I know that these Cameras are brand new and haven't been released yet, but I am wondering what peoples inital impressions are. I have been looking at getting an HV20 for a long time, but I like the simplicity the Solid State devices have. My main concern is that I read that even though the AVCHD codec is superior to the old HDV codec, the solid state camcoders do not have the bandwidth/bitrate to write the data to the chips fast enough without utilizing alot of compression. Because of this HDV/Tape footage looks sharper than footage from AVCHD Solid State devices. Has this issue been addressed? Also, the HF10 appears to able to record at a full 1920x1080 pixels while the HV30 has to cut it down to 1440x1080, but the HF10 has a smaller CMOS sensor then the HV30. Not only does a smaller sensor reduce a camera's low light abilities, but it effcts the camera's over all depth of field. How critical is the the difference between a 1/2.7" vs 1/3.2" CMOS sensor going to be? So what are your opinions. Is AVCHD/Solid State ready right now, or is it still best to stick with HDV/Tape if you wan't the best quality possible at this price point?

There's only been a couple of reviews on the HF10 thus far and they are positive. I was looking at that cam too, but decided to get the Sony SR12. Thus far I've been very impressed with the Sony. It compares extremely well (better in my opinion) than my Canon HV20. I did a number of A/B tests between the two and I like the Sony better due to its noise-free picture, color, presence of a viewfinder and superior 5.1 surround sound.

I've been able to download several HF10 clips, but there have been problems with the way they were either shot or edited in terms of comparing with other cams. Most of these clips didn't compare well with the SR12, but I beleive the preparation (editing or shooting) was sloppily done. But there is one clip I downloaded that is a full-rez, well done clip from the HF10. Although that does look very good, I still see a bit more noise and a typical Canon problem, skies that lean toward the magenta rather than a true sky blue.

As far as the AVCHD format, keep in mind its compression is far superior to HDV. That means when done properly, you need much less bandwidth to produce the same or better picture. At this point AVCHD footage from the best new cams look ever bit as sharp and resolute as the best HDV consumer cams. As far as low light is concerned, my HV20 and SR12 are pretty close.

There's a camcorderinfo review here comparing it to the HV20/HV30: http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Canon-Vixia-HF10-Camcorder-Review-34711.htm. I think that answers all your questions.

The raw HF10 clips can be loaded in almost any program using the standard K-Lite codec pack. The SR11/SR12 requires at the moment the latest Sony or Pinnable programs (VS11.5 I had mixed results). DirectShow at this point doesn't support the SR11/SR12 AVCHD codec.

The SR11/SR12 requires at the moment the latest Sony or Pinnable programs (VS11.5 I had mixed results). DirectShow at this point doesn't support the SR11/SR12 AVCHD codec.

Don't believe that's the case Luc since two friends without the Sony cam had no problems playing SR12 clips they downloaded.

Don't believe that's the case Luc since two friends without the Sony cam had no problems playing SR12 clips they downloaded.

With coreAVC I assume? Without CoreAVC I can definitely playback with ffdshow but I had a few corrupted frames and I had to change default deinterlace method.

If they can edit with anything else Sony Vegas or Pinnacle let me know. I'm certainly interested how to do this. Most programs use directshow.

Well interestingly I just tried the editing program I use in my work, Grass Valley's Edius Pro 4.5. The program has limited support for AVCHD in that it can import AVCHD natively (with sluggish performance obviously) or convert them using Canopus codecs which are great.

At any rate it had zero problems taking in the Sony clips. The problem with the program at the moment is that it can only export to HDV as opposed to AVCHD. Grass Valley says export support is coming. This is my editing program of choice since it's always been very powerful and has been a real time program.

As to my friends, one has CoreAVC, but I don't believe the other guy has it.

Well interestingly I just tried the editing program I use in my work, Grass Valley's Edius Pro 4.5. The program has limited support for AVCHD in that it can import AVCHD natively (with sluggish performance obviously) or convert them using Canopus codecs which are great.

At any rate it had zero problems taking in the Sony clips. The problem with the program at the moment is that it can only export to HDV as opposed to AVCHD. Grass Valley says export support is coming. This is my editing program of choice since it's always been very powerful and has been a real time program.

As to my friends, one has CoreAVC, but I don't believe the other guy has it.

I also imported it just nicely without any problems. But remember I reported the weird broken corrupted frames and only through this forum I found that CoreAVC is one that renders it without these issues. So I would double-check if you use anything other than CoreAVC or Vegas (interestingly it bypasses standard codecs and uses a plugin DLL to decode).

The HV30 may have some better quality than the HF10. I went with the HF10 mainly on the basis of internal flash / external SDHC. I don't want to mess with tape. HV30 does have miniSD, not sure if its able to record directly to it or if its the same quailty as tape.

The HV30 may have some better quality than the HF10. I went with the HF10 mainly on the basis of internal flash / external SDHC. I don't want to mess with tape. HV30 does have miniSD, not sure if its able to record directly to it or if its the same quailty as tape.


HV30 records to tape only(1440x1080). Still images to the miniSD 2048 x 1536 (4:3), 1920 x 1080 (16:9), 1440 x 1080 (4:3), or 640 x 480 (4:3).

The HV30 may have some better quality than the HF10. I went with the HF10 mainly on the basis of internal flash / external SDHC. I don't want to mess with tape. HV30 does have miniSD, not sure if its able to record directly to it or if its the same quailty as tape.

To add downsides with tape based camcorders are also tape motor noise which many forget. I don't know if HV30 is any better than HV20 but probably not. I have a custom compact external mic solution but it still can pick it up.

I've never had any issues with motor noise. My greater concern is that even Core 2 Duo machines are unable to manage AVC footage very easily. I don't want to be suffering through a looooong editing process simply because my machine is too busy choking on footage all the time. I'm not yet convinced that its the right time to jump on the AVCHD bandwagon.

I've never had any issues with motor noise. My greater concern is that even Core 2 Duo machines are unable to manage AVC footage very easily. I don't want to be suffering through a looooong editing process simply because my machine is too busy choking on footage all the time. I'm not yet convinced that its the right time to jump on the AVCHD bandwagon.

Well, most of the camcorder manufacturers are on their 3rd AVCHD revision and I would think the codec is streamlined and solid as it will ever be. By next year the AVC camcorders will probably get a bitrate increase...20mbps or higher and this should increase your file size and editing times even more. :) Honestly, I highly doubt we'll see any speed increase......just like the early days of Mpeg2 codecs.

The reason I'm staying away from the HF10 is the purple fringing. I've seen it in all video clips of the HF10. CNET in particular made note of it in their review. I'm a stickler for stuff like that and why I've chosen to stay with the HV30. Plus the controls that the HV30 has are great. The zebra function alone is great to have, which the hF10 does not have.

The reason I'm staying away from the HF10 is the purple fringing. I've seen it in all video clips of the HF10. CNET in particular made note of it in their review. I'm a stickler for stuff like that and why I've chosen to stay with the HV30. Plus the controls that the HV30 has are great. The zebra function alone is great to have, which the hF10 does not have.

Yeah, the fringing is pretty bad. Would have thought Canon would finally fix this. :(

I went from a canon a70 to a sony s60 and actually missed the fringing! :p it was like a added feature! Now I'm back to a SD450 and it feels like home.....but honestly it's VERY rare that i ever see it or notice it.

Does the HV20 color fringe? I'm kinda shocked the HV30 doesn't(if the HV20 does)......I thought most, if not all, Canons had fringing problems?

I rarely or hardly ever saw any on my HV20. So I would assume the HV30 would be the same. (I haven't even unboxed my HV30 yet) Got it over the weekend and came down with a nasty cold/flu.

I used to have the Sony HC5 MiniDV HDV camcorder and it had horrible fringing.

I rarely or hardly ever saw any on my HV20. So I would assume the HV30 would be the same. (I haven't even unboxed my HV30 yet) Got it over the weekend and came down with a nasty cold/flu.

I used to have the Sony HC5 MiniDV HDV camcorder and it had horrible fringing.

Are you talking purple fringing? or CA(chromatic aberration)fringing? one is a lens problem(CA)and one is a exposure issue. Honestly if you control your exposure and don't allow 'blow outs' you should NEVER see purple fringing on any camcorder(including the HF10). I have little doubt, with a bad enough 'blown out sky', I could easily get the HV30 to purple fringe.

Control your exposure, bring up the light on your subject so you can bring down the exposure on the white/bright objects. Viola! purple fringing gone!

Does the HV20 color fringe? I'm kinda shocked the HV30 doesn't(if the HV20 does)......I thought most, if not all, Canons had fringing problems?

I haven't noticed it on my HV20 but I've seen it on clips from the HF10. I guess we can't be sure of the cause on the HF10. On Canon's prosumer cams, the fringing is definitely CA.

I rarely or hardly ever saw any on my HV20. So I would assume the HV30 would be the same. (I haven't even unboxed my HV30 yet) Got it over the weekend and came down with a nasty cold/flu.



Please try not to breathe on your computer, we don't want to get sick. :D

Yeah...the purple fringing is very noticeable on the HF10 when it records extremely bright white highlights...I too am curious to see if it is due to over exposure or if it is because of the lens...It has only been noticeable in a couple of shots that I have seen and in both cases, it was becuase the subject exhibiting the fringe was highly reflective and was in direct sunlight...so steping down the exposure might correct the issue. I know that over-exposure was what made the purple fringing apparent in Canon's more high end pro-summer cams, and proper exposure settings eliminated this issue with these cameras.

Otakuon, the issues with purple fringing on the Canon prosumer cams like the A1 and G1 were definitely due to CA in the lens. If you visit the owners forums like I did when I was looking at those cams, the owners identified certain apertures and focal lengths where it was a bigger issue. That's not an exposure-based problem, that's a lens issue.

The HF10's problems may be exposure based, but we don't know for sure quite yet.

Yes, I agree that the pro-summer fringing issues were due to CA in the lenses...and like you mentioned, it was more apparent at certain aperture settings (which control exposure). I guess I am just wondering if the the HF10/100 is the same problem (due to the manufacturing of the lens) or if it is an issue inherient in the sensor and/or image processor.

Yes, I agree that the pro-summer fringing issues were due to CA in the lenses...and like you mentioned, it was more apparent at certain aperture settings (which control exposure). I guess I am just wondering if the the HF10/100 is the same problem (due to the manufacturing of the lens) or if it is an issue inherient in the sensor and/or image processor.

It's a good question that I guess will be answered in time. In looking at one clip on DVInfo (the only HF10 clip I've seen that I thought was very good), it seems that the exposure on the HF10 is very sensitive and can quickly blow out highlights. You'll notice this on pans under the bridge on this clip. During that time I see the purple fringing, so it may be an exposure based issue. My concern would be the dynamic range and sensitivity to overload of the HF10 (at least based on that clip). Of course unless we had other cams side by side during this test, we wouldn't know for sure if this issue would also be present in other units or not.

I wonder if that shot was done in easy mode or with just a normal Program AE selected. I wouldn't think that the shooter in this case would have bothered with the "easy mode"...but who knows. All cameras are prone to over-exposure and blown highlights, especially when everything is set to automatic. Fortuneately, the HF10 does have a wide range of manual settings, much like its other Canon predecessors so perhaps that will help compensate. BTW, I don't recall seeing this issue with any of the clips from the Watch.Impress site...but then again, as was discussed at length in the other thread, those clips were taken using less than optimal settings. I am also supprised that CCI didn't say anything on this topic and CNET just sort of briefly mentioned it...

Otakuon, although CCI can be useful in some aspects of their reviews, I and others have found many technical and editorial errors over time. I can recall one test where they measured higher resolution in Cam A than Cam B, but yet their overall score in "resolution" was higher for Cam B. They provide a useful service, but nothing can replace your own hands-on testing and viewing clips on your own HDTV.

Agreed...even in their own review of the HF10, CCI said that the HF10 did not perform as well as the HV20 under low light conditions in the lab (as expected), however, when taking "real world" low light footage, the HF10 actually appeared to look slightly BETTER than the HV20, which supprised even them...so go figure...

I guess the point is, EVERY camera is going to have it's pros and cons...even with regards to image quality and performace...and in the end, it mostly just comes down to personal preference...and as the quality of all of these newer HD cameras become so incredible and so close, personal preference is becomming more and more subjective...

Which one would be better for intermediate green/blue screen recordings? Since 90% of the time it'll be used for these purposes.

If we need quality stuff we'll use 'real' camera's, but for small jobs and test purposes it's nice to have a cam which can key very nicely.

The last one we've used was a Sony HDR-HC3, but somehow you could always see the 1440x1080 to 1920x1080 conversion, no smooth lines, always little jaggies. We use it for webbased stuff so square pixels is the only option.

On camcorderinfo it shows that the HF10 is slightly smoother to me because of the fullress that is recorderd. Any of you guys had any experience with both cams and some keying?

Just looked at some images from the hf10 and hv20. Looked at 24p and 30p performance.
HV20 shows a lot more noise! Lines seem sharper on the HF10, so I'll take that one.

Check this one.
http://sickmotion.com/camera_comparison.png

Just looked at some images from the hf10 and hv20. Looked at 24p and 30p performance.
HV20 shows a lot more noise! Lines seem sharper on the HF10, so I'll take that one.

Check this one.
http://sickmotion.com/camera_comparison.png

I don't think those are fair shots. You can't go wrong either way. If your used to tape & have alot of tape equipment the HV20/30 are great, arguably the best camcorders in there price range. I think the real issue between HF & HV is tape vs. flash memory. For me I'm willing to trade off the more features the HV's offer for SDHC card abilities.

No fair shots? explain...

ofcourse the hv20/30 is ok. But just to say it's a difference between tape or
solid state is false.

To me the recording codec is the big difference here, AVCHD(1920x1080) or HDV(1440x1080), for outputting to tvscreens not a real issue. But postprocessing and using it for computer monitors it's a different story.

In the end it's personal use/preference...I need sharp lines and square pixels, someone else needs great outdoor performance etc. HF10 here i come ;).

I have the HV30 and can tell you it is NOT that noisey. I don't know what happened with that still but it's nowhere as noisey as that.

The HF10/100 use a *new* 1/3.2 sensor.

Canon didn't make the switch from the 1/2.7(HV20/30, HG10, ect..)to save money(well...not the only reason :) ,size, power )they, like Sony's new sensor, did it to *improve* image quality and raise Signal to noise ratio. *oops* Thanks Ken!

This article says a little more:
"CANON pixel pitch, developed the CMOS sensor which achieves the SIGNAL-TO-NOISE RATIO of the highest level as an image pickup element of 2.2 ｵ m loaded onto full HD video & camera "iVIS HF10". Pixel pitch substantially the narrow め it is it succeeded in increasing SIGNAL-TO-NOISE RATIO in spite, process refining due to the new device, from former 2.75 ｵ m. The lowest photographing luminous intensity which becomes standard of efficiency of video & the camera has achieved 3lx. Simultaneously it succeeded in also the decrease of electric power consumption with voltage conversion low. In the lecture, design philosophy and the technical contents etc. regarding the latest sensor are expressed."

Reads like they Have the highest level of S/N ratio and dropped the pixel pitch from 2.75 to 2.2.

I think the new Sony sensor('clearvid')probably does the same.

1/2.7 old technology.
1/3.2 new technology.

The HF10/100 use a *new* 1/3.2 sensor.

Canon didn't make the switch from the 1/2.7(HV20/30, HG10, ect..)to save money(well...not all the only reason :) ,size, power )they, like Sony's new sensor, did it to *improve* image quality and lower Signal to noise ratio.



Eric, I think you meant 'raise S/N ratio'.

The reason I'm staying away from the HF10 is the purple fringing. I've seen it in all video clips of the HF10. CNET in particular made note of it in their review. I'm a stickler for stuff like that and why I've chosen to stay with the HV30. Plus the controls that the HV30 has are great. The zebra function alone is great to have, which the hF10 does not have.

I found it's easy to remove the fringing from the framegrabs using a HSL/Saturation filter on the blue channel using a selective range.
Question is if there's a comparable video saturation filter that can do the same. It seems Sony Vegas Seconday Color corrector could do this but I found it very hard to use.

I'm thinking about creating a virtualdub CA video filter that will do the exact same thing as the picture filter (unless I find a filter in the meantime).
It would take following parameters:

- selection of the color channel: red; green or blue (perhaps magenta as well)
- The degrees range: low and high
- Last parameter would be the (de-)saturation level.

Seems not to hard to program. If anyone is interested I'll send an update when I'd finish it. I wonder if the Sony/Pinnacle have a public filter SDK as well or if they require signing.

Although I plan on getting hold of an HF10, if the purple fringing is an issue, there's no way I'd keep it. The thought of having to 'correct' (if it's even possible!) each video clip that shows this issue strikes me as absolutely absurd. Others may not care, but to me the joy of video is shooting it and watching it without having to correct manufacturer defects. The other thing is that every time a filter is used to get rid of something bad, it will invariably get rid of something that's good. Not the way to go. Having used filters extensively in my DV editing, I know this is the case.

I'm hoping this issue isn't as bad as it is in the Canon prosumer HDV cams. If it is, this puppy will be out the door very quickly. I just don't understand why Canon doesn't see this. The issue didn't exist with either the HV10 or HV20, so why now Canon?

Although I plan on getting hold of an HF10, if the purple fringing is an issue, there's no way I'd keep it. The thought of having to 'correct' (if it's even possible!) each video clip that shows this issue strikes me as absolutely absurd. Others may not care, but to me the joy of video is shooting it and watching it without having to correct manufacturer defects. The other thing is that every time a filter is used to get rid of something bad, it will invariably get rid of something that's good. Not the way to go. Having used filters extensively in my DV editing, I know this is the case.

I'm hoping this issue isn't as bad as it is in the Canon prosumer HDV cams. If it is, this puppy will be out the door very quickly. I just don't understand why Canon doesn't see this. The issue didn't exist with either the HV10 or HV20, so why now Canon?
are you purchasing or using a hf10 for testing,as you have a sr12 and they are similar machines is why i ask.

Flinty, as I've said in the past, I'm always in the quest for the best video quality. So I am expecting an HF10 tomorrow. The winner will stay and the 'loser' (there really will be no losers, these are two great cams) will go to Ebay.

This may be one tough decision though! If we are to go by CCI's review, the color is pretty much the same, the bright light sharpness of the HF10 is better and the noise on the SR12 is superior in low light at 60i. Most of my video is shot in good light, so this will be a consideration. Of course if you look at those still shots of the fire hydrant on CCI (ah yes, the still shots I always say not to judge cams by), you can't help but seeing superior sharpness on the SR12. So go figure. It seems to me there are deinterlacing artifacts on the HF10 shot not seen on the SR12 shot. But going with the HF10 would mean give backs that include losing a viewfinder and the 5.1 surround sound as well as the superior Sony construction.

They absolutely raved about the construction of the SR12...how could they not. This is just one amazingly well-built camcorder.

So I'll be doing lots of A/B testing...real A/B testing...not using one cam on one day and the other a few days later. I love doing this anyway. It should be fun.

Flinty, as I've said in the past, I'm always in the quest for the best video quality. So I am expecting an HF10 tomorrow. The winner will stay and the 'loser' (there really will be no losers, these are two great cams) will go to Ebay.

This may be one tough decision though! If we are to go by CCI's review, the color is pretty much the same, the bright light sharpness of the HF10 is better and the noise on the SR12 is superior in low light at 60i. Most of my video is shot in good light, so this will be a consideration. Of course if you look at those still shots of the fire hydrant on CCI (ah yes, the still shots I always say not to judge cams by), you can't help but seeing superior sharpness on the SR12. So go figure. It seems to me there are deinterlacing artifacts on the HF10 shot not seen on the SR12 shot. But going with the HF10 would mean give backs that include losing a viewfinder and the 5.1 surround sound as well as the superior Sony construction.

They absolutely raved about the construction of the SR12...how could they not. This is just one amazingly well-built camcorder.

So I'll be doing lots of A/B testing...real A/B testing...not using one cam on one day and the other a few days later. I love doing this anyway. It should be fun.
thanks ken i am realy surprised you are considering keeping a hf10 and getting rid of the sr12 even if you find hf10 has a fraction better picture[which i doubt]from user reports the sr 12 is better built with a viewfinder etc,anyway you will keep us infirmed.

Flinty, it will be a very tough decision. Obviously the SR12 has a number of things going for it that the Canon does not. So it will take more than a very marginally better picture to sway me. The one thing that I don't know in the CCI review (or any of their reviews), is what monitor/HDTV they use to view these cams on. I would be very disappointed to learn they never use a large screen HDTV for their reviews since they are FAR more revealing than a small computer monitor. In fact, if the only screen I used to view footage was a computer monitor, I'd never buy an HD camcorder...but that's me. The difference in how HD footage looks on both is like day and night.

So for me, it's how does the footage look on a 60" plasma, not a 20" or 22" computer monitor. I may see bigger differences one way or the other on a 60" 1080p screen than they did.

Note: I moved this to the HF100 Thread.


I received my HF100 from dell yesterday, I am far from an expert, my prior camera is a Sony Hi8. I did not test it yet because my memory stick is still in transit and should be here today. I did charge it and tried to get familier with it.

It felt comfortable. The mode dial was hard to turn with my thumb, cause it seems to close to the thumb. The menus are well laid out. I wish it had a program dial on it, instead of menu navagation all the time. I also wished it had a docking station, All the separate plugs need to be consolidated. Example is, It seems if I wanted to hook it up to my HDTV via component, I would need both the component and Audio breakout cables and don't forget the power cable.

I am still very optimistic for the HF100, I am over budget with this camera and the sony's will cost even more. I do have a question if anyone else gets this camera. When I shake the camera there is a very slight rattle. Maybe because the memory slot is empty? Seems like its working fine. I thought it would be solid cause it's memory only. Is it a defect? If it is I will have to exchange it, If it''s normal, it does not bother me too much.

Thanks,

No defect jjalto, it's the mechanism for the optical image stabilization. Every cam I've owned with OIS has had this rattle except for the SR12 I now have. So don't be concerned, it's fine.

[QUOTE=Ken Ross;13523474]Flinty, as I've said in the past, I'm always in the quest for the best video quality. So I am expecting an HF10 tomorrow. The winner will stay and the 'loser' (there really will be no losers, these are two great cams) will go to Ebay.

This may be one tough decision though! If we are to go by CCI's review, the color is pretty much the same, the bright light sharpness of the HF10 is better and the noise on the SR12 is superior in low light at 60i. Most of my video is shot in good light, so this will be a consideration. Of course if you look at those still shots of the fire hydrant on CCI (ah yes, the still shots I always say not to judge cams by), you can't help but seeing superior sharpness on the SR12. So go figure. It seems to me there are deinterlacing artifacts on the HF10 shot not seen on the SR12 shot. But going with the HF10 would mean give backs that include losing a viewfinder and the 5.1 surround sound as well as the superior Sony construction.

you make me envious ken i wish i could afford to do so but by selling off on ebay you do not lose so much.http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Sony-HDR-SR12-Camcorder-Review-34809.htm this review in my opinion may not give the sony full credit as they are usualy canon biased and with pq being so tight i would always go for the best made cam and could not lose a viewfinder
i will be interested in your review.

Still waiting for UPS Flinty. I thought I'd have it by 10:30am, but no such luck. I'm busy with work today anyway, so I'm not sure how much testing I'll get to do. Plus it's raining. It's ALWAYS raining when I get a new camcorder. I think it must rain 80% of the time when I get a new cam...seriously.

But you're right, I think my biggest concern is not having the viewfinder.

No defect jjalto, it's the mechanism for the optical image stabilization. Every cam I've owned with OIS has had this rattle except for the SR12 I now have. So don't be concerned, it's fine.


Thanks Ken, for the answer, Glad too now I do not have to return it.

Still waiting for UPS Flinty. I thought I'd have it by 10:30am, but no such luck. I'm busy with work today anyway, so I'm not sure how much testing I'll get to do. Plus it's raining. It's ALWAYS raining when I get a new camcorder. I think it must rain 80% of the time when I get a new cam...seriously.

But you're right, I think my biggest concern is not having the viewfinder.

Plus the LCD screen on the SR11/12 smashes the Canon's HV30 which I believe is the same as the HF10...

I don't know why CCI reused that excat same Fire Hydrant picture for the HF10 comparison in the SR12 review...it is clearly out of focus which would explain why it appears to have less detail then the SR12 picture.

Semi- off topic, but does the PS3 support video from the HF10/100's SD card without any sort of conversion needed? I know if I plug a card from the CX7 it works just fine...

What I want is the HF100 in black... :)

Yes...the PS3 works just fine with Footage directly from the HF10/100

Yes...the PS3 works just fine with Footage directly from the HF10/100

do you use hdmi cable? why not just connect hf10 directly to TV via hdmi?

also for everyone, is the HF10 pretty much the best flash/HDD camcorder that can shoot in 24p? i ask because im interested in making movies but cannot afford to spend more than 1k. not interested in miniDV.

do you use hdmi cable? why not just connect hf10 directly to TV via hdmi?


You could use your PS3 to store files and be able to play them back without converting anything. I have a 320GB drive in my PS3 now, so a quick dump to the PS3 means I wouldn't have to turn on my computer to simply transfer.

Hey guys,

I'm planning on a 3 month trip through SE Asia this fall/winter and want to film as much as i can while I'm there. My research has led me to these two cameras based on things I need like HD, external mic and headphone, ect..

My question to you is: What camera can take the most beating?

I don't plan on beating it up at all, but the wear and tear of backpacking tends to reach all of your gear eventually.

So do you think a solid state camera would have a better chance of dealing with bumps and vibrations because it doesnt have internal moving parts? Or is the HV30 rugged enough (and easier to pick up media for) while travelling?

So do you think a solid state camera would have a better chance of dealing with bumps and vibrations because it doesnt have internal moving parts? Or is the HV30 rugged enough (and easier to pick up media for) while travelling?

Solid state camera definitely has the edge. But it is still delicate electronics. Tapeless means one less mechanism to worry about, but the camcorder itself may not withstand rugged or rough use.