Prosumer Digital Camcorder

Post by **Tron X** » Fri Sep 22, 2006 4:39 am

Wow. A lot of replies.

Some of you brought up that this is a FILM forum and that I started a thread that deals with VIDEO. I understand the difference. I chose to post here because this is the film forum I frequent and you guys seem very knowledgeable and have my respect. I assumed that you would understand this.

I also assumed that people would not attack me for opting to use digital media. As a junior in high school, I don't have a lot of free time. I am taking several honors and advanced placement courses, have been cast in the fall play, and work part time as a busboy at the local tavern.

Basically, I don't have time to have film processed and then edit it right now, and my family needs a camera they can use on vacations etc.

People seem to be indicating that both the Panasonic DVX100A and the Canon GL2 are both pretty good cameras. And that I could be fine buying a LIGHTLY used camera.

Your comments please.

Post by **Evan Kubota** » Fri Sep 22, 2006 4:54 am

I hate to break it you, but you will likely never have this much free time again. I wish I started 'serious' filmmaking in high school...

http://members.cox.net/home-theater/ · Post by **JCook** » Fri Sep 22, 2006 5:48 am

If you aren't interested in Rogers DVX100A I'd suggest that you take a look at the Sony HVR-A1U? BHPhoto has them for just under $2K with rebate....HD quality video with a nice XLR audio interface. Sony has a wide angle and tele-lens for this camera, reviews are pretty good.

Depending upon Rogers asking price his camera sounds like a deal, It probably has low miles and is spotless.

John

Post by **MovieStuff** » Fri Sep 22, 2006 1:06 pm

Evan Kubota wrote:Offering a "tangent opinion" is one thing...

It's more than one thing; it's pretty much SOP around here. You should know that by now.

Evan Kubota wrote:...but if someone wants a recommendation for a sports car and you insist "motorcycle," that's just obnoxious and serves absolutely no purpose.

LOL. I'd say that Mitch's response makes as much sense as asking about a sports car on a motorcycle forum, don't ya think? I mean, with the literally hundreds of video forums available on the internet, this question was posed on a film forum. Why don't you call that "obnoxious"? Because it isn't, any more than Mitch's response was.

Look, the original poster had a valid question about choosing a camcorder but it was based on his feeling that shooting film is too costly. For him that may be true but he could have simply posted "Hey, any recommendations on a good camcorder?" with no mention of film costs what so ever. But he did it and I saw people addressing both those issues and trying to be helpful about it since it seemed that he would have preferred to shoot film if he could and not video. Perhaps people did not respond as you would have but there's no need to get insulting about it, is there? We're all friends here, I'd like to think.

Roger

Post by **mattias** » Fri Sep 22, 2006 3:07 pm

JCook wrote:If you aren't interested in Rogers DVX100A I'd suggest that you take a look at the Sony HVR-A1U?

yes, i was going to suggest that. that's easily the one i'm getting, if i ever get around to it. you get so much for the money it's almost embarrasing. the only problem with the "u" is that it's not a great choice for a film out, or "film look". the fake 24p sucks and the fake 30p, while it looks good, isn't really an option either. the 25p on pal version is great.

/matt

Post by **gianni1** » Fri Sep 22, 2006 4:15 pm

If the camera is for mixed use like parents home movie clips, and other point an shoot, go for a low end Canon, something comparable to a cheap MXV 200i. Purchase one for your parents, and get a nicer something else for your personal use.

A Sony HVR-A1U is great, but I would not be happy when mum or dad forget it on the car roof as we drive away, or if it got lost or stolen.... I am talking about disposable cameras here, something you can forgive and forget about....

Today I used, taped some events with my Canon XM-1 and, and also checked out an old MXV200i from my college library. A few years back I ordered a bunch of the Canon MXV200i's for the library as AV Kit for student use, and they've still work fine after several years of abuse from countless students, with the exception of needing new batteries....

You can always use the low end camera for typical teen age experimental shoots where you wouldn't want to risk the fancy cam, like hang gliders, jumping out of airplanes, throwing things off buildings, paintball, bike crashes, pretend gang fights, bloody halloween horror, etc...

Gianni

Post by **MovieStuff** » Fri Sep 22, 2006 5:18 pm

mattias wrote: the only problem with the "u" is that it's not a great choice for a film out, or "film look". the fake 24p sucks...

It really does, doesn't it? Honestly, I don't know why Sony bothered because no one is going to use it, the motion is so awful. I love my HVRZ1U, picture wise, but I would only use it in the 25P mode.

Thanks for the information on cable lengths. I think I'll be okay and, if the noise or interference is an issue, I'll just add a DA.

Roger

Post by **christoph** » Fri Sep 22, 2006 5:55 pm

MovieStuff wrote:
mattias wrote: the only problem with the "u" is that it's not a great choice for a film out, or "film look". the fake 24p sucks...
It really does, doesn't it? Honestly, I don't know why Sony bothered because no one is going to use it, the motion is so awful. I love my HVRZ1U, picture wise, but I would only use it in the 25P mode.

actually the 25P look, while having natural P motion, drops every other field (ie. half of the vertical resolution). so if you have the time in postproduction, shooting 50i and deinterlacing it is still the best option.
obviously this is not a concern if you end up on a SD DVD anyway, but worth it if you have a high-end 1080i/p screen or plan to do a filmout.
++ christoph ++

Post by **MovieStuff** » Fri Sep 22, 2006 6:08 pm

christoph wrote: actually the 25P look, while having natural P motion, drops every other field (ie. half of the vertical resolution). so if you have the time in postproduction, shooting 50i and deinterlacing it is still the best option.

So the Sony really isn't doing a complete progressive scan in the 25P mode? Or is it that by deinterlacing, the software can do a better job of interpolating the missing information than the Sony does in the 25P mode? Not sure I understand how the Sony is really working in the 25P mode compared to shooting 50i and deinterlacing, which I understand will then give you 25 frames without interlaced motion within each frame.

Roger

Post by **mattias** » Fri Sep 22, 2006 6:15 pm

christoph wrote:actually the 25P look, while having natural P motion, drops every other field (ie. half of the vertical resolution). so if you have the time in postproduction, shooting 50i and deinterlacing it is still the best option.

yeah, that's why i called it fake, but i'm not so sure you're 100% right. since the interpolation is done with raw ccd data, more or less, cineframe is much better than just dropping and interpolating one field in post, using 4:2:0 compressed data, and almost as good as what the various "smart" schemes produce. you have to ask yourself whether the extra time and money is worth it. of course this boils down to a discussion of what "best" means, and we all know where those end up. ;-)

/matt

Post by **mattias** » Fri Sep 22, 2006 6:18 pm

roger, it's the same thing either way. it's just a matter of whether the camera or the computer does the job the best. the sonys do shoot true progressive in dv mode though.

/matt

Post by **christoph** » Fri Sep 22, 2006 9:11 pm

roger,
yes, the Z1U can only capture interlaced data from the chip, so the in camera 25 cineframe option captures 1 field, doubles it and writes it to a 50i stream, resulting in 25P motion but only half resolution. a software solution will interpolate or even reconstruct the in-between detail and usualy gives superior results, depending on the efficiency of the algorithm used.

matt,
i did some extensive tests because i shot a short 2 weeks ago with the Z1E that is going to end up on a 35mm print and my results showed that going the 50i route with a high-quality deinterlacer (shake) catches much more detail than the 25 cineframe in camera.

like i said, it's probably not worth it unless you have a great screen, hope for a filmout, do a lot of vfx or just want to get the best possible result anyway.. which rules out 95% of us, right? ;)
++ christoph ++

http://members.cox.net/home-theater/ · Post by **JCook** » Sat Sep 23, 2006 3:14 am

Since we're knee deep in a tangent here any of you read up on the new Canon HV10 yet?

http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Ca ... Review.htm

I must admit, I'm a huge Canon fan, I drool over their top of the line XL H1 and was anxiously waiting for the HV10 release, fully expecting it to fill the hole between low end pro-sumer cameras like the Sony A1U and the consumer camera HC3.

Much to my surprise its one of the new breed of uprights. I had one in my hands last week, what the he!! was Canon thinking? Well I now know I'm not an upright form factor fan, it just felt too flimsy shaky, how would you ever hold the thing steady and attempt to make an adjustment? Also theres no external audio inputs, no digital A/V port (no HDMI or DVI) no shoe, no 24P this goes on and on and the low light LUX rating...sorry for the rant, this was in my price range and it turned out to be a major disappointment. The only thing it has going for it is the use of mini-dv format, all the newer stuff going to the AVCHD format, not my bag either.

From my point of view there's a huge market out there just waiting for a $1600-1800 HDV camera built around an HV10/HC3 entry level HDV camera with a few extra bells and whistles added such as external audio inputs, shoe, 60P/24P, HDMI interface all with a nice big piece of glass on the end. Why won't a manufacturer step up to the plate? I can see them worrying about pulling sales away from their $3000 line but if you can sell many many more to consumers like myself rather than no purchase at all they'd be money ahead.

Sorry, had to vent!

John

Post by **Mitch Perkins** » Sat Sep 23, 2006 5:17 am

MovieStuff wrote: We're all friends here, I'd like to think.

Roger

I'll take the blame for this round, based on the pompous tone of my OP response. My excuse is that I'm a pompous f**k.

[sigh] Better to recognize it I guess...

I think for most visual projects, especially personal memories [stardust!], top priority should be given to the use of the best-looking, longest (physically) lasting available visual capture medium. Even folks with no idea why...seem to recognize which medium that is.

If ~easy~ is the goal, well, it's easiest to do nothing at all...~:?)

Mitch

Post by **Evan Kubota** » Sat Sep 23, 2006 5:37 am

I think for most visual projects, especially personal memories [stardust!], top priority should be given to the use of the best-looking, longest (physically) lasting available visual capture medium. Even folks with no idea why...seem to recognize which medium that is.

Well, most appropriate for the work, anyway. I love film but I can still imagine projects where I'd want to use video for a specific effect.