|
|||||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
May 12th, 2006, 03:29 AM | #1 |
Major Player
Join Date: May 2004
Location: hungary
Posts: 462
|
Good idea to change my GL2 to HC1/HC3?
I'm thinking to replace my xm2 to a new sony hc1 or hc3.
I make two things: - nature videos (outdoor, lot of light) - and wedding videos (indoot, poor light) If i can sell my used xm2, maybe i can buy this new hdv. I know low light performance is not so good. How would compare to xm2? In wedding i need more light? (I have 2x500W) Where can i find sample video in low light? (the sunny video looks beautiful) Pros: -clear hd pics when outdoor or have enough light -3 sec 200fps recording with hc3? (flickerfree superslow!) -new cam, maybe not have problem in 2-3 year :) Cons: - Bottom loading tape - little zoom button - no av in - little, light, not so stable - not so professional looking What do i forget? |
May 12th, 2006, 04:43 PM | #2 |
Major Player
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Minneapolis Minnesota
Posts: 347
|
I might be wrong, but I think the hc-3 is a top loader. The hc-1 is a bottom loader. I have the Hc-1 and used a gl-2 several years ago. The image on the hc-1 is substantialy sharper and more detailed them the gl-2. Also, if you want 16x9, well that's its native format for video. The hc-1 has no where near the low light capability of the gl-2, but the hc-3 is suppose to be better in this regard, but probably still not up to the GL-2 in low light capability:-).
|
May 12th, 2006, 05:19 PM | #3 |
Major Player
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 508
|
HC3 has more accurate red color reproduction, but it lacks many controls of the HC1/A1. HC3 has no headphone/mic jacks, and it has no focus or zoom rings. It also does not have a lens hood, I believe.
HC3 is 30mm while HC1/A1 is 37mm. HC3 low light is better than the others. There are plenty of differences you can read up here. I think for your purposes, a HC1/A1 would be better than a HC3, but I have no idea how it compares to your camera now. |
May 12th, 2006, 05:43 PM | #4 |
Major Player
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 613
|
I personally can tell you that the HC1/A1 would be a great step up from the GL2, but when it comes to low light, I have no idea on the performance as I've only seen ones in Best Buy and well-lit sections of NAB '06. From what I could tell, it looks like a good on-camera light will help just as much as it does for the GL2, a lot.
However, I'd only recommend the A1 because the HC1 lacks certain controls that the GL2 would have, such as manual exposure settings, if I'm not mistaken.
__________________
"Babs Do or Babs Do not, there is no try." - Zack Birlew www.BabsDoProductions.com |
May 12th, 2006, 11:26 PM | #5 |
Major Player
Join Date: May 2004
Location: hungary
Posts: 462
|
Yes, the hc3 is top loader.
"The image on the hc-1 is substantialy sharper and more detailed them the gl-2." I make wedding videos with 2 cam: GL2 and my friend's Sony Z1. When i watch the final dvd, my GL2 pics looks sharper, Z1 pics is a little blurred. (even when i convert to DV from the Z1 hardware or in post with Edius) thx |
May 13th, 2006, 12:09 AM | #6 | |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Elk Grove CA
Posts: 6,838
|
Quote:
__________________
Chris J. Barcellos |
|
May 13th, 2006, 12:19 AM | #7 |
Major Player
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Atwater, CA
Posts: 246
|
I shoot weddings with a 35mm cinema camera and my GL2. And in the final product of the DVD, my GL2 is always sharper. =)
|
May 13th, 2006, 12:44 AM | #8 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 177
|
Kind of surprised the whole bottom loading issue still comes into play since there is an adapter (very nice by the way) out there for $25. This should be eliminated as a con at least for choosing which to get.
|
May 13th, 2006, 01:16 AM | #9 | |
Major Player
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Minneapolis Minnesota
Posts: 347
|
Quote:
|
|
May 13th, 2006, 02:16 AM | #10 | |
Major Player
Join Date: May 2004
Location: hungary
Posts: 462
|
Quote:
|
|
May 13th, 2006, 07:54 PM | #11 |
Trustee
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Knoxville, Tennessee
Posts: 1,669
|
> the HC1 lacks certain controls that the GL2 would have, such as manual exposure settings, if I'm not mistaken...
Um...sorry but I think you are mistaken. The HC1 has manual exposure control (except when in 'cinema mode' which is crippled version of Cineframe24 on the A1). |
May 13th, 2006, 07:59 PM | #12 |
Major Player
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 613
|
Ah, yes, that's right Graham, it was just with the Cinema mode. My bad. =)
__________________
"Babs Do or Babs Do not, there is no try." - Zack Birlew www.BabsDoProductions.com |
May 13th, 2006, 10:09 PM | #13 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Honolulu, HI
Posts: 31
|
Think A1
I presume you use external microphones to record sound. H3 only allows Sony mics. H1 is better, but for pro use (I consider anything that you get paid for pro) the A1 will be the best in the long run. |
May 15th, 2006, 08:04 AM | #14 |
New Boot
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 15
|
Where did you read that the HC1/HC3 can record 3 seconds of 200fps video!?
What other camcorder on the market have those abilities!? |
May 15th, 2006, 08:55 AM | #15 |
Major Player
Join Date: May 2004
Location: hungary
Posts: 462
|
http://media.sonyhdvinfo.com/media/h...lowMotion.mpeg
http://pixinfo.com/hirek/2006-03-23_259206 "normál üzemmódban másodpercenként 50, míg lassított üzemmódban 200 mezőt jelent. Egyszerre három másodpercnyi felvétel készíthető így," Its hungarian so i translate: in normal mode 50 field is recorded but in slow mode this means 200 field. 3 sec video can be made. I found the english link: http://www.cinenow.com/uk/view-press-release-384.html |
| ||||||
|
|