Would like advice before a purchase an AVCHD Camcorder

Krystyna · Post by **Krystyna** » Sun Apr 27, 2008 8:11 pm

This forum has been an invaluable help when I was learning how to use Ulead VideoStudio 11 plus. I use a Cannon DC20 DVD camcorder and by searching through the posts in the forum have found the answers to any problems I have encountered. I absolutely love using Ulead VideoStudio 11 plus and am now making 'home movies' I am quite pleased with.
I thought I might get a Sony AVCHD Camcorder to get even better results. Now I am not so sure because when I searched though the forum it looks as though my computer may not be powerful enough to do the editing. Before I take the plunge and buy an AVCHD Camcorder (which is quite expensive) I wondered if anyone had successfully ediited AVCHD on a computer with my spec. (I am not likely to upgrade my computer for at least 2 years).
I bought videoStudio 11 as a cd in May 2007, and on the box it says that it supports AVCHD directly from the camcorder - plug in required (am not sure what a 'plug in' is - I wondered if it was the usb lead).
Many thans for your help. Krystyna

sherman39 · Post by **sherman39** » Sun Apr 27, 2008 9:16 pm

I have an avchd camcorder Sony SR1e and my computer spec is not that disimilar from your own and it struggles to edit avchd. You can use proxies but at some stage in the process you will find your system lacking IMHO.
That said there are advantages to an hdd camcorder that may influence your decision, such as not having to change tapes being able to copy your video from the hdd camcorder to your pc very quickly and recording several hours of video.
You can convert your avchd to mpeg-2 and edit that and whilst this seems a waste of an HD camcorder and will result in some loss of quality it is not bad, at least to my eye, although admittedly it is not HD.
You can also store your avchd videos on a computer hard drive and as and when you are able to upgrade your pc you can go back and edit then in HD.

Have you given any thought to a HDV camcorder that records to DV tape. I believe (hopefully another forum user may know better than I) that your computer spec will be adequate for that and at least that will give you HD video.

I used to be a regular visitor to your part of the world--Fakenham-not the race track but a chocolate factory.

Regards

Paul

Krystyna · Post by **Krystyna** » Sun Apr 27, 2008 10:46 pm

Thank you for your quick reply - converting avchd to mpeg-2 and editing sounds a possible way around the problem until I upgrade my computer. Is it easy to do with video studio and do you think that the results are as good picture quality as normal DV tapes?
I quite like the idea of not having to change tapes and the other advantages of an hdd camcorder. I bought my current DVD camcorder because it was so easy to use but did not realise that the picture quality was not as good as normal DV tapes - so I would be happy just with better quality video.
Krystyna

sherman39 · Post by **sherman39** » Sun Apr 27, 2008 11:20 pm

Dear Krystyna
As with many things in life, quality can be related to cost. So an expensive camcorder that records DV to tape wil probably produce better quality video than a less expensive one.

My Sony SR1E camcorder came with software, Sony picture motion browser, that converts avchd to mpeg-2 and I'm sure if you search this forum you will find mention of other software that is free or modestly priced that will also convert avchd to mpeg. VS will do it and its not particularly difficult but can be somewhat time consuming depending on the length of your video.

Once converted I personally think the quality is acceptable, that said I'm no expert on discerning quality and as I only video edit for my own amusement I'm the only one who needs to be satisfied.
I hope this is helping and not just confusing

Regards

Krystyna · Post by **Krystyna** » Mon Apr 28, 2008 8:14 am

Dear Paul
Thank you - your reply has been very helpful. I have a much clearer idea of what is involved. Many thanks. Krystyna

Quijote · Post by **Quijote** » Mon Apr 28, 2008 3:58 pm

Hi,
I've always been a Sony user until just now. I formerly had a Sony TRV-900, but the salt air in my environment corroded the heads. I decided to get a HDD camcorder to eliminate heads and vulnerable mechanisms and ended up choosing the Canon HG10. I've had it for a month and really love it. I'm editing the AVCHD on a decent HP laptop, using proxy files and really have no complaints about the ease of use of VSP - in fact, I deleted Adobe Premiere from my system.
I have a few quibbles with the Canon - it hides a few things in the menu system that I would prefer to have available with buttons on the exterior - like manual focus. That said, most of the time I shoot full automatic and get great results. Even when I want to use manual focus, it is normally a time when I am preparing for the shot in advance and so not a burden.
I did a test video of some hard core flamenco that I posted on YouTube that shows the results I am getting within the first month -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LMmpPpjCmls

So I recommend the Canon....

http://www.sailingflamenco.com

PS - the three secrets for professional looking video
1) TRIPOD
2) TRIPOD
3) TRIPOD

Black Lab · Post by **Black Lab** » Mon Apr 28, 2008 5:26 pm

Quijote wrote:PS - the three secrets for professional looking video
1) TRIPOD
2) TRIPOD
3) TRIPOD

AMEN to that!

Post by **Ken Berry** » Mon Apr 28, 2008 11:31 pm

... and more to the point, a tripod with a floating head!!!

That's next on my shopping list now that I have my own high def camera...

sjj1805 · Post by **sjj1805** » Tue Apr 29, 2008 1:22 am

Quijote wrote:......
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LMmpPpjCmls
......

Lovely Video, liked the way you cross faded to stills and back. Didn't understand a word of the song but there was a lot of feeling by the guitar player and it was unnecessary to understand the words - I felt the message.

Why not post it in our Members samples

Krystyna · Post by **Krystyna** » Tue Apr 29, 2008 10:12 am

Quijote wrote:Hi,

So I recommend the Canon....

PS - the three secrets for professional looking video
1) TRIPOD
2) TRIPOD
3) TRIPOD

Hi
Your video looks really good.
I didn't realise cannon had an avchd camcorder. I have a cannon at the moment and am very pleased with it so am now thinking of the HG10 as a possible replacement as it has got good reviews. Do you find it takes much longer to render than your previous video? I am not very technical minded and my main worry is that my computer is not up to the job of editing - my computer is a dual core pentium R CPU 320 GHz 319 GHz 2GB RAM - is that similar to your spec?
Re: the tripod - do you have one you would recommend - I do a lot of walking. A tripod would help as at the moment I often have to do several takes to get one take without shaky video
Krystyna

Quijote · Post by **Quijote** » Tue Apr 29, 2008 2:44 pm

Thanks to both of you for your kind comments about my video.

The AVCHD files that I import from the Canon are easy to edit ONCE you let the proxy manager create the proxy files. This takes a while, so go have dinner before you try to edit. I just have a laptop with less memory than you do, so you should be fine.

I have a fluid head tripod that I have used for years. When I bought the Canon HG10, it came with a cheap Chinese tripod that I was going to give away, but my wife convinced me to give it a try. It is super-light and telescopes down to a very small package which fits into a little case with a shoulder strap. As a result, I am more likely to have it with me when I go out. It doesn't have a fluid head, but I find that, by adjusting the screws correctly, I can follow moving action very smoothly. So, I am happily using a tripod that can't be worth more than $15 in preference to my heavy expensive one.

http://www.sailingflamenco.com

Black Lab · Post by **Black Lab** » Tue Apr 29, 2008 5:10 pm

Fluid heads are the best, but of course you pay more for the best. Fluid-like heads would be next. You'll find these are more for consumers, and you would probably get away with pretty decent results.

jpal · Post by **jpal** » Tue Apr 29, 2008 9:13 pm

As you've probably gathered, the camera is only one part of the equation - in the right conditions the HD consumer cameras can give great results. Having said that, the right conditions are not easily had at times, and I'm afraid the current crop of AVCHD camcorders could be improved - mainly in the facilities you'd get through having a bigger lens and more input output, easier focussing etc...

Once the AVCHD footage is proxied in your system, you'll be able to edit it like any other HD footage (which will depend on your system). Rendering out to MP4 AVC will take some time.

Congratulations Quijote on your video - I was (and still am some) a TRV 900 user - I love that camera! To add to your list:

Tripod, tripod, tripod
Focus, focus, focus (not that easy on small HD camcorders, but v. important)
Lighting, lighting, lighting (small lenses don't gather much light, AVCHD is vulnerable to low light noise)
Sound, sound, sound - although the SSD AVCHD camcorders don't get motion noise, I've heard that some HD models do. Also, none of them seem to have decent microphones, pre-amps or XLR inputs.
Craft, craft, craft... the usual joy of videography

Quijote · Post by **Quijote** » Tue Apr 29, 2008 11:10 pm

Hi,
Just a quick comment on HD noise. Having used the Sony TRV-900 for a long time, I was used to good low light response, but the video noise when present was pretty chunky.
With the HD Canon, the noise seems less obnoxious since the pixels are smaller and I can't see the chunks as well. I shoot mainly in theatres where good lighting (for video) is difficult. I have been very pleased and surprised at the results from the Canon in that environment. Has anyone else noticed this?

jpal · Post by **jpal** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 1:45 pm

Re: Low light video noise

I've recently done a theatre production filming with both TRV 900 and a Canon HV20 HDV camera simultaneously. The HV20 was set to the 25P mode which is supposed to be better in low-light situations (presumably because the elements get twice the time at gathering the light).

Although the TRV 900 is 3ccd and had an excellent reputation for low-light performance, the apparent noise on the TRV footage was much higher than the HV20 whether viewed in HD or downgraded to SD.

I believe that both AVCHD and HDV cams do onboard video noise reduction - the AVCHD really needs it because using encoding bandwidth on noise is very destructive for quality. Maybe the rise in onboard processing power has allowed for this kind of remedy, after all, the TRV900, although a wonderful workhorse, is 10 years old, and you wouldn't be comparing a modern PC with one of that vintage!

I can really recommend the Neat Video noise reduction plugin (works with Vegas and AVISynth amongst others) if you have footage you need to remediate in post to remove noise. A demo is available.