Alludo USER to USER Web Board

For the sake of completeness, there is a JVC camera which is dual format -- both AVCHD and a variant of HDV (which JVC in their wisdom have designated .TOD) which films to a hard disc. I don't think it is in your price range, though confess I can't quite remember the model number so cannot check. Be warned, though, that the one user who has it and who has come to this forum, also reports problems not only with the AVCHD aspect, but also in handling the unique TOD format.

Ken,

In regards to the JVC camcorder, its the Everio HD-GZ40 which has a dual format of AVCHD & TOD(MPEG2 HD). I have used the TOD format and, in general, I have found that VS X2 Pro handle it well (but you will need to use smart proxy) except for the 'blip' issue with the transitions (which appears to be a common problem with among AVCHD type HD formats). Other than for the 'blip' issue I'm quite happy with the GZ40 & its TOD format, although I now appreciate what I don't have in the JVC that I could have had, in say, the Sony camcorder (optical stabliser and all those other lovely 'bells & whistles'). Oh well, only if the budget could have stretched for the top of the range Sony + a super duper PC...maybe next time around. Live and learn.

Approximately, how large a file is an hour video take on your camcorder's drives at the best quality setting?

Just checked the last few DV tapes I used. Each one is supposed to record an hour and I always get around 62.5 minutes (I usually keep recording until the tape is full).
Each tape stored on my hard drive is -
12.5GB
(13,500,000,000 bytes approximately).

While I'm "here"
Has anyone compared how the new HD cameras compare to SD cameras when the video 'taken' with a HD cameras is 'throttled back' to SD resolution.
Just wondering just how good the lenses they use in cameras which affects picture quality ( a picture is only as good as the lens and quality of the CCD).
I have noticed even with my Panasonic GS400 with 3 CCD and Leica lens it still is no where near a professional camera in image quality. Manufacturers use all kind of techniques to 'fudge' things such as 'pixel shifting' etc. and I just wonder just how much better video taken with a consumer HD cameras than taken with a comparable quality SD video camera.
I also know that the physical size of the CCD(s) affects the image quality (consumer video cameras have relatively small CCDs (the one's in a GS400 as 1/4.7" but other cameras are only 1/6" yet the professional cameras use CCD's of 1/2" and maybe larger).
IT's not much use capturing images of say 1920 x 1080 pixels if the CCD is incapable of detecting this resolution.

In general it is not a problem to capture full HD with the recent HD camcorders...but with those small chips (mostly CMOS today) you need enough light (noise!) and the dynamic range is not as good as with the large sensor pro cams.

metmot wrote:Here is an album on Photobucket which contains photos I took with my Canon HV30 in the Philippines a couple months ago. For the most part they are pretty good.

Wow, I must say the photographs are nice. You took a different scenes, low-light at night (with the two guys), the close up (the beauty), landscape, back-lighted. What setting was the shots on - Automatic? I would not mind similar camera but without the MiniDV. Nice photos I must say. Thanks for the camcorder's convencing shots.

caxtin wrote:

metmot wrote:Here is an album on Photobucket which contains photos I took with my Canon HV30 in the Philippines a couple months ago. For the most part they are pretty good.

Wow, I must say the photographs are nice. You took a different scenes, low-light at night (with the two guys), the close up (the beauty), landscape, back-lighted. What setting was the shots on - Automatic? I would not mind similar camera but without the MiniDV. Nice photos I must say. Thanks for the camcorder's convencing shots.

I don't know what you have against Mini DV. Sure you have to buy the tapes but the nice thing is you have a built in archival backup right from the word go. Anything that goes on your computer is saved before hand. And the HD format as was mentioned here is more edit friendly.

Anyway, the still photo setting options of my HV30 is limited compared to a stand alone photo camera. It really isn't designed for that purpose per se. Each of the pictures I posted were taken on full auto mode. The "beauty" you mentioned is my wife.....but don't tell her because she doesn't know she's hot

Please don't get me wrong. My point about MiniDV is the convenience of using Flash drive and the ease of transferring the video. I have a six-pack DV tape I bought for the returned camcorder. I can still use them.

Do you ever here any tape-running sound when you playback the videos? Am just lazy with the video transfer. I did about thirty-five Hi-8 tapes within a week - most of my elder daughter's birthdays and extra curricular activities - very tedious.

The photos. Your wife's shot is great with the details of the hair strands, the one you took the two guys at night - good lighting. Was that with flash or the available lighting? The other is the pitched-roofed house by the coconut tree. They are all, in my book, really good shots. Why would you use a digital camera if you have such camcorder.

I saw the HV30 for $750 and Canon does not seem to make them anymore. I will call Canon to know what has they have that will do same as yours.

caxtin wrote:Please don't get me wrong. My point about MiniDV is the convenience of using Flash drive and the ease of transferring the video. I have a six-pack DV tape I bought for the returned camcorder. I can still use them.

Do you ever here any tape-running sound when you playback the videos? Am just lazy with the video transfer. I did about thirty-five Hi-8 tapes within a week - most of my elder daughter's birthdays and extra curricular activities - very tedious.

The photos. Your wife's shot is great with the details of the hair strands, the one you took the two guys at night - good lighting. Was that with flash or the available lighting? The other is the pitched-roofed house by the coconut tree. They are all, in my book, really good shots. Why would you use a digital camera if you have such camcorder.

I saw the HV30 for $750 and Canon does not seem to make them anymore. I will call Canon to know what has they have that will do same as yours.

That one of the two guys had a single fluorescent light above them with the built in flash also. I bought my HV30 from buydig.com for $645 last year.

The reason you would want another still camera is for control. The camera takes a lot of bad pictures too that could have been avoided with a quick setting change which isn't available on the camcorder. I only posted some that came out good. Trust me there's tons of rejects. And you don't know for sure until you review. With my Nikon D90 I can predict the results much better. The same is true with my Panasonic DMZ-FZ7 and my canon elf SD850. If the shot is critical to not miss, use a good still camera. But if you are just on tour like I was it's nice to just use that one camera, snap a lot of pics and accept the rejects.

metmot wrote:

caxtin wrote:Please don't get me wrong. My point about MiniDV is the convenience of using Flash drive and the ease of transferring the video. I have a six-pack DV tape I bought for the returned camcorder. I can still use them.

Do you ever here any tape-running sound when you playback the videos? Am just lazy with the video transfer. I did about thirty-five Hi-8 tapes within a week - most of my elder daughter's birthdays and extra curricular activities - very tedious.

The photos. Your wife's shot is great with the details of the hair strands, the one you took the two guys at night - good lighting. Was that with flash or the available lighting? The other is the pitched-roofed house by the coconut tree. They are all, in my book, really good shots. Why would you use a digital camera if you have such camcorder.

I saw the HV30 for $750 and Canon does not seem to make them anymore. I will call Canon to know what has they have that will do same as yours.

That one of the two guys had a single fluorescent light above them with the built in flash also. I bought my HV30 from buydig.com for $645 last year.

The reason you would want another still camera is for control. The camera takes a lot of bad pictures too that could have been avoided with a quick setting change which isn't available on the camcorder. I only posted some that came out good. Trust me there's tons of rejects. And you don't know for sure until you review. With my Nikon D90 I can predict the results much better. The same is true with my Panasonic DMZ-FZ7 and my canon elf SD850. If the shot is critical to not miss, use a good still camera. But if you are just on tour like I was it's nice to just use that one camera, snap a lot of pics and accept the rejects.

Sorry I forgot to answer an important question. No I have never detected the tape drive in the audio although I have heard the rumors.

I might add that I too have heard many people, including on this Forum, complain about mechanical camera or tape noise being recorded on the tape. Well, it may be just a Canon thing, but I have only ever had two Canon mini-DV standard def cameras, and now my Canon HV-30, and I have never detected any such noise in the 7 years I have been doing digital video editing.

I think the tape transport noise issue comes about if the sound is left set to its default auto level. When there is no ambient sound, the audio gain is automatically increased, to the point where you may begin to hear the tape transport mechanism. It's easy to prevent that - you can simply set the audio level manually.

In general, Sony camcorders are known for their ease of use, but the Canon HV models have plenty of manual overides.

Here's a link you may find useful - you can read reviews on most available models. My one gripe with the site is that they don't weight "editability" as highly as they should.

http://www.camcorderinfo.com/

Remember that even a flash drive camcorder will have a zoom motor, so it's possible to pick up mechanical noises on such a camcorder.

On the issue of still picture quality - you might find that the spherical aberration for just about all camcorders is significantly greater than that on the average still camera. That may not be too significant for portraits and the like, but becomes noticeable for architectural shots, for example.

An interesting overview/testing/comparison about HD camcorders can also be founf in http://camcorder-test.slashcam.com/compare.html

Thanx Folks an interesting discussion.

My old Canon MVX150 has a unfixable image sensor problem (no parts) so I am going down the road of looking at HD camcorders and as I don't want to add to the cost by having to upgrade my PC I am looking favorably at the Canon HV30 or the later HV 40. I think the words from Ken are the final ones that have pushed me to HDV format..

Finally got what I have been looking for. I was very luck to find my number one choice, on supper sale at BestBuy. It's the Sony HDR-CX12. When I called the national office I was told they don't and will not sell that model since it's not on their program list. One day when I went to the local BestBuy for something else, I saw it on sale . . . they did not know they have them.

It's been wonderful, lots of good menus and the still image is really great. The lighting compensation was nice. You can set the inbuilt light flash to high or low setting.

Surprisingly, I took some HD videos, simply transferred the video, edited it with VS11Plus, added menus, wrote an image file, burned to a DVD and simply watched it on my "regular" non-hd TV. I thought I would have had problem from editing to watching. Much better video than what I have been used to.

I feel really good with this camcorder. Thanks everyone for all the help, information, patience and advice I got from you all.

For non-HS videoing, look at the Canon FS100. Cheap, under $300, with tons of settings.