As someone pointed out, we really do need an official thread for these cams. I lumped 11/12 together since only difference is storage.

I should be receiving mine sometime this afternoon and will try and play around with it over the weekend.

I got the sr12 from sony yest. WOW!!! What a nice unit.

I will be getting SR11 with the next few days.... if dell ever gets off thier lazy butt to send it to me. I will post a review once i do get it.

I got the SR-11 at Best Buy (in Columbus Ohio) wednesday night. It's all good so far. Good to see the official thread get started.

I'm currently testing a 1 hour highest quality video using Nero Recode to prepare for youtube. Nero is able to import m2ts and I'm recoding 1920x1080 down to 320x240 using the Nero AVC profile. Should be pretty easy to go from camera to youtube using only one or two programs.

I just got my SR11.. thing is TINY.. I LOVE how slick it looks.

ABT Gets my vote. I would imagine they should be able to match the $1000 for anyone who wants one.

I got the SR-11 at Best Buy (in Columbus Ohio) wednesday night. It's all good so far. Good to see the official thread get started.

I'm currently testing a 1 hour highest quality video using Nero Recode to prepare for youtube. Nero is able to import m2ts and I'm recoding 1920x1080 down to 320x240 using the Nero AVC profile. Should be pretty easy to go from camera to youtube using only one or two programs.

Wait..how did you already get an SR11 from BestBuy, when there website says its not even out yet? It still says its a pre-order item with a 3/10/08 ETA.-----> http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=8679815&type=product&id=1197678618882 (http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=8679815&type=product&id=1197678618882)

I went looking for it on Tuesday and was told they were enroute. Went back Wednesday evening and they were pulling them off the truck. They didn't even have one on display. The sales guy said I got the first one.

I'm starting to suspect that the SR11/12 are going to be quite popular with consumers; It actually looks BIGGER online than in person.. its pretty small (and to think the Panasonic SD9 is even smaller!)

I'm uploading my first clip to megaupload now. I'll post link in the morning probably.

I have no idea what compression settings or anything were done, but I did copy to USB and played back on PS3 with no problems.

I do agree that lack of light causes it to go grainy (as you will see in the video)

I went through all the specifications for these two models and my interest was dampened by a few things I found. In the first place, their pixels have only 40% as much size as those of the HC7/HC9. There is no choice of J-PEG encoding quality for still pictures. Unlike many models, there is no Fine mode, only an auto-adjusting Standard one. On Sony's DSC-H9 still camera, this elimination of Fine mode caused a significant drop in image quality and it showed artifacts from over-compression in many cases. Also, there is no intermediate pixel-size between 6-megapixels and 1.9 megapixels. At least one and preferably two other sizes, such as 3-MP and 4-MP should have been added. I don't imagine the extrapolated 10-MP images from its tiny pixels (5.7 MP of them), will be too great. I'd really like to be wrong about this, but I doubt that I am. True, it's a video camera, but I take stills just as much as video with mine.

I don't imagine the extrapolated 10-MP images from its tiny pixels (5.7 MP of them), will be too great.

I would agree. Most likely it is just a waste of storage space to store images which are interpolated up to 10.2 MP. You can't add resolution via interpolation. I suspect that the "10.2 MP still images" is pure marketing hype. Hopefully the camera allows you to store images at the native sensor resolution, which is roughly 5.1 MP according to the specs on the sonystyle site. Frankly I don't see any reason to use any other resolution, you can always scale up/down off-camera if needed. Can somebody who owns the camera please confirm what still picture resolutions are offered?

Ok.. I finished uploading the clip.. its about 50meg.

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=IOJTU4RD

Sorry if its not clear or out of focus but was just goofing around :D

>> Can somebody who owns the camera please confirm what still picture resolutions are offered?

10.2 megapixel = 3680x2760
7.6 megapixel = 3680x2070 <- widescreen (nice)
6.1 megapixel = 2848x2136
1.9 megapixel = 640x480
.3 megapixel (vga) = 640x480

I'll be shooting almost everything in 7.6 megapixel widescreen mode.

I went through all the specifications for these two models and my interest was dampened by a few things I found. In the first place, their pixels have only 40% as much size as those of the HC7/HC9. There is no choice of J-PEG encoding quality for still pictures. Unlike many models, there is no Fine mode, only an auto-adjusting Standard one. On Sony's DSC-H9 still camera, this elimination of Fine mode caused a significant drop in image quality and it showed artifacts from over-compression in many cases. Also, there is no intermediate pixel-size between 6-megapixels and 1.9 megapixels. At least one and preferably two other sizes, such as 3-MP and 4-MP should have been added. I don't imagine the extrapolated 10-MP images from its tiny pixels (5.7 MP of them), will be too great. I'd really like to be wrong about this, but I doubt that I am. True, it's a video camera, but I take stills just as much as video with mine.

I don't use my video cameras for still pix, but there are quality mode settings for video on the SR12. In fact, there are three quality settings for HD alone. At the highest quality setting, 16mbps, the video is truly excellent and to my eyes better than my HV20.

The other truly undeniable advantage of the Sonys is their viewfinder. For many people, not having a viewfinder is one of the biggest deal breaks there is. I can manage without one, but it's undeniably more professional and easier to have one.

It's no longer valid to simply compare sensor size and pixel size. Sony is using some very high end technology in their design to compensate for both sensor and pixel size and this tech is borrowed from their high end HD cams. The Exmor and Bionz processing does indeed live up to its promise. The picture is cleaner on the Sony than even my very clean HV20 picture.

I've learned at this point in the technology curve of AVCHD, it's wiser to see the picture than judge from the specs. ;)

Wow.. I just realized the clip I recorded was on the 3rd of 4 level on quality.. I imagine on full quality it will be even better!

Wow.. I just realized the clip I recorded was on the 3rd of 4 level on quality.. I imagine on full quality it will be even better!

Yup, I did the same thing!!! I was very impressed with the first clips I shot and then I realized I was at the LOWEST quality setting! I've yet to do an A/B/C test on the three quality settings, but since I'm a purist I'd tend to use only the highest quality setting. Since the SR12 has over 14 hours of HD storage at the highest quality, I'm not too conerned about space...and then there's still the memory stick storage too.

Tgenius, I just watched your clip and I see more noise in your dark rooms than I've noticed on mine. That might be a function of your 'quality' setting. Of course it's tough to say since I don't know what the light levels were in the dark rooms you shot in. It may just be that the rooms I've shot in are not that dark. But in reasonable light, I think your clips hint at how sharp the cam can be.

The low light performance of the Panasonic SD9 is so bad, it's got to be seen to be believed. The sharpness goes to sub-VHS levels and that in itself is a deal-break. The SR12 maintains the sharpness as does the HV20.

One thing I've seen thus far, the low light of the SR12 appears to be a bit better than the HV20...and that's not bad.

I played back that clip on my PS3 and it looked pretty sharp (especially the kitchen shots)

I have set it to the highest level but won't do any recording for a bit today.

I also finally got Vegas Pro, but it sure looks confusing! Any good books/tutorials of how to use it?

Not sure about tutuorials with Vegas. I downloaded the trial version the other day since I heard it is AVCHD friendly. My disappointment was (assuming I haven't overlooked something), is that it doesn't export in 1920X1080. The highest export setting I saw in AVCHD was 1440X1080. You also take a small bitrate hit since the highest bitrate in Vegas is 15mbps.

Frankly those concessions are a bit of a turn off for me.

Was that Vegas or Vegas Pro? I have Vegas Pro.

What other software supports 1920 and the easiest to use?

>> Can somebody who owns the camera please confirm what still picture resolutions are offered?

10.2 megapixel = 3680x2760
7.6 megapixel = 3680x2070 <- widescreen (nice)
6.1 megapixel = 2848x2136
1.9 megapixel = 640x480
.3 megapixel (vga) = 640x480


Thanks fdisker. It's very strange that they don't offer native resolution. Per the specs on the sonystyle site, native resolution is roughly 5.1 MP in 4:3 mode, and 3.8 MP in 16:9 mode. So it appears that every available resolution is either up or down scaled. Doesn't make sense to me. Anyway, the 6.1 and 7.6 MP resolutions look like the best of the available options.

I got the SR-11 at Best Buy (in Columbus Ohio) wednesday night. It's all good so far. Good to see the official thread get started.

I'm currently testing a 1 hour highest quality video using Nero Recode to prepare for youtube. Nero is able to import m2ts and I'm recoding 1920x1080 down to 320x240 using the Nero AVC profile. Should be pretty easy to go from camera to youtube using only one or two programs.

YouTube upped the resolution late last year to 640x480, so you should get better pics.

I played back that clip on my PS3 and it looked pretty sharp (especially the kitchen shots)

I have set it to the highest level but won't do any recording for a bit today.

I also finally got Vegas Pro, but it sure looks confusing! Any good books/tutorials of how to use it?

Yeah those Kitchen shots were fantastic. I look forward to seeing more footage. Gosh Monday can't come soon enough...

Was that Vegas or Vegas Pro? I have Vegas Pro.

What other software supports 1920 and the easiest to use?

Vegas Pro. Not sure of any other software than supports AVCHD 1920X1080.

Has anyone been successful rendering their video to Xvid, Divx, h.264, wmv etc while retaining the 5.1 sound using Sony Vegas 8?

I keep getting the error message of "settings not compatible with this template", and I've tried them all. I only get this error when choosing 5.1 sound, regardless of audio format or quality.

Can anyone upload some footage of Low Light quality. I hear you all saying how well it performs in low light compared to such cameras as the HV20. Just trying to see how well it performs. Thanks

Here's a link to one SR12 clip. A hazy early morning in downtown N.Y.C. Clips are all native from the cam.

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=00JC43E9

Here's a brief one on a nicer clear day.

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=GOHXJM70

Here's one with an overhead light on in a room where HD cams have typically produced very poor video. The SD9 was unwatchable in this same lighting.

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=KB67H982


Very nice man thanks. That last video of the low light says it is unavailable.

Let me try again. Again, HD cams I've used in the past typically produce very poor results under this same lighting.

OK, this should work now:

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=TCQVKYX5

Hmm, wonder if I shot my load on megaupload. Let me try again.

Sounds like a plan thanks

Traveaso, I edited my last post with a solid link this time. It should work for you now.

Traveaso, I edited my last post with a solid link this time. It should work for you now.

That worked perfectly thank you very much.

Here's an indoor mall shot. Real world material. I'll tell you, the footage looks 100X better on a large screen HDTV. The computer monitor is a poor way, IMO, to view this HD footage. The clarity on a good plasma just blows away a computer monitor!

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=FNJ134QO

I can't wait then, for when the CC comes Monday. Put this on my 42in' 1080P Pansonic Plasma.

All the footage still looks nice. I am pleased I made a good decision on this camcorder. I was getting a little worried with seeing the reviews for the HV20 and the HV30... I didn't think this camcorder would come close to them. But after seeing a lot of footage. I am very impressed!

Anyone is using that camcorder but with a MAC like iMovie 08 or Finalcut ?
Any problems or everything works fine ??

Thanks

Traveaso, my friend has the Sony FX7 and one of the things that really impresses me is when he shot a scene that had such lighting contrasts, ie. his subject was in the shadow of a cloud with the background in very bright sunshine, both the subject and and the background were very clear, just like my eyes would see it. Colors and details both were great in both parts of the scene: No overexposure in the bright background, nor underexposure with the dark subject. In both areas, you could see everything clearly.
How do you think your new cam would handle such a scene? Is there a way you could test something similar and let me know?
Also, how does this new cam handle the various shades of green? Sony, in the past, has had a problem accurately recording some shades of green, like the bright new spring green of aspen trees in May. I am hoping that this new xy color thing will take care of that problem.

Thanks.
Mike

Traveaso, my friend has the Sony FX7 and one of the things that really impresses me is when he shot a scene that had such lighting contrasts, ie. his subject was in the shadow of a cloud with the background in very bright sunshine, both the subject and and the background were very clear, just like my eyes would see it. Colors and details both were great in both parts of the scene: No overexposure in the bright background, nor underexposure with the dark subject. In both areas, you could see everything clearly.
How do you think your new cam would handle such a scene? Is there a way you could test something similar and let me know?
Also, how does this new cam handle the various shades of green? Sony, in the past, has had a problem accurately recording some shades of green, like the bright new spring green of aspen trees in May. I am hoping that this new xy color thing will take care of that problem.

Thanks.
Mike


Mike, the 'xy color thing' is only useful if your display is capable of xy color. Very very few displays on the market are capable of handling this color space. So for now, the feature has very limited value. Add to that the fact that nobody really has much of an idea how much improvement the expanded color space brings to the table.

As far as dynamic range is concerned, this is usually a function of the size of the chips. The larger the chips (everything else being equal), the better the dynamic range. I've found the Sony SR12 to have good dynamic range for a cam of this size. I used to own an FX7, but I no longer have it and can't do an A/B to test how it compares to the SR12.

Here's a clip - out of the box. HD, standard play quality.
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=YJ4MWA8F
The SR11 is avail for $966, Sony auth dealer , at
http://www.shopvsc.com/Sony-HDR-SR11-Hi-Definition-Hard-Drive-Camcorder-p/son-hdrsr11.htm

Reliable Detroit vendor, not one of the NY/NJ scams.

First cam ever - I think it's amazing...

I ordered a second battery from Amazon NP-FH70 model for about $58 shipped, best price i've found. Also, does anyone know how long that battery will last on the SR11?

The supplied battery goes about 90 minutes.

Looked at my Bestbuy.com order online and it said it was backordered 1-2weeks for the SR11. I checked the stock of a nearby BestBuy store and they had 3 instock. Canceled my online order and went down to the store and picked up my HDR-SR11!:D

I'm charging it as we speak, but the build quality is better than the CX7 I returned. I can't wait to see the PQ difference from the CX7's 1440x1080 res @15MBps to the SR11s 1920x1080 res@16MBps encode and better sensor.

Can't wait to start recording.

UTVOL06, let us know how you find that comparison.

Looked at my Bestbuy.com order online and it said it was backordered 1-2weeks for the SR11. I checked the stock of a nearby BestBuy store and they had 3 instock. Canceled my online order and went down to the store and picked up my HDR-SR11!:D

I'm charging it as we speak, but the build quality is better than the CX7 I returned. I can't wait to see the PQ difference from the CX7's 1440x1080 res @15MBps to the SR11s 1920x1080 res@16MBps encode and better sensor.

Can't wait to start recording.

i did the exact same thing. today is my wife's bday and i had been checking bb's site daily. until this morning it always said "pre-order". this morning it said "back ordered". i checked in-store avail and my local had it.

this is our first video camera and i am blown-away! i have an epson 1080p home projector and 106" screen and the high quality images from this camera look awesome!

if any of you guys need the mini hdmi to hdmi cable, check out monoprice. i ordered a 6' one this morning for $8 shipped. bb had 1 in stock for $72 :rolleyes:

what do you guys think of the included software? do you have other recommendations? as i mentioned above, this is my first video camera. we decided to get this because we just found out a couple of weeks ago that my wife is pregnant. i am fairly tech savvy but really just need something to put together decent videos.

Thnx

what do you guys think of the included software? do you have other recommendations? as i mentioned above, this is my first video camera. we decided to get this because we just found out a couple of weeks ago that my wife is pregnant. i am fairly tech savvy but really just need something to put together decent videos.

Thnx

Thats the same reason why my Fiance and I purchased a CC to. We are expecting on June 15th. I should have mine in my hands on Tuesday March 11th...according to dell.

Mike, the 'xy color thing' is only useful if your display is capable of xy color. Very very few displays on the market are capable of handling this color space. So for now, the feature has very limited value. Add to that the fact that nobody really has much of an idea how much improvement the expanded color space brings to the table.

As far as dynamic range is concerned, this is usually a function of the size of the chips. The larger the chips (everything else being equal), the better the dynamic range. I've found the Sony SR12 to have good dynamic range for a cam of this size. I used to own an FX7, but I no longer have it and can't do an A/B to test how it compares to the SR12.


Ken, thanks for the info. Have you done any situations where the contrasts between light and dark areas within the shot would cause difficulties with lessor cams. The FX7 would handle those situations very well, showing the whole scene with the bright areas not being overexposed, and the dark areas not so dark as to lose detail. AS the example I gave before, the subject is in the shadow of a cloud, backlit by a bright skyline and deep blue skies. Both the subject and the background are clear, detailed, with good color. No overexposure, no washouts, no lose of detail in the shadow.

My old digital cam couldn't handle such a scene, either washing out or overexposing the background in order to have enough light for the subject, or correctly exposing the background and having the subject so dark that it was hard to see what was there. Certainly not real like; not as my eyes saw it.

Can you test your new cam in a similar situation and see how it handles the lighting contrasts?
Thanks.
Mike

Hello fellow cam crazies,

I am considering the SR-12. As I am from the Netherlands, this would be the European model SR-12E. Has anyone 'round here already experienced the European model? I would like to know if there are any differences between the SR-12 and the SR-12E. More specifically, I would like to know whether the SR-12E also has microphone and headphone jacks. I understand the American model does have those and I would expect the European model also to have these features. But I am a little confused here, because all European Sony sites state that the camera does not have these features. Please enlighten me. Thanks

Ken, thanks for the info. Have you done any situations where the contrasts between light and dark areas within the shot would cause difficulties with lessor cams. The FX7 would handle those situations very well, showing the whole scene with the bright areas not being overexposed, and the dark areas not so dark as to lose detail. AS the example I gave before, the subject is in the shadow of a cloud, backlit by a bright skyline and deep blue skies. Both the subject and the background are clear, detailed, with good color. No overexposure, no washouts, no lose of detail in the shadow.

My old digital cam couldn't handle such a scene, either washing out or overexposing the background in order to have enough light for the subject, or correctly exposing the background and having the subject so dark that it was hard to see what was there. Certainly not real like; not as my eyes saw it.

Can you test your new cam in a similar situation and see how it handles the lighting contrasts?
Thanks.
Mike

Mike, I would say it's dynamic range appears on par with other HD cams I've used. To be honest, I've never ever seen any HD cam (even megabuck professional units) that could take a brilliantly sun lit background, expose that properly as well as the main subject in the shade. Every professional HD cam I've seen blows out the very bright background. It's just the nature of video. I had both the FX1 and the FX7 and they behaved the same way.

Ken, how would you compare this to the 24p of the HV20? I've recently sold my HV20 in anticipation for the HV30 and the use of 30p video. However I'd be willing to budge if the SR11/12 is the cream of the crop.

Ken - ditto on the request for comments regarding the 24p and 30p of the Canons. Right now I'm thinking I want to hold out for the the Canon HF100/10 to get the 24p/30p. The Sony documentation says something about progressive modes, but no details.

I would primarily be using this camera for home purposes, but supposedly the 24p on the Canon increases the usability in low light situations.

Any thoughts on the Sony?

My understanding is the SR11/12 do NOT support progressive mode, but then again, perhaps they do and we just don't know about it (or its labelled otherwise)?? In any event, the video on my 1080p Toshiba in the bedroom looks phenomenal.

Ken, how would you compare this to the 24p of the HV20? I've recently sold my HV20 in anticipation for the HV30 and the use of 30p video. However I'd be willing to budge if the SR11/12 is the cream of the crop.

I'm a bit different in this respect. I never liked that look of any HDV cam's 24p output that I've seen. The results are too jitterly with fast moving objects or pans. So I never use that feature on my HV20.

So for me the comparison is between 60i on the HV20 and 60i on the SR12. In this respect the image holds up very well to the HV20 and, IMO, may actually be better. Very low noise, nice saturated colors (a bit warmer than Canon's which tends to be a bit cool), and very sharp.

The low light on the SR12 is excellent (for a consumer HD cam). Keeping in mind that no HD cams will look great in very low light, the SR12 is up there with the best of them and certainly does well compared to the HV20. Neither is in the ballpark of the Sony VX2100, but that's a DV camcorder known for superb low light capability. HD always requires more light and you'll see plenty of grain in megabuck HD broadcast equipment.

Mike, I would say it's dynamic range appears on par with other HD cams I've used. To be honest, I've never ever seen any HD cam (even megabuck professional units) that could take a brilliantly sun lit background, expose that properly as well as the main subject in the shade. Every professional HD cam I've seen blows out the very bright background. It's just the nature of video. I had both the FX1 and the FX7 and they behaved the same way.

Thanks Ken. I understand what you are saying. The example I am referring to is this: We were in the sand hills region of Nebraska shooting coal trains. The train in question was north, 2-3 hundred yards away from us in the shadow of a cloud. Beyond it, were the brightly lit tan colored grassy hills with the deep blue sky behind. The FX7 handled it well, balancing the bright background with the main subject in the shadows. Now, it wasn't pitch black beneath that cloud, but it was dark enough so that my old digital cam would not have been able to handle it correctly; either brightening up everything so that the hill and sky were overexposed, or exposing the background correctly and having the train way too dark (hardly being able to see it). The FX7 did it well, keeping the background from being overexposed, AND keeping the main subject lit well enough to see it very easily. Would this have anything to do with the ND filters in the FX7? Anyway, whatever cam I get, I want it to handle those kinds of situations as well as the FX7.

Mike

I want to know if anyone here did use the SR11 or 12 with a Mac ?

Since im very interested with the SR11 and i just bought a Mac... so i wonder if they are compatible with iMovie 08 or Final Cut ?

Thanks for your comments.

Thanks Ken. I understand what you are saying. The example I am referring to is this: We were in the sand hills region of Nebraska shooting coal trains. The train in question was north, 2-3 hundred yards away from us in the shadow of a cloud. Beyond it, were the brightly lit tan colored grassy hills with the deep blue sky behind. The FX7 handled it well, balancing the bright background with the main subject in the shadows. Now, it wasn't pitch black beneath that cloud, but it was dark enough so that my old digital cam would not have been able to handle it correctly; either brightening up everything so that the hill and sky were overexposed, or exposing the background correctly and having the train way too dark (hardly being able to see it). The FX7 did it well, keeping the background from being overexposed, AND keeping the main subject lit well enough to see it very easily. Would this have anything to do with the ND filters in the FX7? Anyway, whatever cam I get, I want it to handle those kinds of situations as well as the FX7.

Mike

Tough to say Mike without being able to duplicate those same conditions. But honestly, I never thought the dynamic range of the FX7 was significantly better than the HV20 which I've used a lot. I don't have enough time with the SR12 to know if it matches the HV20 in that respect. But thus far there's nothing that would make me think it's much different.

BTW, I doubt it had anything to do with ND filters as those would darken everything by a comparable degree.

Looked at my Bestbuy.com order online and it said it was backordered 1-2weeks for the SR11. I checked the stock of a nearby BestBuy store and they had 3 instock. Canceled my online order and went down to the store and picked up my HDR-SR11!:D

It seems that they have it in stock in quite a few BB's. The three near me in SoCal (Manhattan Beach, Hawthorne, Redondo) all had 2-4 in stock at each location. Not a single one had a display model.

YMMV, but for whatever reason the sales associate took $100 of my purchase.

-JR

Tough to say Mike without being able to duplicate those same conditions. But honestly, I never thought the dynamic range of the FX7 was significantly better than the HV20 which I've used a lot. I don't have enough time with the SR12 to know if it matches the HV20 in that respect. But thus far there's nothing that would make me think it's much different.

BTW, I doubt it had anything to do with ND filters as those would darken everything by a comparable degree.

OK Ken, thanks. I'll just have to wait to see what others, who have bought the SR11/12 and used it in a similar situation, have to say. Hopefully, someone will have used it in such a way and will report their findings.
As for me testing it, in-store tests do nothing. I would have to buy one and then test it myself. If it didn't perform as I expect, then I would return it. I don't like doing that, even though I know many do. Once I buy something, unless it is physically broke, I don't return it. So I will be watching to see what others have to say about the performance of this cam.

Ken, thanks for taking the time to answer my questions. You are a valuable and reliable asset.

Mike

Ever since the introduction of the VX700 in 1995, which was the first digital camcorder from Sony's non-professional division, we've all been waiting for a truly good HD model, that was small and affordable. My advice to those itching to get an SR-11/SR-12, is to wait just a couple more weeks, until a few full, professional reviews come out. Despite assurances from some early-adopters, there's a great deal of uncertainty about all the aspects of these radically different models.

If only the camcorder manufacturers had stuck to the original HD specifications that were written into the DV format, at the beginning. DV-100HD would have doubled the tape speed and number of recording heads used for SD-DV and raised the carrier frequency from 13.5 MHz to 23 MHz, to quadruple the bit-rate. This would have given a 30-minute recording time for mini-DV cassettes. As a matter of fact, the DV Consortium planned this format to be primarily for high-definition. Only when delays in being able to commercially develop the HD equipment occured, did they bring out the SD version, so they would be able to start showing some profits. Somewhere along the way, what might have been an outstanding HD format, was lost and eventually replaced with the highly-compressed HDV. This M-PEG2 format uses an interframe compression scheme, with 15-frame packets, that are dependent on one fully-encoded key frame in the middle. If any part of the packet has a glitch, you get a half-second dropout (at least). Not that I'm complaining about HDV, as it gives a lot of performance for its cost and 60 minutes on a tiny cassette. The proposed DV-100HD, would have had the same intraframe type of compression that SD-DV uses, where each frame is fully encoded and depends on no others for its content. With the dropout-correction technology that has allowed DV to show so few on-screen glitches, DV-100HD could have been superior to HDV in both image quality and dependability. Too good, in fact, for hoi polloi like us, and is the likely reason we never saw it come into existence. Many of the professional and broadcast formats are the ones that now use a 100 Mbps compression for HD-video. I don't favor sacrificing video quality to get more recording time and to reduce camcorder and recording media size. But apparently, the manufacturers see just the opposite in what would be most appealing to the majority of potential customers.

This clip was shot on highest quality.


http://www.megaupload.com/?d=DHTGSROO

Wow... dynamic range looks really good. How's the compression artifacts with fast motion. I've read that that's where AVCHD suffers.

Just rendered it as an avi file and damn if that doesn't look great. Maybe better then the HV20..... but darn I'll miss the 24p..

Ever since the introduction of the VX700 in 1995, which was the first digital camcorder from Sony's non-professional division, we've all been waiting for a truly good HD model, that was small and affordable. My advice to those itching to get an SR-11/SR-12, is to wait just a couple more weeks, until a few full, professional reviews come out. Despite assurances from some early-adopters, there's a great deal of uncertainty about all the aspects of these radically different models.



Steve, I've always thought dropouts in the HDV format were vastly overrated. I've shot many many tapes and I can count on one hand the number of dropouts I've ever seen. I think for the most part this is truly a non-issue for HDV.

However, after seeing the recent AVCHD models with their higher resolution and improved bitrate, I have become a firm believer that the AVCHD format will be superior to the HDV format as it continues to evolve.

My brief experience with the SR12 shows the true promise of AVCHD finally being realized. As I've said, IMO, it's image is every bit as good as my HV20, if not better. Things will continue to improve with future models.

But the big thing for me is the amazing convenience of instant access to any scene at any time. Shuttling through HDV tapes was always a pain and very glitchy. It's almost impossible to hit the precise point on an HDV tape while scanning it. Once you've played with a high quality AVCHD cam, it's tough to feel the same way about tape.

Keep in mind that I've long been a skeptic of AVCHD. No more. :)

Wow... dynamic range looks really good. How's the compression artifacts with fast motion. I've read that that's where AVCHD suffers.

Just rendered it as an avi file and damn if that doesn't look great. Maybe better then the HV20..... but darn I'll miss the 24p..

Yes, IMO it is better than the HV20 (or at least its equal). As for compression artifacts with fast motion, that's a thing of the past with AVCHD. In fact, even the CCI site, long known for its disdain for AVCHD, said the recent Panasonic SD9 proves that motion artifacts are for all intents and puposes gone. They even went so far as to say that motion was handled BETTER than the HDV format. I agree. I see detail holding up better with the SR12 for fast moving objects or quick pans, than I do with the HV20.

I do think AVCHD is certainly close to HDV and most wouldn't see a difference in 99% of scenes. The one exception is probably a zoomed in waterfall. I do think with certain specific tests you could always see the compression artifacts (at least up to 17mpbs).

Talking about dropouts. I've weirdly enough seen now 3 'dropouts' in the SR11 clips. At least it looks like it. Checkout the 5th second in the dynamic range video...
What is that? I also see it in the first video clip with the 2 dogs near the end. 3rd video I see it in is the one with the sofa.

PS I have a HV20 but I rarely get dropouts and I use cheapo TDK tapes.

Now I just have to wait and see about the Canon HF10 and the decision will be made based on that.

Does the SR11/12 have an associated wide angle or telephoto lens adapter??

Yes you can buy a 37mm wide-angle lens which imo is a must for pretty much all HD camcorders even though the SR11 starts at 40m instead of typical 43mm.

Regarding dropouts: can someone check if this is a SR11 HDD issue? Bit worried about it since I've seen it 3 times out of 6 clips...

I do think AVCHD is certainly close to HDV and most wouldn't see a difference in 99% of scenes. The one exception is probably a zoomed in waterfall. I do think with certain specific tests you could always see the compression artifacts (at least up to 17mpbs).

Talking about dropouts. I've weirdly enough seen now 3 'dropouts' in the SR11 clips. At least it looks like it. Checkout the 5th second in the dynamic range video...
What is that? I also see it in the first video clip with the 2 dogs near the end. 3rd video I see it in is the one with the sofa.

PS I have a HV20 but I rarely get dropouts and I use cheapo TDK tapes.

Luc, I see no dropouts in either of your clips when viewing it on my computer. I've certainly never seen any on footage from the SR12 thus far. Not sure how you'd even get dropouts in this format. Are you sure it's not something with your computer if that's where you're seeing it?

I'm 100% sure. Just go to second 3 and then look at it frame by frame. There are about 2 frame that are corrupted (you see some blocks). I also saw it in 2 previous clips and on my xbox360 as well.

I can post the image later if you can't find it. It's the last video clip called window_int contrast. I'm pretty sure it's the clip.

Argh......frustration with Dell. I got home from work today hoping to see that my SR11 has shipped and I have a tracking number. But oh no, instead I get Your Dell Order Has Been Delayed till the 17th. Bah...that truly stinks. Goodthing my Fiance' and I aren't having the baby this weekend or else Dell would have gotten an earfull from me.

I downloaded the clip again on my notebook and same result. I took a frame grab:

http://zxatuw.bay.livefilestore.com/y1p20U7JNVxq5zsUpQIzqNi-pzF_t51gsQeKZdBxhh5buWr4VYKUr927i8xskFdyX3XUIqOQvcDOL15OYLHD CqfEg

Check the middle left side. You see broken blocks.

I looked at my original clip and could see no evidence of the "blocking". I do not have frame-by-frame software innstalled, but went thru the sequence in 1/100 sec (i think) increments using the screen grab utility in the included software. Could those artifacts actually have come from a long and arduous "non-premium", often seemimgly interupted upload sequence (about 40kbs)to Megaupload? I have cable modem, but the upload was very slow and erratic.
How can I look at the original in a way to see if they artifacts are present?
And this in't really a dropout, is it? Thought that was when whole frames were gone.

I have some graet indoor-looking-outdoor to snowy yard clips and the range covered is remarkable. Also, can see then gray/black mottling and even coat detail on the dark gray dog against the snow at a distance. Clips are 40-50 meg and Megaupload is a LONG upload. Any faster free service?

Im totally NuB to vid, but do digital still and underwater digital. This SR11 is one great camera period. I haven't touched a custom setting yet (except to shoot highest qual) and the results far exceed my expectations. This I think will be a classic, and should be graet for UW vid, esp when the price comes down a bit. Have a beaut clip of white birch against rich blue sky - perfect on direct feed to HDTV!

OK.
I downloaded from Megaupload the same clip that I uploaded and compared the two, loking for Luc48's aberrant frames.
I used the included SR11 included Picture Motion Browser (PMB) software to go frame by frame (in 1/30th sec increments according to the counter) to look at seconds 3 thru 4 of the "white puppy" clip that yielded the "blocked" frame capture by Luc48. I saw no prob with my original and no prob (although I expected to see it) in the Megaupload clip. So what up with that? Luc - are you seeing more fps? And what's up with the 30fps that I thought the SR11 didn't do? It's the rate used in their PMB software. Does that mean that Sony has a hidden instant-upload-to-internet 30fps function built in?
Way above my head, but this cc is full of surprises! So far very good ones (at least to a rookie)

Luc48 - hope this is all more obvious to you all than it is to me.
Yow - I'm getting hooked on the tekkie part of this - what a challenge....

I went through the "dropout" clip as well in Vegas and could not find anything. I also rendered in a variety of ways to find nothing.

Also Drop outs are exactly that FRAME drop outs. For HDV 720 What is it a pack of 6 frames is affected and in HDV1080 its a pack of 15 frames. But for DV it is only the single frame.

Well, what ever...I could not find any thing that looked like broken blocks

So just my 2 cents.

And lets call it undifined pixelation:eek:

after looking closer at the fram grab it looks as if the pixels shifted down.

If you look you can see the window sill is split with the broken block section lowered but intact.

I tried again to find it in my copies but could not.

Based on the frame grab above the frame number is about #117 But could be anywhere between frames 115 to 119

So if anyone else wants to download the file and check it out.

which size of plasma? Full HD TV?



Here's an indoor mall shot. Real world material. I'll tell you, the footage looks 100X better on a large screen HDTV. The computer monitor is a poor way, IMO, to view this HD footage. The clarity on a good plasma just blows away a computer monitor!

which size of plasma? Full HD TV?

60" Pioneer Kuro Elite (full 1920X1080). The quality of the footage on this size screen is amazing.

I'm 100% sure. Just go to second 3 and then look at it frame by frame. There are about 2 frame that are corrupted (you see some blocks). I also saw it in 2 previous clips and on my xbox360 as well.

I can post the image later if you can't find it. It's the last video clip called window_int contrast. I'm pretty sure it's the clip.

Luc, I tried this on WMP but couldn't do frame by frame so I tried Media Player Classic which can. Going frame by frame I saw no dropouts or macroblocking. Very strange. Every frame looked 100% complete.

Even after your frame grab and knowing what to look for AND going frame by frame, I still can't see it. Since nobody else has been able to see it either, I honestly don't think this is much of an issue. Why you're seeing it and nobody else is very strange.

I want to buy a 37" Plasma. But I can't find a full HD...
@ the moment I can watch the test videos only on PC with 1280*1024


60" Pioneer Kuro Elite (full 1920X1080). The quality of the footage on this size screen is amazing.

37" is barely big enough to show the difference in 1080p, 1080i or 720p. Are you gonna be sitting 3' feet from it?

[offtopic]

2,35 meter.


and 32" is to small for my feeling.

The one clip from New York City looked fantastic, nice dynamic range and exposure.

I want to buy a 37" Plasma. But I can't find a full HD...
@ the moment I can watch the test videos only on PC with 1280*1024

There are no 37" full HD plasmas.

The one clip from New York City looked fantastic, nice dynamic range and exposure.

And interestingly, that's not one of the sharpest clips due to the early morning haze in the city that morning. But yes, the cam does show nice dynamic range.

I was thinking last night as I pondered the purchas of the SR12 or wait for the sr11, Do these cameras have audio control over the external mic?

I have an MKE300 and other mics that I can use and want to know if I will be able to monitor the audio and adjust it as needed while wearing headphones.

Im going to go back over the user manual PDF I have to try to find it but just wanted to pose the question here.

IIRC the SR11 doesn't have manual recording adjustment (only low+normal) but best to double-check manual.

Regarding 'dropouts' or whatever I'm (only) seeing, I only see it with Danlew 2 video's. I don't see it with the NY city video (which is by the way best showcase so far I've seen for the SR11). I also have 8 HF10 video's with no problems either.

The first posted video has actually 2 broken frames at frame #811 and 812 so maybe you can reproduce that one (I tried both media player classic and windows media player on 3 different computers I tried so far). Here's a screenshot:

http://zxatuw.bay.livefilestore.com/y1p20U7JNVxq5y8xnJkX_aSrohVOEJXGf6lBzadF16PqhdhhjE3ioxOX3AGX 0-WD08JHBFRq2RlxGbUE7_YU6_jZQ

Note that this was deinterlaced. Without deinterlacing I can still see it. The video is definitely 60i. So I can't explain why you wouldn't see it other than perhaps different codec (but that seems odd since I never seen this before with AVCHD). On my notebook it's in the exact same spot and it's a clean Vista install with K-lite codec pack. I'm using default ffdshow decoder (never had any issues with this).

A dropout on a HV20 looks the same but that doesn't mean anything since any bits corrupted or missing will show this kind of shifted image. The number of frames affected depends on the position after the keyframe.

Question: which codec did you install to playback the files?

IIRC the SR11 doesn't have manual recording adjustment (only low+normal) but best to double-check manual.

Regarding 'dropouts' or whatever I'm (only) seeing, I only see it with Danlew 2 video's. I don't see it with the NY city video (which is by the way best showcase so far I've seen for the SR11).

The first posted video has actually 4 broken frames near the end so maybe you can reproduce that one (I tried both media player classic and windows media player on 3 different computers I tried so far):

http://zxatuw.bay.livefilestore.com/y1p20U7JNVxq5y8xnJkX_aSrohVOEJXGf6lBzadF16PqhdhhjE3ioxOX3AGX 0-WD08JHBFRq2RlxGbUE7_YU6_jZQ

Note that this was deinterlaced. Without interlacing I can still see it. The video is definitely 60i. So I can't explain why you wouldn't see it other than perhaps different codec (but that seems odd since I never seen this before with AVCHD). On my notebook it's in the exact same spot and it's a clean Vista install with codec lite pack.


I checked on this clips as well in vegas and could not see any problems at all.
So, we'll see how this becomes an issue or not.

Here is a new video on VIMEO of the SR12

Its the first one on VIMEO.

http://www.vimeo.com/774795

Here is a new video on VIMEO of the SR12

Its the first one on VIMEO.

http://www.vimeo.com/774795


Hey Paul that looks amazing. Very nice. I am also on there. So when i get my SR11 next week lokk me up. Im under as Travis W. I look forward to see some more work from you on there :P

Hey Paul that looks amazing. Very nice. I am also on there. So when i get my SR11 next week lokk me up. Im under as Travis W. I look forward to see some more work from you on there :P

Thats not me or my video. I just wanted to clear that up.

But I am on VIMEO and will post my vids as soon as I get the new cc

I checked on this clips as well in vegas and could not see any problems at all.
So, we'll see how this becomes an issue or not.

I installed Vegas 8 pro trial version and there you go: no problems:-). The rendered output also looks fine. So there's something specific to the SR11 video's that requires a different codec (maybe the high profile adaptive 4x4 block). After installing Vegas, still all other programs can't play it without these occasional block corruptions at fixed points.

So which codecs to install to render it correctly in other programs? It seems K-Lite codec pack doesn't work properly with Sony AVCHD high profile.

The HF10 samples didn't show any problems on my machine (and neither did previous Sony AVCHD samples).

I also have 8 HF10 video's with no problems either.



Luc, can you post a link to the HF10 videos. I've only seen a couple of very very brief clips.

Looking again, I see no pixellization or anomolies on the frame you posted as I play the clip on my computer. As far as codecs are concerned, I downloaded the Core AVC codec.

Luc, can you post a link to the HF10 videos. I've only seen a couple of very very brief clips.

Looking again, I see no pixellization or anomolies on the frame you posted as I play the clip on my computer. As far as codecs are concerned, I downloaded the Core AVC codec.

I got HF10 clips from these places:

http://file.meyersproduction.com/hf10/
http://www.watch.impress.co.jp/av/docs/20080206/zooma344.htm

The first link has some torture movement tests:-). The long low quality clip has also low-light examples. I think noise levels are at least as good as SR11. Also it seems again that focusing in low-light is a bit faster and more accurate with the Canon.
Seeing these clips I'd say the HF10 compression is adequate for my needs and a touch softer than the HV20.

I'm going on a trip to Sedona mid April and if the HF100 isn't available at that point I'll buy the SR11 and I will do some direct comparisons to my HV20. Otherwise I'll try the HF100 since it's cheaper and I don't care for a HDD since SDHC 16GB card are cheap.

I wonder why Sony doesn't make the codecs available for free (sure Core AVC codec has only a little fee).

I wanted to ask someone to test the candle exposure mode on the SR11 or SR12.

I am really curious about that mode. I wonder how it would do with just 5 or so candles.

I don't mean the whole room but just the candles and the area around them.

Or even a Birthday cake with candles and no other light on.

I got HF10 clips from these places:

http://file.meyersproduction.com/hf10/
http://www.watch.impress.co.jp/av/docs/20080206/zooma344.htm

The first link has some torture movement tests:-). The long low quality clip has also low-light examples. I think noise levels are at least as good as SR11. Also it seems again that focusing in low-light is a bit faster and more accurate with the Canon.
Seeing these clips I'd say the HF10 compression is adequate for my needs and a touch softer than the HV20.

I'm going on a trip to Sedona mid April and if the HF100 isn't available at that point I'll buy the SR11 and I will do some direct comparisons to my HV20. Otherwise I'll try the HF100 since it's cheaper and I don't care for a HDD since SDHC 16GB card are cheap.

I wonder why Sony doesn't make the codecs available for free (sure Core AVC codec has only a little fee).

I saw those clips, but unfortunately they can't be used in ULead Studio 11+ for the purpose of burning to a DVD-R. That's the only way I can determine the quality (hooked up to my 60" plasma). To be honest the fan clips are pretty useless IMO in determining overall picture quality.

The outdoor clip of the skyline is far better but can't be used in burning to a DVD-R for HD playback on a Blu Ray player. It's a weird extension .dmg and no matter what I did with it (including turning it in to an .iso file) did nothing to get it to DVD. He had no native AVCHD clips that could be used.

I was leaning toward the Canon HF10, but based on what I've seen with the SR12, I'm not so sure anymore. If, as the author of those clips stated, it's only the equal of the HG10, than that would tell me it's not as good as the SR11 or SR12. I say that because the HV20 is already better than the HG10 and my testing has shown the SR12 to be at least the equal of the HV20...at least to my eyes. I've gone buggy eyed doing these A/B tests. :)

Luc, I'm not sure you'd need the Core AVC codec with the included Sony software. I've learned the software a bit better over the last couple of days and it's really not so bad. I've found you don't need to do 'analysis' on the clips when transferring them to computer. This greatly increases transfer speed and the speed is now what I'd expect from cam to computer...very fast. The playback software is also nice in that it shows you thumbnails of all the clips on the cam's hard drive.

Generally speaking though, at least in my case, I'd rarely use the computer for playback given the much much better quality on my plasma.

I wanted to ask someone to test the candle exposure mode on the SR11 or SR12.

I am really curious about that mode. I wonder how it would do with just 5 or so candles.

I don't mean the whole room but just the candles and the area around them.

Or even a Birthday cake with candles and no other light on.

Sorry Paul, I've got no candles.

You can use MacDrive trial to open the DMG (http://www.mediafour.com/products/macdrive/). I extracted the .MTS files successfully.

The other files are .mov file and installing Quicktime should give you the codecs to load it into VS.

I confirmed that ffdshow causes these weird 'dropout' for the SR11 clips only whereas Core AVC codec does not... Pretty screwed up that some AVC codecs don't work. Sony Vegas Pro looks like a great program but it's $460 and I only got a trial. Without the Core AVC installation you probably would run into the same issue with VS11+ I believe.

I agree the fan clip is rather limited for evaluation (he tested this for the different framerates but the fan doesn't move that smooth to start with).
I also noticed with the construction clips more purple fringing than the HV20 and most likely SR11 as well. Second known issue with Canon is white balance. The sky looks slightly purplish (HV20 has that issue now and then as well). On the other hand the auto-focus in low-light appears to be still not that great with Sony.

Do you have both the SR11 and HV20? I only looked at individual different clips and I think in some instances the SR11 does look bit softer especially indoors than the HV20. But I can't tell unless someone would shoot the same scene with both cams.

Luc, I only open those clips in a limited way with that macdrive. When I try to get them in to ULead Studio 11+, I get a 'read/write' error from Windows and it then reports a lost data issue. I had to reboot to get things running again. I don't think I'll ever got those files to a DVD-R for playing in a Blu Ray player. I'll wait for someone to post some native files without the .dmg extension.

The HF10 just got an excellent review over at CCI. They found the resolution to be higher than the HV20 and found it difficult to tell the two apart in most instances. This is the first time they actually raved about an AVCHD camcorder. I'm not surprised as I've believed the latest gen of AVCHD cams is now on par with HDV if not better in some ways.

for the user that tested the SR12:
-what about the optical stabilisation
and what about:
-the autofocus?

Sequencer, the autofocus was a pleasant surprise. It is quick and accurate and probably the best I've encountered on a Sony cam. I recall testing two Sony CX-7s and finding the autofocus miserable in the Best Buys I tested them at.

Image stabilization is very good, but it's still a challenge to hold it steady at full zoom. It's one of the reasons I hate to see cams without viewfinders, they're just tougher to hold steady.

I cannot fathom why they aren't including a viewfinder on the Canon HF line

I cannot fathom why they aren't including a viewfinder on the Canon HF line

It is bizarre isn't it? I mean really, even though the HF10 is small, you still could have included a viewfinder without significantly affecting size. Don't they realize they're tougher to steady without one. AND, if you use reading glasses like certain people I know, that's an additional pain of the LCD flipout. ;)

Is the LCD on the SR11/12 really all it's cracked up to be?

Sequencer, the autofocus was a pleasant surprise. It is quick and accurate and probably the best I've encountered on a Sony cam. I recall testing two Sony CX-7s and finding the autofocus miserable in the Best Buys I tested them at.

Image stabilization is very good, but it's still a challenge to hold it steady at full zoom. It's one of the reasons I hate to see cams without viewfinders, they're just tougher to hold steady.

I can attest to the SR12's autofocus..very fast and nice image stabilization.

I really don't know how Canon can compete with this model.....pretty early.... but I would call the SR11/12 camcorders of the year.

3.2 LCD is really sharp and nice......must wait for HF100.....:)

Eric, despite the HF10 clips posted thus far, I do think the HF10/HF100 will compete well with the SR11/SR12 in the picture quality department. However, the Canons will lack the viewfinder, large and gorgeous flip-out LCD, 5.1 surround sound (which must be heard to be believed) and huge storage capacity. On the other hand the Sonys won't have the 24p/30p and smaller form factor if that's important to you.

But hey, this is a nice decision to have to make, two great cams.

I only read positive feedback from SR12 o-:

Is there some negativ at all (except the alleged fragments problem)

I got my hands on a SR11 briefly today at Costco. It had no power, so I was just examining the look and feel. I was quite impressed with the build quality. It felt solid and well laid out. There are no dangling port covers, all ports are covered with nice doors that slide or flip open and are attached to the camera. Even the shoe cover slides back and stays nicely in place. It felt much better than the HG10 and HV20 that I have handled briefly.

On the downside, I was a little disappointed with the size. It is as big as an HV20, with a similar "appendage" on the side of the body. A hard drive is smaller than a tape mechanism, so they should have been able to make the appendage a bit smaller. I also don't know if I would like the touch screen. I touched it and immediately saw finger prints. The prints are probably less noticeable when the screen is powered on, but still it's going to collect a lot of them. I also don't know why they put the manual control dial on the front. It would have made more sense to have a jog dial type control on the back for one-handed operation.

Spocko, you are right about the build quality. It's about as good as it gets with a consumer camcorder.

I also agree with you regarding the fingerprints on the LCD. I have no idea why Sony doesn't give you the option to navigate using a dial as opposed to having to touch the LCD. Granted a quick wipe with a microfiber cloth brings it back to a spotless condition, but why should we have to do that?

I only read positive feedback from SR12 o-:

Is there some negativ at all (except the alleged fragments problem)

That turned out to be a codec issue... Bad if you wouldn't notice this and you're not using Sony Vegas (or the core avc codec).

Some other potential negatives:
- Slow auto-focus in low-light looking at the video clips (all the Sony's I owned had the same issue). The Canon's focus faster in low-light.
- Limited manual control even though most don't use these. For example no shutter or aperty priority control (except some programmed scenes).

Otherwise it does appear to be a great camera.

I did test the surround on my surround system and sounded certainly great. But I haven't yet analyzed the stream to see if the seperation is really big. According to CCinfo it's just a gimmick (which I would guess since the channels mics are very close to each other). Would be great to test this turning around with a fixed sound source at 1 point.

PS I wonder if you could copy the memorystick contents to HDD. That way you could always make a backup of the memorystick contents.

PS I wonder if you could copy the memorystick contents to HDD. That way you could always make a backup of the memorystick contents.

I found nothing in the manual so I guess not but I have a notebook so with a cheap Sandisk mobilemate adapter I can easily transfer.

I also found something interesting in the SR11 manual. There's a conversion lens setting where you can choose WIDE CONVERSION or TELE CONVERSION. So possibly choosing TELE CONVERSION could give you more steadyshot correction (and hopefully no other side-effects if you don't really have one attached).

I've sent an e-mail to Sony if you can operate the SR11 at higher altitudes if you would not use the HDD but memory stick. That is one of my concerns with HDD.

PS I noticed the manual says only 8GB memory sticks are supported... Pretty stupid but maybe it's only precaution and you could try 16GB anyway.

I received my SR12 today and don't have any problems so far. Certain negative points:

1) Camera gets hot after intensive use at the righ-down side. Battery seems to be just warm.

2) I have a UV filter and it makes my flash unusable (Flash is disabled when UV lens is attached). Do I really need this UV filter?

3) Manual says that Standard DVD players will not play HD content. Is it true?

I orderedmy camera with basic accessories, which included LCD protectors; an akward (not OEM) FPH70 spare battery, which requires connection from battery to
DC IN port; 37 mm UV lens; mini tripod; bag and cleaning kit.

Does anyone tried to use the supplied software utility to burn DVD. Will it work on standard (old) DVD players?

I did test the surround on my surround system and sounded certainly great. But I haven't yet analyzed the stream to see if the seperation is really big. According to CCinfo it's just a gimmick (which I would guess since the channels mics are very close to each other). Would be great to test this turning around with a fixed sound source at 1 point.



No gimmick at all. My buddy and I did a test almost like you suggested. I pointed the cam at him at the beginning of the clip as he was talking. I kept the cam pointed in one direction as he walked in a complete circle around me while continuing to talk. When we played it back, we could clearly hear him walking around the room as his voice shifted from speaker to speaker. No gimmick, it works. I wouldn't say it was a 90db seperation, but you could clearly hear the shift of his voice around the room.

We thought it was pretty amazing. In addition to that, you get an ambiance I've never heard in a consumer camcorder with 2-channel sound.

In terms of copying, you can copy from the HDD to the memory stick, but you can't do that in reverse. But the direction is logical since the concern is not losing info on the memory stick, but rather the HDD. You can always transfer from memory stick to home computer.

PS I noticed the manual says only 8GB memory sticks are supported... Pretty stupid but maybe it's only precaution and you could try 16GB anyway.

I think the verbiage is that 'only 8 gig memory sticks have been tested", but I could be wrong. That's different than saying "16 gig sticks are not supported". But I've read somewhere that it would have no issue with 16gig sticks.

I received my SR12 today and don't have any problems so far. Certain negative points:

1) Camera gets hot after intensive use at the righ-down side. Battery seems to be just warm.

2) I have a UV filter and it makes my flash unusable (Flash is disabled when UV lens is attached). Do I really need this UV filter?

3) Manual says that Standard DVD players will not play HD content. Is it true?

I orderedmy camera with basic accessories, which included LCD protectors; an akward (not OEM) FPH70 spare battery, which requires connection from battery to
DC IN port; 37 mm UV lens; mini tripod; bag and cleaning kit.

Does anyone tried to use the supplied software utility to burn DVD. Will it work on standard (old) DVD players?

1) Yes it's normal with any HD camcorder. The circuitry that processes HD tends to run hot in any of these cams.

2) I've never used a UV or skylight filter on any cam I've owned, but some feel more comfortable with it. I find with the automatic lens cover it's really not essential. Your call.

3) Yes it's true. No standard DVD player is capable of playing HD content from any cam or any Hollywood movie.

The included software will and can burn HD content from the camcorder to an ordinary DVD-R for playback in true HD on a Blu Ray player. But again, since this is HD content it will not play on a regular DVD player. Time to spring for a Blu Ray player my friend.

I have a simple question about archiving the video I shoot. Lets say I shoot about 2 hours of family stuff but not all in one shot, of course.

I assume the original file stored in the camcorded hard drive is an .m2ts file??? I want to save this original on a DVD to archive it. What is the best way to go about creating a data disc. Also I have read that the Sony Playstation 3 will play AVCHD. Does this mean the raw .m2ts file?

So here is the question.

1. what is the best way to make a data disc?
2. will this data disc play on the sony playstation 3 (even though its not a HD DVD or Blue ray) it would just be a standard DVD.

I have a simple question about archiving the video I shoot. Lets say I shoot about 2 hours of family stuff but not all in one shot, of course.

I assume the original file stored in the camcorded hard drive is an .m2ts file??? I want to save this original on a DVD to archive it. What is the best way to go about creating a data disc. Also I have read that the Sony Playstation 3 will play AVCHD. Does this mean the raw .m2ts file?

So here is the question.

1. what is the best way to make a data disc?
2. will this data disc play on the sony playstation 3 (even though its not a HD DVD or Blue ray) it would just be a standard DVD.


pretty easy actually and I'm a newbie myself with HD camcorders. Just take the .m2ts files and burn them onto a dvd using your favorite burner software. I used burn4free. Also, make sure to include your audio files(forgot the suffix for those). Pop it into the PS3 and there you get your hidef video on a standard dvd. Also, if you want to save dvds but still want to see how the video looks, you can use a USB drive. Just make sure to put the files under a /video folder.

1) Yes it's normal with any HD camcorder. The circuitry that processes HD tends to run hot in any of these cams.

2) I've never used a UV or skylight filter on any cam I've owned, but some feel more comfortable with it. I find with the automatic lens cover it's really not essential. Your call.

3) Yes it's true. No standard DVD player is capable of playing HD content from any cam or any Hollywood movie.

The included software will and can burn HD content from the camcorder to an ordinary DVD-R for playback in true HD on a Blu Ray player. But again, since this is HD content it will not play on a regular DVD player. Time to spring for a Blu Ray player my friend.

Actually, the software that comes with the SR11/SR12 (Picture Motion Browser 3.0) gives you 3 options when you want to burn:
1. AVCHD disk (can be on a DVD+-R/W): this will arrange the video files into the AVCHD disk format to be played by the PS3 and/or AVCHD-enabled bluray players. This option doesn't require re-encoding and is pretty quick.
2. DVD-Video disk: this will re-encode the video files in non-HD MPEG2 (480i) so that it can be played on any old DVD player. HD quality is lost and the transcoding takes quite a lot of time (several hours).
3. Data-Disk creation: I haven't tried it, but this seem to let you create a data-disk that could be played on other computers. It probably could be used as a backup solution too.

In other words, there is a way to author disks to be played back in any DVD players with the provided software, but you won't get more than DVD quality from them. Alternatively, you can also create AVCHD disks that will preserve the original quality of the video footage and enable you to play it back on your computer, PS3 and some bluray players.

-eric

I also found something interesting in the SR11 manual. There's a conversion lens setting where you can choose WIDE CONVERSION or TELE CONVERSION. So possibly choosing TELE CONVERSION could give you more steadyshot correction (and hopefully no other side-effects if you don't really have one attached)


This is a great question about stabilization. Any answers?

This camera seems to have a number of "hidden" features. The camera control button, if held down, puts up an LCD dispay of all the cam control functions. You can scroll thru them and select/cancel the one of choice. Very slick.
Night shot is cool , but autofocus seems pretty bad in nightshot mode. The IR light and close range is OK, but focus is painful otherwise.

This camera seems to have a number of "hidden" features. The camera control button, if held down, puts up an LCD dispay of all the cam control functions. You can scroll thru them and select/cancel the one of choice. Very slick.


Dan, I don't recall if it was you that mentioned this 'hidden feature', but it was a great tip! VERY convenient being able to switch the mode of that front adjustment dial to any of the 4 picture parameters that can be altered.

I'll try to check today on that image stabilization thought. I know this came up with an earlier HDV Sony cam that had the same stabilization adjustments, but I don't recall what the end result was.

I received my SR12 today and don't have any problems so far. Certain negative points:

1) Camera gets hot after intensive use at the righ-down side. Battery seems to be just warm.

2) I have a UV filter and it makes my flash unusable (Flash is disabled when UV lens is attached). Do I really need this UV filter?

3) Manual says that Standard DVD players will not play HD content. Is it true?

I orderedmy camera with basic accessories, which included LCD protectors; an akward (not OEM) FPH70 spare battery, which requires connection from battery to
DC IN port; 37 mm UV lens; mini tripod; bag and cleaning kit.

Does anyone tried to use the supplied software utility to burn DVD. Will it work on standard (old) DVD players?

With regards to the battery, that's one of the criticisms I've read about with the non-OEM batteries having to plug into the DC. The other thing they do is that the non-OEM don't give as precise battery life remaining as the original Sony's do. the real FPH70 is $58 + free shipping from Amazon by the way.

By the way guys, ABT has the SR-11 back in stock again for anyone who's been waiting!

its so hard to buy here in germany thsi SR12. You can't find it on the online shops or it is within seconds sold out.

Got my SR-11 yesterday. Wow, what a great camera. I had it delivered to my workplace and did some shooting on my way home, with some panning, and passing cars and stuff. Here's one of the (raw) clips. It was a little tricky being that I'm driving a stick shift. :D

http://www.cstone.net/~dk/00009.m2ts

When I got home, I burned an AVCHD DVD and popped it into my PS3 which is connected to a 65" 1080p Plasma. I was amazed with both the video and audio quality.

One thing I have noted that when I try to play these raw clips on my computer using WMP11, they are being displayed as 4:3 with a resolution on 1440x1080. My laptop has a native 1920x1200 LCD. What's up with that?

When I try to use the Sony AVCHD player, it keeps telling me that my DVD drive is in use by another program and this utility is too simple to allow playback from a hard disk folder.

I can force MPC into playing back the .m2ts at the proper 16:9 AR, but the quality doesn't look right.

Any pointers on how to play raw 1920x1080 .m2ts streams directly from a folder would be appreciated.

I think the default resolution is 1440x1080. You need to go into the camera's menu system and up the resolution to 1920x1080.

As far as playing the files directly from the folder goes it will depend on what software you have. Nero Showtime works great for me and uses significantly less CPU than Picture Motion Browser (30% vs 75%).

My only other concern about the SR11 at this point is how much power you need to edit these videos. I have a home built Intel E8400 slightly overclocked to 3.3GHz with 4gigs of RAM. This is basically as fast as you can get in the dual core world without changing to more elaborate cooling systems. I spent some time in Pinnacle Studio Ultimate v11 last night and some of the render times were pretty high. It was quite depressing!! I think the only real answer is to throw more CPU at it. I'll be first in line for the new Q9450 when they hit the retail channels.

I do get correct aspect ratio in windows media player with any file. Probably because I installed K-lite codec pack (but beware that you still need Core AVC or something similar to avoid occasional corrupted frame problems).

The manual says only 8GB is supported. I guess 'supported' is the magic word.

I decided that I should try the SR11. Costco has a great return policy just in case and I will do some comparison tests against my HV20 (hopefully this weekend I have some time to do this).

The SR11 SR12 and the SR10??? Can record in SD formate What file type is this is it MPEG2.

The reason I ask is I have a Sony DVD camcorder and the image quality is OK but the edit and render times are fast compared tot he HD.

My thoughts are that I can use the SD formate to do my experiments with for editing and such. Also the SR12 SD image quality would be better than my DVD camcorder quality. Am I wrong??

I could use the HD for important stuff and save the raw files of the family stuff to edit when I have time. I could also re-edit with the raw files when faster PC hardware is upto speed like the 64 bit stuff. Thats one of the reasons I dont want to purchase alot of editing software. I think Vegas is going to have the 64bit this fall. I m not to savy with all of this as I am learning.

Im kind of on the fence about this camcorder only because the edit times for the HD are very very long. If I want to burn a standard DVD of the high def
m2ts file that has a run tim of 40 minutes, It will take about 2.5 to 3 hours to render.

My dvd VOB files converted to mepg2 is a 1 to 1 render time. So I am spoiled with that but not picture quality. But the double compression of the DVD VOB files is really bad for the final product.

Any pointers on how to play raw 1920x1080 .m2ts streams directly from a folder would be appreciated.

This is most likely a DSHOW codec issue. If you have the latest PowerDVD or Nero ShowTime, they should out nicely. You also can use the Picture Browser software that comes with the camcorder to play your files back.

Another option is to try open-source codecs currently available. I haven't had much luck with ffdshow/haali combination, but YMMV.

If you really want to use WMP to play them back and would like to use the Codecs that Sony ships with their product, here's a trick you can use: there are a few ".ax" files in common directory of the Picture Motion Browser software directory. Call "Regsvr32.exe" on each of them from a command prompt and you'll be able to use their TS splitter and AVC video codec in WMP. The one that won't work with that is their AC-3 (Dolby Digital) codec, which is disable by default. I don't remember which one it is, but I would not register that one.

Note that their codecs don't seem to use hardware acceleration, but seems somewhat fast (maybe they just BOB the frames for de-interlacing). For quick viewing, it's not bad (and free compared to CoreAVC).

I haven't tried CoreAVC, but the fact that they've been promising hardware acceleration on decoding for over 2 years without any success doesn't make me feel it's the best solution right now (I know PowerDVD does it well).

Hope this helps!

-eric

The SR11 SR12 and the SR10??? Can record in SD formate What file type is this is it MPEG2.

The reason I ask is I have a Sony DVD camcorder and the image quality is OK but the edit and render times are fast compared tot he HD.

My thoughts are that I can use the SD formate to do my experiments with for editing and such. Also the SR12 SD image quality would be better than my DVD camcorder quality. Am I wrong??

I could use the HD for important stuff and save the raw files of the family stuff to edit when I have time. I could also re-edit with the raw files when faster PC hardware is upto speed like the 64 bit stuff. Thats one of the reasons I dont want to purchase alot of editing software. I think Vegas is going to have the 64bit this fall. I m not to savy with all of this as I am learning.

Im kind of on the fence about this camcorder only because the edit times for the HD are very very long. If I want to burn a standard DVD of the high def
m2ts file that has a run tim of 40 minutes, It will take about 2.5 to 3 hours to render.

My dvd VOB files converted to mepg2 is a 1 to 1 render time. So I am spoiled with that but not picture quality. But the double compression of the DVD VOB files is really bad for the final product.
Paul, you shouldn't lose any quality from your DVD to edit to DVD again, as long as you set the bit rate in rendering to be the same as the original.
HD consumer level codecs come in two flavors, AVCHD and MPEG2.
AVCHD does take a long time to edit, and so far the software has to convert AVCHD to something else when editing and then converting back assuming you are changing things in AVCHD footage. Depending on how many parameters you change a 10min AVCHD can easily take two hours to render on a fast PC.
HD in MPEG2 (HDV) doesn't take much longer to render than SD, but then you have to live with tapes being the recording media.

My only other concern about the SR11 at this point is how much power you need to edit these videos. I have a home built Intel E8400 slightly overclocked to 3.3GHz with 4gigs of RAM. This is basically as fast as you can get in the dual core world without changing to more elaborate cooling systems. I spent some time in Pinnacle Studio Ultimate v11 last night and some of the render times were pretty high. It was quite depressing!! I think the only real answer is to throw more CPU at it. I'll be first in line for the new Q9450 when they hit the retail channels.

Pinnacle Studio Ultimate v11 is what I've been using for a while now. I have a QuadCore (Q6600) + good video card (8800GTS) and the editing experience isn't too bad. But then again, I'm used to deal with HD (had an HDV camcorder since 2004). It usually takes 8-12x real-time to re-encode, meaning that it'll take more than 8 hours per hour of content, whether it's HDV or AVCHD. And this is pretty much true on any video editing software. BTW, I suggest you try choosing a 60p WMV profile in Pinnacle Studio, it does a pretty good job at preserving the temporal data and it looks amazing.

-eric

I think the default resolution is 1440x1080. You need to go into the camera's menu system and up the resolution to 1920x1080.
All my clips are native 1920x1080. That was the 1st setting I changed when I powered up the camera for the first time.

As far as playing the files directly from the folder goes it will depend on what software you have. Nero Showtime works great for me and uses significantly less CPU than Picture Motion Browser (30% vs 75%).
I'll check out Nero Showtime. Yes, Picture Motion Browser is a hog and I don't think it works with the 64-bit version of Vista Ultimate that I'm running on my laptop. At least I can't get anything to play with this program, but I was able to burn a DVD.

My only other concern about the SR11 at this point is how much power you need to edit these videos.
My home workstation is a Q6600 running at 3.6GHz on water with 2 Raptor 150s in a RAID0 with a tight 25GB boot partition and the rest for data, and a 3rd Raptor for data. So far I have mainly used it for ripping/transcoding DVDs and HD-DVD/Blu-ray. Playing back Blu-ray only uses about 20% CPU on AVC titles, and some of those titles hit 40Mbps, so playing back 16Mbps AVC material should not be an issue at all. I'm getting Vegas Pro this weekend, and I hope my setup will run that just fine.

This is most likely a DSHOW codec issue. If you have the latest PowerDVD or Nero ShowTime, they should out nicely. You also can use the Picture Browser software that comes with the camcorder to play your files back.

Another option is to try open-source codecs currently available. I haven't had much luck with ffdshow/haali combination, but YMMV.

If you really want to use WMP to play them back and would like to use the Codecs that Sony ships with their product, here's a trick you can use: there are a few ".ax" files in common directory of the Picture Motion Browser software directory. Call "Regsvr32.exe" on each of them from a command prompt and you'll be able to use their TS splitter and AVC video codec in WMP. The one that won't work with that is their AC-3 (Dolby Digital) codec, which is disable by default. I don't remember which one it is, but I would not register that one.

Note that their codecs don't seem to use hardware acceleration, but seems somewhat fast (maybe they just BOB the frames for de-interlacing). For quick viewing, it's not bad (and free compared to CoreAVC).

I haven't tried CoreAVC, but the fact that they've been promising hardware acceleration on decoding for over 2 years without any success doesn't make me feel it's the best solution right now (I know PowerDVD does it well).

Hope this helps!

-eric
Thanks Eric. Lots of good stuff there.

I might also try doing what I do with Blu-ray titles. I use eac3to to rip out the video and audio tracks I want, and then use mkvmerge to create a nice mkv container that I can play with pretty much anything. All without actually touching the original video encode. On the case of AVCHD files, there will only be a single video and ac3 audio track, so I can likely script this pretty easy if it works.

I just tried to load the SR11 MTS files in anything other than Vegas and I keep getting issues. For one tmpgenc xpress doesn't recognize the 5.1 channel and reports it as stereo 2 channel. When I use K-lite tweak tool I can make some changes to disable ac3 filter codec which in turn shows 5.1 channel however audio is distorted.

Second I suddenly get no deinterlacing anymore from CoreAvc. Sony's MTS files are certainly trouble. Any tips? would installing Sony's DVD fix it? I'll buy one today so I'll hope that fixed it. I don't want to be tied to Sony Vegas.

Pinnacle Studio Ultimate v11 is what I've been using for a while now. I have a QuadCore (Q6600) + good video card (8800GTS) and the editing experience isn't too bad. But then again, I'm used to deal with HD (had an HDV camcorder since 2004). It usually takes 8-12x real-time to re-encode, meaning that it'll take more than 8 hours per hour of content, whether it's HDV or AVCHD. And this is pretty much true on any video editing software. BTW, I suggest you try choosing a 60p WMV profile in Pinnacle Studio, it does a pretty good job at preserving the temporal data and it looks amazing.

-eric

Thank you eric. That is helpful. I'm relatively new to Pinnacle so I don't know what rendering times I should expect. I recorded a one hour clip of the beginning of last week's "Blizzard of 2008" (i'm in columbus ohio) and thought it would be great to see it time lapsed down to 30 seconds. I imported the 60 minute clip into Pinnalce last night and applied the SPEED filter at 500% and then watched in horror as encode inched across the time line at what seemed like 10x slower than real time! Ok I thought, maybe a dual core proc isn't enough for this newfound video editing hobby of mine. Like I really need an excuse to upgrade anyway.

Can you tell me if going from dual to quad will produce encoding results that are close to twice as fast? Some of the Adobe benchmarks I've seen seem to scale nicely with additional cores. If I can expect only a 25 to 50% speed increase I may just keep the dual.

Everything I've read says going dual to quad increases proportional, if something takes 4 hours on single, 2 on dual, it will take 1 on Quad. It may vary obviously depending on the software package, but I believe that its generally a pretty good rule of thumb.

Got my SR-11 yesterday. Wow, what a great camera. I had it delivered to my workplace and did some shooting on my way home, with some panning, and passing cars and stuff. Here's one of the (raw) clips. It was a little tricky being that I'm driving a stick shift. :D

http://www.cstone.net/~dk/00009.m2ts

When I got home, I burned an AVCHD DVD and popped it into my PS3 which is connected to a 65" 1080p Plasma. I was amazed with both the video and audio quality.

One thing I have noted that when I try to play these raw clips on my computer using WMP11, they are being displayed as 4:3 with a resolution on 1440x1080. My laptop has a native 1920x1200 LCD. What's up with that?

When I try to use the Sony AVCHD player, it keeps telling me that my DVD drive is in use by another program and this utility is too simple to allow playback from a hard disk folder.

I can force MPC into playing back the .m2ts at the proper 16:9 AR, but the quality doesn't look right.

Any pointers on how to play raw 1920x1080 .m2ts streams directly from a folder would be appreciated.

Congrats on your SR11. The sound from these cams is unreal and the best I've ever heard on any cam I've ever owned. The 5.1 actually works to my amazement. Your problem is odd, I've had no problem getting proper playback of my SR12 on WMP11. But I do have the CoreAVC codec which might be helping. This is something you can download for under $10 and appears to help greatly with smooth AVCHD playback.

IThe manual says only 8GB is supported. I guess 'supported' is the magic word.

I decided that I should try the SR11. Costco has a great return policy just in case and I will do some comparison tests against my HV20 (hopefully this weekend I have some time to do this).

Let us know how you like it Luc. I'd be willing to bet that 16 gig cards will have no issue.

Actually, it mostly depends on the encoder you use. I can't speak of the other options, but the WM Encoder in Pinnacle doesn't seem to use all 4 proc at 100%. Pinnacle will take advantage of them to apply effects (it will max them all), but I don't think I'm getting I can get from the 4 procs for WMV encoding. I'm certainly not twice as fast as a dual proc system.

Just like pclausen, I'm also running on Raid-0 dual raptors at home and I think I'm getting better much better performance boost for encoding than going from a dual->quad.

I guess you need to figure out where the bottleneck is and figure out what will make it go faster. If both your procs are maxed at 100% when encoding, then you might benefit from a CPU upgrade or a dual->quad switch. If they're not maxed, then you have to look elsewhere. :)

-eric

I will be doing my editing on a Quad Q6600 running at 3.2, plus 2 500GB in RAID0 via eSATA external (Western Digital 16MB 500GB drives are used)

This is most likely a DSHOW codec issue. If you have the latest PowerDVD or Nero ShowTime, they should out nicely. You also can use the Picture Browser software that comes with the camcorder to play your files back.

Another option is to try open-source codecs currently available. I haven't had much luck with ffdshow/haali combination, but YMMV.

If you really want to use WMP to play them back and would like to use the Codecs that Sony ships with their product, here's a trick you can use: there are a few ".ax" files in common directory of the Picture Motion Browser software directory. Call "Regsvr32.exe" on each of them from a command prompt and you'll be able to use their TS splitter and AVC video codec in WMP. The one that won't work with that is their AC-3 (Dolby Digital) codec, which is disable by default. I don't remember which one it is, but I would not register that one.

Note that their codecs don't seem to use hardware acceleration, but seems somewhat fast (maybe they just BOB the frames for de-interlacing). For quick viewing, it's not bad (and free compared to CoreAVC).

I haven't tried CoreAVC, but the fact that they've been promising hardware acceleration on decoding for over 2 years without any success doesn't make me feel it's the best solution right now (I know PowerDVD does it well).

Hope this helps!

-eric

Eric, one thing I've found with the Sony software is that it does play the AVCHD files nicely, but at the expense of a bit of sharpness. When I play the same files in WMP or Media Player Classic, I get a bit sharper results. But as you say, for quick playback it looks fine and works well.

I just go the SR11 and did a quick indoor comparison shot to the HV20.

Note that the HV20 had a HQ wide-angle lens but that should have no effect on resolution or noise levels:

http://zxatuw.bay.livefilestore.com/y1p20U7JNVxq5yaQ90R9YlkXYfJBEDx0_ZxepRij54i92SbuAVix9whZLnOa eHSUkyejupG94iMsAptasEEo2toqg

I did see some evidence of detail loss due to noise removal on the SR11. However I also see several areas with more detail on the SR11. So so far a good balance.

I hate btw the USB connection... There should be an automatic connection instead of having to search through the menu's.

This weekend I'll do more tests....

in that image is the HV20 sample the one on the left?

I just go the SR11 and did a quick indoor comparison shot to the HV20.

Note that the HV20 had a HQ wide-angle lens but that should have no effect on resolution or noise levels:

http://zxatuw.bay.livefilestore.com/y1p20U7JNVxq5yaQ90R9YlkXYfJBEDx0_ZxepRij54i92SbuAVix9whZLnOa eHSUkyejupG94iMsAptasEEo2toqg

I did see some evidence of detail loss due to noise removal on the SR11. However I also see several areas with more detail on the SR11. So so far a good balance.

I hate btw the USB connection... There should be an automatic connection instead of having to search through the menu's.

This weekend I'll do more tests....


In the link above is the image on the left the HV20?

In the link above is the image on the left the HV20?

You guessed right:-). Certainly I was surprised but I'll do more thorough comparisons this weekend.

One problem I have now is that I haven't found a program other than Sony Vegas which can load these clips correctly with 6.1 channel sound.

By the way you can see clearly Sony noise removal PP if you look at these areas:
- top of fireplace (smudges)
- Mirror

However I do see slightly more resolution but the Sony was slightly more zoomed in so I have to better tests.

So I have one of these on order, really looking forward to it. For right now I will probably still be burning standard DVDs to distribute the movies, not high def, because all my family just has regular dvd players. Do you guys think it is better to still record in HD then re-encode it to SD on the computer? Or just record in SD from the beginning?

I just go the SR11 and did a quick indoor comparison shot to the HV20.

Note that the HV20 had a HQ wide-angle lens but that should have no effect on resolution or noise levels:

http://zxatuw.bay.livefilestore.com/y1p20U7JNVxq5yaQ90R9YlkXYfJBEDx0_ZxepRij54i92SbuAVix9whZLnOa eHSUkyejupG94iMsAptasEEo2toqg

I did see some evidence of detail loss due to noise removal on the SR11. However I also see several areas with more detail on the SR11. So so far a good balance.

I hate btw the USB connection... There should be an automatic connection instead of having to search through the menu's.

This weekend I'll do more tests....


Luke, when you plug in the cam via USB, the menu should automatically pop up on the LCD asking which drive do you want to connect to, the memory stick or the HDD. So there should be zero menu searching.

For comparisons, I would definitely remove the WA lens. You're not doing apples to apples that way. I even zoom the SR12 just a bit to equal the field of view of the HV20. It's the only fair way to do this when assessing detail.

But I too have found a few clips where there is a tad less detail in the SR12 than the HV20, but then I find many more where there is somewhat more. But to me the big deal is getting this performance with such a professionally low level of noise. In some cases I think it's an exposure related issue more than anything because I do feel the SR12 has a bit more resolution.

BTW, there's a lot more noise in the pix on the left which I assume is the HV20. The SR12 and 11 are just so clean. I would take the pix on the right in a heartbeat.

Luke, when you plug in the cam via USB, the menu should automatically pop up on the LCD asking which drive do you want to connect to, the memory stick or the HDD. So there should be zero menu searching.

For comparisons, I would definitely remove the WA lens. You're not doing apples to apples that way. I even zoom the SR12 just a bit to equal the field of view of the HV20. It's the only fair way to do this when assessing detail.

But I too have found a few clips where there is a tad less detail in the SR12 than the HV20, but then I find many more where there is somewhat more. But to me the big deal is getting this performance with such a professionally low level of noise. In some cases I think it's an exposure related issue more than anything because I do feel the SR12 has a bit more resolution.

BTW, there's a lot more noise in the pix on the left which I assume is the HV20. The SR12 and 11 are just so clean. I would take the pix on the right in a heartbeat.

I will do more testing later without the wide angle lens.

Well looking at it in more detail I see big evidence of heavy noise removal on the Sony. It does look more pleasing but if we talk about a clean picture then the Sony is definitely not. The top of the fireplace is the best example. You see that the line is not straight anymore. This reminds me of using NeatImage on photo's. The end result looks very similar (clean but some smudges).

Too early to tell yet without more tests.

That's what makes for preferences Luc. In your pix I see both more detail (glass jar, flowers, clock, mantel etc.) and less noise in the SR11. But it's not fair since the SR11 is more zoomed. BTW, I'd bet if you zoomed the HV20 image to the same degree as the SR11, you'd see the same deviation from a straight line on top of the fireplace. At any rate to my eyes that's a very minor issue relative to the overall image. The one thing I have no doubt about in my VIDEO comparisons between the HV20 and SR12, is that it is a cleaner picture...no two ways about it. I've seen tons of professional video, and the SR12 looks more professional to my eyes than the HV20. But as I've said before, some people prefer videos and HDTV pictures with edge enhancement. There's also no way I could ignore the noise that permeates that HV20 shot you posted...it's throughout the frame.

I haven't done any stills. I'm assuming what you posted are either stills or frame grabs? I would not make any judgements until you watch moving videos from both cams. I've said it before, grabs and stills are not in any way indicative of the video picture quality. That's true with any cam I've ever owned.

Traveaso, my friend has the Sony FX7 and one of the things that really impresses me is when he shot a scene that had such lighting contrasts, ie. his subject was in the shadow of a cloud with the background in very bright sunshine, both the subject and and the background were very clear, just like my eyes would see it. Colors and details both were great in both parts of the scene: No overexposure in the bright background, nor underexposure with the dark subject. In both areas, you could see everything clearly.
How do you think your new cam would handle such a scene? Is there a way you could test something similar and let me know?
Also, how does this new cam handle the various shades of green? Sony, in the past, has had a problem accurately recording some shades of green, like the bright new spring green of aspen trees in May. I am hoping that this new xy color thing will take care of that problem.

Thanks.
Mike

The SR11/12 has this "Back light" button just below the lens and near the manual ring which activates the Back light function which adjusts exposure for backlit subjects. I haven't yet tested how well it works.

- - -

Hello, everyone. Let me just introduce myself. I'm from Singapore, and I just purchased my very first camcorder (which is SR12E - PAL version) last Sunday from the (Singapore) IT Show 2008. Camcorders are kinda expensive here; I got my SR12E for about 2100 US dollars if converted. It came with lots of "free" gifts: Sony Vegas Platinum 8.0, FP60 photo printer, handycam bag, extra FH60 and FH70 batteries, a dry/moisture protection box, and a Sony 2GB Memory Stick Pro Duo, and two SDW courses. There, no one has to wonder why the price of SR12 here is 50% than in the U.S., because of these "free gifts". :D

My only complaint is that I wish I had the NTSC version instead. I only realized I got the PAL version after I opened the package and took it home. Because I just feel like it's a downgrade from 60fps of NTSC to 50fps of PAL. Or did I misunderstand how this PAL/NTSC 50i/60i thing works?

Anyway, I just stumbled upon this forum because I'm looking for other SR11/12 users and wanna find out how do they find their new camcorder. As this is my first camcorder, I don't really know how it fares against the competition. But I'm glad owners here are very much pleased with their purchase, as I am. :)

....My only complaint is that I wish I had the NTSC version instead. I only realized I got the PAL version after I opened the package and took it home. Because I just feel like it's a downgrade from 60fps of NTSC to 50fps of PAL. Or did I misunderstand how this PAL/NTSC 50i/60i thing works?



Why complaint, be happy with your purchase. If you live in PAL land PAL version makes a lot more sense. Quite often you will use the cam to shoot indoor scenes. As more and more lightings are compact florescent type, the electrical Hz rate has to match the frame rate, otherwise you get terrible flickers. So in your case 50i IS the right choise.
To make you feel better you should know you are NOT getting less by getting only 50 fields, because the video bit rate is the same for both versions, the fewer frame per second, the higher bit rate each frame gets and more lighting each frame gets. So your video may have slightly better lighting and may have slightly higher resolution due to lower compression per frame. The only thing lose on is smoothness of the video, but at 25 frame it should be smooth enough anyway.

My only worry would be that certain areas, because of the noise reduction, may tend to look blotchey instead of having a finer grain noise.

Take this video for example and pay attention to the reddish-brown part of the building as he zooms in and out.

http://www.vimeo.com/774795

That's what makes for preferences Luc. In your pix I see both more detail and less noise in the SR11. But it's not fair since the SR11 is more zoomed. BTW, I'd bet if you zoomed the HV20 image to the same degree as the SR11, you'd see the same deviation from a straight line on top of the fireplace. At any rate to my eyes that's a very minor issue relative to the overall image. The one thing I have no doubt about in my VIDEO comparisons between the HV20 and SR12, is that it is a cleaner picture...no two ways about it. I've seen tons of professional video, and the SR12 looks more professional to my eyes than the HV20. But as I've said before, some people prefer videos and HDTV pictures with edge enhancement. There's also no way I could ignore the noise that permeates that HV20 shot you posted...it's throughout the frame.

I haven't done any stills. I'm assuming what you posted are either stills or frame grabs? I would not make any judgements until you watch moving videos from both cams. I've said it before, grabs and stills are not in any way indicative of the video picture quality. That's true with any cam I've ever owned.

Despite the distortion in HV20's image and different zoom settings the difference in these two cams are shown very well. The low noise in SR11 is unmistakable. But every heavy noise removal can come at a cost, just like you see in point and shoot digital cams at high iso settings. The images can look so smooth and noise free that they gloss over details, they are especially easy to spot in areas such as a fabric and wood textures.
In the above case you can faintly see the fabric patterns in the carpet in HV20's image but you can't see it in SR11s. But overall SR11 maybe a more pleasing looking image.

Eric, one thing I've found with the Sony software is that it does play the AVCHD files nicely, but at the expense of a bit of sharpness. When I play the same files in WMP or Media Player Classic, I get a bit sharper results. But as you say, for quick playback it looks fine and works well.

And I think I know why. If you connect that filter in graphedt and sniff the pins, you'll see that the data sent out of that filter is 1920x540x29.97p. Looks like their filter just throws half of the fields to gain performance, which would explain why it's looking ok with software decoding, but looking a little soft.

I guess I wouldn't be using that filter to re-encode. Merely just to preview the data.

Despite the distortion in HV20's image and different zoom settings the difference in these two cams are shown very well. The low noise in SR11 is unmistakable. But every heavy noise removal can come at a cost, just like you see in point and shoot digital cams at high iso settings. The images can look so smooth and noise free that they gloss over details, they are especially easy to spot in areas such as a fabric and wood textures.
In the above case you can faintly see the fabric patterns in the carpet in HV20's image but you can't see it in SR11s. But overall SR11 maybe a more pleasing looking image.

All I can tell you is that in moving video, not stills, not frame grabs (worthless IMO for determining video quality) what most people will use these cams for, there is utterly no blurring or removal of fine detail. It is tack sharp. Take a look at the McDonalds clip I uploaded and tell me that's not razor sharp. Posting grabs and stills from any videocamera doesn't help people in determining picture quality.

I think there's another issue for confusion, noise. Don't necessarily assume that Sony is removing noise as opposed to not introducing noise in the first place! They talk about their technology at the pixel level and it appears their processing simply is not introducing the noise to begin with. This is the same processing that is used in their professional equipment. So that's precisely why you don't get blurring of detail associated with heavy noise reduction. It seems as if the noise is simply not being introduced in the first place. I can tell you the HD videos sure look that way.

I've shown the SR12 footage to several people on my 60" Pioneer and all have used the word 'stunning'.

My only worry would be that certain areas, because of the noise reduction, may tend to look blotchey instead of having a finer grain noise.

Take this video for example and pay attention to the reddish-brown part of the building as he zooms in and out.

http://www.vimeo.com/774795

Videos on this site are always highly compressed for good playback. Every video I've seen on that site has blotches and evidence of heavy compression. The only way to determine the true picture is to get the untouched M2T files that have not been compressed.

Isn't noise reduction done directly on the sensor when it is CMOS? If there wasn't a restocking fee I'd go get the SR11 at Best Buy.

Isn't noise reduction done directly on the sensor when it is CMOS? If there wasn't a restocking fee I'd go get the SR11 at Best Buy.

Yes, but the processing introduces less noise to begin with. This from the Sony site, but I've seen far more detailed explanations about this technology that is borrowed from their pro cams. The point that needs empasizing is that these cams are introducing less noise to begin with so there's less need for agressive noise removal. That's why the video is so clean and so detailed at the same time. This is a lot more complicated than simple 'noise removal'. Sony is on to something here. If it works for the pro camp it's fine with me in a consumer cam! ;)

BIONZ™ Image Processor
The advanced Sony BIONZ™ Image Processor uses hardware-based Large Scale Integrated (LSI) circuitry that improves camera response time, screens out noise before RAW data conversion, handles Dynamic Range Optimization processing, and prolongs battery life.

Exmor™ Imaging Sensor
Exmor™ technology captures video and still photo images with high resolution, high sensitivity, and exceptional detail. Advanced on-sensor A/D conversion yields rich tonal reproduction with high signal-to-noise ratio.

Anyway, I just stumbled upon this forum because I'm looking for other SR11/12 users and wanna find out how do they find their new camcorder. As this is my first camcorder, I don't really know how it fares against the competition. But I'm glad owners here are very much pleased with their purchase, as I am. :)

KrionX, welcome aboard. I've had almost every consumer/prosumer HD camcorder that's come to market: HC1, HC7, FX1, FX7, HV10, HV20 and now the SR12. To my eyes the SR12 (the first full 1920X1080 cam I've had) has the best combination of picture qualities I've yet seen: Superb color, lowest noise I've seen, terrific sharpness and detail and amazing 5.1 sound. Add to this the great build quality of the SR12 and it makes for one superb cam.

Now, to be fair, given my resume of camcorders, I'll still take a look at the FH10 when it comes out. But it's got a tall mountain to climb in my book after having played with the SR12. I'm also not happy about losing the viewfinder with the Canon. I would never design a camera without a viewfinder...what were they thinking? But it is small and light.

Isn't noise reduction done directly on the sensor when it is CMOS? If there wasn't a restocking fee I'd go get the SR11 at Best Buy.

Do you have a memory stick pro duo? If you don't, It would probably worth the 15-20$ to buy one, take it to Best Buy(or buy it there) and *try* the SR11 out! ;)

Or for that matter...try the CX7 and the SD9(SDHC) while your at it.

*probably need a card reader too* , but they are cheap......

Do you have a memory stick pro duo? If you don't, It would probably worth the 15-20$ to buy one, take it to Best Buy(or buy it there) and *try* the SR11 out! ;)

Or for that matter...try the CX7 and the SD9(SDHC) while your at it.

*probably need a card reader too* , but they are cheap......

This is exactly what I told people in the CX7 vs SR11 thread. This is the ONLY way to really tell which cam is right for you. It's cheaper to invest in memory media than getting the wrong camcorder.

Try out two cams and see which you like better. By taking the stick home with you (if you have a BR player), you should be able to burn the files to a DVD-R and play them on your BR player (assuming it's AVCHD compatible). That way you can see it on a large screen HDTV...no frame grabs that tell you nothing, no compressed video on compressed websites...just pure clean video as shot by the cam. :)

I find my 60" plasma is far far more revealing and looks a hell of a lot better than on any computer screen I've seen.

This is exactly what I told people in the CX7 vs SR11 thread. This is the ONLY way to really tell which cam is right for you. It's cheaper to invest in memory media than getting the wrong camcorder.

Try out two cams and see which you like better. By taking the stick home with you (if you have a BR player), you should be able to burn the files to a DVD-R and play them on your BR player (assuming it's AVCHD compatible). That way you can see it on a large screen HDTV...no frame grabs that tell you nothing, no compressed video on compressed websites...just pure clean video as shot by the cam. :)

I find my 60" plasma is far far more revealing and looks a hell of a lot better than on any computer screen I've seen.

Great minds think alike! :D

I'll wait till the HF100 hits town, walk in with my trusty SDHC and try it out. Can't wait!

BTW, I think I should provide my little review of my newly acquired SR11 (just 4 days ago). :)

Background: I've owned an HDR-FX1 in the past, and purchased a SR1 about 18 months ago, so I can give the SR1->SR11 upgrade perspective. My main purpose for owning those camcorders are very humble: I'm the "family historian" of the extended family, father of 2 little monsters (1.5 and 4yo), and many times uncle, and want to preserve our memories at the highest quality possible.

Features that attracted me in this SR1->SR11 upgrade:
- 1920x1080 (vs 1440x1080)
- Face Detection
- 16Mpbs (vs 15Mbps)
- OIS (vs EIS)
- Smaller: 83x76x138 (vs 78x84x165)
- Lighter: 650g (vs 720g)
- HDMI output
- 10MP photos
- 60GB HDD (vs 30GB)
- High-res LCD
- Can record on flash memory
- Better zoom: 12x (vs 10x)


First, the SR11 is smaller, lighter and "chubbier" than the SR1, something I was looking for since the SR1 can't really fit in a pocket. But I was also concerned about it being too small for me. But it's not the case: even with my big hands, I feel I have a good grip and have access to all the controls. Unfortunately, every HD Canon that came out gave my hand cramps because of the way the controls are layed out, so I stayed on the Sony side again this time (it doesn't look like the HF10 will resolve this issue).

Video Quality (daylight): In general, I think it's a small but appreciable quality gain in AE, colors and resolution over the SR11, mostly due to the face detection and the full 1080. Used as a point and shoot, it's easier to get a better picture because of those two features.

Video Quality (low light): This is the interesting part. In very dark settings, I think the SR1 produces a better output, probably because of the sensor. I can also confirm the flakiness of the autofocus in low light using the SR11, which is also worse than the SR1 in that department. But in indoor settings with some amount light, the SR11 does a much better job at white balance and AE and the resulting image has a lot less noise without being much softer than the SR1's image. The SR1 was sometimes annoying to use in indoor settings, but I can see myself using the SR11 without much pain.

Photo Quality: I own a Nikon D80, and while the SR11 won't be replacing its use, I can see myself using the SR11 to shoot photos when I don't want to bring both cameras. The colors are very good, not looking like the usual camcorder photo output, and while it's clearly not as crisp as a 10MP SLR output, it's definitely on par with the better point-n-shoot outputs I've seen recently. As a side note, there is a way to turn off the flash on the SR11, while you couldn't on the SR1.

Controls: the front knob works in a similar way as the "multi-function ring" did in the SR1, so I'm not feeling like I'm loosing much functionality. I like the zoom control too. My peeves are that the video/photo mode switch is hard to use with only one hand (the SR1 was much easier) and that there seems to be no other way to take a picture than pressing on the "Photo" button, which is situated at the top of the camcorder (same as SR1 I guess, but I never really bothered taking pictures with it). Unfortunately, it's pretty hard to take a picture using that button without jiggling the camcorder a little. I wish there would be a way to use the record buttons either on the back or on the viewfinder to also snap pictures (at the least in picture mode).

OIS vs EIS: Optical stabilization is very good on the SR11, surpassing the electronic stabilization on the SR1 by a long shot. For those who have the camcorder already, try to zoom in completely and turn it off and on. It's pretty amazing how much vibration can be dampen without having any major impact on the video quality.

Battery: Looks like I need to get another battery. The one that comes with it would barely last me one activity (the 90 minutes was more like 50). But maybe I was playing around with the flash and IR lights too much. :P

Overall, I'm pretty happy with my purchase so far. It's not a perfect camcorder, but IMHO, it was well worth the upgrade over the SR1.

-eric

$973.70 Shipped from Dell. Estimated Ship time is 4-1-08, but our Dell Guy said that he could probably try and get that moved up a bit...

is there a different between different AVCHD modes? I heard something about 60 Hz and another **Hz? Is it all compatible?



you should be able to burn the files to a DVD-R and play them on your BR player (assuming it's AVCHD compatible).

is there a different between different AVCHD modes? I heard something about 60 Hz and another **Hz? Is it all compatible?

It seems some AVCHD files from some manufacturers perform a bit differently than some others. Some people have no problem with camera A in one editing program and another has problems with camera B in the same program.

So I think there are compatibility issues. There is one issue with Canon AVCHD camcorders that has yet to be resolved. It won't affect most people, but it will and has impacted some. If you shoot a piece of video that exceeds 2 gigs (about 12-15 minutes), the Canons will produce two files for this one clip. The problem is that apparently Canon software (or any other software) won't stitch the files together properly and you will get a visible glitch at the seam. Some have found some workarounds with DOS commands, but it is a pain at this point and needs to be addressed by Canon. It's unclear at this point if the HF10 has bundled software that has corrected this issue. But people with the HG10 and large files are not happy.

Video Quality (daylight): In general, I think it's a small but appreciable quality gain in AE, colors and resolution over the SR11, mostly due to the face detection and the full 1080. Used as a point and shoot, it's easier to get a better picture because of those two features.



Eric, I'm more than a bit surprised that you're finding only a small difference in the picture quality between the SR1 and SR11. There are so many technology differences between the two, and the SR1 didn't get the best reviews. I've never played with that cam nor have I seen the videos it produces.

But like you, I've had the FX1 and also the FX7 and I've found that the SR12 compares very favorably with either of those. What was really interesting today was I came across footage that I shot almost precisely 1 year ago (March 15th I believe). It was footage from the FX7 shot out my window on a cloudy day. I have almost identical footage from a few days ago on a cloudy day that I shot with the SR12! For a lifeless person like me, this was a find!!!! Same weather conditions, same time of year and I get to do a rough A/B between a very highly regarded 3-chip HDV cam and the SR12!

Well the SR12 faired very very well. I thought the color and noise levels were better on the SR12, but the FX7 might have been a tad sharper. But it also looked like there was some edge enhancement in the FX7 that was absent in the SR12. The biggest difference was the significantly wider field of view on the FX7 vs the SR12. I had forgotten how wide the field of view on that cam was (I sold it when I got the HV20). That's a really nice feature when shooting indoors with friends & family.

So it's things like this that make me surprised you saw such a small difference between the SR1 & SR11. How would you compare the FX1 with the SR11? I personally found the FX7 was a sharper camera than the FX1 which I always found a bit on the soft side.

It seems some AVCHD files from some manufacturers perform a bit differently than some others. Some people have no problem with camera A in one editing program and another has problems with camera B in the same program.

So I think there are compatibility issues. There is one issue with Canon AVCHD camcorders that has yet to be resolved. It won't affect most people, but it will and has impacted some. If you shoot a piece of video that exceeds 2 gigs (about 12-15 minutes), the Canons will produce two files for this one clip. The problem is that apparently Canon software (or any other software) won't stitch the files together properly and you will get a visible glitch at the seam. Some have found some workarounds with DOS commands, but it is a pain at this point and needs to be addressed by Canon. It's unclear at this point if the HF10 has bundled software that has corrected this issue. But people with the HG10 and large files are not happy.

I have bigger compatibility problems with the SR11. I haven't been able to get the surround audio stream correctly in any editing program tried except vegas. I didn't see these issues with HF10.

Regarding noise: I'm positive there's more noise to begin with in the Sony SR11 imager simply because it's smaller size and more pixels (digital camera's show that over and over again). However I do have to say that Sony does a good job of cleaning it up. But 'clean' as in 'unprocessed raw image' is not the case.
I indeed see detail loss in some areas like the carpet which is low contrast. Probably that's where the HV20 will appear sharper.

So for a purist you would choose the HF10 which is more unprocessed (provided it has the same overall PQ otherwise). I can use a noise filter very well on the HV20 video but not SR11 since it already is heavily processed.

Definitely will do more equal tests with same zoom ratio.

There is a lot of great information in this thread about video editing PCs so I hoped the folks here could answer a few questions on how to improve the performance of my PC.

I have a Q6600 running at 3.6 on air, an 8600GT video card, a 150gb Raptor for my system drive and a 500gb Seagate as my data drive. When I render HD videos in Vegas Pro, I find that each core of my cpu is only running at 30-50%. Is there anything I can do to get this closer to 100% and reduce render times? I am thinking about buying two new drives and running them in Raid 0 as the working drive and using the 500gb drive as a back-up drive.

Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

I ran a 2nd sample with equal zoom ratio and difference was smaller. But more interesting if I move in low-light I see the noise jump a lot in the SR11 video but not so much on the HV20. This weekend I'll have more time and hopefully better weather to test this more.

Either way I still have a bigger problem I can't solve. I cannot open the MTS file with 5.1 channels in any program I tried. Videostudio 11+ says could not open file, tmpgenc xpress opens it but says 2 channel (it uses DirectShow).
Do I have to pay $500 for Sony Vegas Pro just to be able to open these files?
It also seems there's nothing on the Sony DVD that came with it where I can do basic conversion or editing (sure WMV but not WMVHD).

I have bigger compatibility problems with the SR11. I haven't been able to get the surround audio stream correctly in any editing program tried except vegas. I didn't see these issues with HF10.

How could there possibly be surround sound issues when the HF10 doesn't even have sourround sound to begin with? You got it to work in Vegas, so why not use that. Vegas appears to be the most AVCHD friendly program for any AVCHD cam at the moment anyway. Also, how do you know what issues you'll have with the HF10 when it doesn't seem we've yet seen any untampered with native HF10 clips. All seem to have either been down-rezzed, put in editing programs and converted to something other than the native stream. I can tell you that people are having lots of issues with the Canon AVCHD clips that run long. Visit the DVInfo website to see how upset people are there with the Canon AVCHD units for that reason.


Regarding noise: I'm positive there's more noise to begin with in the Sony SR11 imager simply because it's smaller size and more pixels (digital camera's show that over and over again). However I do have to say that Sony does a good job of cleaning it up. But 'clean' as in 'unprocessed raw image' is not the case.
I indeed see detail loss in some areas like the carpet which is low contrast. Probably that's where the HV20 will appear sharper.

First off, if you read the CCI review, you'll see that what they 'thought' should be with 'smaller imagers and more pixels' did not hold true. Luc, you can't always use 'what used to be true' principals with newer technolgies. That's the whole idea of newer technology...to make what couldn't be done before actually happen. There are so many examples of where new technology disproved old adages.

As to the low contrast image, again, these are frame grabs or stills...they have no relationship to what occurs in a moving image. I've had videocams that produced horrific stills but fabulous video. The two are simply not comparable...I'm not sure how to make that any clearer. You are dwelling on the area where you see less detail but ignoring the many areas I mentioned where there was more detail in the SR11 (glass vase, flowers, clock etc.).

So for a purist you would choose the HF10 which is more unprocessed (provided it has the same overall PQ otherwise). I can use a noise filter very well on the HV20 video but not SR11 since it already is heavily processed.



WOW! How on Earth do you come to this conclusion? How do you know the HF10 is more 'unprocessed'???? How do you know the SR11 is 'heavily processed'??? Man, the video I've seen from the HF10 in no way can lead you to that conclusion.

Seriously Luc, I'd suggest you return the Sony since it really appears you have some preconceived notions based on pre-conceived biases. Your heart is set on the HF10 and that's the cam you should go with. But honestly, it's silly to say the HF10 is 'more unprocessed' and therefore would appeal more to the 'purist' and the SR11 is already 'heavily processed'. Let's try to keep these discussions more factual. I've now shot lots and lots of SR12 footage, and it looks anything but 'heavily processed'. I've posted several clips and not one person suggested those videos looked 'processed'. People seemed to think they looked great. Trust me, I've been doing video for many many years and I know how to recognize an overly processed image.

WOW! How on Earth do you come to this conclusion? How do you know the HF10 is more 'unprocessed'???? How do you know the SR11 is 'heavily processed'??? Man, the video I've seen from the HF10 in no way can lead you to that conclusion.

Seriously Luc, I'd suggest you return the Sony since it really appears you have such preconceived notions based on nothing factual. I honestly don't know why you got to begin with since you seemed to have negative vibes from the get go. Your heart is set on the HF10 and that's the cam you should go with. But honestly, it's silly to say the HF10 is 'more unprocessed' and therefore would appeal more to the 'purist' and the SR11 is already 'heavily processed'. Let's try to keep these discussions more factual.

My heart is not set on the HF10. Don't get me wrong I like the SR11 output so far. I just wanted to point out that the 'clean' image doesn't come from the imager but from the noise PP removal. I can reproduce the picture with a basic noise filter. However I do think the SR11 has higher resolution.

I do have raw HF10 files from Austin (extracted from the image). I have no problem opening these (and I didn't need core AVC to fix the occasional broken frames). Sure they are stereo so I wouldn't run in the same issues.

Bottom-line question: how can I open Sony SR11 mts files in Tmpgenc xpress? Do I really have to buy another (Sony) software? You understand my frustration that I have non-working existing software?

I know that you have Windows, but you can edit and import the Sony files just fine in iMovie 08 and Final Cut Express 4 for MAC. you just cant save them back out as avchd.

My heart is not set on the HF10. Don't get me wrong I like the SR11 output so far. I just wanted to point out that the 'clean' image doesn't come from the imager but from the noise PP removal. I can reproduce the picture with a basic noise filter. However I do think the SR11 has higher resolution.

Luc, the low noise comes from the high end technology borrowed from Sony's pro-cameras. If the video was so heavily processed to remove noise, it would also be removing much of the high frequency, fine detail in the video...it's not. I've got lots of footage that shows that. This is far far more complex than just 'removing noise with filters'. The technology involved (Exmor & Bionz) starts off with a cleaner image and a higher signal to noise ratio to begin with and thus there is LESS need to remove noise. Forget the size of the sensors, technolgy is marching on. CCI saw that when all their prediction with the FH10 and its smaller sensor went out the window based on THEIR pre-conceived notions.

I do have raw HF10 files from Austin (extracted from the image). I have no problem opening these (and I didn't need core AVC to fix the occasional broken frames). Sure they are stereo so I wouldn't run in the same issues.

But you see how you worded your original post? You said you had problems with the Sony's file and 5.1 but had no issues with the HF10's audio. I pointed out that of course you wouldn't have issues with the HF10 audio since it's simple stereo. So the comparison wasn't valid to begin with.

By the way, you wouldn't have problems with the HF10 footage and stitching because there is no posted HF10 clip anywhere that goes for 12-15 minutes. It's only on clips of that length or longer that the stitching issue comes in to play. Apparently Sony does a better job with their software in this respect as long clips are seamlessly stitched together by the software. Canon needs to fix this, but I'd bet the majority of Canon HF10/HG10 users will never see this issue. Since they are pure consumer cams, it would be rare that someone would run a clip for 15 minutes or longer. That will be an issue more for the event videographers and they won't use cams like the HF10 or HG10 anyway.

Interestingly I have had no luck in getting Austin's nutty .dmg file open. Chris said he would post the native clips today, but I still haven't seen them. So I have yet to see true native HF10 clips. I would like to see the clip of the skyline and construction equipment he posted. I was able to play it in WMP, but I can't get it into ULead to throw on a DVD-R since it's a file that no program I have recognizes. Until I see that video on my plasma, I like to reserve judgement. I'm not a big fan of making definitive judgements on a 22" LCD monitor.


Bottom-line question: how can I open Sony SR11 mts files in Tmpgenc xpress? Do I really have to buy another (Sony) software? You understand my frustration that I have non-working existing software?

Sorry, I don't know that program. But I still don't understand why you don't use Vegas which you've already said works. Vegas is known to be the most AVCHD friendly program out there and handles native AVCHD without conversion. I wish I could use my Edius Pro editing program I use for work. That program is far better than any of these other programs, but the program only imports AVCHD but doesn't export it yet. Supposedly an update will come at some point.

The bottom line for me at least, is that I don't really edit my personal stuff very much. I do enough editing for work. ;)

[QUOTE=Luc48;13374824] Do I have to pay $500 for Sony Vegas Pro just to be able to open these files?

Luc $290 here. It came in two days - brand new, sealed, now loaded and authorized. Vendor has rating in the 90's.

http://search.express.*********/merchant/_W0QQ_ihcZ2a4f401e38aa3d84QQ_sidZ2a4f401e

(I guess you need to fill in you know who bay.omcay for the asterisks)

I have been wondering, with the steady release of these models in the past few weeks why haven't we seen a review from anywhere. Usually there some sort of review by now.

Eric, I'm more than a bit surprised that you're finding only a small difference in the picture quality between the SR1 and SR11. There are so many technology differences between the two, and the SR1 didn't get the best reviews. I've never played with that cam nor have I seen the videos it produces.

But like you, I've had the FX1 and also the FX7 and I've found that the SR12 compares very favorably with either of those. What was really interesting today was I came across footage that I shot almost precisely 1 year ago (March 15th I believe). It was footage from the FX7 shot out my window on a cloudy day. I have almost identical footage from a few days ago on a cloudy day that I shot with the SR12! For a lifeless person like me, this was a find!!!! Same weather conditions, same time of year and I get to do a rough A/B between a very highly regarded 3-chip HDV cam and the SR12!

Well the SR12 faired very very well. I thought the color and noise levels were better on the SR12, but the FX7 might have been a tad sharper. But it also looked like there was some edge enhancement in the FX7 that was absent in the SR12. The biggest difference was the significantly wider field of view on the FX7 vs the SR12. I had forgotten how wide the field of view on that cam was (I sold it when I got the HV20). That's a really nice feature when shooting indoors with friends & family.

So it's things like this that make me surprised you saw such a small difference between the SR1 & SR11. How would you compare the FX1 with the SR11? I personally found the FX7 was a sharper camera than the FX1 which I always found a bit on the soft side.

I merely stated that for me, when using both the SR1 and SR11 to record the same scene (my kids playing outside on bright cloudy day), I was not seeing a night and day difference in the picture quality. Yes, the SR11 picture was somewhat sharper, yes the colors were a little bit better too. But I didn't experience a "WOW" effect in that setting. Inside footage had a much bigger delta IMHO and frankly, this is where I personally wanted the most improvement anyway. :)

I agree with you about the FX1 being on the blurry side compare to the new CMOS sensors, but I've yet to find another consumer HD camcorder with so little noise in low-light condition (it was a 3 lux camcorder afterall). Well, something's got to give when you reduce the size of a camcorder. :)

As far as the SR1 not getting the best reviews, it was one the first AVCHD camcorder available and I think that the main peeves of the pro reviews out there were more targeted at general AVCHD issues than anything SR1 specific (lack of editing solutions, not on par with some last gen HDV camcorders, etc). I'm not a reviewer, but I can safely say that for my day-to-day use, the SR1 fit my needs for the last 18 months and I didn't feel I made a mistake trading my FX1 for a SR1 (the FX1 was too bulky for my needs and took the attention of my subjects whenever I was filming).

Anyways, YMMV. My personal experience with the SR11 so far is that I want to keep it because of all the pluses I enumerated in my earlier post with barely any tradeoffs, so I feel completely validated in my upgrade and will be able to shoot my kids in even better quality. At the end of the day, that's what matters to me. :)

-eric

[QUOTE=Luc48;13374824] Do I have to pay $500 for Sony Vegas Pro just to be able to open these files?

Luc $290 here. It came in two days - brand new, sealed, now loaded and authorized. Vendor has rating in the 90's.

http://search.express.*********/merchant/_W0QQ_ihcZ2a4f401e38aa3d84QQ_sidZ2a4f401e

(I guess you need to fill in you know who bay.omcay for the asterisks)


Ummm This link is not working.

Also, I take a part time class at college at night. SO I am a "college student"
Which means I can get it here as an academic application. Note that it is still full version software. So if you are not going to use it to make money then its all good.

Here's the link http://www.campustech.com/c/campust/88739.html


I also have Autocad 2008 academic version and this is an educational version. It is still full version but If I plot "print" drawings it places a banner around the border stating that this was produced by an educational product from autodesk. The reason I tell you this is so youunder stand that to place a banner across a finished video would just not work. So It is full version and it states it on the web site.

Bottom-line question: how can I open Sony SR11 mts files in Tmpgenc xpress? Do I really have to buy another (Sony) software? You understand my frustration that I have non-working existing software?

If you want to play them back, just use the free Sony software that comes with it. If you're eager to get the best playback quality, I've personally experienced the smoothest and sharpest output from PowerDVD (bluray edition). This player was bundled with a bluray drive, so I didn't pay for it either.

If you want to edit, my personal opinion is to get Pinnacle Studio 11 Plus (you can get it for around $65 these days). It works, it's hardware accelerated, it uses all your procs available and let's you author AVCHD disks too. I tried tmpgenc a few times in the last couple of years to re-encode my SR1 files and had a hard time making it work. And when it did, it was doing something funky with the deinterlacing. My best experience re-encoding with my SR1 content is with Pinnacle Studio publishing to WMV 720p59.94 with 5.1 audio (I created a custom profile to boost the bandwidth to 7Mbps). Looks amazing for downloadable content for the rest of the family. :)

-eric

I have been wondering, with the steady release of these models in the past few weeks why haven't we seen a review from anywhere. Usually there some sort of review by now.


I was thinking the same thing but if you listen really close you'll hear the sound of very large files being rendered. When they stop and you here keyboard keys clicking get your reading glasses:D

You know all of the camera/video stores around me have the SR10 and SR12 I was told by 2 different merchants that they have no idea when the SR11 will come. All they know is that it has not shipped.

Now bestbuy near me has a few SR11's so I don't understand how its working.
The local shop near me where I want to get mine told me that he got 20 SR12's in and 18 have sold. He is getting more in on friday. None of the SR10's sold yet.


Im close to pulling the trigger on the SR12 but the extre $200 is going take away from the sony vegas PRO 8 upgrade:(

I have been wondering, with the steady release of these models in the past few weeks why haven't we seen a review from anywhere. Usually there some sort of review by now.

I also was waiting for a nice review, but I tired of waiting. I went to a pricegrabber and found that SR12 was already on sale for a $1200. Great!

This is my first camera and I'm really impressed. All my digital cameras are Canon (SD600, SD950) and for me it was really hard to choose between Canon and Sony. However, I left with a bunch of questions, which you might also have. So if someone will answer them I (myself) and other people who are researching will be very happy.

1) Is there any way to choose between 50i and 60i inside the camera, since I will be living in a place where 50Hz is used for electric bulbs after few months. I'm really concerned about flickering.

2) Which mode is better AVCHD at 5MB/s (1440x1080) or MPEG-2 at 9Mb/s (720x480) in terms of overall quality. (Like noise level, light sensitivity, detail processing, blocking, motion)

3) Can I copy the CD software installer (picture motion browser) to the Camcoder's Hard Drive? I just don't want to carry this CD to install software on other PCs.

4) Can I really take still images (photos) while recording a video if I'll buy a Sony Memory Stick? What will be the quality? 2MP or 10.2MP?

5) I found it akward that there is now way to pause the video recording, or I just missing something. So, there is no need in pause button anymore?

I used the sony Picture Motion Browser Software to convert the AVCHD to Standard MPEG-2 and it was done pretty quick (C2D 2.2GHz, 4GB RAM, 160GB 5400RPM, 8600M GT) for 2-5 min clips. Now I can watch all my clips on any DVD player before I'll buy a Blue Ray Disk player and/or recorder.

I have a Q6600 running at 3.6 on air, an 8600GT video card, a 150gb Raptor for my system drive and a 500gb Seagate as my data drive. When I render HD videos in Vegas Pro, I find that each core of my cpu is only running at 30-50%. Is there anything I can do to get this closer to 100% and reduce render times?

I can't speak with absolute certainty on this but I believe that this is the software just being single threaded (i.e. only using one CPU). I have seen this before (with other single threaded software) but I don't know why Microsoft shows 50% on both CPUs instead of 100% on one and 0% on the other. If you turn off one of the CPUs in the BIOS, and reboot, I bet it jumps to 100% (just for testing obviously).

It my theory is correct, the resolution would only come with a software update from Vegas Pro to support multiple threads.

Again, just a theory on my part. No experience with Vegas Pro.

By the way, if a single CPU doesn't give you near 100%, then perhaps the storage subsystem is part of the issue but what you're doing sounds very CPU intensive, right?

I agree with you about the FX1 being on the blurry side compare to the new CMOS sensors, but I've yet to find another consumer HD camcorder with so little noise in low-light condition (it was a 3 lux camcorder afterall). Well, something's got to give when you reduce the size of a camcorder. :)



Yup, the FX1 was certainly the low light champ. I've yet to see another HD cam that could produce HD video as well in low light. Of course even the FX1 was a shadow of the VX2000/VX2100, but those were/are mini-DV cams.

I gave it up for the same reason...huge! It was embarrassing going anywhere with that beast. I felt like I should have an NBC badge on my shirt.

Now bestbuy near me has a few SR11's so I don't understand how its working.
The local shop near me where I want to get mine told me that he got 20 SR12's in and 18 have sold. He is getting more in on friday. None of the SR10's sold yet.

Im close to pulling the trigger on the SR12 but the extre $200 is going take away from the sony vegas PRO 8 upgrade:(

Paul, even the clips posted in another thread from the SR10 look very nice. It looks as if the SR10 has no viewfinder though.

I also was waiting for a nice review, but I tired of waiting. I went to a pricegrabber and found that SR12 was already on sale for a $1200. Great!

This is my first camera and I'm really impressed. All my digital cameras are Canon (SD600, SD950) and for me it was really hard to choose between Canon and Sony. However, I left with a bunch of questions, which you might also have. So if someone will answer them I (myself) and other people who are researching will be very happy.

1) Is there any way to choose between 50i and 60i inside the camera, since I will be living in a place where 50Hz is used for electric bulbs after few months. I'm really concerned about flickering.

2) Which mode is better AVCHD at 5MB/s (1440x1080) or MPEG-2 at 9Mb/s (720x480) in terms of overall quality. (Like noise level, light sensitivity, detail processing, blocking, motion)

3) Can I copy the CD software installer (picture motion browser) to the Camcoder's Hard Drive? I just don't want to carry this CD to install software on other PCs.

4) Can I really take still images (photos) while recording a video if I'll buy a Sony Memory Stick? What will be the quality? 2MP or 10.2MP?

5) I found it akward that there is now way to pause the video recording, or I just missing something. So, there is no need in pause button anymore?

I used the sony Picture Motion Browser Software to convert the AVCHD to Standard MPEG-2 and it was done pretty quick (C2D 2.2GHz, 4GB RAM, 160GB 5400RPM, 8600M GT) for 2-5 min clips. Now I can watch all my clips on any DVD player before I'll buy a Blue Ray Disk player and/or recorder.

Madi, I'll try to answer what I can:

1) No. It's extremely rare to find a camera that can internally switch between 50i and 60i. Equipment bought for use in the U.S. will invariably be 60i and can't be switched. PAL versions will be 50i and of course those too can be bought in the U.S.

2) I think that's a tough question given that AVCHD is a far more efficient compession technology and a lower bitrate will produce the same quality as a higher bitrate in MPEG2. But with that said, you'd still need to do an A/B between two cams with those settings to see. Light sensitivity will be more a function of the sensor itself than the bitrate. Yes, a higher bitrate might produce a bit less noise, but the sensor and processing would be more important.

3) Interesting question, I doubt it, but I'm not sure. It seems to me that recording to the HDD is only via the camcorder. But wouldn't it be just as easy to put the CD on a small memory stick or flash drive? They're tiny.

4) Yes you can. I don't take still pix with my videocams since I've never seen one that can come close to a good still digicam, so I'm not sure of the quality of the SR11/SR12. It seems the megapixel count in videocams has little to do with the ultimate picture quality from what I've seen from posted pix.

5) Get used to AVCHD. Everytime you pause the recording, you're creating a new file. But in playback it's seamless, so it's no big deal.

Let me share another "hold button" tip: If you hold the Display button for a couple of seconds, it would turn off the LCD screen. Press it again to turn the LCD screen on.

Just to let you know, if you're in Canada...

the SR11 is 1299$ and the SR12 is 1499$ (sony price)... Yeah i know 100$ more than the US... It's not fair since CAN$ is worth the same or more than the US$ now... oh well...

But this week, Future Shop (like best buy) is doing a sale on the SR11... for 1199$ (same US price) and give with it the Pinnacle Movie Studio Ultimate 11 for free...

So for all canadian on here, it's could the a goood time to buy the SR11.

I''ll be running to the store later today.... but ill try to have something else free, since I'm on MAC... with already Final Cut.... so no need Pinnacle.

Annyone on here tried the SR11 or 12 on MAC ????

Paul, even the clips posted in another thread from the SR10 look very nice. It looks as if the SR10 has no viewfinder though.

Ken is correct... The SR10 has no viewfinder, and I know that is a dealbreaker for some people. However as my test clips show I have done some shooting in bright outdoor sunlight, and while the LCD screen was washed out, I could always tell what I was shooting.

Greg

4) Can I really take still images (photos) while recording a video if I'll buy a Sony Memory Stick? What will be the quality? 2MP or 10.2MP?
Here's how pictures work on the SR11: there are two modes on the camcorder, and picture taking behaves differently between the two.

Mode #1: Video - The aspect ratio and the resolution are fixed to widescreen 7.1MP, independently of if you're recording video or not. The flash is disabled in that mode. Note that you can use night shot to take photos, but you can't apply "pict effect" (which are misleadingly called, since they're really video effects).

Mode #2: Photo - You can choose which resolution the picture will be taken from VGA to 10MP (only one widescreen res is available though, which is the same as 7.1MP).

You can set the pictures to record on the HDD or the stick, and do so independently of the video. Personally, I didn't take any chance of any hiccup on the video side and just bought a 4GB stick from Costco ($30) that I'm planning to use to record photos.

Quality-wise, from what I see on the 7.1MP and 10MP pictures I took so far, they seem to be of similar quality (no degradation of the color quality in video mode). There's obviously some interpolation done to get both resolutions and it shows a little on the effective resolution when compared to true 10MP pictures. But they're also looking sharper than a 4-5MP to me. I hope an incoming professional review will do some resolution tests on the photos coming out of the SR11, as I know countless of people that are looking for good hybrid (good camera taking decent HD video or good camcorder taking decent hi-rez pictures), and with my experience so far, the SR11 could be what they were looking for.

-eric

Annyone on here tried the SR11 or 12 on MAC ????

There's a whole thread on an other popular forum just dedicated to the SR11 on the mac. Check your PM.

There's a whole thread on an other popular forum just dedicated to the SR11 on the mac. Check your PM.


I'm on a mac too, any chance I could get this PM?

I have been waiting for this type of clip and finally it came. The SR12 at night
http://www.vimeo.com/782786

I find the noise levels to be good (good enought for me to upgrade anyway)

I redid the comparison this morning with almost same zoom setting (and I did remove the wide-angle lens). Here are the image gallery (more comparisons will follow this weekend):

http://lucienk.spaces.live.com/photos/cns!A4AE3FB12A26635!673/

Click full screen to compare (or download). Points to check: marble around fire place, sofa fabric.

To be honest I'm more interested in sunny daylight comparisons since that's what I typically shoot. But it's been raining last couple of days. Hopefully there will be a break in the weather tomorrow so I can finally compare it.

I will also post later on Vimeo.com the video's (at high bit rate so you can download instead of lower quality streaming).

I redid the comparison this morning with almost same zoom setting (and I did remove the wide-angle lens). Here are the image gallery (more comparisons will follow this weekend):

http://lucienk.spaces.live.com/photos/cns!A4AE3FB12A26635!673/

Click full screen to compare (or download). Points to check: marble around fire place, sofa fabric.

To be honest I'm more interested in sunny daylight comparisons since that's what I typically shoot. But it's been raining last couple of days. Hopefully there will be a break in the weather tomorrow so I can finally compare it.

I will also post later on Vimeo.com the video's (at high bit rate so you can download instead of lower quality streaming).



Ok I'll guess again HV20 on left??

Well all I can say is that they are both very close in quality and noise. Each has weak areas as well as strong one's.

Less stair-stepping on the SR11, most likely due to full 1920x1080 res.

I added one outdoor example (cloudy conditions but bright).

Yes left is HV20. I wish someone could do another outdoor test comparison as I didn't expect this outdoor difference:

http://zbanuw.bay.livefilestore.com/y1p20U7JNVxq5wyJajKkgmHaNq7YuchbA_RLw8KHgIjuqc4YuCyLZiJNAG14 AOaACro1IvG_fDX-uLm87T_Q3tjug

Both cameras were on auto and I used the FP mode on the SR11. I'll do another test tomorrow.

Ok I'll guess again HV20 on left??

Well all I can say is that they are both very close in quality and noise. Each has weak areas as well as strong one's.

Yup. Some areas of the same pix show more detail on one cam and another area shows more detail on the other. The one consistent is the much lower noise level of the SR11.

But again, I find these results totally academic since it's not moving video and has no relationship to moving video. I think most people that have used videocameras over the years know that any given camera might produce better stills than cam B, but cam B might produce better videos.

This is why I don't take these tests seriously. There is only one way to test 2 cams, side by side, same material, same time and same focal length with the same settings.

I added one outdoor example (cloudy conditions but bright).

Yes left is HV20. I wish someone could do another outdoor test comparison as I didn't expect this outdoor difference:

http://zbanuw.bay.livefilestore.com/y1p20U7JNVxq5wyJajKkgmHaNq7YuchbA_RLw8KHgIjuqc4YuCyLZiJNAG14 AOaACro1IvG_fDX-uLm87T_Q3tjug

Both cameras were on auto and I used the FP mode on the SR11. I'll do another test tomorrow.

The picture of the grass is precisely what I'm talking about with moving videos vs still pix. There is no video clip I have from my SR12 that even comes close to being that soft and blurred...guys, not even close. In fact I honest to God think I would have a very difficult time producing a video clip that looked that soft on this cam. I've shot on cloudy days and my videos are much much sharper than those pix would suggest. The clips I've uploaded previously pretty much prove that.

Interestingly I just had a friend over during lunch who is also a videophile. I showed him my A/Bs of the HV20 vs the SR12 in a 'blindfold' fashion. He had no idea which clips came from which camera. He owns an HV20 and just got back from California with some footage shot with the HV20.

To be sure he wasn't cheating, I made sure the ambient noise in the room was loud enough so that he couldn't hear the tape transport of the HV20 running to give that away. Input switching was done by my Yamaha 3800, so even there, there was no clue on the screen since both cams showed "Input 4" on the Pioneer plasma.

His overall impression was precisely like mine, the SR12 looked more professional with just a slight amount more detail in some scenes than the HV20 but with a more professional, lower noise 'polished' look. He also preferred the SR12's color in many scenes, since he finds the HV20 tends a bit to magenta with some colors (like the sky). The Sony was a true sky blue.

He was suprised like me about the relatively poor showing of the clips posted thus far from the HF10. But he agreed with me that something must have been wrong with the way they set these cams up. Even though the SR12 was set to a lower rez, it still looked much better.

Bottom line? He'll be picking up the SR12 shortly. ;)

I added one outdoor example (cloudy conditions but bright).

Yes left is HV20. I wish someone could do another outdoor test comparison as I didn't expect this outdoor difference:

http://zbanuw.bay.livefilestore.com/y1p20U7JNVxq5wyJajKkgmHaNq7YuchbA_RLw8KHgIjuqc4YuCyLZiJNAG14 AOaACro1IvG_fDX-uLm87T_Q3tjug

Both cameras were on auto and I used the FP mode on the SR11. I'll do another test tomorrow.

Wow, thanks Luc!

I'm really impressed with the HV20 that is some tack sharp stuff.

Do you have any plans to purchase the HF100?

Wow, thanks Luc!

I'm really impressed with the HV20 that is some tack sharp stuff.

Do you have any plans to purchase the HF100?

I have the HF100 on order. Problem is that I'm going on vacation mid April so not sure if I'll get one in time. I don't know yet if the HF100 will be adequate for my needs but hopefully there's some time for me to compare first.

I've posted the 2 comparison video's on vimeo (WMVHD 5Mbps, 2 pass). Direct download links (you need to log on to be able to download):

http://www.vimeo.com/download/video:41212964
http://www.vimeo.com/download/video:41245865

I would venture to say that Sony probably may of underestimated the popularity of the SR10/11/12 family.. seems to be a good seller!

I would venture to say that Sony probably may of underestimated the popularity of the SR10/11/12 family.. seems to be a good seller!

Yeah, I just got a price adjustment from the place I bought mine (nearly $200!) and the guy was telling me they can't keep them in stock. This is the best Sony cam I've seen them make in years. In fact, I had almost given up on them! :)

Hi guys, I havent brought a camcorder since almost 7-8 years ago. I'm really tempted to get the sr11. My biggest worry, is that my laptop isnt powerful enough. Its an Dell Inspiron 1500 with Intel dual core and barely hitting 2ghz, and it does have 1 gig of ram.

I'd like to film clips of my kid playing soccer, and taking pieces and combine them which I believe I can do with Sony Vegas, right? Also, I'm planning a trip this summer, and just filming and making clips as a hobby.

Sorry for the newb questions and concerns, but with this new camcorder and new file format, I dont want to be stuck with a slow laptop that cant handle all this video processing. I just want to have a good hd video experience thats all, and it would be my first time playing with video editing software like Sony Vegas :)

I have the HF100 on order. Problem is that I'm going on vacation mid April so not sure if I'll get one in time. I don't know yet if the HF100 will be adequate for my needs but hopefully there's some time for me to compare first.

I've posted the 2 comparison video's on vimeo (WMVHD 5Mbps, 2 pass). Direct download links (you need to log on to be able to download):

http://www.vimeo.com/download/video:41212964
http://www.vimeo.com/download/video:41245865

Both looked bad. You might want to try megadownload for full quality clips and when you do these tests, pan slowly. Your pans are much to quick and the artifacts in both cams is almost dizzying.

I have the HF100 on order. Problem is that I'm going on vacation mid April so not sure if I'll get one in time. I don't know yet if the HF100 will be adequate for my needs but hopefully there's some time for me to compare first.

I've posted the 2 comparison video's on vimeo (WMVHD 5Mbps, 2 pass). Direct download links (you need to log on to be able to download):

http://www.vimeo.com/download/video:41212964
http://www.vimeo.com/download/video:41245865

Thanks for the videos!

I hope you get the HF100 before your vacation...would love to see a HV20/HF100/SR11 shootout!

Hi guys, I havent brought a camcorder since almost 7-8 years ago. I'm really tempted to get the sr11. My biggest worry, is that my laptop isnt powerful enough. Its an Dell Inspiron 1500 with Intel dual core and barely hitting 2ghz, and it does have 1 gig of ram.

I'd like to film clips of my kid playing soccer, and taking pieces and combine them which I believe I can do with Sony Vegas, right? Also, I'm planning a trip this summer, and just filming and making clips as a hobby.

Sorry for the newb questions and concerns, but with this new camcorder and new file format, I dont want to be stuck with a slow laptop that cant handle all this video processing. I just want to have a good hd video experience thats all, and it would be my first time playing with video editing software like Sony Vegas :)

The AVCHD format really taxes any computer, especially slow ones. If you're looking at the Sony, keep in mind that clips are 'stitched' together, so every time you hit 'pause' the clips will play back seamlessly. The reason I mention this is you can do rough edits within the cam (trimming clips) and maybe you can get away with just that and avoid the computer completely.

But yes, Vegas is probably the best right now although you can also use Ulead Studio 11+ which supports AVCHD and can handle the Dolby Digital 5.1 surround that the Sonys have.

The AVCHD format really taxes any computer, especially slow ones. If you're looking at the Sony, keep in mind that clips are 'stitched' together, so every time you hit 'pause' the clips will play back seamlessly. The reason I mention this is you can do rough edits within the cam (trimming clips) and maybe you can get away with just that and avoid the computer completely.

But yes, Vegas is probably the best right now although you can also use Ulead Studio 11+ which supports AVCHD and can handle the Dolby Digital 5.1 surround that the Sonys have.

So do you think I'll have slow performance issues? Or I should be ok?

Ultimately, if I want to share clips with family or save onto a dvd. How big of a process is this? I mean just a rough estimate of what steps are involved beginning with transfering AVCHD file to computer, etc? Thanks in advance. Trying to get a feel of what I would be in for.

Ken what does Ulead give you that Vegas doesn't? Is the interface better? I think I remember you saying that Ulead can't export 1920, right?

Ken what does Ulead give you that Vegas doesn't? Is the interface better? I think I remember you saying that Ulead can't export 1920, right?

No, it can. It was Vegas that I couldn't export in 1920X1080. When my friend was over today we both looked at Vegas to see if maybe I overlooked something, but we can't find a setting for 1920X1080. When you select AVCHD, the highest quality is 1440X1080 at a 15mbps bitrate. So you lose quality on both bitrate and resolution. On the other hand, it seems Vegas handles AVCHD clips a bit smoother than ULead. But I do like the interface of ULead a little better.

We still need a really good editing program for this stuff. I'm hoping Grass Valley's Edius Pro will offer full support for AVCHD. Right now I can only import AVCHD into that program, but I have to export in HDV.

Maybe there's something I'm just not seeing in Vegas in terms of rez & bitrate. :confused:

I have the HF100 on order. Problem is that I'm going on vacation mid April so not sure if I'll get one in time. I don't know yet if the HF100 will be adequate for my needs but hopefully there's some time for me to compare first.

I've posted the 2 comparison video's on vimeo (WMVHD 5Mbps, 2 pass). Direct download links (you need to log on to be able to download):

http://www.vimeo.com/download/video:41212964
http://www.vimeo.com/download/video:41245865

nice comparison.

One thing we can say about the results is that the HDV and AVCHD formats have now become equal.

nice comparison.

One thing we can say about the results is that the HDV and AVCHD formats have now become equal.

I certainly see no AVCHD compression artifacts so that's great. But I was hoping for a better outdoor SR11 performance but I'll repeat the test tomorrow. I do see smudging due to noise removal even in this cloudy shot. It could be my SR11 so I'm interested if someone could do the same thing if they have both cams.

I don't have any problem with the vimeo download quality and yes the panning is too fast (compression test).

PS I found VS 11.5 can open the SR11 files properly (11+ doesn't).

Luc48 what software didi you end up using for the tests? The same on both cams?

I will say that the SR11 wind the indoor and I have to hand the outdoor to the HV20 on the 2 videos.

The color on the HV20 outdoor looks more natural.

Well I didn't get the SR11 after all :(:(

I have a feeling there is going to be a longer wait than I am being told.

I don't think it will be until April until my local seller gets them in.

So I went for the SR12 :D:D:D

The extra $200 was going to be for a battery and wide lens but I'll have to wait a little longer.

I was also going to upgrade to Vegas PRO8 from vegas home studio but oh well.

On the good side I have the HVL-HL1 light and the ECM-HQP1 (5.1 surround sound mic)

Well I was hoping for a better outdoor SR11 performance but I'll repeat the test tomorrow. I do see smudging due to noise removal even in this cloudy shot. It could be my SR11 so I'm interested if someone could do the same thing if they have both cams.

I don't have any problem with the vimeo download quality and yes the panning is too fast (compression test).

I will try to upload a cloudy day shot on megaupload and you'll see what I'm talking about. Luc, in all honesty, I just don't how you're shooting or how you've got your cam set to be getting the results you're getting or if these sites are so heavily compressing the video. But again, as I've said many times to you, there is zero smudging in any outdoor shot (cloudy or sunny) and whatever you're seeing has nothing to do with 'noise removal'. Every full-bandwidth posted clip on the internet from the SR11/SR12 from everybody else (including myself) show no evidence of 'smudging'.

You don't seem to beleive me because you are so hooked on thinking the Sony has this very 'aggressive noise removal' rather than the fact that it simply has better processing and a higher signal to noise ratio, which means it starts off with LESS noise and therefore requires LESS noise removal. What I find funny is that almost all of the HF10 clips posted so far DO show smudging and detail smearing. Now, I believe these tests were done sloppily, but nonetheless it doesn't seem to have altered your opinion of the Canons. So we shall agree to disagree because I know I'll never convince you.

As I said before (and I was not surprised to see you've pre-ordered the Canon), I firmly believe the Canon will be better for you. You apparently won't go in to that cam thinking it has 'aggressive' noise removal or 'smudging'. So whatever picture it does produce, I believe you'll be happier with it. I see why you bought the Sony from Costco. ;)

Luc48 what software didi you end up using for the tests? The same on both cams?

I will say that the SR11 wind the indoor and I have to hand the outdoor to the HV20 on the 2 videos.

The color on the HV20 outdoor looks more natural.

Paul, that was the other thing, the colors on his SR11!!! I've never seen blue-greens like that on the Sony. The Sony's colors are warm. Very bizarre, that's all I can say. I will try tonight to upload a cloudy day shot I've got with the SR12, and you guys tell me if it bears any resemblence to Vic's shots.

The Ecm-hqp1 surround mic isn't listed as compatible. Does it work in surround mode and is there a directed foreward mode?
thanks

Here's a sunny day shot (almost 100 megs):

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=3DTTVIZP

Here's a cloudy day shot (150 megs):

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=TMUMC37A

Paul, that was the other thing, the colors on his SR11!!! I've never seen blue-greens like that on the Sony. The Sony's colors are warm. Very bizarre, that's all I can say. I will try tonight to upload a cloudy day shot I've got with the SR12, and you guys tell me if it bears any resemblence to Vic's shots.


I was thinking the same thing but figure that these test have a little bias. So I take them with a grain of salt.

As you can see I dont let it affect my choice. I have a sony DVD403 and this SR12 is going to be my upgrade. So I should be happy with the quality to say the least.

I understand the passion for the HV20. I just don't have it. I really like the ease of finalizing a mini dvd and importing to vegas in no time. My new PC did not have the firewire (I didn't think I would need it a few months ago) So to go with the HV30 and the tapes and real time upload felt like a little step backwards (to me).

I was going to post asking someone to give me a reason to get the SR12 now and not wait until the SR11 comes in. But I know I already had my mind madeup, a little like these tests;) So I followed my gut.

I like what I have seen so far. I will really never use this to take pictures with. I have a nikon 70S with 18-200VR lens for that. As a matter of fact I would rather that SOny forget that feature and add other useful video features. Lets just stick to video kind of thinking. But thats not whats selling (at the consumer level) I really dont like what Canon has done with the new HF10 and HF100 in terms of a proprietary hot shoe and manual focus imbedded in the software. That to me is a step back. But there is a market for it.


So what I see on the horizon is that the new SR series from sony is the pick of the litter.

If I want to go to tape and firewire, I would buy a Sony VX2100 period.

The Ecm-hqp1 surround mic isn't listed as compatible. Does it work in surround mode and is there a directed foreward mode?
thanks

Its not available any more. I bought it a long time ago. It works perfectly with the DCRDVD403 and (HOPE) it will work with the SR12.

The pins are the same so We'll se.

Does anyone think it could cause a problem if I try it?? I think i'll take it to bestbuy with a set of headphones


AS far as the mic,it works as a surround sound mic. Just like the one built in but it sits higher and has a wind screen

I was thinking the same thing but figure that these test have a little bias. So I take them with a grain of salt.

As you can see I dont let it affect my choice. I have a sony DVD403 and this SR12 is going to be my upgrade. So I should be happy with the quality to say the least.



Paul, AVS is a great place for us all to learn from each other, but as I've found with so many topics, there is always misinformation that seeps in and that always bugs me. My last two cams have been Canon, so I surely have no axe to grind, but when a company puts out a superior product, it's worthy of mention and accurate reporting.

Good luck with your SR12!

It's really that lack of 24/30p that's killing me on the Sony. I'd be all over the SR11 if it gave me these abilities. I just may stick with the HV30. We're splitting hairs as far as image quality goes.

I dont mean to quote myself, but can anyone answer how big of a process it is to be able to share video clips with family if I wanted to put it on some media like a dvd? Thanks in advance. Dont want to get in over my head.

Here's a sunny day shot (almost 100 megs):

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=3DTTVIZP

Here's a cloudy day shot (150 megs):

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=TMUMC37A

Thanks a lot for the shots. It does rule out for me that it is my cam. I do see the same things in these shots (looking at the grass, brush, powerlines, ...).
I'd love to see a side-by side shot with the HV20 for the same exact scene.

I don't know why I'm attacked for doing this comparisons. I don't have an interest which camcorder you like. Also I might not like the HF100 either (and I never claimed the opposite without testing it).

I'll stop posting comparisons to this thread. If anyone is interested I'll add more comparisons over the weekend. The way I did this is full auto mode and highest settings (FP). Second I use HDVSplit to get the HV20 raw file and use file stream copy to get the SR11 file.

Links:
HV20 vs SR11 Photo gallery: http://lucienk.spaces.live.com/photos/cns!A4AE3FB12A26635!673

Vimeo video's (make sure you use the download WMVHD link on the right bottom):
http://vimeo.com/lucienk

The vimeo video's are WMVHD with 2 pass at 5Mbps average with 9Mbps peak. Second video quality encoder settings are set at slowest possible.

Thanks a lot for the shots. It does rule out for me that it is my cam. I do see the same things in these shots (looking at the grass, brush, powerlines, ...).
I'd love to see a side-by side shot with the HV20 for the same exact scene.



Luc, all I can tell you is that these shots are crystal clear on my 60" Pioneer plasma...tack sharp. I'm not sure what you're seeing or how you're viewing the clips. Does the shot outdoors with Nathans look fuzzy to you? Do you see blurring or macroblocking? If so, there's something wrong with your setup. Neither of these shots has either the off color or the smudging of the shots you posted. You just have no idea how pristine and sharp they look on a 60" 1080p plasma. I don't use computer monitors as the main way I'd view HD clips. If I did, I'd never get an HD cam. Computer monitors are fuzzy for video by comparisions to the image a good plasma produces. They can produce artifacts all by themselves with no help from the camcorder that produced the video.

I don't have HV20 shots of Nathans, but somewhere I think I have a cloudy day shot of the school with the HV20. Those two shots are virtually indistinguishable. No difference in detail, but a slight difference in color. These two cams are far more alike than you think. My 60" Pioneer Elite Kuro is exceptionally good at showing slight differences in picture quality and for most clips these two cams are so close, it's tough to tell them apart aside from the lower noise in the Sony.

Luc, you're not being 'attacked' for doing these comprisons, but your bias does show through and that's the issue. I'm not the only one that sees it. You keep referring to the SR11 picture as 'very processed' and the HF10 as appealing to people who are 'purists'. Anyone who can make statements like that about a camera that hasn't even been released, whose clips that have been shown on the internet are unquestionably poorer than those posted for the SR11/SR12 (regardless of how poor a job the site that released the clips did) and who has bought the SR11 at Costco for the sole purpose of being able to return it while having an HF100 on order...well, I'd call that bias. I've told you about the technology behind the Sony that's borrowed from their professional cams, but you ignore that and insist on calling the picture 'heavily processed'. I've pretty much given up. I said it before (even before I knew you had an HF100 on order), you'd be better off with the Canon. And trust me Luc, that's fine, my last 2 cams have been Canons and I too will look at the HF10...but misinformation does nobody any good.

It's really that lack of 24/30p that's killing me on the Sony. I'd be all over the SR11 if it gave me these abilities. I just may stick with the HV30. We're splitting hairs as far as image quality goes.

Why not wait for the HF10 and HF100 and see what kind of image they produce? If the quality is on par with the new Sonys and the 24p/30p is what you want, then the Canons could be a 'win win' for you. Just make sure you're OK about not having a viewfinder (like the SR10).

Luc, I posted these SR12 clips before and people seemed quite impressed. These clips are no different than the average video coming from the SR12. The N.Y.C. clip was shot early in the morning on a hazy day. I've got a friend in Canada who has a 64" Zenith HD RPTV with 9" guns (best in class for HD RPTV). He has modified it to produce a 100" tack sharp image with a specially designed lens and screen. He downloaded these clips and thought they looked great on a 100" screen. He said it was highly detailed with amazingly low noise. For background, he owns a Canon HV10. He was so impressed he's going to see the SR12 himself this weekend with a Sony memory stick in hand. So do you see the same issues with these clips that you see in all SR12 clips? These are smaller files so they should take less time to download.

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=GOHXJM70

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=00JC43E9

... and who has bought the SR11 at Costco for the sole purpose of being able to return it while having an HF100 on order...well, I'd call that bias...

That's insulting. I have not bought the SR11 at Costco for the sole purpose of being able to return it. The HF100 will not be available before end of April and I ordered it since it was $750 which surely will go up. I can cancel it at any time in case I'm not happy with the SR11.

Luc,
Thanks for the comparisons, I find them interesting. The indoor shots look comparable to my untrained eye, but in the outdoor shots the HV20 clearly has better color and detail.

Ken,
I really appreciate your input also, but IMHO you should go easier on Luc. His intentions seems genuine to me. We're supposed to be here to help and learn from each other. Pointing out errors or assumptions from others is part of that, and sometimes we just disagree, but let's keep it constructive. Can't we all just be friends? :)

Also, a question for you regarding your statement that frame grabs don't correlate to video quality. I have way less experience with video than you, but that doesn't make sense to me. I can understand that stills shot in still mode don't correlate to video, but frame grabs come from the actual video itself. It seems to me that a frame grab is by definition representative of the video, since it is part of the video (as long as the frame is extracted accurately). Plus frame grabs are much easier to share and study than moving video. Can you please elaborate on your position?

Thanks!!

Luc,
It seems to me that a frame grab is by definition representative of the video, since it is part of the video (as long as the frame is extracted accurately). Plus frame grabs are much easier to share and study than moving video. Can you please elaborate on your position?

Thanks!!

Frame grabs are subject to considerable artifacting. Even using Luc's grabs (although he's never told me whether that's what they were) and then watching his posted video (even though the video was significantly down-rez'd), you can see the video is more detailed...and remember, not only is the video down rez'd, but the data rate is cut drastically. That's why I'd never use that site for camcorder shopping...everything looks pretty poor there.

Sites that are really dedicated to camcorder video (e.g. DVinfo) always frown on using grabs or stills to demonstrate video quality. Anyone that owns the SR10/SR11 or SR12 will tell you with 100% certainty they've never gotten video that was so poor as Luc's grabs would indicate.

Let's put it this way Spocko, if his grabs were indicative of what I saw on my plasma, I wouldn't walk to return the Sony, I'd run.....FAST! :D

Luc, I posted these SR12 clips before and people seemed quite impressed. These clips are no different than the average video coming from the SR12. The N.Y.C. clip was shot early in the morning on a hazy day. I've got a friend in Canada who has a 64" Zenith HD RPTV with 9" guns (best in class for HD RPTV). He has modified it to produce a 100" tack sharp image with a specially designed lens and screen. He downloaded these clips and thought they looked great on a 100" screen. He said it was highly detailed with amazingly low noise. For background, he owns a Canon HV10. He was so impressed he's going to see the SR12 himself this weekend with a Sony memory stick in hand. So do you see the same issues with these clips that you see in all SR12 clips? These are smaller files so they should take less time to download.

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=GOHXJM70

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=00JC43E9

I'm completely misunderstood here. I never ever said the SR11 looks fuzzy. My issue is that it doesn't equal the HV20 outdoor resolution and I'm looking for a replacement due to bad tape motor noise. That's why it's a comparison not a review.

I've downloaded these clips before and did play them back on my 133" HD projector (calibrated). They look great but just not as sharp compared to all of my HV20 footage. And it's not just sharpness but also resolution.

Also I haven't decided yet. I'll continue testing this weekend. I also had mixed indoor results so it's possible result will be different.

I'm completely misunderstood here. I never ever said the SR11 looks fuzzy. My issue is that it doesn't equal the HV20 outdoor resolution and I'm looking for a replacement due to bad tape motor noise. That's why it's a comparison not a review.

Well we can agree to disagree on that and that's fine. All I can tell you, on my 60" 1080p plasma, using dot by dot mode (pixel mapping) two very experienced videophiles came up with exactly the opposite impression. In most clips it was tough to tell them apart from a resolution standpoint, but in some clips the resolution advantage went to the SR12...and this with less noise. We invariably preferred the Sony's more natural color.

I've downloaded these clips before and did play them back on my 133" HD projector (calibrated). They look great but just not as sharp compared to all of my HV20 footage. And it's not just sharpness but also resolution.



You see here too we disagree. Unless you had the HV20 and was standing next to me under the same conditions, your statement can't be held as accurate. There are times and conditions where the same camcorder will look extremely sharp and other times it will appear not so sharp. Time of day, settings (even under full auto settings) and weather conditions all contribute to the possibility of distinctly different results. As I mentioned before, my Canadian buddy with his 100" display came to a different conclusion than yours too. He thought the clips appeared as sharp as his average HV10 shots. As I said, he's got the HV10 (which actually measured to a slightly higher resolution by CCI than yours and my HV20).

Now I will say this, the HV20 can 'appear' to be a bit sharper than the SR12, but that's because it uses edge enhancement which the SR12 does not. Just look at any HV10 or HV20 footage and you can see evidence of it if you know what to look for. Luc, once you've been trained to see it, you'll recognize it in a heartbeat. If you don't believe me, go to CCI and look at their test of the HF10. In that test they have a blowup of the resolution charts shot with the HV30 (same as the HV20) and the HF10. The HV20 shows very distinct signs of both edge enhancement and noise.

The more I've been doing video, the more I've come to hate edge enhancement in both camcorders and display devices that also use it. Most of the public like an image with edge enhancement because it appears sharper to them and they think they're seeing more detail. That's why they turn their sharpness up way too high on their displays. It's also why most people dislike the look of an HDTV that's been ISF'd. Even though the display is now far more accurate, people think it looks too dull and subdued. Professionals will not stand for edge enhancement. So what I'm saying is that the apparent sharpness of the HV20 is just that, 'apparent'...that why it's given that name in video (I didn't make it up). But when you look for actual detail, the SR12 is at least as good as my HV20 and doesn't need edge enhancement. For me at least, having a picture like this with the least noise I've ever seen in a consumer HD camcorder is a 'win win'.

But the bottom line is that the image from these two cams is not radically different and their similarities are greater than their differences. However to get the same or better picture quality with the advantages of instant scene access and non-linear access in general, is a real plus in my book. Of course editing is another story.

For what its worth, I'm encouraged by the blow up rez charts on CCI for the HF10. It appears from that blow up that Canon has backed off from edge enhancement. I think with these new higher resolution sensors there's less need for it.

I dont mean to quote myself, but can anyone answer how big of a process it is to be able to share video clips with family if I wanted to put it on some media like a dvd? Thanks in advance. Dont want to get in over my head.

If you've installed the included software it's almost a one click process. Sony won't win any awards for their Picture Motion Browser software but one of the things it will do for you is make it easy to burn your videos to disc. Simply connect the camera via USB and let the import happen. Once the import is complete just select the video with the mouse and hit the "Burn to Disc" icon. It's that simple. The software will transcode the AVCHD video to MPEG2 and burn a consumer device compatible DVD, single or dual layer depending on how long your video is. I tested this feature tonight for the first time and it worked perfectly.

If you've installed the included software it's almost a one click process. Sony won't win any awards for their Picture Motion Browser software but one of the things it will do for you is make it easy to burn your videos to disc. Simply connected the camera via USB and let the import happen. Once the import is complete just select the video with the mouse and hit the "Burn to Disc" icon. It's that simple. The software will transcode the AVCHD video to MPEG2 and burn a consumer device compatible DVD, single or dual layer depending on how long your video is. I tested this feature tonight for the first time and it worked perfectly.

Yup. Some of the Sony software is excellent and some of it is really poor. When I connect my SR12 to the computer and launch the "Player for AVCHD", I get nice thumbnails with a date and time for each clip. I can then play the clips smoothly with the software.

But when I launch Picture Motion Browser and capture clips via that program, I never get visible thumbnails nor can I actually play the clip even though I can pull up properties on each clip. I don't know if there's an issue with that piece of the software or if there's something in my installations that's whacky. Yet in that same piece of software, I can trim a clip and that clip WILL be visible and playable. Very weird.

Eric,
I really appreciate your input also, but IMHO you should go easier on Luc. His intentions seems genuine to me. We're supposed to be here to help and learn from each other. Pointing out errors or assumptions from others is part of that, and sometimes we just disagree, but let's keep it constructive. Can't we all just be friends? :)

You meant Ken, right? :)

-eric

I have to agree with Ken... if my SR10 looked as bad as it does in Luc's comparison shots I would RUN back to the store with it... it simply looks amazing on my 60 inch SXRD 1080p set. And the stills i have captured with the sony software don't look nearly as good as watching the playing video, and thats what i bought it for... VIDEO... I have an excellent digital SLR for stills.

just my 2cents

You meant Ken, right? :)

-eric

Nah, he means YOU! :D

If we're talking about resolution the HF10 should be higher then the Sony's due to the 24p/30p modes. Just my 2 cents. It's so stupid though not to include a viewfinder. This is why I just may stick with the HV30.

I have to agree with Ken... if my SR10 looked as bad as it does in Luc's comparison shots I would RUN back to the store with it... it simply looks amazing on my 60 inch SXRD 1080p set. And the stills i have captured with the sony software don't look nearly as good as watching the playing video, and thats what i bought it for... VIDEO... I have an excellent digital SLR for stills.

just my 2cents

Gthompson, does your SR10 also have 5.1 recording?

If we're talking about resolution the HF10 should be higher then the Sony's due to the 24p/30p modes. Just my 2 cents. It's so stupid though not to include a viewfinder. This is why I just may stick with the HV30.

That's assuming all other things are equal with these two different cams...not a sure thing by a long shot. The presence of 24p/30p doesn't guarantee the Canon will have a higher rez than the Sonys. However, comparing the resolution of the HF10/HF100 in its own 60i mode vs its own 24p/30p mode, yes, it should bring about a slightly higher resolution.

Judging from past CCI rez #s though, the differences are usually subtle.

I agree, I just have no idea why they dropped the viewfinder other than expense control. It's such an important 'feature' IMO in bright light. I've yet to see an LCD that does anywhere near as well in bright sunshine as using the normal viewfinder. This is a real issue for me with the new Canons and I'd really have to be wowed by them to give up the viewfinder. I'd be surprised if the disparity between the HF10 and the SR series is great enough to make me ditch the viewfinder. We shall see.

Gthompson, does your SR10 also have 5.1 recording?

Yes it does do 5.1... AFAIK the only differences are the lack of Viewfinder, less Megapix on stills and a smaller CMOS sensor.

If you've installed the included software it's almost a one click process. Sony won't win any awards for their Picture Motion Browser software but one of the things it will do for you is make it easy to burn your videos to disc. Simply connected the camera via USB and let the import happen. Once the import is complete just select the video with the mouse and hit the "Burn to Disc" icon. It's that simple. The software will transcode the AVCHD video to MPEG2 and burn a consumer device compatible DVD, single or dual layer depending on how long your video is. I tested this feature tonight for the first time and it worked perfectly.

Thanks for this info fdisker. DO you think this is faster than going through vegas? or is all the same render time?

Can i post this here??? Youtube???


Well I'll post it and if I shouldn't please tell me and I ll remove


The SR12 face detection working overtime

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g5OxP1R_KsQ

Leaving for Hawaii with SR11 tomorrow. Should have some nice clips to post...

Paul - face detection clip is hilarious...Shot some clips of a seven ft long, highly detailed, radio controlled model sailing ship. The face detection picked out the faces of the 1.5" tall crew figures!

Don't care where the Canon/Sony conversation goes, this cc already seems to be a classic. I can't wait to learn how to even start using Vegas 8. Are the tutorials a good place to start?

Hello. Mike here... long time lurker... first time poster...
I'm not a pro but certainly an enthusiast. Owned a Canon A1 MkII(Hi8); Sony CCD-V5000(Hi8); and DCR-TRV310(D8) in the past.
Just got an SR11 a week ago. It's certainly not perfect but I'm happy with the purchase overall.
But before I proceed with my little review... I'd like to comment on the Canon VS Sony framegrab discussion earlier in this thread. Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't it unfair to compare "frame grabs" between the two because isn't it impossible to get "frame" grab from an SR11 footage that accurately represents what the human eye actually perceives when watching live 60i footage from the SR11? I mean, isn't the supposedly SR11 "FRAME" grab actually just a "FIELD" grab due to the interlaced nature of the SR11 footage? So the SR11 field grab actually only represents half of the horizontal lines/resolution that the human eyes actually perceive when watching 60i footage? The point is, actual live/recorded (moving) footage from an SR11/12 is much much better than the "frame/field" grab suggests.
Anyway, on to my "review" which I will summarize into likes and dislikes...

LIKES
5000K+ gross/ 3800K+ effective video pixels (the extra pixels make at least part of the range of the digital zoom actually useful which effectively increases the 12X optical zoom. ya I know. dig zoom sucks. but not on the first 40 to 50% <rough guess> of the dig zoom range of this baby. Either that or EXMOR/BIONZ is really good at interpolation.)
Highres 1920X480 LCD (easier to manual focus)
Viewfinder! (What can I say? Sometimes, I'm old school. Besides, a camera this small could use additional stability by bracing it against my face when using the VF.)
Flash closer to the lens (although Sony should have placed it in the 12 o'clock position)
5.1 Dolby built-in mike
EXMOR/BIONZ baby!

DISLIKES
No 30P option. (For those who like to brag about their frame grabs <wink> <wink>)
Putting a filter on disables the flash (does anybody know if an HVL-HFL1 hot shoe flash can overcome this?)
Can't find the darn LANC port (where am I supposed to connect the external controller on the VCT-60AV tripod that I've ordered?)
VF eye cup uncomfortable (ordered a NP-FH100 monster battery to *cough* use as a cheekbone "shoulder" stock to further stabilize the recoil of this bad boy.)
Canon beats the crap out of it in low light focusing performance.
No built-in "semi useful" LED light at least to assist in low light auto-focusing.
Where the heck to attach a shoulder strap? (Stole the wrist strap from my kid's Wii controller cause I don't wanna drop this baby.)
Why oh why do they have to use a *mini*-HDMI port? It's not THAT much smaller.
PMB software sucks. If the camera can play separate M2TS files seamlessly, so should the software.
AVCHD forcing me to think about upgrading my computer.(this whole "honey can I buy a new camera..." thing is going to be more expensive that I initially anticipated.)
No more in-camera dissolve transitions.... but that's what post-production is for, right? Oh wait, I don't have Vegas, Ulead VideoStudio, Nero 8 Ultra, etc. yet.... there goes my IRS refund.
Nervous about the longevity of the hard drive. What's the MTBF of this 1.8" toshiba SATA hd anyway? Is it user *cough* replaceable (upgradeable)? Or do I have to rely on (future) 60GB memory stick pro duos after the hd fails? Has anybody tried using one of those microSDHC(cheaper) to MSProDuo adapters on these things?

Other accessories ordered - LRC-SRC "quick draw" holster

You meant Ken, right? :)

Doh! You are correct, sorry about that! Fixed.

Nah, he means YOU! :D

LOL, very funny. :D


Back on topic, I personally will probably be choosing between the SR11 and HF100. I've had too many reliability problems with my existing Canon MiniDV camera, so I'm not doing tape again. I'm anxious to see the SR11/12 review over at CCI. It looks like the HF100 will have a significant price advantage.

The 5.1 audio on the Sony's does seem like a gimmick because the mics are all in the same place. Heck, for all I know there could only be a stereo mic in there and the 5.1 is created via processing. Anyone know the facts on that? Anyway, if you are playing back on a 5.1 sound system, chances are it will have DPL II etc. to create a 5.1 soundfield from 2.0. I wonder how much extra space is required for 5.1 recording compared to 2.0?

Regarding frame grabs, keep in mind that modern displays are progressive scan. Even though 1080i/60 video is interlaced, it is generally deinterlaced and displayed as 60 full frames per sec, right? So if the grabber is smart enough to combine and deinterlace 2 fields, then the grab should represent full resolution. Furthermore, if frame grabbing causes artifacts, how is is that those same artifacts don't appear in the full motion video? Isn't the codec essentially just producing sequential frame grabs during playback? I don't mean to belabor this point, I'm just trying to understand.

Mikeyjunk, good questions about the hard drive. I hope that it is user replaceable. I doubt Sony wants us to be able to do so, but they surprised me by making it possible on the PS3, so who knows. I believe MS Pro Duo cards are technically limited to a max of 32GB, the same as SDHC (short sighted designs by both parties in my opinion). The large built-in storage on the SR11/12 is a nice benefit compared to the HF10/100.

Can i post this here??? Youtube???


Well I'll post it and if I shouldn't please tell me and I ll remove


The SR12 face detection working overtime

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g5OxP1R_KsQ

Paul, funny stuff!!! Your SR12 is really going to get pissed off at you! :D

I'm curious about owner's thoughts on face detection. I had tried it in a mall (same mall I posted a clip from) and I wasn't sure I liked it. You can the exposure and color balance change, but I'm also aware of how the background exposure and color are changing.

When I showed my friend the clips yesterday of my A/B with the SR12 and HV20, I showed him that clip. He liked what face detection did, but I'm not sure I do.

Leaving for Hawaii with SR11 tomorrow. Should have some nice clips to post...

Paul - face detection clip is hilarious...Shot some clips of a seven ft long, highly detailed, radio controlled model sailing ship. The face detection picked out the faces of the 1.5" tall crew figures!

Don't care where the Canon/Sony conversation goes, this cc already seems to be a classic. I can't wait to learn how to even start using Vegas 8. Are the tutorials a good place to start?

Probably so Dan. I'm surely no expert in Vegas and only have the trial version downloaded. I spend all my time in a different editing program, so I'm not sure I'll bother to learn Vegas. I'll probably wait for my program to catch up with AVCHD.

The 5.1 audio on the Sony's does seem like a gimmick because the mics are all in the same place. Heck, for all I know there could only be a stereo mic in there and the 5.1 is created via processing. Anyone know the facts on that? Anyway, if you are playing back on a 5.1 sound system, chances are it will have DPL II etc. to create a 5.1 soundfield from 2.0. I wonder how much extra space is required for 5.1 recording compared to 2.0?

You may have missed my post Spocko, but it's no gimmick at all! Does it work as well as having separate mikes placed in 4 or 5 different places? Of course not, but you CAN absolutely hear the separation. When I first got the cam, I pointed it straight ahead at my friend who began talking constantly. I kept the camera pointed in one direction as he walked in a circle around the cam. When we played it back, we were both amazed as he seemed to be walking around my living room. You could definitely hear his change in direction. The other benefit of this is an ambiance that I've never heard before in any camcorder of any format I've ever owned. The shots I did in N.Y.C. were amazing in terms of the sound and the ambiance of all the traffic. This is by far the best sound I've heard.


Regarding frame grabs, keep in mind that modern displays are progressive scan. Even though 1080i/60 video is interlaced, it is generally deinterlaced and displayed as 60 full frames per sec, right? So if the grabber is smart enough to combine and deinterlace 2 fields, then the grab should represent full resolution. Furthermore, if frame grabbing causes artifacts, how is is that those same artifacts don't appear in the full motion video? Isn't the codec essentially just producing sequential frame grabs during playback? I don't mean to belabor this point, I'm just trying to understand.



I don't believe that's how it works. Every frame grab I've seen has distinctly lower resolution and clarity than the moving video. You just can't use these to determine moving video quality. Anyone that does is going to make a big mistake if they use this approach in choosing a camera. You've already heard from both me and another owner that our moving video is far far sharper than anything that Luc has posted.

We both agreed we'd run back to return this cam if the video looked anything like what he's posted.

Viewfinder! (What can I say? Sometimes, I'm old school. Besides, a camera this small could use additional stability by bracing it against my face when using the VF.)


Mike, nice review. In terms of a viewfinder, there's nothing 'old school' about wanting to clearly see your framing and subject in bright sunlight! That's my main issue with any of these camcorders that have no viewfinder. There is no way that you can critically compose color, focus or exposure with an LCD flip out in bright sunlight. Can you imagine trying to correct an off-color situation or focus issue in bright light with an LCD? The best of the LCD's I've seen are still not as good as a viewfinder. You are also 100% correct about a viewfinder increasing the stability of your videos.

What's frustrating to me is that if their intent is to keep a cam small, adding a viewfinder is not going to increase size all that much. In a pinch, just give me the viewfinder and leave out the flip up feature (as in the Sonys) if you have to. Now if it's cost saving, that's something else.

The trend is disappointing to say the least.

Re: 5.1 on the Sonys

This DOES work. I noticed it right away when playing back some clips I took indoors. Our Kitchen is behind our living room, and my wife was cleaning in there while I was filming my son in the front part of the room. When I played back the recording all the noises my wife was making while cleaning were coming out of my Back Right and Back left speakers while my sons sounds were coming from the front speakers.

Gthompson, it is amazing isn't it? I don't know how they get that separation with the mikes bunched together like that, but somehow they do.