Hi All,

I'm looking for the 'best' camcorder that does 1080p recording... I'm flexible on price and would be interested in something that is essentially no more than $3K and would love to know what brands/model numbers to narrow it down to...

Thank-you,

Chris

24p? 30p? 60p? I'm not aware of any supporting 60p at that price range right now, so I gather you're looking for 24p or 30p?

Also, please define "best". Are you looking for best PQ overall? Sound? Other features? Manual control? Handling? Size?

Below $1000, you're looking at consumer camcorders, like the Canon HV30 and HF10 (both support 24p and 30p). Otherwise, you have to look at over $2k for prosumer/low-end pro, like the Canon XH A1 and the Sony HVR-HD1000U and HDR-FX7 (Panasonic also has a few models available in that price range).

The XH A1 is probably going to give you the best PQ, but it's blowing your budget by at the least $100, and it's certainly not a point-n-shoot camcorder. :)

If you're looking for something compact, the HV30 and HF10 are pretty nice in their respective markets.

I'm not an expert in camcorders, so I meant 'best' in the sense of someone who knows these products well and has already done the research. I don't emphasize best in any particular category, only best overal and which you would buy given the money...

I suppose 1080p 30 will have to do... unless you suggest waiting for another 6 months? Does 1080p30 appear choppy at all on heavy motion? I assume you could always switch to 1080i60, but is not there a kell factor which reduces apparent resoution on interlaced imaging anyway?

It sounds as though you lean toward Canon products... I have no preference but it is good to know what to stay away from also...

I'll have to compare the the HV30, HF10, and XH A1...

Essentially I'm just looking for advice from how you would spend the money or not spend the money given the usual state of high rate of continuing improvements with 'camcorders'... $3750.00 is not going to break the bank if there is something worthy of that purchase... At the same time, if there is a gread product at $1100.00 that has 95% of the quality and is a solid performer, I probably wouldn't mind going with that option either...

I guess I could always put a buzzer under my sofa to add sensaround

I guess I could always put a buzzer under my sofa to add sensaround

The more explosions, the better.

There is also an HF-10, HF100.... I'm trying to figure out all the differences...

From what I can tell, this appears to be the best current consumer model:

Sony HDR-SR12 10MP 120GB

It takes 10MP still images and has a 120 GB hard drive...


Disk High Definition Camcorder

High Definition
Hard Drive Camcorder


What's in the Box?
Power Adapter/Charger
Rechargeable Battery
Remote Control
Handycam Station
A/V Cable, USB Cable
CD-ROM & Software



*New for 2008
Sony HDR-SR12 120gb Hard Disk Drive High Definition Camcorder
High Definition, Super SteadyShot image stabilization, 12x optical zoom, 1/3-inch ClearVid CMOS , 3.2" high resolution Touch Screen. stereo sound.

Rated 4 1/2 out of 5 stars by owner reviews.
(Click for Reviews)


**New for 2008** The latest harddrive based high definition camcorder from Sony. The optical zoom gets bumped up to 12x, and still images go from 6 to 10 megapixels. Also new is a larger high resolution 3.2 inch screen with 921,000 pixel resolution (up from 211,000 pixels). Another new feature for 2008 is the Bionz image processor which improves the speed and quality, as well as improving battery life. The SR12 uses the AVCHD compression format and records to its huge internal 120gb hard disk. No tapes to buy. Professional Carl Zeiss lens. Super Steadyshot 12x optical image stabilization. Headphone and microphone input.

Can hookup to an HDTV through component or HDMI jacks on the included Handycam Station. Can record in Dolby Digital 5.1-channel surround sound. Active Interface Shoe (to easily add accessories). (Harddrive holds 14 - 44 hours of high definition video).

Canon HV30 High Definition 1080i MiniDV Camcorder

Optical Image Stabilization
High Definition Camcorder


What's in the Box?
Compact Power Adapter
Rechargeable Battery
Wireless Controller
Component Video Cable
Stereo Cable, USB Cable
PC/MAC CD-ROM & Software



*New for 2008
Canon HV30 High Definition MiniDV Camcorder
High Definition, Optical image stabilization, 10x optical zoom, 1/2.7 inch CMOS sensor , 2.7" Touch Screen, 24p cinema mode, 30p mode. stereo sound. HDMI, microphone jack.

Rated 4 1/2 out of 5 stars by owner reviews.
(Click for Reviews)


*New for 2008. The Canon HV30 is the top of the line Canon consumer camcorder. The HV30 has received some of the highest professional ratings we have seen for a consumer camcorder in 2008. The HV30 is the replacement model to the highly rated HV20. Included are advanced features such as optical image stabilization, a large 1/2.7 inch CMOS imager (better for low light), external headphone and microphone terminal, and is the lowest cost camcorder with a true 24p Cinema mode. Also new for 2008 is a 30p mode. The HV30 records to MiniDV tape using HDV compression. Still pictures up to 3.1 megapixels. Built in flash and movie light.

This model has both component and HDMI connectors for best quality when hooking this camcorder directly to an HDTV. Advanced Accessory Shoe.

Dimensions: 3.5" x 3.2" x 5.4" (1.2 lbs. w/o battery).

Essentially the Sony seems better in every way, including the larger CMOS which should produce better low light images... Has a nice Zeiss lens also...

Opinions?

I did the reading of reviews on Amazon... One person still liked the Canon better... but the main reason was the lack of 1080p24 and 1080p 30 recording on the Sony... I thought the new Sony Did that? I'll have to check again....

I have a feeling that you are more a "consumer" than a "prosumer". Things like megapixell on still pictures are not relevant unless you are a typical consumer who wants to shoot birthday parties and vacations. The sony SR12 and the Canon HV30/HF10/100 are very good consumer cameras. Based on my own experience, a light , small camera is a much better choice unless you really want to make movies. My prosumer camera was sold on Ebay for this reason. Too heavy, too bulk.

Botton line : You didn't say what you intend to do with the camera but unless you want to produce an Indy film, stay away of the 3K cameras. If you areally serious about film making you probably need a 8K camera instead, anyway.

Sergio

Hmmm... The Canon HF100 has a 3.2 inch CMOS...

Perhaps I should just go with the HF100 which also does 1080p24 and 1080p30....

I'm just not sure about the Sony model... but it has many nicer features as well

Hey Sergio,

I agree that the middle of the road options are often not good... The HF100 seems to be the best quality Canon currently... seems to have better features than the HV30....?

I'm mostly concerned about how this camera will perform in terms of capturing motion, not to mention home filming in the ummmm... bedroom. Hey, I'm still a professional!! That is just one concern!!!

Hmmm... The Canon HF100 has a 3.2 inch CMOS.
You wish. It will take a helluva "CMOS enhancement" to grow a sensor that large.

Perhaps I should just go with the HF100 which also does 1080p24 and 1080p30.
I would stay with 60i for smoother motion, this is what your viewers will be looking for.

I'm mostly concerned about how this camera will perform in terms of capturing motion, not to mention home filming in the ummmm... bedroom. Hey, I'm still a professional!
They use all sorts of crappy cameras in porn, so either the HV or HF will work fine for you. I would prefer the HF as it is silent and it is smaller.

Here is a good review:

I have a one year old HV20 and a 2 month old HF100. First and foremost, I care about video quality, but convenience is also important.

Each year, we go to the Fraser Valley in Colorado - an area surrounded by pine-forest covered peaks. Last year, we took a ton of footage with the HV20. Did the same this year with the HF-100. Three fundamental things about the video quality strike me in comparing similair footage.

1 - the HV20, given any movement at all, still has a slightly better ability to resolve fine detail. In bright indoor shots and in in reasonably but not overly detailed outdoor shots, not sure I can tell the difference. However, the moment I have a backdrop with lots of pine trees on distant hills, there is a very noticable difference. The HV20 simply seems to resolve a lot more of the distant pine detail. The HV20 did (and does) create a "wow" factor with those kind of shots. The HF100 does not. The 100 is not bad, but I lose the ability to marvel at the distant detail. Of course, thousands of pines mean millions of needles. That's a lot of detail. And my camera is never completely still in real life - even if only slowly zooming or panning (or if there is some movement in the subject/s). This is not a small quality difference. (I should note I have a 65" 1080p projector - smaller screens may not reveal such a big difference).

2 - Movement is more fluid with the HV20. With the HF100, I noticed that I found even reasonably slow pans bothersome - there was blur and greater "blockiness" to the scenery. The HV20, on the other hand, seems both more fluid and to present more of a solid image as I pan - really allowing my eyes to track the scenery during a pan.

3 - Medium to low light shots are dramatically better on the HF100. With the HV20, I tried to do all kinds of things to compensate any time it was evening in doors (even with a few hundred lux of light) or nearing twilight outdoors. The colors seemed overly reddish on the full auto settings, the image got noisy, etc. I used cineamode to try and offset both to some reasonable effect. By comparison, I have found I never need to take the HF100 out of the "Easy mode" and the quality is far better than what I got with all my fiddling on the HV20. (I should note I do all my filming in 60i - so bear that in mind). This is no small quality difference. It's huge.


In the end, for video quality, I'm faced with having to let go of the occasional "wow" factor in higly detailed (and real world - with movement) shots for the much greater quality consistancy under varying lighting conditions. That's not an easy trade-off, but probably tips the scales for me to the HF-100.

If you are a hobbyist or such who can always assure ample lighting - the HV20 probably still reigns for best quality.


EDITING AND CONVENIENCE - another matter entirely. If you want to do a lot of post work, there's still no comparing the tools available. I do not do a lot of post work. I was pleasantly suprised by the packaged (Pixela) software. It's not great, but for scene deletions, trims and rearrangements, it works while doing smart-rendering, which is a big deal for time and quality. So that suggests the HF100 for me.

For distribution, the jury is still out, but it looks like AVCHD will win out. There is some suggestion that Hi-Rez MPEG2 (HDV) can be natively encoded to Blu-Ray disks. I haven't tried that. But I can say that that the AVCHD disks created on DVD from the HF100 play very well on the Play station 3 and several other Blu-ray players I've tried them on. All my connections are via HDMI - and there is no perceptible quality loss to me vs. hooking up the camcorder straight. That's promising.

INTERESTING NOTE
I took my Colorado HV20 footage and encoded to AVCHD (17Mb/s). I used Pinnacle Studio 11 - probably not the best encoder. But the important point is that, even though TWICE compressed with the re-encoding, the resulting footage was, in general, better than the AVCHD from the HF-100 for the highly detailed nature scenes described in point 1. That's really surprising and is good news for the standard. It suggests any quality trade-offs I'm seeing today may be more a function of processor limitations (doing it all in real time) vs. the protocol(s).

I'm still struggling, but in the end, I think the more consistant quality with low light and the distribution convenience probably will make me shift to the HF-100 and AVCHD.

For what it's worth.

16 of 18 people found the following review helpful:
It may be Class 6, but it's still slow, May 13, 2008
By Roger P "Roger"

I bought this Transcend 16GB memory card to use in a Canon HF100 camcorder. I think Amazon even recommended the pair. And the price was right.

Unfortunately, this card is slow. When I turn on my Canon camcorder, I have to stare at a message saying "READING THE CARD" for 10-15 seconds before I can take a picture. The wait to take a movie is better, but still 4-5 seconds.

I tried my old 2GB Sandisk Extreme III card, and it is at least TWICE AS FAST, so I may have to send this Transcend back. Waiting 3-4 seconds is OK, but 10-15 is awful. I'm missing shots. I also need to see if the Transcend can keep up with 17 Mbps video mode. It claims to be "Class 6" speed, but maybe it's slow at random accesses?


Hmmmmm....

These HD camcorders still need more work...

The new Sony has a 120 GB hard drive and the reviews say it is totaly silent...

I'm still flip-flopping....

I have a Canon HF-100.

Regarding the memory issue, I have a 8GB Class 6 Transcend and it works flawlessly. Maybe the other person was using a Class 2 card, or the memory was faulty.

From what I've heard you can go safely with either Sony HDR-CX12 or Canon HF-100.

I think Canon does a better job in low light condition and that's why I prefer that one. The key to this is the combination of Cinema Mode (which will reduce the grain to a minimun) and the 24p framerate.

Let's say that Cinema Mode is a software advantage and 24p advantage is due to each frame taking 1/24 of a second. Since the frame takes more than twice being captured the camera can capture twice the light, improving the recording.

The best think is that this combination is better than actually using night mode. Since the ghost/motion-blur effect is less evident.

Meanwhile Sony have night-shot, which uses infrared light to let you record in complete darkness, but I don't really like this mode because you can only see monocromatic image while using it (green tones or gray tones).

I ended up getting the Canon HF-100. I wasn't concerned about the price, but all things being equal, I agree that low light performance combined with lowwer price tipped me towards the Canon...

I ordered a battery, batterry charger, and am looking for a tripod.

I think you have to get two heads for best performance, one for camcorder (video with fluid), and one for Nikon D300

Anyone know a good tripod? I was thinking of getting this:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B00026CAZ0******ord_cart_shr?%5Fencoding=UTF8&m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&v=glance