 5. XL H1 with Jon Fordham, of course. Last Sunday, we tried to test the HD100, but the batteries kept dying, and we were outside at a park. So we worked with the Z1 and FX1 for some 24p conversion tests. heath __________________ My Final Cut Pro X blog

September 21st, 2005, 01:08 PM	#7
Harry Brennen Tourist Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 4	Thank you every one for the wonderful response. I can see every one writing off Sony, well.. yess the people out here belongs to the best in class, so i dont argue on that. BUT, just because Sony is a CMOS its not bad. CCD need not necessarily be always the best. Yes you have far more superior option in Canon, but lets see the footage and then start on it. Last edited by Harry Brennen; September 21st, 2005 at 02:53 PM.

September 16th, 2005, 01:29 PM	#2
Bill Pryor Contributor Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Kansas City, MO Posts: 4,449	I don't think it's meaningful to compare a single chip camera to a 3-chip one. Comparing the Z1, on the other hand, as well as the JVC, should be useful. But it can't be done until they're all on the market and readily available.

September 16th, 2005, 07:40 PM	#5
Marco Leavitt Inner Circle Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Albany, NY 12210 Posts: 2,652	I absolutely think that a comparison would be helpful. Comparisons between low-end and high-end equipment are made all the time. That's how people are able to determine the tradeoffs between between price and performance, and then pick what best fits their needs. Almost certainly the new Canon is going to look way better. I do think though, since hardly anyone has seen footage from thhe XLH1, and it's doubtful that comparison footage taken in controlled, identical environments even exists, it seems like the wrong time to be asking this question.

September 21st, 2005, 02:03 PM	#8
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	CMOS isn't bad--a 3 CMOS chip camera would be nice. BTW, why plunk down $9000 on the XL H1 when NO ONE has even used it. It's all just speculation right now, and you can't make a decision off of that. If you need a camera today, I'd recommend the FX1 or Z1, because they've been out for nearly a year, and have been proven by many to be a nice camera(s)--in my opinion, they're the same thing, just the Sony Z1 has more than the Sony FX1. heath __________________ My Final Cut Pro X blog

September 21st, 2005, 02:11 PM	#9
Ash Greyson Trustee Join Date: May 2003 Location: Tulsa, OK Posts: 1,689	I dont think it is a valid comparison either. 6 times the price and countless other factors make it silly IMHO. Like comparing an 8oz hamburger to an 8oz prime steak. HC1 is a consumer HD cam, HLH1 is a professional HD cam. You dont pay for resolution only, the issue is CONTROLLING the image and capturing the dynamics. The HC1 might work in an environment where you cant have a big camera but that is situational and not a real comparison. ash =o)