I'm in the video production business and have used professional 3-chip HDV cameras in the past, though we mostly use HDCAM for our shoots.

However, I'm in the market for an affordable and more importantly, portable, HDV camera for family use. My daughter was born recently and I would like to capture those special moments in HD.

Any recommendations? I know new models come out all the time so I wanted to see what the latest and greatest models were. My budget is around $2,000 or under.

Thanks very much for your help.

I was also looking for a HDV camcorder recently and liked the reviews I read on the Canon HV20. After trying out an inexpensive 3CCD SD camcorder I returned it and went with the Canon HV20 HDV camcorder and am very happy with the PQ using the HDMI output connected directly to my HDTV. Although it does get grainy indoors (depending on the light level), it still does better than the 3CCD SD camcorder did indoors, so I'm very happy with it. It records to miniDV so I don't know how you feel about that. I like the format personally, since you end up with a back-up tape right away.

Wow, thanks a lot for the recommendation. I haven't kept up with the latest models and didn't even know there were ones connected with HDMI! This sounds like a good bet. My only reservation is that during my wedding 2 years ago, we recorded it on a rented Sony HDV camera. One of the reasons also I'm looking for a HDV camcorder is to playback these tapes. My experience with playing Sony-recorded DV on Canon VTRs and vice-versa was that they are not always 100% compatible. Haven't tried it with HDV though. Has anyone had experience with this?

Either Canon HV20 or Sony HDR-HC7.

I have both.

Both have pluses and minuses.

Sony is better in terms of ergonomics, stills, LANC support and I have an underwater enclosure where it fits.

Canon has 24p mode which blows away anything I've ever seen from my cams in terms of PQ.

Either Canon HV20 or Sony HDR-HC7.

I have both.

Both have pluses and minuses.

Sony is better in terms of ergonomics, stills, LANC support and I have an underwater enclosure where it fits.

Canon has 24p mode which blows away anything I've ever seen from my cams in terms of PQ.

If you could only have one which would it be? And why?

Wow, thanks a lot for the recommendation. I haven't kept up with the latest models and didn't even know there were ones connected with HDMI! This sounds like a good bet. My only reservation is that during my wedding 2 years ago, we recorded it on a rented Sony HDV camera. One of the reasons also I'm looking for a HDV camcorder is to playback these tapes. My experience with playing Sony-recorded DV on Canon VTRs and vice-versa was that they are not always 100% compatible. Haven't tried it with HDV though. Has anyone had experience with this?
yes, HDV tapes are 100% compatible among difference brands/models, at least between Sony and Canon, because I have tried it.
Actually the prefered method of playback nowadays is thru a high def DVD player (an HDDVD player or a PS3). Basically you dump the footage onto a computer and then burn the files onto a regular DVD disk (yes, those 10 cents DVD+/-Rs). You stick them into a Toshiba HDDVD player or a PS3, then the HD video comes on your HDTV exactly the same as you hook the cam directly to the TV. The single layer DVD holds 23min of HDV and dual layers holds about 42min of HDV.
If you could only have one which would it be? And why?
Besides the difference Galileo has mentioned I can see other major differece being the noise in the bright scenes. Sony HDV cams, particularly their older models like FX1, HC1 have way too much artificial sharpening that appears as black lines in high contrast areas. Canon is almost absent of it. HC7 still has some hint of it. But HD video in the last two years has had a sea change. They are all pretty close in PQ to most casual observers.

In the end, I got the Sony HDR-HC7E today. The Canon sounded good as well, especially with the 24p setting, but I wasn't sure at the time about the compatibility with HDV footage recorded on a Sony camcorder. Thanks for clearing that up anyway, GodobeHD.

The Sony HC7E also has a 6.1 megapixel still camera, while the Canon's HV20 is only 3.1 megapixels. I was actually quite surprised at the high pixel count of the Sony, as my Sony DSC-T50 is only 7.1 megapixels, so the HC7E's is right up there. My previous Sony digital camera was only 4 megapixels, and that was good enough for about 3 years, so I'm thinking the HC7E would be excellent to take stills as well, in case I didn't have my regular still camera and also for convenience's sake.

Also, I bought a new 2GB Memory Stick ProDuo with the camcorder, so I will use this memory stick with my digital camera, and put my old 1 GB card in the camcorder.

In the end, it seems like the PQ of the both the Canon and Sony were close enough where it was the smaller convenience features made the difference. If I wasn't already invested in using Sony products, i.e. having had shot my wedding video with the Sony HVR-Z1 and also owning a Sony digital camera with Memory Stick, I probably would have been more than happy with the Canon.

GodobeHD, I wasn't aware that you could just play HD MPEG-2 off HD-DVD or BD players. I actually have both, with the Xbox 360 HD-DVD add-on and also the PS3, so I will definitely give this a try. A single-layer DVD storing 23 minutes is pretty good. I was actually just thinking to myself when HD-DVD or Blu-ray burners will become available and affordable as I definitely want to back up my HDV footage and also for ease of use. Would probably want to limit the use of the camcorder as a playback device as much as possible to limit wear and tear on the head. Also, mini-DV tapes are not so reliable, especially after a few years, so I'm looking buy a 500GB HDD to back everything up.

BTW, how would you compare the PQ of Sony HC7 or Canon HV20 to Sony HVR-Z1? You mentioned the sea change in HD quality the last two years, so I'm wondering how close the gap has been narrowed between 1CCD and 3CCD camcorders?

Galileo, can you do me a favor and read my post on "jittery video with HDR-HC7" and tell me what you think?

Thanks

BTW, how would you compare the PQ of Sony HC7 or Canon HV20 to Sony HVR-Z1? You mentioned the sea change in HD quality the last two years, so I'm wondering how close the gap has been narrowed between 1CCD and 3CCD camcorders?

There are claims the single chip HV20 video quality is decently close to that of the 3-chip Canon HDV cams under the right lighting conditions. I would guess that to be true. It's an amazing piece of gear in spite of some irritating shortcomings.

There also seems to be a lot of fuss on the Internet about the Sony HC7's ability to record in the xvYCC color space. Of course, very few HDTVs support this right now, mostly just Sony Bravias, so the vast majority of people don't even have TVs that can show this "improved" color. But I do wonder if there is a bit of future-proofing in investing in a camcorder or TV with xvYCC. The only other time I've heard about this feature was when I was reading about the improvements of HDMI 1.3 over 1.2. Right now, not even HD-DVDs or Blu-ray titles support this, though it is possible on future releases. Basically I'm wondering if the Sony HC7 will look even better on a xvYCC-capable HDTV or is it just more marketing hype?

Any thoughts on this? My instincts are leaning toward the latter.

If you could only have one which would it be? And why?

Regretfully, HV20.

Why regretfully?

Sony looks and feels much better. Lousy ergonomics of HV20, inferior stills, no LANC support..

However, PQ is amazing. Especially at 24p and Cinema mode.

And at the end of the day PQ is what counts for the camcorder.

Galileo, can you do me a favor and read my post on "jittery video with HDR-HC7" and tell me what you think?

Thanks

Californiajay, I responded.

I have noticed those too.

Perhaps can be corrected with the manual settings.

However, take it with the grain of salt.

I cannot test at the moment. And my footage is quite limited.

Good site to post your question is www.sonyhdvinfo.com.

There also seems to be a lot of fuss on the Internet about the Sony HC7's ability to record in the xvYCC color space. Of course, very few HDTVs support this right now, mostly just Sony Bravias, so the vast majority of people don't even have TVs that can show this "improved" color. But I do wonder if there is a bit of future-proofing in investing in a camcorder or TV with xvYCC. The only other time I've heard about this feature was when I was reading about the improvements of HDMI 1.3 over 1.2. Right now, not even HD-DVDs or Blu-ray titles support this, though it is possible on future releases. Basically I'm wondering if the Sony HC7 will look even better on a xvYCC-capable HDTV or is it just more marketing hype?

Any thoughts on this? My instincts are leaning toward the latter.

I wouldn't count on this feature as being future-proof.

In fact, there are discussions whether human eye can actually distinguich between the "regular" and "added" color space.

One thing I can tell you HC7 footage shot in xvYCC looks bad on the displays that don't support xvYCC. And the factory default for this feature is "No".

Regretfully, HV20.

Why regretfully?

Sony looks and feels much better. Lousy ergonomics of HV20, inferior stills, no LANC support..

However, PQ is amazing. Especially at 24p and Cinema mode.

And at the end of the day PQ is what counts for the camcorder.

That's a good point, galileo2000. Perhaps I should have considered the HV20 more strongly. However, having no LANC support is a given no-buy for me, since I tend to do a lot of underwater recording. Also, I have a variety of prosumer tripods with LANC controls for my business, and as you probably know, it's much preferable to use the controls on the tripod versus on any camcorder itself when mounted.

I also heard the HV20's microphone will pick up noise from the internal motor, which to me can be very annoying. I guess you can reduce that problem with an external mic, but one of the reasons I'm getting a consumer model and not a prosumer model is convenience and portability (i.e. can fit in my wife's bag :D).

Still, how would you compare the PQ of the Canon HV20 to the Sony HVR-Z1?

I wouldn't count on this feature as being future-proof.

In fact, there are discussions whether human eye can actually distinguich between the "regular" and "added" color space.

One thing I can tell you HC7 footage shot in xvYCC looks bad on the displays that don't support xvYCC. And the factory default for this feature is "No".

Yes, it does sound like a whole lot of marketing to me. However, I'd like to hear from someone that has actually played HC7 footage through a xvYCC set and see if they saw any improvement or difference at all.

I have little doubt that future xvYCC equipment will bring improvements in color, but I'm a little skeptical whether the feature on a first-generation xvYCC camcorder can make a true difference.

That's a good point, galileo2000. Perhaps I should have considered the HV20 more strongly. However, having no LANC support is a given no-buy for me, since I tend to do a lot of underwater recording. Also, I have a variety of prosumer tripods with LANC controls for my business, and as you probably know, it's much preferable to use the controls on the tripod versus on any camcorder itself when mounted.

I also heard the HV20's microphone will pick up noise from the internal motor, which to me can be very annoying. I guess you can reduce that problem with an external mic, but one of the reasons I'm getting a consumer model and not a prosumer model is convenience and portability (i.e. can fit in my wife's bag :D).

Still, how would you compare the PQ of the Canon HV20 to the Sony HVR-Z1?

Just played back my Sony HVR-Z1 wedding footage on my HC7, and if the HV20 and HC7 are somewhat similar in PQ, then I can estimate that the Z1's PQ is far superior to that of both models. No surprise as we're comparing a $4,000 3CCD prosumer camera to $1K 1-chip CMOS consumer cameras, but I have to say the gap isn't narrow at all. The footage shot on the Z1 has way better color accuracy and more realistic saturation, and was by-and-far a lot sharper. Even though I find the Z1 has a lot of faults, which are probably inherent in the HDV format, it's still superior to consumer level cameras.

That said, the HC7 is exactly what expected, which was an affordable, easy-to-use, and convenient home camcorder that records in HD. For those purposes, it's a great little machine and the PQ is more than good enough for home movies. Would never use it professionally, even for b-roll, but it'll be great for shooting my daughter growing up and family vacations, etc.

Just played back my Sony HVR-Z1 wedding footage on my HC7, and if the HV20 and HC7 are somewhat similar in PQ, then I can estimate that the Z1's PQ is far superior to that of both models. No surprise as we're comparing a $4,000 3CCD prosumer camera to $1K 1-chip CMOS consumer cameras, but I have to say the gap isn't narrow at all. The footage shot on the Z1 has way better color accuracy and more realistic saturation, and was by-and-far a lot sharper. Even though I find the Z1 has a lot of faults, which are probably inherent in the HDV format, it's still superior to consumer level cameras.

That said, the HC7 is exactly what expected, which was an affordable, easy-to-use, and convenient home camcorder that records in HD. For those purposes, it's a great little machine and the PQ is more than good enough for home movies. Would never use it professionally, even for b-roll, but it'll be great for shooting my daughter growing up and family vacations, etc.

Don't have Z1, can't compare.

However, "they" say HV20 rivals $5K Canon cams. It also much better than HC7 in low light.

Don't wanna upset you.

I was in the same position recently.

I also picked HC7 initially and HV20 was added later.

Since I don't have any pro cams, HC7 will do as underwater, deck and backup.

Maybe b-roll.

Your take on HC7 is right on the money.

Yeah, the Z1 will blow any of these consumer camcorders out of the water. I downloaded some raw HV20 test footage off the Internet and it looks really good, but not even close to the Z1. Compared to the HC7, however, I could notice an increase in sharpness, as well as more "3D pop". In the shootout video that I saw that compared both cameras, you could distinctly see more detail in far away shrubbery, etc. from the HV20. The color balance, however, were pretty similar, at least when compared to the Z1. I think a casual viewer might find the HV20 and HC7 to be very similar, but a more careful viewing will find that the HV20 has more detail, sharpness and better color reproduction (how much depending on the lighting conditions).

Yeah, the Z1 will blow any of these consumer camcorders out of the water. I downloaded some raw HV20 test footage off the Internet and it looks really good, but not even close to the Z1. Compared to the HC7, however, I could notice an increase in sharpness, as well as more "3D pop". In the shootout video that I saw that compared both cameras, you could distinctly see more detail in far away shrubbery, etc. from the HV20. The color balance, however, were pretty similar, at least when compared to the Z1. I think a casual viewer might find the HV20 and HC7 to be very similar, but a more careful viewing will find that the HV20 has more detail, sharpness and better color reproduction (how much depending on the lighting conditions).

How did the Z1 look compared to this (note, it's downrezzed, but just look at the rest of the picture)?

http://www.nightfallinteractive.com/sc/HV20/rain.wmv (30MB) (Save target as)

This is the best footage I've seen with the HV20. It straight up looks like Super 35mm film and you can't ask for better than that.

How did the Z1 look compared to this (note, it's downrezzed, but just look at the rest of the picture)?

http://www.nightfallinteractive.com/sc/HV20/rain.wmv (30MB) (Save target as)

This is the best footage I've seen with the HV20. It straight up looks like Super 35mm film and you can't ask for better than that.

I concur.

It does look like 35mm.

Thanks for posting this.

Any specific settings?

Yeah, the Z1 will blow any of these consumer camcorders out of the water. I downloaded some raw HV20 test footage off the Internet and it looks really good, but not even close to the Z1. Compared to the HC7, however, I could notice an increase in sharpness, as well as more "3D pop". In the shootout video that I saw that compared both cameras, you could distinctly see more detail in far away shrubbery, etc. from the HV20. The color balance, however, were pretty similar, at least when compared to the Z1. I think a casual viewer might find the HV20 and HC7 to be very similar, but a more careful viewing will find that the HV20 has more detail, sharpness and better color reproduction (how much depending on the lighting conditions).

PQ of HV20 in 24p + cinema mode is far superior to HC7.

I was very sceptical myself at first.

But I've seen the light. And the light's name is HV20.

I concur.

It does look like 35mm.

Thanks for posting this.

Any specific settings?


I'll see if I can find out. I heard something about setting exposure to a -2 and using more yellow. I don't think the cine gamma feature was used. I'll have to check to see which one he used. The guy has the best HV20 footage around.

I have the HV20 and am very happy with it. I think the ergonomics (like the build quality I already wrote about) is a matter of personal tastes/feel/etc. My HV20 fits my hand like a glove. It feels very natural and just about effortless to handle. I tried the Sony and it was good but the Canon felt perfect. Everyone has different size hands and will fit one or the other better.

How did the Z1 look compared to this (note, it's downrezzed, but just look at the rest of the picture)?

http://www.nightfallinteractive.com/sc/HV20/rain.wmv (30MB) (Save target as)

This is the best footage I've seen with the HV20. It straight up looks like Super 35mm film and you can't ask for better than that.

Yes, footage from the Z1 look miles better than this. I wouldn't call this footage as looking anywhere even in the same ballpark as Super 35mm, much closer to Super 8mm or at best, 16mm. Also, was there some sort of filter applied to this footage? The white balance is way off, and the image looks excessively dark in some shots.

Overall, the HV20 may be a nice little camera for the price range, but its quality has been way overhyped. Besides this footage, I've downloaded actual raw footage shot with the HV20 and it doesn't come close to any of the 3CCD prosumer cameras out there.

Yes, footage from the Z1 look miles better than this. I wouldn't call this footage as looking anywhere even in the same ballpark as Super 35mm, much closer to Super 8mm or at best, 16mm. Also, was there some sort of filter applied to this footage? The white balance is way off, and the image looks excessively dark in some shots.

Overall, the HV20 may be a nice little camera for the price range, but its quality has been way overhyped. Besides this footage, I've downloaded actual raw footage shot with the HV20 and it doesn't come close to any of the 3CCD prosumer cameras out there.

Kya,

To each their own.

It seems like with all you pro equipment HC7 will be fine.

I'll stick with HV20 for my important shootings despite the fact that I hate its shape, zoom control, cheap plastic etc. But it all fades when I see its footage and compare it with my long-awaited HC7.

HC7 will be used under water and as a deck and the backup device.

Yes, footage from the Z1 look miles better than this. I wouldn't call this footage as looking anywhere even in the same ballpark as Super 35mm, much closer to Super 8mm or at best, 16mm. Also, was there some sort of filter applied to this footage? The white balance is way off, and the image looks excessively dark in some shots.

Overall, the HV20 may be a nice little camera for the price range, but its quality has been way overhyped. Besides this footage, I've downloaded actual raw footage shot with the HV20 and it doesn't come close to any of the 3CCD prosumer cameras out there.

Hm, doesn't look too dark on my monitor. Is your monitor gamma corrected for low end dark detail? If not, maybe it's crushing dark detail. There was no filter applied. It was color graded in post. Point me to some Z1 footage that looks more film like if there is any. I haven't seen any yet, except maybe the ones using a depth of field adapter. Most of the Z1 footage I've seen looks straight up like video. I don't want anything that looks too videoy, especially if it costs a lot more.

Super 16mm smokes the Z1 from what I've seen of the Z1 so you're giving the H20 one hell of a comment. lol. I want the closest to film look as possible for the lowest price. Before the HV20 the DVX100A/B was the closest I've seen. I'd say the DVX100 I still easily the champ as far as achieving the coveted film/movie look.

Hm, doesn't look too dark on my monitor. Is your monitor gamma corrected for low end dark detail? If not, maybe it's crushing dark detail. There was no filter applied. It was color graded in post. Point me to some Z1 footage that looks more film like if there is any. I haven't seen any yet, except maybe the ones using a depth of field adapter. Most of the Z1 footage I've seen looks straight up like video. I don't want anything that looks too videoy, especially if it costs a lot more.

Super 16mm smokes the Z1 from what I've seen of the Z1 so you're giving the H20 one hell of a comment. lol. I want the closest to film look as possible for the lowest price. Before the HV20 the DVX100A/B was the closest I've seen. I'd say the DVX100 I still easily the champ as far as achieving the coveted film/movie look.

Yeah.

Kyadawn, can you post some Z1 footage which looks miles better than HV20 and has more film-like look, thank you.

Hi, I got to use both of these camcorder's for a couple of weeks starting with the HV20. I am coming from a TRV900 so I had pretty high expectations. For the HV20, I would say the picture is just amazing. In some cases, it looked a little too processed (almost like the new Willie Wonka movie effect) although very pleasing. But for me, in many cases it tended to underexpose my subject and seemed to favor any brightness in the picture. For my purposes, it wasn't very good since many of the videos of my children who have brown hair, you cannot see detail in their hair. It seems black in many cases. Contrast is just way too high. This really came out when shooting my children in a pool. When I noticed this, I would zoom in and in most cases I had to zoom in so that the underexposed object had to fill almost 75% or more of the picture to fix the metering. So I decided to try a HC7. First impressions were that the Canon looks like pictures, while the Sony looks like video. But the HC7 just did a much better job of highlight in the dark areas and metering to what I thought should be metered on. Now I know many people have commented on adjusting monitor gamma, etc., but I tried my LCD projector, my CRT projection TV and my expensive calibrated LCD monitor and all three showed that the Canon just favors the bright parts of a picture too much. Unless I zoomed in to the subject's faces in many cases, any whiteness in the background seemed to overtake the subject and hair just looked like a black blob. I wish there were a way to do center weighting.

My other main criteria was OIS for which I disappointed in both camcorders. You would think this would have come a long much more since I bought my last camcorder in '99. The TRV900 was just much better, so much so even my wife compained about the shaky video she shot with the new cameras. I also noticed a funny effect on the HV20 in that if I slowly panned to the right or left, eventually the picture would jump slightly if there was a vertical edge in it (like the corner of a wall). I found that strange since I never saw this with the TRV900...it was almost like it was doing digital and optical stabilization. Another effect I saw was in filming indoors, like a violin recital, when watching the video later, I noticed a jittery effect. It's hard to explain but it was very irritating. Not shakiness, but almost like the picture was just slightly flickering or something. I assumed it was some quirk of the OIS. This was when I was bracing the camera by setting it on my left arm as it went under the camer and held my right shoulder so it did have to do a little OIS. This technique worked extremely well with the TRV900 and usually almost looked like I used a tripod. For the Canon, the picture did not look like it was moving, but it was doing something that was more distracting than if the picture has smoothly moved a little.

OIS on my HC7 was non-existent. The HC7 I got must have been broken for OIS since it seemed to make no difference when I turned it on or off and it was much worse in stability than the Canon. I had these side by side filming the same material and the HC7 was shaky while the Canon was not.

In the end, I have returned both. Had the OIS worked on the Sony, I might have kept it if it had worked well enough. This is simply because of the metering that my wife also noticed several times.

I really preferred the look of the Canon pictures and tried my hardest to make it work. I tried cinema mode (which reduces the dynamic range and made the darks a little brighter) and even tried some of the suggestions to take away contrast, etc. I even found a store finally that had the Sony and Canon side by side (on one of my trips to San Jose at a local Fry's) to compare directly and see if maybe the HV20 I had was somehow uncalibrated, but I saw the same effect there where everything seemed visible in the picture on the HC7, but several things were underexposed in the Canon.

In the end, in real use, I just had too many scenes where the metering did matter and the Canon wasn't quite as good as the Sony. In addition, while I could keep trying to use special modes, this camera has to be useable by my wife in an automatic mode and there is no way she can set Cinema and adjust the overrides for contast, sharpness, etc. in a full proof manner.

Why can't they have a camera in between the top of the line $3500 and the $1000. Slightly larger with superior OIS and other attributes. I want a HD TRV-900 :)

I also noticed a funny effect on the HV20 in that if I slowly panned to the right or left, eventually the picture would jump slightly if there was a vertical edge in it (like the corner of a wall).
Wow...so I wasn't either just imagining it on my HV20, or thinking that it was just only me, although in my instance it wasn't necessarily "jumping" if it encountered a vertical edge--I noticed the same thing myself when I played back the footage...same jumping issue you described...done while I was slowly panning. I heard that the recommendation was to turn off OIS if you're panning; I'll have to check my latest batch of recordings to see if that did the trick (I had OIS turned off pretty much the entire time while recording recent vacation footage).

Hi, I got to use both of these camcorder's for a couple of weeks starting with the HV20. I am coming from a TRV900 so I had pretty high expectations. ... I want a HD TRV-900 :)

I was VERY interested and grateful to you for your posting. I also have a TRV900 that I purchased in 2002 (got just about the last new one available). I have been considering an "upgrade" to a newer smaller lighter weight camcorder, and was considering the Canon HV20. After reading your post, I think I'm going to just put this project to rest for a while and wait for the technology to develop a bit further.

I used the TRV900 and my Canon (still camera) G7 on a culinary tour of Japan in April and was quite pleased with the image quality produced by both machines. We're contemplating a similar tour of India in January, so I was considering having a lighter weight camcorder. However, I'm not willing to sacrifice the good image quality of the TRV900 for the lighter weight.

I think you have saved me a lot of work and aggravation.

Many thanks.

JudyM

I also noticed a funny effect on the HV20 in that if I slowly panned to the right or left, eventually the picture would jump slightly if there was a vertical edge in it (like the corner of a wall). I found that strange since I never saw this with the TRV900...it was almost like it was doing digital and optical stabilization. Another effect I saw was in filming indoors, like a violin recital, when watching the video later, I noticed a jittery effect. It's hard to explain but it was very irritating. Not shakiness, but almost like the picture was just slightly flickering or something. I assumed it was some quirk of the OIS. This was when I was bracing the camera by setting it on my left arm as it went under the camer and held my right shoulder so it did have to do a little OIS. This technique worked extremely well with the TRV900 and usually almost looked like I used a tripod. For the Canon, the picture did not look like it was moving, but it was doing something that was more distracting than if the picture has smoothly moved a little.
Wow...so I wasn't either just imagining it on my HV20, or thinking that it was just only me, although in my instance it wasn't necessarily "jumping" if it encountered a vertical edge--I noticed the same thing myself when I played back the footage...same jumping issue you described...done while I was slowly panning. I heard that the recommendation was to turn off OIS if you're panning; I'll have to check my latest batch of recordings to see if that did the trick (I had OIS turned off pretty much the entire time while recording recent vacation footage).

These are disturbing reports. Can anyone else confirm or deny them?

I need the best OIS I can get. (Turning off OIS for pans is an absurd idea.) The Panny SD1 seems to get high marks for its OIS.

I do want to go HD. I will need to buy by the end of September.

Any thoughts?

Thanks.

I do want to go HD. I will need to buy by the end of September.

Any thoughts?

Thanks.
By chance I had a TRV900 about 8 years ago. Nice camera, especially for that time, but too heavy for me, so eventually I went to lighter ones, all from Sony.

When I went HD 2 years ago (first with a Sony HDR-HC1, then right now a HC3), I was totally blown away by the difference in picture quality. "Blown away" may still be an understatement. I have to mention that I watch videos with a 1080 projector on a 165" diagonal screen. But everyone will do so at least in a couple of years.

To sum it up: every single minute of video which you are shooting which is not HD is a cruel waste. So much so, that even if you make a relatively bad choice amongst the HD camcorders, IMHO you are better off with it than with an SD camera.

Just a month before I got my HDR-HC1 2 years ago, I made an extensive vacation in the US southwest. All taped with my then Sony SD camcorder (forgot what it was). I still get to anger when I look at the very beautiful landscape and the (comparably) low picture quality.

P.S.: All my remarks re SD vs HD may be wrong under special lighting conditions. I'm just talking about the amateur's standard taping of children and such during the day.

Since some weeks I got nervous because my trusty Sony HDR-HC3 is not at all any longer the consumer camcorder with the best picture quality. And as I wrote in my last post, imagining that in 10 years time I will watch my children with a PQ which is not the best then in hindsight possible, seriously disturbs me.

So after reading all the stuff again here in the thread I just (several minutes ago) pulled the trigger and ordered an HV20. I'm sure it will not be night and day compared to my HC3, but it gives me the feeling to have done my best.

One problem, however: all those consumer HD camcorders have lenses which are louse lousy for wide angle recording. When recording within the home, I usually don't have sufficient viewing area. So with my HC3 I attached a Sony wide angle lens, and I have let it permanently attached. This adds to the bulk and weight of the camcorder, but the HC3 has an 30mm filter diameter, so weight and size of the lens is somewhat limited, and I accept that as a trade in for the added recording flexibility.

Now what is the best light and small wide angle lens for the HV20 with its larger 43mm filter diameter?

Thanks for any hint.

Since some weeks I got nervous because my trusty Sony HDR-HC3 is not at all any longer the consumer camcorder with the best picture quality. And as I wrote in my last post, imagining that in 10 years time I will watch my children with a PQ which is not the best then in hindsight possible, seriously disturbs me.

So after reading all the stuff again here in the thread I just (several minutes ago) pulled the trigger and ordered an HV20. I'm sure it will not be night and day compared to my HC3, but it gives me the feeling to have done my best.

One problem, however: all those consumer HD camcorders have lenses which are louse lousy for wide angle recording. When recording within the home, I usually don't have sufficient viewing area. So with my HC3 I attached a Sony wide angle lens, and I have let it permanently attached. This adds to the bulk and weight of the camcorder, but the HC3 has an 30mm filter diameter, so weight and size of the lens is somewhat limited, and I accept that as a trade in for the added recording flexibility.

Now what is the best light and small wide angle lens for the HV20 with its larger 43mm filter diameter?

Thanks for any hint.

Hey,

I use Canon WD-43 and quite happy with it.

Some folks insist on Canon WD-43 HD version, but I couldn't justify the cost difference and it seems HD-43 is little on the marketing hype side.

Hey,

I use Canon WD-43 and quite happy with it.

Some folks insist on Canon WD-43 HD version, but I couldn't justify the cost difference and it seems HD-43 is little on the marketing hype side.
Interesting to hear.

But as far as I researched in the net it's somewhat heavy, around 330 grams.

How about a lighter lens, such as the Kenko SGW-05Hi, at around 100 grams? Any opinion?

Since some weeks I got nervous because my trusty Sony HDR-HC3 is not at all any longer the consumer camcorder with the best picture quality. And as I wrote in my last post, imagining that in 10 years time I will watch my children with a PQ which is not the best then in hindsight possible, seriously disturbs me.

So after reading all the stuff again here in the thread I just (several minutes ago) pulled the trigger and ordered an HV20. I'm sure it will not be night and day compared to my HC3, but it gives me the feeling to have done my best.

One problem, however: all those consumer HD camcorders have lenses which are lousy for wide angle recording. When recording within the home, I usually don't have sufficient viewing area. So with my HC3 I attached a Sony wide angle lens, and I have let it permanently attached. This adds to the bulk and weight of the camcorder, but the HC3 has an 30mm filter diameter, so weight and size of the lens is somewhat limited, and I accept that as a trade in for the added recording flexibility.

Now what is the best light and small wide angle lens for the HV20 with its larger 43mm filter diameter?

Thanks for any hint.

I agree that most camcorders require a wide angle adapter for proper usage. And I look forward to the clarity of HD over SD.
I sit 9 feet from an HD70 (720P) driven 100" screen.
There is another Wide angle lens people have posted about with good reviews for the HV20. It can be found on eBay by searching with the key words Canon HV20 wide angle.

I have been considering the Panny HDC-SD1. It has a nice 12 to 1 zoom.
EDIT: I had said here that the Panny was a wider angle camera than most. It is not.

I also hear that the OIS is better with the Panny. Most of my shooting is handheld so that is very important.
I have reservations about HVCHD but I've read several user reviews (on Amazon HDC-SD1 reviews page) that state no problems with Ulead's (Corel) VideoStudio 11+. I mostly like the user interface of VS9 so VS11+ will be fine.

However, I am still of the opinion that MiniDV is the best recording and archiving medium. And I don't like the idea that I'd have to buy 10 to 15 hours worth of SDHC flash memory. Too expensive and I'd have to transfer everything (Raw Data) to DVD. I do like having MiniDV tapes for archival security.

I have ordered VS 11+ (Upgrade box is only $59) and I'll shoot some AVCHD footage at BB and test the editing capability at home when I get the VS11+ program. I like Sony's Vegas but I am still learning all the keystrokes. Ulead's VideoStudio allows me to create as I think of it. I like the speed. Although it is also slow in some ways. It is a more natural creating tool for me than the more keyboard aided (and crippled) Vegas.

JMO

P.S.: I'll bet I end up with the HV20. It is pretty rock solid.