For those of you looking for a really small HD camcorder, I urge you to look at the Canon HV10 if you were thinking only Sony.

The HV10 is the REAL DEAL! My buddy and I put it through its paces with the HC1. I was first shocked at the quality of m2t HV10 clips I downloaded from a site in Japan. These clips were shot using a Canon HV10. I put them in my Edius Pro editing program and then output them back to tape. From there I played it on my Sony HDV camcorder output to my 50" Fujitsu plasma. The end result was as if the guy in Japan had loaned me his HV10 tape. The colors were just gorgeous (better than the HC1 IMO), the picture was cleaner and sharper and we both agreed, it could even give the FX1 a run for its money.

The H10 produces a cleaner more polished picture than the HC1/HC3. My buddy felt it look exactly like a professional cam's picture: Smooth, detailed, polished with no discernable noise in any kind of decent lighting and just utterly transparent. I really believe the full-rez, 1920X1080 chip, are part of the solution! Additionally the chip is larger than either of the Sony cams. In fact, this is the first application of a full-rez chip in a consumer camcorder.

When we put the HC1 clips on back to back, you could definitely see a more 3D effect. It was just like looking through a window! I know I've felt that with both the HC1 and HC3 at times, but when you see the difference, it's like the next level up in picture quality. The picture is just so amazingly clean and quiet! It very much reminds me of the difference between the better Canon digital cameras and the Sonys. The Canons I've found produce a more polished picture with better exposure, less noise and better colors. It's the same difference between the Canon H10 and the HC1/HC3. It's almost impossible to believe this tiny thing is putting out this kind of video!

Low light has very little grain in the tests I've done thus far (it's raining in N.Y. today, so I got to shoot a bit in somewhat dark rooms). I can definitely see the HC1 has more low-light noise than the H10. Keep in mind I haven't begun to explore the manual controls yet. I haven't really done much in the way of A/Bs on the audio front, but initial audio sounds decent, but probably more typical of the Sony cams. Didn't hear much of a differernce between the HC1 and the HV10.

To me the only downside is the ergonomics. I'm not a big fan of upright designs by any company, but with a picture like this I'll learn to love it.

So this is a keeper. I can't tell you how impressed I am with this cam. I honestly think it gives the FX1 a run for its money (my buddy who had that cam too, agrees). He was amazed at the consistency from shot to shot, lighting change to lighting change. The autofocu BLOWS AWAY the Sony cams. It just doesn't miss, even in low-light! Canon has a winner on their hands....its been a long time since I've owned a Canon video camera (the last one was a Hi8 model).

Good info Ken. I've been looking for a review of this camcorder. It doesn't help that I just bought a HC3 a few months ago. I really like the HC3, but it is never ending in this picture quality obsession we have here on AVS:) Guess I'll have to try one out, once I save up the dough.

Man....I own numerous DV camcorders....and have been waiting to hear about the Canon.

My wife ain't gonna like this at all.....:)

My wife actually likes this unit....she calls it 'cutie'. She knows I'll be Ebaying the HC1, so it won't be a big dollar investment in the end.

I believe the same clips you got are from this website (http://videosan.web.fc2.com/HV10docs/index.html) . I downloaded the light rail/train clips and they look amazingly good.

BTW, the MyHD PCI tuner card and HD MediaBox are hardware devices that can play these files (with a simple renaming from .m2t to .ts or .tp) to HDTV displays without needing to play them through an HDV camcorder or outputting them from a graphics card (which isn't as accurate as playing through dedicated MPEG-2 devices). I use both devices to play back HD recorded files and HDV videos captured from tape (like the HV10 video files).

Ken, (or should I say Kenny7 :) ),

I happened into Best Buy on Saturday to ask when they might get the HV10 in and to my surprise it was already there! I looked at it for a bit and headed on home. Of course I couldn't resist so I grabbed my HC3 and a blank tape and headed right back.

I asked if I could tape a little demo footage to compare with the HC3 and they were nice enough to unbolt the HV from it's anti-theft cable/bracket so I could load my tape. I shot a couple minutes of various areas of the store I could see from the counter and then shot the same views right after with the HC3. Went home and watched the clips on my Sony HD CRT via component and came to basically the same conclusion as you.

I replayed the clip over and over looking at different things. The biggest diff IMO is the cleanness of the HV10 images. The HC3 is pretty noisy particularly when zoomed in. It gives a lot of "twitter" on edges which almost appear to be flashing at times. The HV10 still produces a bit of the same but MUCH less. It's images are really pretty solid, and definitely a bit sharper. Still not HDNet sharp, but a definite step in the right direction. I thought the colors were also more natural and true to life as well. Also, the optical image stabilization is outstanding.

Thought I'd check AVS this morning to see if anybody had checked one out yet and found your thread. I'm now planning on selling my HC3 and will pick up the HV10 too. For me the smaller the better because I use my cam for shooting backpacking video. My previous cam before the HC3 was an Canon Optura 300 which is the same upright form factor and essentially the same size and weight as the HV10. Now I can have compact size/weight AND great PQ. I think the HC3 is a nice little cam that has great ergonomics/handling, but from the beginning I felt it was a bit too soft and artifacty.


ron

The footage I downloaded looked good but not that much better than my HC1. I'm waiting to check out the Panasonic 3-CCD camera due this fall. I'm way overdue for a 3-CCD camera having owned a number of single CCD cameras. :)

How is the microphone working out on the HV10? That was a big concern as there is no hotshoe or mic jack for an external microphone.

Can HV10 material be firewired to a JVC DVHS unit?

If the answer is yes....I'm a goner!

No, none of HDV can be 'officially' dubbed to DVHS, unless you use a mits deck. Or something non-JVC but thats the only thing I tested with.

No, none of HDV can be 'officially' dubbed to DVHS, unless you use a mits deck. Or something non-JVC but thats the only thing I tested with.

So it could be dubbed to DVHS with a Mits....does the Mits recorded tape playback in a JVC unit?

I believe the same clips you got are from this website (http://videosan.web.fc2.com/HV10docs/index.html) . I downloaded the light rail/train clips and they look amazingly good.



Tony, yes, those are indeed the clips.

Ken, (or should I say Kenny7 :) ),

I happened into Best Buy on Saturday to ask when they might get the HV10 in and to my surprise it was already there! I looked at it for a bit and headed on home. Of course I couldn't resist so I grabbed my HC3 and a blank tape and headed right back.

I asked if I could tape a little demo footage to compare with the HC3 and they were nice enough to unbolt the HV from it's anti-theft cable/bracket so I could load my tape. I shot a couple minutes of various areas of the store I could see from the counter and then shot the same views right after with the HC3. Went home and watched the clips on my Sony HD CRT via component and came to basically the same conclusion as you.

I replayed the clip over and over looking at different things. The biggest diff IMO is the cleanness of the HV10 images. The HC3 is pretty noisy particularly when zoomed in. It gives a lot of "twitter" on edges which almost appear to be flashing at times. The HV10 still produces a bit of the same but MUCH less. It's images are really pretty solid, and definitely a bit sharper. Still not HDNet sharp, but a definite step in the right direction. I thought the colors were also more natural and true to life as well. Also, the optical image stabilization is outstanding.

Thought I'd check AVS this morning to see if anybody had checked one out yet and found your thread. I'm now planning on selling my HC3 and will pick up the HV10 too. For me the smaller the better because I use my cam for shooting backpacking video. My previous cam before the HC3 was an Canon Optura 300 which is the same upright form factor and essentially the same size and weight as the HV10. Now I can have compact size/weight AND great PQ. I think the HC3 is a nice little cam that has great ergonomics/handling, but from the beginning I felt it was a bit too soft and artifacty.


ron

Ron, yes, those were exactly my observations. The cleanliness of the picture is really very professional and something you don't see in consumer cams, HDV or not.

I took a clip down my block with plenty of trees and leaves. With the Sony quite a bit of the detail in the leaves were obscured due to the in-camera sharpening and the resulting 'twitter' as you described it. You are dead-on in saying that the Canon isn't devoid of this twitter, but there is much much less. With the Canon, the detail on those leaves was clearly visible.

A review on Camcorder Info indicated that the HV10's picture was essentially identical to the professional Canon HDV cameras that were just released. The major difference was that the pro cameras were much better in low-light. That same review knocked the HV10 for low-light, but I truly didn't see it as being any worse than the Sony (they did). In fact, in videos I took in my house at night (lighting on), I found the colors far superior to the Sony AND the autofocus was 100%. I couldn't say that for the Sony.

The footage I downloaded looked good but not that much better than my HC1. I'm waiting to check out the Panasonic 3-CCD camera due this fall. I'm way overdue for a 3-CCD camera having owned a number of single CCD cameras. :)

How is the microphone working out on the HV10? That was a big concern as there is no hotshoe or mic jack for an external microphone.

Brian, I'd say the audio was on par with the Sonys. Not as good as 3-chip units that have the mike outboard of the camera itself, but certainly passable. I really believe for the intended purpose of most people, the lack of mike inputs, XLR and hot shoe is not a deal break. For me this is a great knockaround HD cam that happens to produce superb images.

So it could be dubbed to DVHS with a Mits....does the Mits recorded tape playback in a JVC unit?

From what others have said in other threads, yes.

HDV is authored for the HD-DVD format easily enough on single or dual layer disks, but I digress.

For the price I'm tempted but I'm wary of the hype that says it's as good as the Canon pro HDV, currently the XL-H1.

Canon's reputation with CMOS sensors in the DSLR world is stellar, yet the bayer filter in front of a camcorder sensor could be root cause for twitter. notably absent on a 3 chipper pro. And I'm wondering just what the true output resolution is considering the best pro grade HDV cams are only 1440 x 1080 sensors x3. The observation that it's giving the Sony FX1 a run for it's money doesn't quite add up either, since it's derided unfairly perhaps, but derided still for it's 960 x 1080 x3 CCDs. I would hope the HV10 could have better potential for detail than that. The Sony FX1/Z1U are noted for best in class focusing, perhaps the comment to the contrary is reflecting the HC1/HC3 family.

Tom, I had an FX1 for a brief time before selling it. Trust me when I tell you the autofocus on the HV10 not only bests the FX1, but bests any camcorder I've ever owned in any format. Canon's 'instant' autofocus really really works. Go to the store and try one and see if it's marketing hype or for real....I think you'll find it's for real.

The true 1920X1080 sensor in the HV10 appears to account for a much higher final measured resolution than the Sony camcorders. Canon is really on to something and it makes me want to see the Canon HDV pro cams. To me the real asset of the Canon picture is its stellar signal to noise ratio....there is just so little noise in the picture, especially when compared to anything close to its price range.

Only if it had HDMI, then I'd consider getting that to use with realtime recording with that new intensity HDMI capture board... Maybe next version!

Only if it had HDMI, then I'd consider getting that to use with realtime recording with that new intensity HDMI capture board... Maybe next version!

I'd love for this unit to have had HDMI, but considering the picture is so fantastic via component, it's not that big a deal. Besides, I will probably wind up with a larger HDV camcorder and be able to use that unit as an HDMI playback deck for any recordings made with the HV10. Whatever recordings you make today with an HV10 can be played tomorrow or next week on a deck with HDMI output. Certainly not the cheapest alternative, but it not only gives you HDMI output, but it also takes the wear off of a tiny camcorder.

Yea, thing is though, if it had HDMI, it would output raw uncompressed video from the great 1920x1080 sensor, to be processed with the HDMI capture board, as opposed to editing 25mbps HDV which has been scaled down to 1440x1080. Thats all, I'm not knocking it, but there's no affordable analog component capture kit which does 1920x1080.

According to camcorderinfo.com, the measured resolution is about 636x691 lines, really good and about on par with the FX1, better than HC1/HC3 but pretty far behind the XL-H1 at 800 x 800 lines with a lower native resolution, but 3 panels...

I want to see the new Canon HDV pro cams as well.

Timecop, I'm not sure if you used HDMI, that you'd still get full 1920X1080 resolution. It may well be that even at an HDMI output, the signal might still be processed and show the HDV resolution of 1440X1080....but who knows?

its a little baffling to me given all the advantages of HV10 why camcorderinfo.com gave a slight edge to HC3 in recommending one of the two. To me the biggest concerns with HV10 are low light and still performance because lot of us do use it indoors half of the time and take still photos with it too.

A review on Camcorder Info indicated that the HV10's picture was essentially identical to the professional Canon HDV cameras that were just released. The major difference was that the pro cameras were much better in low-light. That same review knocked the HV10 for low-light, but I truly didn't see it as being any worse than the Sony (they did). In fact, in videos I took in my house at night (lighting on), I found the colors far superior to the Sony AND the autofocus was 100%. I couldn't say that for the Sony.its a little baffling to me given all the advantages of HV10 why camcorderinfo.com gave a slight edge to HC3 in recommending one of the two. To me the biggest concerns with HV10 are low light and still performance because lot of us do use it indoors half of the time and take still photos with it too.I have found the CCI reviews of both the HC3 and HV10 a little mystifying myself...

As far as their contention that the HV10 was much worse than the HC3 in low light I just didn't see it. When I shot the video in BB I made a point to shoot some footage up into the rafters in a dark corner of the roof area and they both showed a lot of gain grain and reduced color output. I still thought the HVB10 showed more accurate color between the two there though.

Their assertion that the HV10 looked "softer" in brighter light really kind of blew me away. I watched my clips over and over (even in slow mo) and at no point what-so-ever did the HC3 look sharper to my eyes. To me the HV10 was always at least as sharp and the large majority of the time looked a level better. I paused many times and often distant text on signs was clearly more legible with the HV10. Watching in slo mo really points out the fact that both cams take a pretty big hit in ultimate clarity when zoomed out with even small movement of the camera. The OIS seemed to provide a distinct advantage there.


ron

Ron and Godobe, this wouldn't be the first time that CCI has released contradictory reviews. Their reviews are often very strange.

Ron and Godobe, this wouldn't be the first time that CCI has released contradictory reviews. Their reviews are often very strange.

I think I'm in the market for this new camera HV-10 from Canon now that I made the jump to my first DLP from Samsung, the LED model, if the picture quality is as you describe it, it should be stunning in the 5679 LED from Samsung.
Can you tell me how long is the Component cable that comes with the camera??
If I have a DVD recorder with a front DV input, can I record directly to DVD ??
My last camcorder was the original Canon Optura (1998) version.
This new HD camera will be a big jump for me.
Thanks,
:D

Luidoly, I believe the component cable is about 6' long. You can always get a shorter or longer cable with no trouble.

I see no reason why you couldn't burn directly to a DVD, but I believe you would have to downconvert to regular SD resolution (mini-DV).

As a sidenote, I just returned from Vegas where I brought the HV10. I was particularly interested in how it did in some lowlight areas the HC1 did not do well in last year when I was there. I went to the same spots where my HC1 had shown quite a bit of grain (some of the poorly lit mall areas in the hotels) and reshot those scenes with the HV10. I found, contrary to what the review said, the HV10 performed better than the HC1. The color, sharpness and focus were better than the same shots from the HC1 and it did this with less video noise. This is not to say the HV10 image was pristine under those conditions, it wasn't, but I found it was better than the HC1. The autofocus on this thing is truly amazing.

I am really considering this HD camcorder. I have all pro Canon DSLR camera equipment and have been happy with that. I just can not find any local Tampa store that have this camcorder yet. I found it on line from places at very reduced prices though but I am not much of a internet shopper with products like this. Any ideas? Also would I be able to download the HD video onto a HD DVD and play it in a HD DVD player? How would I go about this?
thanks, Mike

Mike, I know someone posted how to burn HDV to a DVD, but I don't recall where. I tried it and it didn't work for me, but I know other people did get it to work. As far as availability, I thought either BB or Circuit City was carrying it.

Hi Ken, BB does not have it until mid October. CC say's it is coming anyday now. However both places are selling at full retail price. Like everyone else I am looking for a better deal.

Ken, have you tried using the HV10 footage output from the HC3 using the HDMI? Or burned the HV10 HD footage to DVD using Ulead and Nero, then playing on a HD-DVD player using the HDMI? I know you have been a great source of info, on these HDV cams, here on the forum. You decided awhile back that you thought the HC3 was slightly better than the HC1. You really liked the HC3. Is the Canon HV10 alot better than the HC3? Could you give us an idea percentage wise, how much better you feel the HV10 is over the HC3?

Blasst, I actually only have the HC1 now. What happened was my Sony TRV900 died and I used that as a backup to my VX2000. For a backup camera I needed mike inputs which the HC3 didn't have (unless you went with Sony's proprietary mikes). So I sold my HC3 and bought the HC1 again....life is strange. So unfortunately I can't play the HV10 footage via HDMI. I could do it via my JVC D-Theater deck (firewire out of the HV10 in to the firewire input of the JVC and out via HDMI of the JVC). Unfortunately, although it adds additional sharpness inherent in the HDMI connection, it also somewhat disturbs the light/dark ratios from the camera. I don't know why it happens, but the JVC does something in the conversion of firewire to HDMI. I would think it shouldn't, but it does. The manifestation is that some brighter areas of the video tend to get very slightly blown out. You have to look for it, but once you see it, it becomes annoying. So I go component.

Comparing the HV10 to the HC1 and HC3, the HV10 simply has a lower noise floor. The video this thing produces more closely resembles professional, low-noise, cameras. It's really amazing how noise free the video is. The higher rez chip (full 1920X1080) also contributes to a greater resolution on tape even though the HDV format only goes out to 1440X1080. The Sonys use in-camera sharpening as Sony does on their digital still cameras. The Canons don't and this contributes to a quieter, more natural looking picture. Looking at the Sony on its own you might not see it, but when you compare the Canon to the Sony, you just say "ah, that's more natural looking without any artifacts".

I've also found the indoor quality is better than either the HC1 or HC3. This weekend I compared some HV10 footage I shot in my house at night to footage I shot with the FX1 (which I sold....too big). The HV10 actually had superior color to the FX1 with those shots! Hard to believe but true. Would the HV10 be superior to the FX1 under all conditions? Probably not, but I'd bet it would beat it or match it in many many scenes.

The autofocus on the HV10 is by far the best I've ever experienced on any camera. Absolutely no comparison. It seems to never miss! They promote this feature as 'instant autofocus' and it's one of those rare times where the hype matches the reality.

The other thing I really appreciate is the zoom. If you've noticed the HC1/HC3's slowest zoom speed isn't that slow. On larger cams I've been used to a nice slow zoom if so desired. The HV10 brings that feature back with a very slow, professional-like zoom. It's speed range is from very slow to very fast....very very nice.

There's only one thing I don't like about the camera, and that's the ergonomics. I've just never been a fan of upright designs and the Canon has the same drawbacks in that respect. But every time I see the video I know it's worth getting used to the ergonomics.

How much better? Tough to say and it really depends upon how much of a videophile you are. Some see slight to moderate improvements and others don't. When I sum up all the improvements I mentioned (resolution, low video noise, zoom speeds, autofocus and what I feel is better low-light) the net result IMO is about 25%-35%. Obviously Blasst this is highly subjective and YMMV. But one thing is for sure, Canon has created a hell of an HDV camera here....especially in their first effort! :)

Ken, A big thanks for taking the time to give a detailed report on the HV10. I think what I will do is take my HC3 into a store like another forum member did, and film with both cameras using the same tape. Take that footage home and have a look see:). Samys Camera here in So.Cal. has a demo from Canon on a laptop showing footage from both cameras. Clearly they would not show their camera to be inferior. Judging by that footage the HV10 does do a better job in showing a cleaner, crisper, picture. I have to say that my HC3 has taken some great footage this last summer. Putting that image up on a 100" screen has been fantastic!

Ken, thanks for all the reports and Blasst, I can't wait to hear what you think. I plan on getting the Canon sometime in mid-October. One Sony that I have my eye on is the HDR-UX1. It shot to mini-dvd but has 5.1 digital audio. Have any of you looked into this particular Sony to see how well it does the 5.1 audio and the HD picture?

mdrums, keep in mind that the MiniDVD version is LOWER bitrate than the HDD version (by about 4mbps), therefore you will get even more compression artifacts and less quality.

I can't say about its 5.1 capability, but there's only so much you can expect from a body-mounted microphone (including picking up the dvd mechanism noise).

Ken, A big thanks for taking the time to give a detailed report on the HV10. I think what I will do is take my HC3 into a store like another forum member did, and film with both cameras using the same tape. Take that footage home and have a look see:). Samys Camera here in So.Cal. has a demo from Canon on a laptop showing footage from both cameras. Clearly they would not show their camera to be inferior. Judging by that footage the HV10 does do a better job in showing a cleaner, crisper, picture. I have to say that my HC3 has taken some great footage this last summer. Putting that image up on a 100" screen has been fantastic!

I can't stand watching HD clips from my HC3 on a 120 screen. It just gives headache (motion sickness maybe?). The feature I most care about in HV10 would be its much touted optical stablizer. Does that eliminate the shakiness of the HD video?

Ken, A big thanks for taking the time to give a detailed report on the HV10. I think what I will do is take my HC3 into a store like another forum member did, and film with both cameras using the same tape. Take that footage home and have a look see:). Samys Camera here in So.Cal. has a demo from Canon on a laptop showing footage from both cameras. Clearly they would not show their camera to be inferior. Judging by that footage the HV10 does do a better job in showing a cleaner, crisper, picture. I have to say that my HC3 has taken some great footage this last summer. Putting that image up on a 100" screen has been fantastic!

Blasst, that's the best way to make the call yourself. I didn't have that luxury when I bought mine since they weren't yet in the stores. I downloaded a bunch of HV10 clips from a Japaneese site and then put it back on tape. My result was as if I had shot the clips myself and I was then able to play it on my plasma. I was sufficiently wowed to buy the unit knowing I could return it if it didn't pan out. Fortunately it did. When I viewed the clips with a friend, believe it or not our biggest concern was 'did the HV10 really take those clips'? :)

I can't stand watching HD clips from my HC3 on a 120 screen. It just gives headache (motion sickness maybe?). The feature I most care about in HV10 would be its much touted optical stablizer. Does that eliminate the shakiness of the HD video?

Godobe, yes it does do a better job than the HC1/HC3's electronic stabilization. But as with any tiny camera, it's still harder to hold steady than a larger camera. But with that said, I was surprised at how steady I was able to hold it at full telephoto. My last day in Vegas was windy and my telephoto shots became shaky, so ambient weather conditions definitely play a role.

[QUOTE=
How much better? Tough to say and it really depends upon how much of a videophile you are. Some see slight to moderate improvements and others don't. When I sum up all the improvements I mentioned (resolution, low video noise, zoom speeds, autofocus and what I feel is better low-light) the net result IMO is about 25%-35%. Obviously Blasst this is highly subjective and YMMV. But one thing is for sure, Canon has created a hell of an HDV camera here....especially in their first effort! :)[/QUOTE]

Ken: that is the most unbiased and down to earth report that I have seen of the HV-10, especially from someone that has experience HD recording with other brand cameras.
Being Knowlegeable of Canon optics via their Digital Photo Cameras, I beleive what you are saying.
Couple of stupid questions, since I'am already sold on this camera.
Can you burn DVDs from HDV tapes from the HV-10, and get same PQ????
Can you use any outboard or additional batterry pack to increase recording times???
I have heard of the BP-15, I don't even know what that is, I'm assuming is an outboard battery pack.
Thank You
:D

I can't stand watching HD clips from my HC3 on a 120 screen. It just gives headache (motion sickness maybe?). The feature I most care about in HV10 would be its much touted optical stablizer. Does that eliminate the shakiness of the HD video?
Are you using a tripod GodobeHD? Rarely does my HC3 come off the tripod. When I watch my old videos from my VHS-C and DV cameras, I make it about 10 minutes, and then I feel like I"m carsick. My filming ability was pathetic. It's only been a couple of years since I started using a monopod with the DV camera, and then a tripod with the HC3. It makes a world of difference! I've really concentrated on not being so jerky with superquick pans and zooms.

Ken: that is the most unbiased and down to earth report that I have seen of the HV-10, especially from someone that has experience HD recording with other brand cameras.
Being Knowlegeable of Canon optics via their Digital Photo Cameras, I beleive what you are saying.
Couple of stupid questions, since I'am already sold on this camera.
Can you burn DVDs from HDV tapes from the HV-10, and get same PQ????
Can you use any outboard or additional batterry pack to increase recording times???
I have heard of the BP-15, I don't even know what that is, I'm assuming is an outboard battery pack.
Thank You
:D

Thanks for the kind words Luidoly. There have been people who have successfully burned HDV to DVDs and played them in the Toshiba HD DVD player. To be honest I tried a few times and failed. I was probably doing something wrong, but I never did figure it out. I'm sure you can output standard mini-DV quality and burn that to a DVD and play it on a normal DVD player. I believe the HV10, like the Sony, down-rezzes on the fly. However that won't give you the resolution of HDV, it will simply be mini-DV quality.

Contrary to what I read in a review, Canon does have an extra capacity battery that's now available. I believe it's the BP315 and comes close to doubling the recording/playback times of the standard battery. I'm not sure how much bigger it is and how it affects the width of the camera, but it might be a nice tradeoff. From what I gather it fits in the same recess the standard battery does, but it must protrude a bit more. Of course you can always get a couple of the standard batteries too.

Are you using a tripod GodobeHD? Rarely does my HC3 come off the tripod. When I watch my old videos from my VHS-C and DV cameras, I make it about 10 minutes, and then I feel like I"m carsick. My filming ability was pathetic. It's only been a couple of years since I started using a monopod with the DV camera, and then a tripod with the HC3. It makes a world of difference! I've really concentrated on not being so jerky with superquick pans and zooms.

Blasst, great advice! It's amazing how much more professional any video looks when it's tripod mounted. As you mentioned, a monopod is a great solution too and has the benefit of being much lighter and more portable. Although the optical image stabilization on the Canon is great, you still need steady hands when using the telephoto.

Are you using a tripod GodobeHD? Rarely does my HC3 come off the tripod. When I watch my old videos from my VHS-C and DV cameras, I make it about 10 minutes, and then I feel like I"m carsick. My filming ability was pathetic. It's only been a couple of years since I started using a monopod with the DV camera, and then a tripod with the HC3. It makes a world of difference! I've really concentrated on not being so jerky with superquick pans and zooms.
No I almost never carry the tripod around for shooting family videos. My HC3 videos usually consist of clips of around 2-3 minutes which is shorter than the time I would spend on setting up the tripod. These HD cams really let us for the first time creat some movie quality family videos. I just need to figure out the techniques and perhaps the cam models that work best for the purpose.

Godobe, I hear what you are saying about setting up the tripod. You could try doing what I do and keep the HC3 on the tripod at all times. Then you are ready for action. I take mine to the beach, just fold up the legs, and off I go. It is worth it when I see the end result. Or try the monopod, since it is not as bulky. I have just gotten used to always taking the tripod with me.http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y10/Polardoor/tripodsnaps002.jpg[/IMG] http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y10/Polardoor/tripodsnaps001.jpg[/IMG]

Ken: that is the most unbiased and down to earth report that I have seen of the HV-10, especially from someone that has experience HD recording with other brand cameras.
Being Knowlegeable of Canon optics via their Digital Photo Cameras, I beleive what you are saying.
Couple of stupid questions, since I'am already sold on this camera.
Can you burn DVDs from HDV tapes from the HV-10, and get same PQ????
Can you use any outboard or additional batterry pack to increase recording times???
I have heard of the BP-15, I don't even know what that is, I'm assuming is an outboard battery pack.
Thank You
:Dluidoly, you can burn from HDV to dvd (keeping your HD footage, not DV)using a couple of programs. Here is the link for detailed instructions on how to do this. http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=705146 As Ken said you will need a HDDVD player for the dvd disc to work. I know personally that this process works, since I have been burning my HDV footage to dvd, thanks to this great forum and its members.

Godobe, yes it does do a better job than the HC1/HC3's electronic stabilization. But as with any tiny camera, it's still harder to hold steady than a larger camera. But with that said, I was surprised at how steady I was able to hold it at full telephoto. My last day in Vegas was windy and my telephoto shots became shaky, so ambient weather conditions definitely play a role.Hey Ken, how was the wind effect on the mics? The footage I shot was all indoors so I didn't get to check that aspect. The HC3 mics are quite good at not picking up wind noise. But a Canon Optura I had previously (same upright format and mic placement as the HV10) was just terrible. I had to stick a piece of open cell foam over the mic screen and even then it was barely tolerable in even moderately windy conditions...


ron

luidoly, you can burn from HDV to dvd (keeping your HD footage, not DV)using a couple of programs. Here is the link for detailed instructions on how to do this. http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=705146 As Ken said you will need a HDDVD player for the dvd disc to work. I know personally that this process works, since I have been burning my HDV footage to dvd, thanks to this great forum and its members.

Thank You, Blasst for your input, I guess I may be out of luck in this regard since I use the Mac platform, However I am not familiar with their editing software like, Final Cut Express HD, or Final Cut Pro, I just have iMovie HD, all of them have DVD authoring software, but I don't know if they work for HDDVD, I'll have to start hunting the Mac sites to hunt for articles about these.
Thanks. ;)

Hey Ken, how was the wind effect on the mics? The footage I shot was all indoors so I didn't get to check that aspect. The HC3 mics are quite good at not picking up wind noise. But a Canon Optura I had previously (same upright format and mic placement as the HV10) was just terrible. I had to stick a piece of open cell foam over the mic screen and even then it was barely tolerable in even moderately windy conditions...


ron

Ron, I haven't really taped yet on a very windy day, so I can't say yet. Thus far I've heard no real issue. I know that the HV10 has a built-in wind screen, but as I said, I'm sure how effective it is yet.

Well, if you haven't noticed anything yet I guess that's at least a good sign anyway :). Thanks Ken.


ron

Here's an example capture from my new HV10, taken at Point Lobos state park near Carmel CA:

33% screen grab - click for entire mpeg2 transport stream file (93MB m2t)
http://www.wb5mrn.com/tv/hdtestpattern/sspl.jpg
(http://www.wb5mrn.com/tv/hdtestpattern/ptLobosCove.m2t)

It's nearly 100MBytes and can be played with VLC (http://www.videolan.org/vlc/) and other transport stream players. I suggest clicking Video->DeInterlace->Blend.

I'm pretty happy with this beast, although still learning how to get the most out of it. I've made several HD-DVDs using the method shown in the HDDVDSW forum (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=705146), although I'm not getting the sound to work yet.

I've used CapDVHS (http://home.earthlink.net/~weathersix/CapDVHS_0306a.zip) to transfer movies to a PC then Sony Vegas MS+DVDPE for editing.

Mike, a recent review in a German AV magazine indicated that in good light the HV10 is as good as cameras like the FX1, the new FX7 and better/sharper than Sony's small cams, the HC1/HC3. They comment on the amazingly low noise floor in good light. My use thus far certainly shows that to be true. The lack of noise in the images continues to amaze me as does the overall professional look to the pictures.

One area I disagree with in that same review, is the performance of the HV10 in low-light. They felt the HC3 was better and I've found exactly the opposite as I mentioned in a post above. If the light is really really low, there's always the onboard video light. I've come to learn this is a very nice feature and sure beats carrying a video light with you. The reach is certainly not like that of a dedicated video light, but in a pinch it really can work wonders.

I continue to be delighted by this unit!

Oh geez...looks like I'm gonna be spending some money soon.

I have been a camcorder fanatic far longer than I've been into HD. I have extensive personal archives going back to the 80's. My Dad's 8mm films go back to 1960.

I drifted away from shooting so much tape about 3 years ago. Started doing lots of digital SLR photography.

The Canon HV10 is tempting me to jump back into the camcorder water. Parents are not getting any younger and would love to get them in HighDef. Also may be greeting my first child over the next year.

Spring colors would be great in High def!

I went to Circut City yesterday to check out the HV10. I was amazed with it. It really works well and is easy to use. Now I just wonder if they will go on sale in November for Christmas Holiday sales?
I see some websites have them for hundreds of dollars cheaper than the $1299 retail price.

Here's an example capture from my new HV10, taken at Point Lobos state park near Carmel CA:

33% screen grab - click for entire mpeg2 transport stream file (93MB m2t)
http://www.wb5mrn.com/tv/hdtestpattern/sspl.jpg
(http://www.wb5mrn.com/tv/hdtestpattern/ptLobosCove.m2t)

It's nearly 100MBytes and can be played with VLC (http://www.videolan.org/vlc/) and other transport stream players. I suggest clicking Video->DeInterlace->Blend.

I'm pretty happy with this beast, although still learning how to get the most out of it. I've made several HD-DVDs using the method shown in the HDDVDSW forum (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=705146), although I'm not getting the sound to work yet.

I've used CapDVHS (http://home.earthlink.net/~weathersix/CapDVHS_0306a.zip) to transfer movies to a PC then Sony Vegas MS+DVDPE for editing.

Brosnan, just for fun I downloaded your clip and put it in my Edius HD editing program. I then converted it back to tape so that it was as if you had loaned me your tape. I then played it on my plasma and it was really very very nice footage. So I've now seen footage from you, the guy in Japan (who posted a number of very nice clips) and of course the stuff I've shot.....this is just one sweet camera! :)

Mike, did you shoot the clip with a tripod or hand held?
Also, can Mike or Ken comment on its still photo performance? because that was also one of two weaknesses in camcorderinfo.com (the other one being the low light). Thanks much.
Jim

That clip just above was with a tripod. As a still camera it's only ~3Mpixels and based on a few shots it's not a great 3Mpixels at that. Of course the 10:1 zoom is a big plus. Haven't taken too many stills yet, though.

As far as low light performance, I'm satisfied with it. I'll capture a few scenes at low lux levels for comparison to other contenders. My guess so far is that it has ISO sensivity in the 100-600 range. Will try to quantify further using a lux meter.

Godobe, I haven't shot anything with the still photo feature since I use a dedicated digital still camera for that. As far as low-light is concerned, I am truly confused by CCI's review of that aspect of the camera. Part of it I guess depends on your definition of low-light. To me, realistically low-light is the light you have in a typical home at night when shooting video. It's certainly far less bright than typical store lighting or an indoor mall, but brighter than a darkened room with no lights. Cityscape videos I took in Vegas at night with the HV10 were truly outstanding...not a hint of grain and razor sharp. So despite what it appears, it's apparent that a typical cityscape at night is brighter than we might think.

Here's my take on this. When the light is so low that the video becomes very grainy, all of these small cameras will produce relatively poor video. In that kind of situation you must have a light to produce quality footage. I've got a Sony VX2000 which blows all of these cams away in really dim lighting. However, in the scenario I described above (at home at night with typical lights on), I've found that the HV10 is every bit the match of the Sony FX1 and unquestionably better than either the HC1/HC3. I've compared that exact footage shot with these cams and frankly, I prefer the Canon rendition which I found both sharper and more color accurate.....yes, even compared to the FX1. Also keep in mind that the Canon has a tiny, but usable at close distances, video light. At first I thought this was more a gimmick than anything else, but I found otherwise in my hotel room in Vegas. Turning off all the lights, I switched on the video light and was able to take very sharp, well-illuminated videos in the dark of the hotel room. No, this is not a substitute for an outboard video light, but how many people will carry with them an outboard video light when on vacation or just knocking around? This is a very nice feature that could come in useful at some point.

There's a German website that reviewed these cameras and posted pictures in 30 lux lighting of cameras such as the FX7, HC3 and HV10. To my eyes the HC3 was less grainy, but it was so dim, so lacking in color and so very soft, I thought their pix from the HV10 was clearly better even at 30 lux. So perhaps some of this is subjective, but I showed these same videos and same pictures to a friend who currently has the HC1 and he agreed the HV10 did better. He too will be selling his HC1 to get the HV10.

Godobe, I haven't shot anything with the still photo feature since I use a dedicated digital still camera for that. As far as low-light is concerned, I am truly confused by CCI's review of that aspect of the camera. Part of it I guess depends on your definition of low-light. To me, realistically low-light is the light you have in a typical home at night when shooting video. It's certainly far less bright than typical store lighting or an indoor mall, but brighter than a darkened room with no lights. Cityscape videos I took in Vegas at night with the HV10 were truly outstanding...not a hint of grain and razor sharp. So despite what it appears, it's apparent that a typical cityscape at night is brighter than we might think.

Here's my take on this. When the light is so low that the video becomes very grainy, all of these small cameras will produce relatively poor video. In that kind of situation you must have a light to produce quality footage. I've got a Sony VX2000 which blows all of these cams away in really dim lighting. However, in the scenario I described above (at home at night with typical lights on), I've found that the HV10 is every bit the match of the Sony FX1 and unquestionably better than either the HC1/HC3. I've compared that exact footage shot with these cams and frankly, I prefer the Canon rendition which I found both sharper and more color accurate.....yes, even compared to the FX1. Also keep in mind that the Canon has a tiny, but usable at close distances, video light. At first I thought this was more a gimmick than anything else, but I found otherwise in my hotel room in Vegas. Turning off all the lights, I switched on the video light and was able to take very sharp, well-illuminated videos in the dark of the hotel room. No, this is not a substitute for an outboard video light, but how many people will carry with them an outboard video light when on vacation or just knocking around? This is a very nice feature that could come in useful at some point.

There's a German website that reviewed these cameras and posted pictures in 30 lux lighting of cameras such as the FX7, HC3 and HV10. To my eyes the HC3 was less grainy, but it was so dim, so lacking in color and so very soft, I thought their pix from the HV10 was clearly better even at 30 lux. So perhaps some of this is subjective, but I showed these same videos and same pictures to a friend who currently has the HC1 and he agreed the HV10 did better. He too will be selling his HC1 to get the HV10.

Agree with you 100%

Godobe, I haven't shot anything with the still photo feature since I use a dedicated digital still camera for that. As far as low-light is concerned, I am truly confused by CCI's review of that aspect of the camera. Part of it I guess depends on your definition of low-light. To me, realistically low-light is the light you have in a typical home at night when shooting video. It's certainly far less bright than typical store lighting or an indoor mall, but brighter than a darkened room with no lights. Cityscape videos I took in Vegas at night with the HV10 were truly outstanding...not a hint of grain and razor sharp. So despite what it appears, it's apparent that a typical cityscape at night is brighter than we might think.

Here's my take on this. When the light is so low that the video becomes very grainy, all of these small cameras will produce relatively poor video. In that kind of situation you must have a light to produce quality footage. I've got a Sony VX2000 which blows all of these cams away in really dim lighting. However, in the scenario I described above (at home at night with typical lights on), I've found that the HV10 is every bit the match of the Sony FX1 and unquestionably better than either the HC1/HC3. I've compared that exact footage shot with these cams and frankly, I prefer the Canon rendition which I found both sharper and more color accurate.....yes, even compared to the FX1. Also keep in mind that the Canon has a tiny, but usable at close distances, video light. At first I thought this was more a gimmick than anything else, but I found otherwise in my hotel room in Vegas. Turning off all the lights, I switched on the video light and was able to take very sharp, well-illuminated videos in the dark of the hotel room. No, this is not a substitute for an outboard video light, but how many people will carry with them an outboard video light when on vacation or just knocking around? This is a very nice feature that could come in useful at some point.

There's a German website that reviewed these cameras and posted pictures in 30 lux lighting of cameras such as the FX7, HC3 and HV10. To my eyes the HC3 was less grainy, but it was so dim, so lacking in color and so very soft, I thought their pix from the HV10 was clearly better even at 30 lux. So perhaps some of this is subjective, but I showed these same videos and same pictures to a friend who currently has the HC1 and he agreed the HV10 did better. He too will be selling his HC1 to get the HV10.

Thanks a lot Ken for going to great detail in explaining your observation. I think I am going to a CC to see for myself how the HV10 stacks up with the HC3 in low light since in bright light there is really no contest.

Here are some frame captures (using VirtualDub) from video at 4 light levels using the HV10:


http://www.wb5mrn.com/tv/hdtestpattern/hv10/1400LUX.jpg
1400 LUX - click for full size (http://www.wb5mrn.com/tv/hdtestpattern/hv10/1400LUX.BMP)



http://www.wb5mrn.com/tv/hdtestpattern/hv10/0100LUX.jpg
100 LUX - click for full size (http://www.wb5mrn.com/tv/hdtestpattern/hv10/0100LUX.BMP)



http://www.wb5mrn.com/tv/hdtestpattern/hv10/0010LUX.jpg
10 LUX - click for full size (http://www.wb5mrn.com/tv/hdtestpattern/hv10/0010LUX.BMP)



http://www.wb5mrn.com/tv/hdtestpattern/hv10/0005LUX.jpg
5 LUX - click for full size (http://www.wb5mrn.com/tv/hdtestpattern/hv10/0005LUX.BMP)


Lux PeakSNRluminosity
-----------------------------------
1400 214:1
100 53:1
10 33:1
5 24:1


All in full auto mode.
So it seems that it takes about 25 lux to achieve a 40:1 signal to noise ratio on the white portions of the test target.

I am going to get this camera but am waiting for the upcomming holiday shopping price wars. I will only buy from a auth canon dealer and so far they are still selling at list. I'm hanging in there but it's tough!

In japan price on this camera is dropping fast, as well as general reviews / impressions.


It's currently down to 98990 JPY, which is ~$840. (HC3 is $100 less).
People seem to be the most dissatisfied with battery life (lowest rank), followed by functionality, and sound quality.
Design, size, and image quality is rated top-notch.
Just FYI.

In japan price on this camera is dropping fast, as well as general reviews / impressions.


It's currently down to 98990 JPY, which is ~$840. (HC3 is $100 less).
People seem to be the most dissatisfied with battery life (lowest rank), followed by functionality, and sound quality.
Design, size, and image quality is rated top-notch.
Just FYI.

I'm surprised at the Japaneese reviews since the reviews I've read have been very favorable, especially when compared to the Sonys. It seems the only bone of contention is low-light and I'm actually very happy with that aspect....again, compared to my previous Sonys.

I just ordered one of these. :)

I assume any MiniDV tape will work?

Can someone let me know which tapes you have found that work the best?

People seem to be the most dissatisfied with.... , followed by functionality,

Design, size, and image quality is rated top-notch.This reminds me of the Rolling Stone annual readers survey results, where a particular artist, album or song sometimes wins best of the year AND worst of the year at the same time :). I've always thought of functionality as being in large part determined by design, although I guess feature set probably plays a big role too...


ron

I just ordered one of these. :)

I assume any MiniDV tape will work?

Can someone let me know which tapes you have found that work the best?


Gruson, standard miniDV tapes work just fine. I bought a couple of Sony's HD mini-DV tapes and frankly I see no difference at all.

I'm really torn between this and the HC3. Guess I'll head to a local BB or CC to check them both out. I am definitely a point and shoot type guy looking to use one of these purely to capture memories of the kids, vacations, Christmas, etc... I will also be recording my sis-in-laws wedding in Jamaica next year for her. Both camcorders look great to me and I want to thank everyone who has posted info on these devices.

I'm really torn between this and the HC3. Guess I'll head to a local BB or CC to check them both out. I am definitely a point and shoot type guy looking to use one of these purely to capture memories of the kids, vacations, Christmas, etc... I will also be recording my sis-in-laws wedding in Jamaica next year for her. Both camcorders look great to me and I want to thank everyone who has posted info on these devices.

I looked at both earlier this week. No contest.

The footage from the HV10 just has more "punch" to it. Both are nice but the HV10's footage looked more HD to me. Most likely because of the new chip it uses.

I am also a point and shoot guy who wants this for kids, vacations, memories, etc.

The HV10 is also REALLY small.

I looked at both earlier this week. No contest.

The footage from the HV10 just has more "punch" to it. Both are nice but the HV10's footage looked more HD to me. Most likely because of the new chip it uses.

I am also a point and shoot guy who wants this for kids, vacations, memories, etc.

The HV10 is also REALLY small.

Yup, having owned an HC3 and an HC1, I find the HV10 is superior in almost all respects....especially overall PQ. :)

Guys, how is the audio portion of the HV10? Does it distort with loud noise like a band, parade and does it have that typical camcorder thin AM radio sound quality?
I'd love to be able to put a outboard mic on to record with.

It does not have a external mic connector, not even a 3.5" mini-stereo jack.

The onboard mic is fine and I haven't noticed any audio cutting out. But as mentioned, it won't accept an outboard mike. The outboard mike would be as big as the camera itself! ;)

The onboard mic is fine and I haven't noticed any audio cutting out. But as mentioned, it won't accept an outboard mike. The outboard mike would be as big as the camera itself! ;)
actually I was going to use some Sure or AKG mics I use for my drums. they are about as big as your thumb and have a high db level plus they sound good and record pretty flat with just a bit of boost around 100hz and 10khz.

Here's another example capture from the HV10 showing the closeup capabilities.

33% screen grab - click for entire mpeg2 program stream file (13MB mpg)
http://www.wb5mrn.com/tv/hdtestpattern/hv10/watch.jpg
(http://www.wb5mrn.com/tv/hdtestpattern/hv10/watchMpeg2PS.mpg)

(handheld,IAF on)

And other the other end of the distance spectrum...

1:1 cropped sharpened screen grab - click for entire mpeg2 transport stream file (61MB mpg)
http://www.wb5mrn.com/tv/hdtestpattern/hv10/moon.jpg
(http://www.wb5mrn.com/tv/hdtestpattern/hv10/moon.m2t)

(tripod,IAF off,T=1/2000sec,EXP=-11,max zoom (there's never enough zoom!))

Ok I called the local Bestbuy's this weekend and found the only HV10 in town and grabbed it. The camcorder is awesome and the clarity and sharpness on my 65" HDTV are incredible. But I am having a dilema...My plan is as follows -

Record footage onto HDV tapes and then capture feeds to my PC.
Then archive and organize the footage into Media Center and stream them back onto my HDTV via my Xbox 360.

The xbox360 indeed will stream HD content from my PC as long as its WMV-HD content. I verified this using some of the sample WMV-HD clips at microsoft's site prior to purchasing the HV10.

Now granted, I am by far from an expert when it comes to camcorders - infact this is my first one! But here is what I did -

I used the latest Pinnacle Studio 10.6 software and captured the HDV footage, then outputted the movie in an HDTV format (*wmv file format)
The resulting file plays great on my PC, however when I attempt to stream this through Media Center via Xbox 360 the video freezes up....I can hear the audio, I can even fast forward/rewind the video but as soon as I hit play, the video freezes after the first few frames.

So, my questions are -

1) Has anyone else tried this?
2) Just because I outputted an hdtv feed in .wmv format does this consider it a WMV-HD file?
3) Or is there something special I should be doing to create wmv-hd file? If so, what is the best way to take HD footage
from a HDV camcorder and convert into WMV-HD?

Only reason I'm asking is because I know for a fact the Xbox360 will stream wmv-hd files... I dont know if this will help, but here are the video statistics from the HD files I outputted via pinnacle below -

1440x1080 pixels
audio sample size - 16bit
audio channels - 6
audio sample rate - 48kHz
video Bit rate - 5426kbps
video data rate - 5000kbps
video sample rate - 24bit

This thread needs to be moved to the new Camcorders section of this website. There ais a lot of info here that other might be able to use over on the camcorder section. Plus some answers might be there too.
I really want to buy this camcorder. My question is (being a computer dummy for the most part) is:

1- how can I burn HD video onto a dvd and play in a hd dvd player?

2- I have a Dell XPS M140 2gig laptop. How can I put HD video on my laptop and then play on my Sim2 HT300 E-Link projector?

Instructions for burning HD to DVD for play on HDDVD player are here: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=8105904&&#post8105904

To transfer video from the camera to your laptop you use a firewire cable (4 pin to 4 pin in your case) and applications such as the free CAPDVHS tool (http://www.videohelp.com/tools?tool=CapDVHS). The resultant files can be played with various things such as the free VLC player (http://www.videolan.org/vlc/)

No LANC, so no deal!

Point and shoot crowd don't use lanc. I imagine HV10 would look ridiculous on a lanc anyway and for event videography HV10 is probably too grainy.

Godobe, kind of like not having XLR inputs? ;)

With the onset of the Sony SR100 (with no editing SW available!), they are doing some price cuts on the HV10. Currently about $150 off, it's been up to $200 off (where I bit). Couple that with a 10% off coupon they send out (which I finagled to use WITH the heavy discount) and that's quite a deal! Keep your eyes peeled...

I now have it on 'price hold', anxiously awaiting reviews of the HDD Sony just in case...

Hey guys,

I received my HV10 last week and love it.

However, I am wondering which software you use to import the HD video and edit it.

For some reason, Ulead 8 (the only software I own) could not even detect the camera.

I prefer software that is easy to learn and will use it for some quick edits and adding music. Nothing too fancy.

Thanks, appreciate it!

So what is everyone using?

for capturing only you can use HDVsplit, CapDVHS, both are freebies.
For capturing and editing, Ulead (VS10 and MF5 and higher), Sony Vegas, Adobe and Pinnacle will all work with HDV. IMHO Ulead MF5 is the cheapest ($50) and will meet you needs of some quick editing and adding music. And it will even create HD DVDs, the only consumer grade software on the market capable of creating high def DVDs for now.

Has anyone connected a Canon HV10 to a Samsung HL-Sxxx8W DLP rear projection HDTV via the Firewire (D-Net) connection? I am considering a HD Camcorder purchase in the near future and would love to verify I can use this connection and get the full resolution from the camcorder.

Gizmo Joe

If people are interested in this unit, CC has the best deal yet you may want to jump on. Currently online purchase is back to nearly $200 off--plus an addition $150 with a coupon that works with the original discount, makes this unit $350 total off retail at a local B&M store. This puts it under a grand--not bad at all. The Sony units have similar discounts as well...

Apparently the aforementioned price cuts in Japan are reflecting here as well....

If people are interested in this unit, CC has the best deal yet you may want to jump on. Currently online purchase is back to nearly $200 off--plus an addition $150 with a coupon that works with the original discount, makes this unit $350 total off retail at a local B&M store. This puts it under a grand--not bad at all. The Sony units have similar discounts as well...

Apparently the aforementioned price cuts in Japan are reflecting here as well....Thank you very much! That was what I was waiting for. I'll be picking up my HV10 (and the free bag) that I just ordered on my way home from work. Looks like it's time to put the HC3 on Craigs list tomorrow...


ron

CC=Circuit City? I couldn't find it there....link? Sounds like a great deal.

Darin

If people are interested in this unit, CC has the best deal yet you may want to jump on. Currently online purchase is back to nearly $200 off--plus an addition $150 with a coupon that works with the original discount, makes this unit $350 total off retail at a local B&M store. This puts it under a grand--not bad at all. The Sony units have similar discounts as well...

Apparently the aforementioned price cuts in Japan are reflecting here as well....
Where are you getting this $150 coupon? I checked the CC and Canon website for a coupon and can not find anything.

Has anyone connected a Canon HV10 to a Samsung HL-Sxxx8W DLP rear projection HDTV via the Firewire (D-Net) connection? I am considering a HD Camcorder purchase in the near future and would love to verify I can use this connection and get the full resolution from the camcorder.

Gizmo Joe
Yes, I've connected it to the new Sammy 5679 LED using D-net and the PQ is outstanding. D-Net identifies it as Canon Camcorder on the list of attached firewire things you have connected, I can't remenber if it even gives it its proper name.
I use Movie Mode, and it fills the full screen 16:9 full resolution.

Again, the PQ is superb
:D ;) :D

I have to make 5 posts before I can post a URL...this should be the 5th :)

Yep...here ya go:

This for CC ONLINE only--but you can order here and pick up in-store. Tip: don't try this after 11pm at night EST since they will be in inventory mode and won't be able to lock into a store, making shipping your only choice. Just punch the code in at the order screen when it asks if you have any credits or coupons to use.

They seem to hover the original discount between $150-$195 off....it is now about $186. I locked one in at $195 last week. Keep in mind this 'coupon' works for the SR1 too...once they get it in stock any day now.

And yes...free bag too now :)

If I remember right this is GOOD TIL 10/21 only!

http://www.circuitcity.com/ssm/Camcorders/sem/rpsm/catOid/-13063/N/20013061+20013063+3820/link/ref/rpem/ccd/categorylist.do

Coupon code for $150 off:

K9A5T73A8Y

It looks like they raised the price online though...

Still not a bad deal.

Wow, they really did bump it up this morning all right. Glad I jumped last night when I did. Don't forget, there's the free mail in promo for the Pinnacle Studio 10.5 Titanium package too if you don't already have editing sw:

http://downloads.canon.com/cpr/software/video/HV10_Pinnacle.pdf



ron

Can someone post the Pinnacle link? I need it. The one above does not work...

If you right-click and save to your desktop you should be able to open it. If not, the link is prominently diplayed on the Canon.USA website at the main HV10 page.


ron

Yes, I've connected it to the new Sammy 5679 LED using D-net and the PQ is outstanding. D-Net identifies it as Canon Camcorder on the list of attached firewire things you have connected, I can't remenber if it even gives it its proper name.
I use Movie Mode, and it fills the full screen 16:9 full resolution.

Again, the PQ is superb
:D ;) :D

Sweet - so can you control the Canon camcorder with the Samsung TV remote? Is the connection as good as HDMI would be?

Gizmo Joe

I literally think the pricers play pin-the-tail on the monetary figure every few hours---I've never seen more fluctations that with that site. As with this morning, it can change within hours and I've seen it do that before. I think they realized the coupon worked with the discount--$195 + $150 is quite a chunk of change off.

As for Canon, they notoriously have site link issues. Just go to their site and you'll see the Pinnacle link on the main HV10 page.

Here's a tip: I wanted to extend the 14-day return policy on camcorders so I would be able to check out the new Sony SR1, yet lock in the great Canon price. So...here's what I did. Go to the store and have them price-match the online discount (they will)--maybe even the really great one if you printed it out before the changed it. Then put down 20% which holds it for 2 weeks. This will effectively give you a month--two weeks to pick up from the hold and two weeks to return. Just don't open it and that should give you plenty of time to check out the Sony and decide. If you don't want ANY of them, that cost still should be fully refundable.

Good luck!

Sweet - so can you control the Canon camcorder with the Samsung TV remote? Is the connection as good as HDMI would be?

Gizmo Joe
Yep, you can control it.
As far as the connection, I think the Firewire connection gives you better color than the component connection.

I have it hooked up both ways with the wires hanging out from the sides of the TV so I can reach them and hook the camcorder easily to either one.

I think the Firewire connectionn gives you better and more dense color because it is totally unaltered. As far as HDMI goes I could not tell since the HV-10 does not have HDMI out, but to tell you the truth I see no difference in PQ between the camcorder feeds and the HD feeds I get from Direct TV where I use HDMI.

I still like to use the little remote that comes with the camera, to control it it gives you more choices and a nice display of what's happenning including shutter speed, f stop etc......
Hope this helps.
:D :D :D

Yep, you can control it.
As far as the connection, I think the Firewire connection gives you better color than the component connection.

I have it hooked up both ways with the wires hanging out from the sides of the TV so I can reach them and hook the camcorder easily to either one.

I think the Firewire connectionn gives you better and more dense color because it is totally unaltered. As far as HDMI goes I could not tell since the HV-10 does not have HDMI out, but to tell you the truth I see no difference in PQ between the camcorder feeds and the HD feeds I get from Direct TV where I use HDMI.

I still like to use the little remote that comes with the camera, to control it it gives you more choices and a nice display of what's happenning including shutter speed, f stop etc......
Hope this helps.
:D :D :D

Thank you much for the replies! I am excited about getting one of these. Any reason to believe that the Firewire version in your Sammy LED DLP is any different than the HL-S7178W I am buying?

Gizmo Joe

Thank you much for the replies! I am excited about getting one of these. Any reason to believe that the Firewire version in your Sammy LED DLP is any different than the HL-S7178W I am buying?

Gizmo Joe

I really doubt it. You will be amazed at the playback from this "little" camcorder.
:D :D

As far as HDMI goes I could not tell since the HV-10 does not have HDMI out, but to tell you the truth I see no difference in PQ between the camcorder feeds and the HD feeds I get from Direct TV where I use HDMI.

Uh, oh. Guess I can scratch this camera off my list.

My new Panny plasma only has HDMI accessible from the front. Seem dumb not to have HDMI.

Uh, oh. Guess I can scratch this camera off my list.

My new Panny plasma only has HDMI accessible from the front. Seem dumb not to have HDMI.

This is one of the biggest reasons that I have not bought this model yet. Someone really messed up leaving off HDMI. So the only way to connect is with unweildy component cables...for this tiny camera (and I have yet to see a component input on the front of a TV). Ridiculous.

This is one of the biggest reasons that I have not bought this model yet. Someone really messed up leaving off HDMI. So the only way to connect is with unweildy component cables...for this tiny camera (and I have yet to see a component input on the front of a TV). Ridiculous.

Not true - check my conversations with "luidoly" a few posts up - Firewire appearently looks better than HDMI and is a pure digital connection using 1 wire. Now if you do not have Firewire on your HDTV you obviously have a problem with this suggestion...

Gizmo Joe

HDMI is the standard digital connection for HD while firewire is not. Most new HD flat panels on the market do NOT have any firewire connections. That means you probably won't be able to go around to show your HD footage to your friends and neighbours without carrying and pluging in five cables (three video and two audio).
Another huge advantage of having an HDMI is it seems region free just like HD DVD player. I routinely carry my HC3 with a small HDMI cable to PAL countries and never had any trouble playing the HD footage on their flat secreens. But component won't work.

HDMI is the standard digital connection for HD while firewire is not. Most new HD flat panels on the market do NOT have any firewire connections. That means you probably won't be able to go around to show your HD footage to your friends and neighbours without carrying and pluging in five cables (three video and two audio).
Another huge advantage of having an HDMI is it seems region free just like HD DVD player. I routinely carry my HC3 with a small HDMI cable to PAL countries and never had any trouble playing the HD footage on their flat secreens. But component won't work.

You make good points, but with my 2 HDMI ports already spoken for, I am glad to have a one cable, pure digital solution that works. Besides, I do not know anyone with a HDMI-compliant HDTV (that I would want to share my videos with anyway) and I do not get overseas much. :)

Gizmo Joe

Does anyone see any competitive HD Camcorders to rival the Canon HV10 on the near horizon? I heard the Sony can't compare with picture quality but the Sony has a aux mic input and hdmi output. If the Canon HV10 had hdmi and aux mic input I'd buy 1 today.

Some observations about the HV10:

I have it for about a week and here are some quick observations:

PROS:

- Great image quality. Noise is seen only in really dark scenarios.
- Very portable, light and small sized.
- Still Image quality is very good. Flash is OK as well.

CONS:

- Build quality is not so good. Feels cheap compared to the HC-3.
- No MIC input. The built in MIC is quite OK but I need that extra MIC port.
- Image stabilizer has a hard time at max-zoom. Not as good as SD Sony CAMS.
- KIT battery is very weak. Drains-out after 30-45 mins.
- Controls on the back of the camera are very hard to use. Very small buttons.

Overall, this camera suits me fine for family videos as it has a great quality and being portable. Would have loved to see better build quality and extra MIC input.

E.S.

E.S., I'm surprised you ddin't realize that the Canon didn't have a mic input. Regarding the image stabilization of the HV10, I can tell you it is superior to both the Sony HC1 and HC3 since I had both. It does a better job at max telephoto than either Sony. The other thing that I don't think gets discussed nearly enough, is that of the autofocus. The autofocus on the Canon is significantly superior to the Sonys. In fact, it's the best autofocus I've ever used on any camcorder in any format....better than my Sony VX2000.

I agree with you regarding the battery, but it was no better with either Sony. The HDV format, with its intensive computing necessities, really drains the small batteries these units come with. But you can purchase a larger battery for the Canon that will provide something on the order of double the run time.

Disagree:
- That the build quality is cheap
- That the image stabilization is superior to Sony, unless the HC1 and HC3 are significantly worse than the Z1U I owned.
- That the image stabilization is better at max telephoto than Sony with the same disclaimer above
- That the autofocus is superior to Sony, with the exception that is has an extra instant focus mode.

Agree:
- That the image quality is great.

*********************************
I just sold the Sony Z1U in anticipation of the Canon XH A1 that I have on on order but has been delayed. I just purchased an HV10 to use in the interim. My impressions follow.

1.) Image quality is more than surprising. In outdoor light the colors and detail rival the pro cams, Z1, XL H1, HD100.

2.) It's harder to get steady video with the HV10 than the pro cams but not impossible.

The HV 10 image is so noise free and detailed, and the color balanced and natural, I think it will be very hard to tell it apart from the pro cams from the image alone.

Tom, the extra instant auto focus of the Canon makes all the difference in the world...trust me! I too owned an FX1 for awhile and the autofocus of the HV10 is much quicker and certainly better than either the HC1 or HC3.

Yes, the image stabilization of the HC1 & HC3 are probably worse than the Z1U since they use electronic image stabilization. I'm not saying their stabilization systems were bad, but the optical IS of the HV10 and Z1U/FX1 is better. Remember too, as with any very small camera, it's inherently tougher to hold steady. I found the FX1 to be extremely easy to hold steady....although very tiring after a short period.

But yes, that image quality of the HV10 is truly remarkable. I remember the first clip I shot and played back made my jaw drop. I just couldn't believe this tiny thing produced such a pristine, professional looking picture. Remember you doubted me when I first compared the HV10 to more professional HDV units. ;)

Do you know the 35mm equivalent zoom range? It's not as wide as I thought, and way more telephoto than I was expecting.

Interesting that the closest focus distance is many times more than the Z1, which would focus on an object 1 inch away. The HV10 glass is very impressive though. It has some fringing as the others, a bit more pincushion, but is highly resolved and great color.

The contrast -1 setting on the custom menu is very similar to using the Sony with the black stretch "on" setting.

If my math is right, the 35mm equivalent zoom range is 32-320mm if matching the vertical field of view and 27 to 270 mm matching the horizontal field of view. So let's say 30 to 300ish.

The closest focus distance is about 0.4" if you set it to minimum zoom.

Ken, Tom and all,

Sorry if I was misunderstood:

Disclaimer: The HV10 is a really great camcorder and I'm having a great time shooting with it. The results are
also unbelievable. I knew before I bought it about the short battery life and No-mic issue and still chose the HV10. Portability
and image quality are the most important aspects for me.

1. As for Image stab, I was comparing to Sony's SD cams and NOT their HD cams. HD image stab is a harder task especially if you
don't want to pay with resolution. People who are experienced with SD camcorders may be a little disappointed when they see
the result of the HV10 in Max zoom. You just have to pay more attention to it when you shoot. Just a quote from the NYTimes review: "...In practice, the Canon’s stabilizer works fantastically when you’re zoomed out; if you use two hands, the picture is indistinguishable from a tripod shot. As you zoom in, however, camera shake becomes more noticeable; at the 10X maximum, keeping the video rock-solid requires either a tripod or nerves of steel."

2. I still think that built quality is noticeably lower than the HC-3. The SD card, I/O doors use very thin plastic and the feel
of the camera is that low-grade, thin plastic was used (It looks great though). HC-3 uses aluminum & more rugged plastic (Similar to Canon SLR plastic).
This was a disappointment for me considering the price-tag (A 1000+ $ camera should feel rugged to some degree).

Overall, although it's not perfect I fully recommend it to anyone looking to buy a new camcorder for home use. In 10 years
only the footage will matter and the HV10 delivers unbelievably good footage.

E.S.

I am still on the fence but really want this camcorder for it's portable size and image quality. It is close to going below $1000 now on line so I'm holding out a little longer in hope for some holiday sales.
However typical of my luck is I will buy this camcorder and in a few months Canon will come out with a better version!

Do you know the 35mm equivalent zoom range? It's not as wide as I thought, and way more telephoto than I was expecting.



I'm not sure, but the wide angle is less so than the small Sonys, but it gives back on the telephoto end which brings you closer than the Sonys.

I remember the first clip I shot and played back made my jaw drop. I just couldn't believe this tiny thing produced such a pristine, professional looking picture.;)

Ken:
Jaw dropping is the right description for the PQ of this little baby. The Movies in my HDTV set are like watching Discovery HD.
I just got the wide angle lens adapter from Canon, and holding the camera with it gives it more balance and I can hold rock steady wide angle shots as well as zoomed.

The size of it does not interfere with the Instant Auto Focus feature, and does not have any vignetting at all.

It does interfere with the little video light, but I never used much anyway. Available light noise (regular room lights) is almost imperceptible, even in not so well illuminated night street scenes.

I've had for about 4 weeks and the more I use it, the easier it gets to handle, as well as changing the controls, exposure, shutter speed etc...

I don't know why people are so worried about HDMI out, or the lack of it. The component connection is just as good, plus for editing you have to have Firewire which the HV-10 does. You cannot use HDMI anyway.

Talking about editing, I'm planning to dub some background music using iMovie to some of my clips but so far I've shot with the setting in Stereo 1, but on playback you have 4 choices S1,S2,Mixed 1-1 and Mixed/Variable, what would you recommend I use if I want to dub Music.
Thank You.
:D :D

I agree you don't need HDMI but component is not as good. If you rip the video from tape to hard disk via the 1394, you can author it to HD-DVD and play it back from a red laser disk via the HDMI of that unit. I think Ken may be doing this as well.

In the end, I agree HDMI is not so important for a camcorder and do you plan on loaning it out so others can watch your video? What you really need is a distribution format, and that's what HD-DVD represents now, although what future it has if any is unknown. I really like having mine, from tape to HD-DVD to HDMI to HDTV, all digital, pretty nice.

I agree you don't need HDMI but component is not as good. If you rip the video from tape to hard disk via the 1394, you can author it to HD-DVD and play it back from a red laser disk via the HDMI of that unit. I think Ken may be doing this as well.

In the end, I agree HDMI is not so important for a camcorder and do you plan on loaning it out so others can watch your video? What you really need is a distribution format, and that's what HD-DVD represents now, although what future it has if any is unknown. I really like having mine, from tape to HD-DVD to HDMI to HDTV, all digital, pretty nice.

Until the HDDVD vs BluRay wars are over I don't plan to invest on HDDVD although your point is well taken. HDMI would be ideal for that purpose.

My HDTV Samsung LED set has 2 Firewire inputs to connect up to 10 Firewire units in series in the form of a network, when I hook the HV-10 to the Firewire input I get pure unaltered video and I must say it is better than component. The playback is awesome.

In that sense I agree with you, for the time being I have to resort to DVD recording via Firewire to a recorder that will downconvert to 480p if I want my friends to see my movies or share with them.

If you have used the HV-10 do you have any thoughts on Music dubbing???
Thanks.
:D :D

Ken:
Jaw dropping is the right description for the PQ of this little baby. The Movies in my HDTV set are like watching Discovery HD.
I just got the wide angle lens adapter from Canon, and holding the camera with it gives it more balance and I can hold rock steady wide angle shots as well as zoomed.

The size of it does not interfere with the Instant Auto Focus feature, and does not have any vignetting at all.

It does interfere with the little video light, but I never used much anyway. Available light noise (regular room lights) is almost imperceptible, even in not so well illuminated night street scenes.

I've had for about 4 weeks and the more I use it, the easier it gets to handle, as well as changing the controls, exposure, shutter speed etc...

I don't know why people are so worried about HDMI out, or the lack of it. The component connection is just as good, plus for editing you have to have Firewire which the HV-10 does. You cannot use HDMI anyway.

Talking about editing, I'm planning to dub some background music using iMovie to some of my clips but so far I've shot with the setting in Stereo 1, but on playback you have 4 choices S1,S2,Mixed 1-1 and Mixed/Variable, what would you recommend I use if I want to dub Music.
Thank You.
:D :D

Luidoly, glad you're enjoying the HV10! I've thought about a wide angle lens, but I'm not sure. I initially missed the HDMI connection, but after seeing the picture on my plasma via component, I don't miss the HDMI too much. Just remember, these tapes are always 'HDMI ready' whenever you can output them from an HDMI equipped playback deck.

If you have used the HV-10 do you have any thoughts on Music dubbing???

This is very easy to do with a simple non-linear editor such as Vegas or Womble MPG Video Wizard. Yes I do this all the time, a background music track. But you do it in post. What cam you use, whether the HV10 or anything else is irrelevant .

with womble, you can replace audio track without even touching the video portion or re-encoding, which is a much quicker process.

This is one of the biggest reasons that I have not bought this model yet. Someone really messed up leaving off HDMI. So the only way to connect is with unweildy component cables...for this tiny camera (and I have yet to see a component input on the front of a TV). Ridiculous.

What is far worse is this cameras lack of any kind of external jack for accessories, and its supposedly highly sub-par usage in low lighting conditions. And by low lighting I mean "shooting indoors at night with lamps and lights turned on", not trying to film your buddies in near darkness as they tip over the cow, etc. :)

An external Mic jack or shoe for external mics or a mount for a camera light are invaluable once you do more than shoot outdoors on bright, sunny days.

Thats whats kept me away from this camera.

is this a 1G or 2G camera from Canon on the HD front? Whichever, when is the next generation due out? Or is this still relatively new? Just thinking of HDMI output, etc.

What is far worse is this cameras lack of any kind of external jack for accessories, and its supposedly highly sub-par usage in low lighting conditions. And by low lighting I mean "shooting indoors at night with lamps and lights turned on", not trying to film your buddies in near darkness as they tip over the cow, etc. :)

An external Mic jack or shoe for external mics or a mount for a camera light are invaluable once you do more than shoot outdoors on bright, sunny days.

Thats whats kept me away from this camera.It's all relative of course, but IMO the reports of the "highly sub-par" usage in low light conditions are highly overrated. I've found "shooting indoors at night with lamps and lights turned on", to be totally acceptable. Better than the HC3 in fact. As you move to very dim scenes the HV10 begins to introduce a bit more noise than the HC3, but the detail remains sharp unlike the Sony which gets soft quickly.


ron

that's good to know, Ron. I wonder if anyone here has used 1/30 shutter speed to remedy some dim conditions. 15 frames/sec seemed awfully low. But does it still produce acceptable HD video?

What is far worse is this cameras lack of any kind of external jack for accessories, and its supposedly highly sub-par usage in low lighting conditions. And by low lighting I mean "shooting indoors at night with lamps and lights turned on", not trying to film your buddies in near darkness as they tip over the cow, etc. :)

An external Mic jack or shoe for external mics or a mount for a camera light are invaluable once you do more than shoot outdoors on bright, sunny days.

Thats whats kept me away from this camera.

Sorry, HeadRusch but I agree with previous post from R-11 this little camera does exceptionally well on indoor lighting conditions like the ones you describe. I've done some experimenting (not that I do it all the time) by creating a custom white balance with a white card under the conditions which you describe, and noise is even less perceptible.

:D :D

This is one of the biggest reasons that I have not bought this model yet. Someone really messed up leaving off HDMI. So the only way to connect is with unweildy component cables...for this tiny camera (and I have yet to see a component input on the front of a TV). Ridiculous.

Actually once you see the output via component, you quickly forget about HDMI. You can always leave a component connection plugged in the back of the display waiting to be connected. It's not too bad and it's a simple one wire connection to the camera. Yes, I would rather have had an HDMI conneciton, but since the PQ is superior to the little Sony via HDMI, I'm fine with it. ;)

What is far worse is this cameras lack of any kind of external jack for accessories, and its supposedly highly sub-par usage in low lighting conditions. And by low lighting I mean "shooting indoors at night with lamps and lights turned on", not trying to film your buddies in near darkness as they tip over the cow, etc. :)



Totally 100% false! The results in exactly the conditions you describe are superior to my FX1 footage shot under identical conditions! Everyone that has seen my footage agrees. The HV10 is wonderful under normally lit room conditions! :)

Also, regarding the external light, I never use such equipment for a 'fun camera'. When I use a cam for work, that's far different, but for fun....no way am I going to lug around lights, mikes etc. I want light and easy. The other great thing about the HV10 is the onboard light which comes in handy in a pinch and doesn't require you to carry an extra light. Very very nice. Yes, it doesn't have much reach, but in a pinch when I wouldn't be carrying a light regardless, it's a very nice touch. ;)

It's all relative of course, but IMO the reports of the "highly sub-par" usage in low light conditions are highly overrated. I've found "shooting indoors at night with lamps and lights turned on", to be totally acceptable. Better than the HC3 in fact. As you move to very dim scenes the HV10 begins to introduce a bit more noise than the HC3, but the detail remains sharp unlike the Sony which gets soft quickly.


ron

Precisely Ron! It's really ashame the Canon has this perception in some circles when it should be the Sony getting the bad rap for low-light performance. The Canon is just a wonder under typical outdoor/indoor lighting situations. What you say about really low-light performance is dead on. The Sony gets very very soft, whereas the Canon gets a bit more grainy but retains its sharpness.

that's good to know, Ron. I wonder if anyone here has used 1/30 shutter speed to remedy some dim conditions. 15 frames/sec seemed awfully low. But does it still produce acceptable HD video?

Yes Godobe, I've used 1/30 of a second. In fact, in fully auto settings the Canon will actually drop down to 1/30 of a second on its own. The picture is obviously somewhat brighter and a bit more colorful @ 1/30. The downside is that people walking close to the camera and across the plane of the camera, have a slight stutter. People a bit further away look OK. Of course this can always be bypassed if so desired. In general it's quite usable. I tried that experiment when I was in Vegas in one of the dimly lit malls. I had the same footage shot on my HC1 from the prior year and the Canon footage was significantly sharper since that lighting already started the 'softening process' in the Sony.

I am about to pull the trigger...I can't wait any longer!

Has anyone dealt with Express Camera?
http://www.expresscameras.com/prodetails.asp?prodid=628929&start=1

Thanks for any advice! Mike

nowadays you can just google everybody if you want to know something about it. Looks like cameraexpress.com is one those bait and switch sites. I would stay away from it.

Ken, when you commented about HV10 being a little better than HC1/HC3 in low light was that with the 1/30 shutter? Thanks.

Godobe, no, it was at the normal 1/60 second setting. I was specifically commenting about normal indoor room lighting at night....a typical setting for relatively low light indoor video. Not only did it outdo the HC3/HC1, it was absolutely the match if not better, than my FX1 that I had sold.

Totally 100% false! The results in exactly the conditions you describe are superior to my FX1 footage shot under identical conditions! Everyone that has seen my footage agrees. The HV10 is wonderful under normally lit room conditions! :)


Interesting...thats not what CamcorderInfo has to say. But..they've been wrong in the past, their reviews aren't exactly consistant.


Also, regarding the external light, I never use such equipment for a 'fun camera'. When I use a cam for work, that's far different, but for fun....no way am I going to lug around lights, mikes etc.

Well, no offence to you, but some of us dont have the budget for work/play cameras. There have been many a time when I was glad I had my little shotgun mic to filter out ambient noise.......while you may not seem to think this is any big deal, some of us do.

I'm glad to hear someone saying that the Canon isn't as bad as some reviews are painting it to be, however, and I'll update my opinions accordingly.

Rock solid support.
Enjoy
;) :D

nowadays you can just google everybody if you want to know something about it. Looks like cameraexpress.com is one those bait and switch sites. I would stay away from it.

Ken, when you commented about HV10 being a little better than HC1/HC3 in low light was that with the 1/30 shutter? Thanks.
Thanks...I checked them out on some review sites and will stay away from them.
thanks again, Mike

Rock solid support.
Enjoy
;) :D
Thanks....is that a Canon extender or wide angle lens on the camcorder?

Thanks....is that a Canon extender or wide angle lens on the camcorder?

It is the Canon wide angle converter specifically made for this camera WD-H37C.
It has to have the C at the end. Different from the other 37mm converter that fits the optura. No vignetting at all, covers the full 16:9 format withou a hicth and I feel it ads balance to the overall handling of the camcorder, It does not interfere with the Instant Auto Focus feature which continues to work very fast, but it does interfere with the onboard light. More images from Sony's support
:D

luidoly, could you please give a model number for Sony's "support"? Thank you!

"What is far worse is this cameras lack of any kind of external jack for accessories, and its supposedly highly sub-par usage in low lighting conditions. And by low lighting I mean "shooting indoors at night with lamps and lights turned on", not trying to film your buddies in near darkness as they tip over the cow, etc.

An external Mic jack or shoe for external mics or a mount for a camera light are invaluable once you do more than shoot outdoors on bright, sunny days.

Thats whats kept me away from this camera."

I have to disagree here. I was expecting very bad low-light behavior after I've read the Camcorderinfo review. I'm glad to say this is not the case (Hope there was a DPREVIEW-level camcorder review site...)
In most lamp-lit situation the camera footage is still very clean, sharp and colors are accurate.
When an average room is lit by a single weak lamp (40W) the noise is noticable although the picture stays sharp. I think canon should have introduced some stronger NR options for these situations.

I'm still looking for a good NR option when editing the footage (I'm using Vegas7).

E.S.

I agree the HV10 low light performance is satisfactory.
The detail and color is over the top in outdoor daylight, very clean image. I'm finding the image stabilization to be very effective even fully zoomed, just had to develop the right hold for steady shots.

Where the image has flaws is in the single CMOS imager and bayer filter. If you zoom fully on something like a squirrel in a tree, the background foliage bokeh (out of focus blur) has a bit of a cross-hatching, screen door to it. This is minor. But where the same thing gets ugly, is glinting reflections from glass, water, chrome. Instead of points of light, these little hot spots are like "X"s. The term for it is "smear."

luidoly, could you please give a model number for Sony's "support"? Thank you!

It is an old pistol grip that I had lying around from an old TR 700 sony camcorder of the good old days of Video8 and/or Hi8, can't remember which. Maybe 8 to 10 yrs old.

I don't think they make these anymore, but you might try E-Bay.

On top of the grip is and old HAMA support bracket that has an adjustable shoulder extension and a double quick release plate on the bottom and the top, the latter threads into the tripod socket of the HV-10. this makes it very easy to disengage the camera from the shoulder support extension and fit it to the pistol grip or leave the camcorder free of any attachment to carry in a pocket.

With the strap attached to the neck, shoulder bracket fully extended, holding the cam thru the hand strap and the left hand thru the pistol grip gives me rock solid support for telephoto shots and very good view of the LCD at eye level.

The whole thing is made of plastic which adds very little weight. And of course you can always deploy the hind legs of the pistol grip and converted it into a table top tripod in a snap. (as you can see in the pics).

I like to keep all kinds of crap from camera accesories, I guess this time it paid off.

Thank You
:D :D :D

I'm glad to hear someone saying that the Canon isn't as bad as some reviews are painting it to be, however, and I'll update my opinions accordingly.

Keep in mind that nobody is saying the Canon is 'bad', some are saying it's not good in low-light. Virtually all reviews rave about its PQ in good light. Those on this forum that have the unit seem to agree and also find its performance in low-light to be better than the reviews indicate. By the way, if I recall correctly, if you look at Camcorder Info they actually rated the PQ higher than the Sonys.

I don't think they make these anymore, but you might try E-Bay.

I realized this is an old one and tried search e-bay ans couple of other places with words "sony pistol grip" but had no lack. I thought if I could use more specific words, I would try to use generic search engines like google. Anyway, thank you once more for an idea to look on old camera grips! :)

HV10 is now $999 SHIPPED at www.newegg.com
NICE DEAL!

Almost incomprehensible for the kind of quality the Canon offers.

Hell of a deal! Has anyone used newegg with great results? Ken, I took my HC3 into Samys Camera here in So.Cal. I filmed with the HC3 first, then put the tape into the HV10 and filmed the same shot outside and inside. I have to say that so far it is difficult to tell a huge difference between the two cameras. I'm throwing the image up on a 100" screen using a Benq7700 projector. I almost always use a tripod, and I have the image stabilization turned off on the HC3. I wonder if that is why the two look so close? And I"ll say I have better than 20/10 vision also. The demo Samys Camera had on a laptop showed the two cameras with the same footage. The HV10 in this sample was clearly better than the HC3..... of course they wouldn't show it the other way would they?;) I bought my HC3 after reading your thoughts on it Ken. I'll have to give it another shot and see if I can come up with different results, if not maybe having the electronic image stabilization turned off on the HC3, helps it look as good as the HV10 with its optical image stabilization.

Blasst, not sure how much the EIS on the HC3 impacts PQ. I know on my 50" plasma, the HV10 has a clearly better, cleaner picture with more accurate color. I think others here have found the same thing. The thing I find very odd is that generally if you can see a difference on a small laptop screen, the differences should be even greater on a bigger screen. I've never seen an exception to that rule. But, if you don't really see a difference, I can't see the wisdom in switching. The HC3 remains a very nice cam.

BTW, I've used newegg with no problems.

used newegg many times for computer parts and always excellent prices and service

I used newegg many times as well, always got fast shipping, and, which is more important IMHO, great support if bought item showed any kind of issue. Once I had a case when vendor did not honor it's warranty - newegg simply took the problematic item back for a full refund.

Another vote for Newegg. My HV10 arrives from Newegg today. I picked the option of the free bag and six tapes. Only had to pay $7 shipping for the extras.

I used Newegg for my D* HR10-250 last year. No problems with them at all. Looks like I'm getting my Canon HV10 HD camcorder from them too. Awesome prices.

Here try this file. This is a 1080p WMV Advanced profile video from the Canon HV10 and the Sony HC-3 video cameras. I have deinterlaced it to 1920x1080 @ 30 FPS. I cut this one down to 4 mb/sec which is half of what current standard definition DVDs are recorded at. I saw no macroblocks in this file at all on my Sony 55" LCD at 1080i. However, my P4 3.0 GHZ struggled to play it smoothly. Please note that currently none of the video cards support hadware decoding for the Advanced profile. Neither Nvidia nor ATI has released drivers to decode this new codec yet. If you want to play it smoothly then it will all depend on your CPU or CPU's.

http://www.yousendit.com/download/2VfkvHNAp3k%3D

Guys here's a followup question......I'm tempted to get one of these for the holidays and move my Sony HC90 widescreen camcorder off. While I was tempted to go with the HC3, I do kinda want the best video quality I can get for the money.

Here are some concerns I have, and I hope you guys can answer them for me:

QUESTION ONE:
The lack of any external mic does bother me. Granted, I am a point-and-shooter, but the microphone situation disturbs me. With the Sony I could use my Shotgun mic, and I could also use their bluetooth mic if I wanted to. Sometimes using the Sonys built-in mic I couldn't get adequate sound levels, so I'd have to jack up the sound volume in editing and that also increased hiss, ambient noise, etc. The shotgun mic helped alot with that.

Have you guys found the audio on this camcorder to be adequate if someone is speaking at normal tones in a quiet room, or are you just picking up a ton of background noise?

QUESTION TWO:
How is the lens arranged on this camcorder....I had to add a wide-angle lens to the Sony to get an adequate image IMHO. Does the canon offer a similar wide angle lens? I see its 37mm as opposed to Sonys 30mm right? Rats....how $$$ is the canon wide-angle lens add-on......Sonys wasn't too expensive....

QUESTION THREE:
My main plan is to shoot on standard MiniDV and archive to HD....but also try to edit in Pinnacle Studio 10 (working well after last patch), but I'm not sure my 3.4Ghz Northwood with 2gigs of ram is up to the challenge...can anyone comment?

QUESTION FOUR:
Is the output of this camera really leaps and bounds above the HC3, or just marginally better than the HC3. The HC3 may still be the better choice for me.....so I'm asking for honest opinions to those who have used both.

Many Thanks!

Guys here's a followup question......I'm tempted to get one of these for the holidays and move my Sony HC90 widescreen camcorder off. While I was tempted to go with the HC3, I do kinda want the best video quality I can get for the money.

Here are some concerns I have, and I hope you guys can answer them for me:

QUESTION ONE:
The lack of any external mic does bother me. Granted, I am a point-and-shooter, but the microphone situation disturbs me. With the Sony I could use my Shotgun mic, and I could also use their bluetooth mic if I wanted to. Sometimes using the Sonys built-in mic I couldn't get adequate sound levels, so I'd have to jack up the sound volume in editing and that also increased hiss, ambient noise, etc. The shotgun mic helped alot with that.

Have you guys found the audio on this camcorder to be adequate if someone is speaking at normal tones in a quiet room, or are you just picking up a ton of background noise?

QUESTION TWO:
How is the lens arranged on this camcorder....I had to add a wide-angle lens to the Sony to get an adequate image IMHO. Does the canon offer a similar wide angle lens? I see its 37mm as opposed to Sonys 30mm right? Rats....how $$$ is the canon wide-angle lens add-on......Sonys wasn't too expensive....

QUESTION THREE:
My main plan is to shoot on standard MiniDV and archive to HD....but also try to edit in Pinnacle Studio 10 (working well after last patch), but I'm not sure my 3.4Ghz Northwood with 2gigs of ram is up to the challenge...can anyone comment?

QUESTION FOUR:
Is the output of this camera really leaps and bounds above the HC3, or just marginally better than the HC3. The HC3 may still be the better choice for me.....so I'm asking for honest opinions to those who have used both.

Many Thanks!

Well I don’t own either camcorder but I have done extensive testing on re-encoding with the raw footage for both of those cameras and the other higher end Sony camcorders. Honestly, the Canon’s quality looks as good or better than all of the other cameras. It is quite an outstanding little camera.

As far as encoding goes. Your P4 will work. However, the only thing that is really going to speed it up is a new Core2. Those processors are many many times faster than the older processors. Put it this way the < 10 minute clip I posted above took almost 24 hours to re-encode at 1080p 30 FPS with a P4. It would have probably taken 8-12 hours with a good Core2.

I am not sure what is the best way to encode the file. It all depends on how you want to play it. If you want to play it on an HD-DVD or a Blu-Ray player then you have to be careful to encode it in a format that those players can read. I am not sure if they can read or play 30 FPS or Interlaced content. My suggestion is to just encode it at 720p @ 30 FPS deinterlaced at about 2-4 mb/sec with the WMV9 advanced profile codec. That way it will be small and playable on most computers. If you need to re-encode it later to a different format then you will still be able to get a decent re-encode from the 720p file.

Guys here's a followup question......I'm tempted to get one of these for the holidays and move my Sony HC90 widescreen camcorder off. While I was tempted to go with the HC3, I do kinda want the best video quality I can get for the money.

Here are some concerns I have, and I hope you guys can answer them for me:

QUESTION ONE:
The lack of any external mic does bother me. Granted, I am a point-and-shooter, but the microphone situation disturbs me. With the Sony I could use my Shotgun mic, and I could also use their bluetooth mic if I wanted to. Sometimes using the Sonys built-in mic I couldn't get adequate sound levels, so I'd have to jack up the sound volume in editing and that also increased hiss, ambient noise, etc. The shotgun mic helped alot with that.

Have you guys found the audio on this camcorder to be adequate if someone is speaking at normal tones in a quiet room, or are you just picking up a ton of background noise?

QUESTION TWO:
How is the lens arranged on this camcorder....I had to add a wide-angle lens to the Sony to get an adequate image IMHO. Does the canon offer a similar wide angle lens? I see its 37mm as opposed to Sonys 30mm right? Rats....how $$$ is the canon wide-angle lens add-on......Sonys wasn't too expensive....

QUESTION THREE:
My main plan is to shoot on standard MiniDV and archive to HD....but also try to edit in Pinnacle Studio 10 (working well after last patch), but I'm not sure my 3.4Ghz Northwood with 2gigs of ram is up to the challenge...can anyone comment?

QUESTION FOUR:
Is the output of this camera really leaps and bounds above the HC3, or just marginally better than the HC3. The HC3 may still be the better choice for me.....so I'm asking for honest opinions to those who have used both.

Many Thanks!I can answer questions 3 and 4. I have a 2.8Ghz and 1 gig of ram, and I use Ulead5 and Nero 7 to burn HDDVD to DVD. You should be okay in that department. I filmed a short clip, using the same scene with the HV10, then my HC3, then viewed at home. I posted this before, I really couldn't tell a difference on my displays. 42" Mitz HD, and 100" screen with a 720P Benq. I know Ken has seen a difference, I have yet to replicate a "better picture" with the HV10. I hope to try it again this weekend. They are both great little cameras, and the Canon may well be a tad sharper:)

Thanks for the info on the PC.....I might be ok with my current setup.

I've actually kind of leaned back towards the Sony....reason being the ergonomics, and I just can't get past that lack of a shoe. Plus, I can re-use my sony accessories.

I realize that they are both excellent camcorders and I probably wont be disappointed with either one because I'm stepping up from widescreen MiniDV.......we shall see....

Forum member Blackbill posted a couple of links in the new camcorder forums. After reading them, maybe this is why I'm not seeing the difference Ken. I'm filming the same scene from both the HC3 and HV10, and outputting from the HC3. Maybe the HV10 shows all 1920X1080 from its component outputs, while the footage I filmed with the HV10 is then limited to 1440X1080 coming out of the HC3? Okay here is the post from the link:

"There is kind of an advantage to a camera using 1920x1080 compared to 1440x1080 chips. First the 1440x1080 is anamorphic so when it is viewed on a HDTV it is stretched back out to 1920x1080. So many people feel as though starting with a natural 1920x1080 and down sampling to 1440x1080 can give you a more natural image then just starting out with 1440x1080 anamorphic pixels.

So from a certain point of view that HV10 is special in the fact that it uses a true 1920x1080 chip. Every single 3 chip HDV or DVCPROHD camera uses less pixels then it should. Some cameras such as the SONY Z1 use 960x1080 anamorphic chips that use pixel shift to try and simulate a value closer to 1440x1080. The Canon XL-H1 uses the most pixels out of any of these cameras but it still only uses 1440x1080 chips and it uses pixel shift to simulate 1920x1080 which then gets down scaled to 1440x1080. The Panasonic HVX200 only uses 960x540 chips that pixel shift in both directions to simulate 1920x1080 pixels. The large pro Panasonic DVCPROHD cameras actually use a 1280x720 chip and do something to simulate 1280x1080 which is what DVCPROHD uses for 1080 HD. It does this by the fact that the camera shoots 720 at 60 fps. 1080 interlaced actually only uses 540 pixels for each field so it just uses one 720p frame per 1080 field and gets very good results for 1080i content.

So the HV10 is kind of special in the fact that it is one of the only HDV cameras under $100,000.00 to actually sample 1920x1080 pixels. While HDV tape and firewire output is limited to 1440x1080 if you used the HD component outputs with a HD capture card you will get the full 1920x1080 pixel raster.

With all of that garbage said have you ever seen the difference between 1920x1080 and 1440x1080? There really isn't that major of a change. After a certain level of pixels the human eye doesn't really pick up any more detail. Scan a picture at 1920x1080 and scale it down to 1440x1080 and then scale it back up to 1920x1080 and compare it with the first version and you will have a hard time really seeing any difference. You might loose a very tiny bit of sharpness but nothing you would ever notice without comparing side by side".

That was the meat of my question, summed up in your last paragraph. I didn't think there was a perceptible difference losing about 500 lines of resolution in an already HD source.

I figure at that point the quality of the optics and color reproduction come more into play than the missing 500 lines. Since this resolution is superior to 720p, and 720p is quite sharp (with 1080p honestly not looking that much sharper) I'm not really worried.

I didn't even know they made capture cards with component inputs...even still, thats basically outputting your digital signal via analog and capturing via analog, no doubt losing sharpness in the process...so there you go, back to the original equation. :P

Well the only problem here guys is that the Canon's footage, IMO, goes beyond just resolution. There is a pristinity to the Canon's picture that no other HDV camera I've ever seen, used or owned can match. In fact, last night I just downloaded four clips from the brand new Sony 3-chip FX7. These were native stream clips. I put these clips in the same editing program I use for my Canon (Edius Pro) and then played them on my 50" Fujitsu plasma.

The clips were really quite nice with excellent sharpness and very nice color. However, in dark areas of these clips (taken at some ocean shore site), I could see some video noise in darker areas of these daylight videos as well as edge enhancement (typical in Sony camcorders). Video noise and edge enhancement are virtually non-existent in the Canon HV10. In fact, that's what caused my and my buddy's initial 'gasp' when we played my first HV10 clips. They were so clean, so professional looking, that it really wowed us (he has since bought his own HV10). Now I wasn't totally shocked since I had downloaded a number of HV10 clips from a Japanese site prior to buying. Those clips convinced me that this unit was something truly special. In fact the only thing I was concerned about was whether those clips actually came from the HV10!

Now for HeadRusch, the better choice may indeed be the HC3 if the hot shoe and mike input is critical. For me though, in a personal, "fun" use camera, I could care less about mike inputs, hot shoes etc. My attitude has always been for a fun camera I want something light and something I don't have to take a second bag of accessories for. The camera should be something I want to pick up and run with. The other nice thing about the Canon is the small onboard video light. Although certainly not powerful by any means, it can bail you out of a really dark lighting situation without having to worry about an outboard light.

So it's nice to have these choices, you just have to pick your priorities.

Well the only problem here guys is that the Canon's footage, IMO, goes beyond just resolution. There is a pristinity to the Canon's picture that no other HDV camera I've ever seen, used or owned can match. In fact, last night I just downloaded four clips from the brand new Sony 3-chip FX7. These were native stream clips. I put these clips in the same editing program I use for my Canon (Edius Pro) and then played them on my 50" Fujitsu plasma.


Could you post links to the FX7 sample clips?

Could you post links to the FX7 sample clips?


Here ya go:
http://www.videomaker.com/blog/2006/11/179-sony-hdr-fx7-footage

Fellas, where can I get the codec that can play those HV10/HC3 comparison clips from above???? Scouring the net I can't seem to find it. WCV1 or something like that?

Danke'

Fellas, where can I get the codec that can play those HV10/HC3 comparison clips from above???? Scouring the net I can't seem to find it. WCV1 or something like that?

Danke'

I think you can find it here.

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=117957

Just picked up the HV-10 from BB for $1019 after a CC price match.
The product is awesome. I do need some help with DVHS Capture. What are everyone using for settings?

Here's what I use for settings for CapDVHS (as retained in CapDVHS.ini)

[Capture]
Device=-1
FileName=1
SaveDir=C:\fun\hdtv\recordings\
TrimPacket=1
FULL=0
LPCM=0
LastTime=64
LastFile=!!
ConvPES=1
PowerOn=0
PowerOff=0
FileExists=0
AddDelay=0
AddDate=1
DateFormat=YYYYMMDD
SyncByte=1
PS_EXT=.ts
TS188_EXT=.ts
TS192_EXT=.ts
NameFormat=YYMMDDHHNNSS
Folder=1
TaskTray=0
ReservePowerOff=0
ReservePowerOn=0
OutDir=C:\fun\
Wait=100

I just purchased mine.

Item Description Unit Price Quantity Total Price

HV10 High Definition Camcorder $1,299.00 1 $1,299.00

Dell Home Customers: Save 15% off Select Cameras & Camcorders! - $194.85

Buy $400 worth of EnA Product - Recieve 15% off - $165.62

Subtotal: $938.53

Shipping and Handling: $8.00
Shipping Discount: -$8.00

Tax Total: $39.65
Total: $978.18

dell still shows $1299. how did you get two 15% off coupons?

Just posted this on the HD-DVD software thread, but I thought I would try my luck here. Has anyone had success using the HV-10 + Pinncacle 10.7 to produce HD-DVDs (with one single software package). Is this the same Pinnacle software package that is being offered free with the HV10?

Thanks in advance.

Forum member Blackbill posted a couple of links in the new camcorder forums. After reading them, maybe this is why I'm not seeing the difference Ken. I'm filming the same scene from both the HC3 and HV10, and outputting from the HC3. Maybe the HV10 shows all 1920X1080 from its component outputs, while the footage I filmed with the HV10 is then limited to 1440X1080 coming out of the HC3? Okay here is the post from the link:

"There is kind of an advantage to a camera using 1920x1080 compared to 1440x1080 chips. First the 1440x1080 is anamorphic so when it is viewed on a HDTV it is stretched back out to 1920x1080. So many people feel as though starting with a natural 1920x1080 and down sampling to 1440x1080 can give you a more natural image then just starting out with 1440x1080 anamorphic pixels.

So from a certain point of view that HV10 is special in the fact that it uses a true 1920x1080 chip. Every single 3 chip HDV or DVCPROHD camera uses less pixels then it should. Some cameras such as the SONY Z1 use 960x1080 anamorphic chips that use pixel shift to try and simulate a value closer to 1440x1080. The Canon XL-H1 uses the most pixels out of any of these cameras but it still only uses 1440x1080 chips and it uses pixel shift to simulate 1920x1080 which then gets down scaled to 1440x1080. The Panasonic HVX200 only uses 960x540 chips that pixel shift in both directions to simulate 1920x1080 pixels. The large pro Panasonic DVCPROHD cameras actually use a 1280x720 chip and do something to simulate 1280x1080 which is what DVCPROHD uses for 1080 HD. It does this by the fact that the camera shoots 720 at 60 fps. 1080 interlaced actually only uses 540 pixels for each field so it just uses one 720p frame per 1080 field and gets very good results for 1080i content.

So the HV10 is kind of special in the fact that it is one of the only HDV cameras under $100,000.00 to actually sample 1920x1080 pixels. While HDV tape and firewire output is limited to 1440x1080 if you used the HD component outputs with a HD capture card you will get the full 1920x1080 pixel raster.

With all of that garbage said have you ever seen the difference between 1920x1080 and 1440x1080? There really isn't that major of a change. After a certain level of pixels the human eye doesn't really pick up any more detail. Scan a picture at 1920x1080 and scale it down to 1440x1080 and then scale it back up to 1920x1080 and compare it with the first version and you will have a hard time really seeing any difference. You might loose a very tiny bit of sharpness but nothing you would ever notice without comparing side by side".


You will not SEE the actual 1920x1080 even when the cam is directly connected to the tv... (HDTV standard is 1440x1080... known as HD2) I don't even know if they make 1920x1080 tv's... you would have to check that. BUt you are correct in that the reason why the canon is clearer in full light is because the FULL 1440x1080 pixels are being displayed (this because of the oversized cmos). I must say, for over-all performance, I prefer the HC3, but the canon IS UNIQUE and can only be compared to the high end machines with respect to the cmos being used.

Just posted this on the HD-DVD software thread, but I thought I would try my luck here. Has anyone had success using the HV-10 + Pinncacle 10.7 to produce HD-DVDs (with one single software package). Is this the same Pinnacle software package that is being offered free with the HV10?

Thanks in advance.

I am not too sure how the canon reacts with studio 10.7 (never tried it myself.... don't like talking about things I haven't PERSONALY tried). But I do use studio 10.7 with my HC3 and it works GREAT!! You can do REAL HDdvd disk author to a 4.7/8.5gig disk and play it back in the Toshiba. The picture is nothing short of breathtaking. It's the same as if you were playing back from the cam itself.

$999.99 at Circuit City right now!
http://www.circuitcity.com/ccd/productDetail.do?oid=160294&WT.mc_n=3&WT.mc_t=U&cm_ven=COMPARISON%20SHOPPING&cm_cat=CNET&cm_pla=DATAFEED-%3EPRODUCTS&cm_ite=1%20PRODUCT&cm_keycode=3

I just bought the HV10 this week and took some video of our Thanksgiving festivities. The quality of the video is simply jaw dropping. How do they get such good HD out of a camera that is so small? Just unbelievable.

I brought the video into my Mac, used iMovie HD to fix it up a little bit with transitions etc., then exported the video back to the HV10 and watched it. I feel as if I hired someone with HDNet or Discovery HD Theater to film our family Thanksgiving!

It is true that some of the buttons are small, but that is a more than fair tradeoff to have something that can slip into a coat pocket. This is really a technological marvel.

Wow.

-Jeff

Hows the audio.....is the mic sensitive enough to pick up what you are filming, or is it too much bias towards the cameraman/woman.....

You will not SEE the actual 1920x1080 even when the cam is directly connected to the tv... (HDTV standard is 1440x1080... known as HD2) I don't even know if they make 1920x1080 tv's... you would have to check that. BUt you are correct in that the reason why the canon is clearer in full light is because the FULL 1440x1080 pixels are being displayed (this because of the oversized cmos). I must say, for over-all performance, I prefer the HC3, but the canon IS UNIQUE and can only be compared to the high end machines with respect to the cmos being used.
I don't know where you get your information, but there are a lot of TVs that display the full resolution of 1920x1080p. I have a Sony SXRD and it displays it all.

1440x1080 is actually a 4:3 resolution. In order to display as widescreen it has to be anamorphic. Unless the Canon is scaling its image it will display the full resolution of the CMOS. I don't have one, so I can't say for sure.

I just got the HV10 in Japan for $750 US dollars. It has an option to switch the menu to English so everything should be fine. The color I got is all silver. I think Japan only has a choice between the black version and the all silver version because I have only seen the black one at CC and BB. Debated over this or the hc3 for a while so hopefully I'll be satisfied with my decision.

How are lens attachments attached? Is their threading on the lens? Is it 37mm? Will any 37mm attachments work?

Wow, looks like a good camera. Might have to look into it some more.

Got mine a couple weeks ago. I have a few questions:

1) the "end search" function seems to stop playback about a second or two before the acutal footage stops. I obviously don't want that. Am I doing something wrong? Or does it just seem that way, but it actually stops in the right spot?

2) Counter: It seems that sometimes my counter starts at 0:00 when I start recording. It seems to be after I do some playback, then get the tape in the right spot to record (I"m not using end search due to # 1 above). Would the counter not reset if I used end search? I'd rather see a running total of recorded time than have it reset often.

3) in order to record an HD-DVD, what burners are you using? I plan to get the Pinnacle software that comes free with the camcorder and start editing in HD. But I don't have a drive yet that can burn them. I plan to go the HD-DVD route for now. Please let me know what computer DVD burners you are using.

Thanks!

I don't know where you get your information, but there are a lot of TVs that display the full resolution of 1920x1080p. I have a Sony SXRD and it displays it all.

1440x1080 is actually a 4:3 resolution. In order to display as widescreen it has to be anamorphic. Unless the Canon is scaling its image it will display the full resolution of the CMOS. I don't have one, so I can't say for sure.

well... if you read my post PROPERLY you will see that I made no claim that there wasn't such a tv. In fact I do believe I said I was unsure about it... you need to pay closer attention!!

And if you are talking about watching HD2 on your tv (an average BD or hd-dvd movie for example) then you are not watching the FULL 1920x1080.... your tv is upscaling because the HD standard is 1440x1080.

3) in order to record an HD-DVD, what burners are you using? I plan to get the Pinnacle software that comes free with the camcorder and start editing in HD. But I don't have a drive yet that can burn them. I plan to go the HD-DVD route for now. Please let me know what computer DVD burners you are using.

Thanks!

You don't need a special burner to burn HDdvd with pinnacle... you can do REAL hddvd with any standard dvd writer (works better with a high end one though)

Great to know! Thank you for the info blackbill! I'll give it a shot soon. I currently have a MadDog dual-layer DVD burner as well as a Sony single-layer DVD burner. I'll try it first on the Dual-Layer drive.

dell still shows $1299. how did you get two 15% off coupons?

hmmmm... this morning I added the camera to my cart and went to checkout. The 15% off coupon for orders over $400 is still there. The other is gone.

hmm

I searched and could not find anything on this topic so I am hoping someone can help. I have a Samsung HL-S7178W DLP set which I have connected to my Denon A/V receiver via optical cable so that I can get Dolby Digital playback for OTA via the built in tuner. That connection works great so I assumed (my first mistake?) that all audio sources connected directly to the 7178 would use that optical connection, particularly my new Canon HV10 camcorder I have connected via Firewire (awesome little HD camcorder). The video via the Firewire hookup looks incredible but I get no audio through my A/V sound system. I can hear audio from the camcorder through the TV speakers so I know the audio is being sent to the 7178 via Firewire, but I really do not want to use the TV speakers if I do not have to. Is this set not capable of passing audio via optical out from other inputs besides the built in tuner?

Joe

I searched and could not find anything on this topic so I am hoping someone can help. I have a Samsung HL-S7178W DLP set which I have connected to my Denon A/V receiver via optical cable so that I can get Dolby Digital playback for OTA via the built in tuner. That connection works great so I assumed (my first mistake?) that all audio sources connected directly to the 7178 would use that optical connection, particularly my new Canon HV10 camcorder I have connected via Firewire (awesome little HD camcorder). The video via the Firewire hookup looks incredible but I get no audio through my A/V sound system. I can hear audio from the camcorder through the TV speakers so I know the audio is being sent to the 7178 via Firewire, but I really do not want to use the TV speakers if I do not have to. Is this set not capable of passing audio via optical out from other inputs besides the built in tuner?

Joe

Joe, you have a PM for your set up problem.
Thanks
Luidoly.

Hi Guys, this is my 1st post around here...

With much interest I have read all the stuff about picture quality but what amazes me is that audio quality is not discussed much.

I am hesitant about this camera. Here's why:
For over 4 years, i have been using my trusty old Canon Optura 100MC. Perfect picture quality, but the built-in microphone picks up a LOT of unwanted sounds. You can clearly hear the tape transport. Now there is one guy (JackRand2000, in the comments below the review at camcorderinfo), that complains about the HV10 having this same problem. In fact, he has returned the camera because of it.

Here's wat my Canon camera sounded like:
http://www.filecrunch.com/file/~56gg3c
(unaltered sound converted to MP3 for portability)

You can hear why I bought the Canon $250 shoe-mounted microphone. And you might understand that this could very easily spoil my fun, because there IS no accessory shoe on the HV10.

Do any of you guys recognize this in a HV10? Of course it is audible only indoors in almost silent surroundings, and not outside. But, as Headrusch pointed out: in a quiet conversation you would pick it up too...

Please let me know,
regs
pieterj
Netherlands

I find the onboard mike no better or worse than other cams of its size. I've owned the HC1 & HC3 and I find it comparable to those.

Ken thanks for the quick response.
Do you (or anyone else) by any chance know of or have samples that are shot under similar conditions (quiet indoors), so I can do a comparison?
tnx
pieterj

Ken thanks for the quick response.
Do you (or anyone else) by any chance know of or have samples that are shot under similar conditions (quiet indoors), so I can do a comparison?
tnx
pieterj
the sound on HV10 is most likely comparable to your older Canon.
The extenal mic and lanc features were delibrately left out on HV10 by Canon so it won't compete with its $4000+ pro HD models. With it pro like video performance HV10 can easily be a pro HD cam if it has these add-on possibilities which may cost less $100 for Canon to implement. So for those of you still wishing to have some pro add-ons features on HV10 they are not something to be desired from Canon but something you just can NOT have from Canon's perspective.

I bet Kenny wouldn't need his FX7 if HV10 had all of these features. ;)

I can't argue with that, GodobeHD. Still I would be interested in anyones info on low-db audio samples...

I haven't tried it yet, it was exceptionally clear on some outdoor footage I took....I will try the indoor book-reading thing sometime soon however (sometimes I film the wife reading to the kids, sometimes at bedtime so her tone is softer, so if they turn out ignorant they can't blame us) :D

I can recommend the >$40 Power 2000 2000ma 315 battery replacements however. They hold a much longer charge and my camera didn't appear to fry when I used them. I did a 60 minute tape and then popped in another one and the battery indicator was still above 1/2. Compared to the stock battery's 30 minute lifespan, that is.
I paired it with a $25.00 Power2000 travel charger.

Forget Canon's 70 dollar 315 battery. Even the power2000's dont hold a charge as long a year from now (a common problem with 3rd party batteries like this) its still cheaper to buy new ones than be rocking the $70.00 Canon 315's.

I bet Kenny wouldn't need his FX7 if HV10 had all of these features. ;)

Godobe, I bet you're right! :D

The extenal mic and lanc features were delibrately left out on HV10 by Canon so it won't compete with its $4000+ pro HD models. With it pro like video performance HV10 can easily be a pro HD cam if it has these add-on possibilities which may cost less $100 for Canon to implement. So for those of you still wishing to have some pro add-ons features on HV10 they are not something to be desired from Canon but something you just can NOT have from Canon's perspective.

Interesting info. Can you cite a reference for what you said?

The extenal mic and lanc features were delibrately left out on HV10 by Canon so it won't compete with its $4000+ pro HD models.



I would love to see some kind of reference to that as well.... sounds a little far-fetched to be perfectly honest.

How can you expect Canon or its related people in their official capacity to be on record saying that?! I just heard from people knowing a little bit about industry telling me in private. This type of practice in designing different levels of products targeting different cosumers and price points is so common among all industries. Why should we assume Canon just doesn't practice that. The point is if you compare the HV10 to Canon's Pro HD cams there aren't many things missing in terms of feature and performance.

How can you expect Canon or its related people in their official capacity to be on record saying that?! I just heard from people knowing a little bit about industry telling me in private. This type of practice in designing different levels of products targeting different cosumers and price points is so common among all industries. Why should we assume Canon just doesn't practice that. The point is if you compare the HV10 to Canon's Pro HD cams there aren't many things missing in terms of feature and performance.

Come on... gimme a break!!

I am not a pro... but this is a BIG hobby for me. As a result I own some pretty "pro-ish" software, and I know point-blank that if you went onto an Avid or sony vegas forum and even suggested the thought of a pro using the a dinky little HV10 as a work cam, you would get laughed at pretty hard.... Don't believe me...give it a try.

The HV10 is a nice little cam, and under the correct circumstances, can produce an image pretty close to a pro cam... but it is not now, nor will it EVER be considered anything even remotely close to a pro cam. I doubt the HV10 could even take the pounding for one day that a pro cam takes.

It is a consumer-hobbyist's cam... nothing more..... Let's try to avoid such blown out statements shall we??

I watched some footage I took on my HV10 for the first time on my HDTV and I am shocked at how clear the picture is!!!! This camera is awesome!

Come on... gimme a break!!

I am not a pro... but this is a BIG hobby for me. As a result I own some pretty "pro-ish" software, and I know point-blank that if you went onto an Avid or sony vegas forum and even suggested the thought of a pro using the a dinky little HV10 as a work cam, you would get laughed at pretty hard.... Don't believe me...give it a try.

The HV10 is a nice little cam, and under the correct circumstances, can produce an image pretty close to a pro cam... but it is not now, nor will it EVER be considered anything even remotely close to a pro cam. I doubt the HV10 could even take the pounding for one day that a pro cam takes.

It is a consumer-hobbyist's cam... nothing more..... Let's try to avoid such blown out statements shall we??

It is the pro HD level performance we are talking about here not the pro perception. The ultimate benchmark for any video cam is its video footage, and if a serious hobbyist or pro looks at the video footages coming out HV10 (not knowing its HV10) he or she wouldn't be laughing at them for sure. IMHO judging from 125 inch screen HV10 video quality comes indistinguishably close to that of pro HD cams.

Of course I agree with you about not using it as a work cam. I guess you won't be taken seriously as videographer by any client if you show up with that little thing.

Funny: this discussion points out exactly how much of this camera business is about positioning and selecting the right features&package for the right price.

Or does it? Maybe ascertaining the audio quality (mic, internal acoustics, AD cirquitry) will convey more of a difference. Anyone? (see my earlier posts) ;)

yes, you can hear the tape transport in a quiet indoor setting but I'm not picky so I have no problems with hearing unwanted sounds in the audio...... if you're so concerned about getting a camcorder with no audio problems, then the HV10 isn't a good choice for you... the audio sounds fine to me because the tape transport sound is only audible if you turn up your TV volume really loud.... the picture quality is so damn good that I could care less about the sound

Come on... gimme a break!!

I am not a pro... but this is a BIG hobby for me. As a result I own some pretty "pro-ish" software, and I know point-blank that if you went onto an Avid or sony vegas forum and even suggested the thought of a pro using the a dinky little HV10 as a work cam, you would get laughed at pretty hard.... Don't believe me...give it a try.

The HV10 is a nice little cam, and under the correct circumstances, can produce an image pretty close to a pro cam... but it is not now, nor will it EVER be considered anything even remotely close to a pro cam. I doubt the HV10 could even take the pounding for one day that a pro cam takes.

It is a consumer-hobbyist's cam... nothing more..... Let's try to avoid such blown out statements shall we??

I think Godobe was quite clear in what he said. The fact is, like it or not, the PQ of this cam IS up to the level of the larger prosumer HDV cameras. The PQ of this unit gives up nothing to the larger Canon A1 & G1 (except in low light situations). I have seen posts on other sites by owners of these larger Canon cams who also have the HV10 and have said just that. They have done A/B shoots and say the HV10 is virtually indistinguishable from the larger Canon cams.

I own a new Sony FX7 and I can tell you the HD picture of the HV10 is actually cleaner than the FX7. Yes, the FX7 is brighter and sharper, but there is a professional feel to the HV10's picture in terms of its total lack of video noise, that just sets this thing apart from anything I've seen.

Come on... gimme a break!!

I am not a pro... but this is a BIG hobby for me. As a result I own some pretty "pro-ish" software, and I know point-blank that if you went onto an Avid or sony vegas forum and even suggested the thought of a pro using the a dinky little HV10 as a work cam, you would get laughed at pretty hard.... Don't believe me...give it a try.

The HV10 is a nice little cam, and under the correct circumstances, can produce an image pretty close to a pro cam... but it is not now, nor will it EVER be considered anything even remotely close to a pro cam. I doubt the HV10 could even take the pounding for one day that a pro cam takes.

It is a consumer-hobbyist's cam... nothing more..... Let's try to avoid such blown out statements shall we??

blackbill,

Why waste your and my time posting stuff like this? Nobody ever said HV10 is good for a pro.

We are talking about VIDEO IMAGE QUALITY here, that's all.

I am sure you "own" some pro software. You now hear from someone who used to design and develop this "pro" software you own.

the sound on HV10 is most likely comparable to your older Canon.
The extenal mic and lanc features were delibrately left out on HV10 by Canon so it won't compete with its $4000+ pro HD models. With it pro like video performance HV10 can easily be a pro HD cam if it has these add-on possibilities which may cost less $100 for Canon to implement. So for those of you still wishing to have some pro add-ons features on HV10 they are not something to be desired from Canon but something you just can NOT have from Canon's perspective.

I bet Kenny wouldn't need his FX7 if HV10 had all of these features. ;)

Am I the only one here that can read???



" With it pro like video performance HV10 can easily be a pro HD cam if it has these add-on possibilities which may cost less $100 for Canon to implement. "

Sounds to me like we're looking at this cam from a PRO angle

I repeat... this is not now, nor will it EVER be a pro cam.

Thanks tamakin, if you ever come arount to posting an audio example i would be très grateful :)

All, because i passed the 5-post mark, i have restored the link in my 1st post, thanks.

pieterj

I had tried out both the HV10 and the Sony HDR-HC3 and was pretty impressed with both. As everyone has noted, the PQ from the HV10 in bright daylight is spectacular. Ultimately, a few things concerned me -

* History of issues with Canon tape transports - though I've heard of this primarily among GL2s. Interestingly, Consumer Reports suggests that the frequency of serious issues is about 3x as great as with Sony camcorders. Anyone heard anything about whether the earlier issues have been fixed?

* Lowlight performance - My opinion of the Canon's performance in indoor lighting (60w bulb during the evening) is a bit lower than some of the other folks that have posted. In fact, the noise I noticed was pretty noticeable, moreso than on the HDR-HC3. That said, the HV-10 remained fairly sharp, while the HDR-HC3 became much softer in lower light. All in all, I probably prefer the HV10 if you don't have better lighting - though you'd certainly be better off with a video light. In this regard, the inability to connect a legitimate video light (and, sorry, the light on the HV10 doesn't meet this criterion) is pretty unfortunate. Because I take a fair amount of video of our baby in lowish light, I'd much prefer to have a hot shoe to add on a video light.

* Inability to add on a mic - The mic on the HV10 is adequate generally. If you do any talking while filming, the placement of the mic pretty much ensures that your voice will dominate the audio entirely. For this reason, among others, I really wish there was some way to add on an external mic.

For the time being, I'm going to wait to see if the Sony HDR-HC7 stacks up better vs. the HV10 on the video side of things. It's got a modestly bigger CMOS sensor and a new color system, so I'm hopeful that it might close some ground on the HV10 in the PQ department. Along with the hot shoe and mic input, it seems to have the potential to address my main concerns. Hopefully, we'll see some reviews coming out pretty soon.

I just pulled the trigger on the HV10 after my Sony hdr-hc1 stopped working ,warranty expired and sony wants 500+ just to look at it . That was it for me this is the second Sony mini dv I have had to replace because sonys ripoff customer service.As much as I like sony I have had it,I just hope the ps3 I just bought doesn't crap out as soon as the warranty expires. I also bought a Hdtv that turns off after 5 mins and then again after 2 hours . They a have had two techs come and try to fix it.I would have taken it back but it weighs 250 pounds ,the last guy took the guts 3 weeks ago , the thing hasn't worked since I bought it in october.Again poor service . I was thinking about waiting for the new HDD camcorders, not sony but jvc, but I am using the camera for shooting friends and clients powder skiing so I like the portability of the canon . And I have had good service from Canon in the past. They just rebuilt a 1200$ lens for 100.Not near the scam sony pulls. But I did go for the 4 year mack for an extra 90$ , extra impact battery for $40 and tape for 11$ so with shipping 1098 seems like a deal. Hope fully it will be a better experience than Sony.

Come on... gimme a break!!

I am not a pro... but this is a BIG hobby for me. As a result I own some pretty "pro-ish" software, and I know point-blank that if you went onto an Avid or sony vegas forum and even suggested the thought of a pro using the a dinky little HV10 as a work cam, you would get laughed at pretty hard.... Don't believe me...give it a try.

The HV10 is a nice little cam, and under the correct circumstances, can produce an image pretty close to a pro cam... but it is not now, nor will it EVER be considered anything even remotely close to a pro cam. I doubt the HV10 could even take the pounding for one day that a pro cam takes.

It is a consumer-hobbyist's cam... nothing more..... Let's try to avoid such blown out statements shall we??
I would like to find a Prosumer cam that could be taken into the streets (of Paris, Rome, New York, etc,) and not be as noticeable as pro cameras are. I want something I can put in a jacket pocket and pull out when needed. I want something with a wide enough angle (30 would be nice) w/o adding an accessory.
And I would like to be able to add a Stereo (good sonic quality) mic when circumstances allow. But the builtin mic should not be where my fingers need to be. (I have large hands.)

What Camera (under $2K) should I be looking for?

Thanks.

No such animal...

I know. Optical Image Stabilizer is also a must have for me.

I know. Optical Image Stabilizer is also a must have for me.

wait for Sony HC7 in a month.

I am awaiting the HC7 as well, although this Canon looks impressive. One thing I will never get, why 720/60p isn't the de-facto standard for HD camcorders. You don't give up much resolution, and dealing with interlaced video, ESPECIALLY high defintion 1080i interlaced video is a COMPLETE PAIN. Combing artifacts are the norm on most computer players, and I think wmv files created in most video editors have the improper deinterlacing/combing artifacts "burned in" meaning they can't even be fixed on playback.

I am able to get mpeg-2 transport streams to play correctly in some players, but just because I can do it doesn't mean people you send these HD files have their players setup properly to deinterlace 1080i video.

Interlaced video is just a pain, how much extra bandwidth would 720/60p be compared to 1080/60i HDV format? Just seems results would be better all around if everything were 720p instead of 1080i.

One thing I will never get, why 720/60p isn't the de-facto standard for HD camcorders. You don't give up much resolution, and dealing with interlaced video, ESPECIALLY high defintion 1080i interlaced video is a COMPLETE PAIN. .
That's because 1080i can become 1080p with proper deinterlacing while 720p never will. And 1080p just looks way better on a big screen than 720p. The reason we are having this debate about 1080i vs 720p is because of the lack of computer chips to adquately perform this 1080i>1080p task. Does anybody doubt that computer chips will remain the current state of the art for years to come? Pretty soon this issue of having 720p vs 1080i will be moot because there will be no comparison between 720p vs 1080p. You'd better believe that you are better off in shooting all your HDV in 1080i now.

If you play back on a decent 1080p HDTV with good 1080i deinterlacing, yes I agree, 1080/60i is better overall vs 720/60p. But the current methods of distributing HD content means most people wont have a 1080p display, and many who do don't have it setup to properly deinterlace 1080/60i sources.

Right now 1080/60i is a total pain in the neck, and 720/60p would be far better looking for MOST setups, and make for better looking wmv and mpeg files for computer playback.

With this and other HD cams, what is your output media? Can you save it on a regular DVDr? or, is it destined to live on tape/hdd until a resonable priced HD DVDr comes out?

Does Adobe Premiere Essentials support HD source yet?

How big are the files, say, for a 30 minute video?

Thanks.

With this and other HD cams, what is your output media? Can you save it on a regular DVDr? or, is it destined to live on tape/hdd until a resonable priced HD DVDr comes out?

Does Adobe Premiere Essentials support HD source yet?

How big are the files, say, for a 30 minute video?

Thanks.
The output media many people use on this forum is a regular DVD disk. The process is shooting in HDV>capturing in PC>authoring in HD-DVD>burning on to a DVD >playing in an HD-DVD player>watching on an HDTV. Nothing fancy, pretty standard just like a SD DV video.

Yes, Adobe supports HDV.

One hour HDV takes 12GB.

The output media many people use on this forum is a regular DVD disk. The process is shooting in HDV>capturing in PC>authoring in HD-DVD>burning on to a DVD >playing in an HD-DVD player>watching on an HDTV. Nothing fancy, pretty standard just like a SD DV video.

Yes, Adobe supports HDV.

One hour HDV takes 12GB.

Someone correct me if it's wrong. The weakest link in this chain would be the ">burning onto a DVD" part, where the resolution is somewhat degraded? What's the output resolution for the material coming out of a DVD. It can't be anything higher than 480p, couldn't it.

I suppose one can burn the stuff onto an HD-DVD or blue-ray but the prices for the drives and media are still prohibitive.

The output from these DVDs will be 1080i or 720p or whatever the original res is.

This question/topic has come up hundreds times on this forum in the past year, so much so that AVS had created a sticky just for that:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=705146&page=1&pp=30

You do NOT need any HD-DVD/BlueRay burner and media to play HD-DVD/BlueRay. All you need are regular DVD burner and DVD disks and an HD-DVD player like Toshiba HD-A1/A2. One DVD+R/-R holds 23min of HDV and dual layer DVD holds 41min of HDV.

You can burn High Def content to a standard DVD and play it on a HDDVD player, but you'll only get about 20 minutes per standard DVD-R disc at maximum bitrate of 25mbps.

Someone correct me if it's wrong. The weakest link in this chain would be the ">burning onto a DVD" part, where the resolution is somewhat degraded? What's the output resolution for the material coming out of a DVD. It can't be anything higher than 480p, couldn't it.

I suppose one can burn the stuff onto an HD-DVD or blue-ray but the prices for the drives and media are still prohibitive.
understand where your thinking that a dvd is limited to 480p only but your wrong.

as others pointed out in this case it is simply about the files burned to the standard dvd media and then the hd dvd player can read those files and display it in hd resolution.

It has been posted already on AVS, but there is a possible leak on HV20 coming.
It was on listed CircuitCity.com earlier, but it was removed http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/25/canons-hv20-hd-camcorder-leaked/

So far it looks like it has the same specs with the addition of HDMI port and mic input.

understand where your thinking that a dvd is limited to 480p only but your wrong.

as others pointed out in this case it is simply about the files burned to the standard dvd media and then the hd dvd player can read those files and display it in hd resolution.

Thanks for the clarification. So it's the files, and a necessary HD-DVD player. Hope they got that BD-HD war sorted out so I can decide which format to burn to.

It will be several years before the winner of HD-BD war emerges. One thing has already been crystal clear now though: HD option costs only 15cents (for a DVD disk)while BD option costs $22 (for a BD disk) plus $700 BD burner investment.

The reason for this buge difference is also obvious: Sony's insistence on controling very aspect of the BD process, from content to authoring to disks. I think as consumers we have to send those arrogant manufactures a message that we won't throw away our hard earned $$$ just for endorsing one format over the other. The hundreds of hours I have burned on my home made HD-DVDs have more than paid for the Toshiba player itself.

You can burn High Def content to a standard DVD and play it on a HDDVD player, but you'll only get about 20 minutes per standard DVD-R disc at maximum bitrate of 25mbps.

You can also use a Double Layer disc and drop the bitrate to 19000 (you won't notice much difference) and you will get about 54 minutes on a disc (depending on the type of audio used)

But Toshiba is gearing up to release the HD DVD burner in march or April... no word on the pricing but one toshiba official stated that it will most likely be around 1/2 the price of the BD burners. The HD DVD media (15g) is about $15.

So even when burning REAL hd dvd's, it will be cheaper than BD.

Did anyone watch "The Office" on NBC last night?
During the intro, Dwight was making a video of Michael - he was using a Canon HV10. :cool:

Did anyone watch "The Office" on NBC last night?
During the intro, Dwight was making a video of Michael - he was using a Canon HV10. :cool:


Good catch, I didn’t even notice what camera he was using. Too bad NBC does record the office with the HV10. I think it would look better than the crap they feed us right now!

The Canon website doesn't seem to have a picture of the HV20. The one shown on the press release doesn't look like the HV10, but perhaps that's is the real deal.

Check out the HV20 thread in this forum.

Hi, could you post an image of what you shoot with this extra lens . I bought a kenko converter x0.6 for my Canon MVX2I and the result is ugly.

Thank you

Have any HV10 users bought a Canon wide angle lens for the HV10?

I really need to find a solution for my HV10 because it is hard to frame everything at party's in side a house for example with out shooting from the next room.