Canon HF11 vs. Canon HG21 vs. Sony HDR-SR12 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 347 Old 09-28-2008, 06:49 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
djgcue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 289
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I'm on the fence b/w the Canon HF11 and Canon HG21 with slight consideration to the Sony HDR-SR12.

So far the only differences I see b/w the HF11 and HG21 are the 32GB flash memory (HF11) vs. 120GB hard disk drive memory (HG21) and viewfinder (HG21). Other than memory capacity are there any other advantages of one over the other? I'm assuming the flash memory is quicker than the hard disk drive.

I believe I eliminated the Sony HDR-SR12, due to it lacking 24Mbps. However, if anyone thinks this is a better choice please chime in.

Anyone have any experiences with the HG21 yet?
djgcue is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 347 Old 09-29-2008, 08:32 AM
Senior Member
 
VTPete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 291
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
I, like you, am waiting to see some reviews on the HG21.

The SR12 has failed to impress me on the show-room floor.
VTPete is offline  
post #3 of 347 Old 09-29-2008, 08:54 AM
AVS Special Member
 
NJ3118's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Northern New Jersey
Posts: 1,223
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I just bought the HF11...If you have any questions please ask!!

I recommend it!!

I have a fever and the only cure is more Blu-Ray....
NJ3118 is offline  
post #4 of 347 Old 10-03-2008, 10:34 AM
Member
 
anthony11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 38
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I too have been trying to decide among the Canon HG21, Sony SR12, and even the Panasonic HDC-HS100. Panasonic seems to tout the three-chip design of their offering, but what little I've found online seems to rate the end results of this model as disappointing, which leaves me with the same two that you're considering.

Until now, I haven't had much need for video capture, but my son's due to be born in 19 days, so now I have a reason!

Some early reviews laud the HG21's 24p recording mode, but I've read posts that claim that it's not real 24p, and that there really isn't any point to it.

Others like the 5.1 sound on the Sony. I'm less certain about that, as one problem I've seen in older camcorder footage, eg. Hi8 captured through my Canopus ADVC300 is noise and shooter/companion conversation coming in from the sides and back -- so my first-blush reaction is to wonder that 5.1 audio on a camcorder would suffer even more from these effects. On the other hand, maybe I do want to be able to capture me talking to the kid while shooting.

Re the 32GB on the HF11. Remember that video can be captured to an appropriately-chosen SDHC card, which go to 32GB, so it becomes a 64GB camera.

From what I can tell, the HG21 has better low-light performance than the Sony, so I'm favoring it for that, plus I must admit that Sony's behavior (and the proprietary memory stick format) in recent years has left a bad taste in my mouth and I'm disinclined to buy from them.

So I then find myself wondering if the HF11 would be a better choice for me than the HG21, to avoid mech noise from the disk. Hmm, one could record on SDHC on the HG21, though, too, and I think even shuffle clips once recorded onto the disk for temporary staging.
anthony11 is offline  
post #5 of 347 Old 10-03-2008, 04:02 PM
Member
 
Jmorabito25's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 32
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
How do you watch the HD video on your HDTV aside from connecting the camcorder to the TV? I also have a Panasonic BD30 blu-ray.
Jmorabito25 is offline  
post #6 of 347 Old 10-03-2008, 04:38 PM
Member
 
anthony11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 38
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Same as any other camcorder:
o Transfer it to a computer and plug the computer into the TV via HDMI/DVI, VGA, etc.
o Transfer it to a computer and burn it to a BR or DVD-video disc, then play in disc player
o Transfer it to a computer and burn it as a data file and play the disc on a smart DVD player
anthony11 is offline  
post #7 of 347 Old 10-04-2008, 08:17 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tqlla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,447
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 11
The Sony SR12 also has a viewfinder, which is pretty important to me. The only camera on your list that doesnt is the HF11.

Not that it matters much, but the sony has a larger 3.3" LCD scrren, 5.1 audio, nightshot and a digital camera based on their BIONZ/Exmor processors(So it takes decent shots)

The Sony also continues to use their older proprietary shoe, which has an adapter for standard products. Wheras Canon is using a newer proprietary shoe(Meaning that there will be less accessories, and they will be more expensive)

The thing that I think sony is missing the most is 1080p24. Which I am suprised about.
tqlla is offline  
post #8 of 347 Old 10-04-2008, 05:13 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
djgcue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 289
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Today, I purchased the HF11 from Best Buy. It was on sale and I had a 10% coupon, so I got an okay deal. I have 14-days to decide if I'm going to keep it. Best Buy puts a sticker on the packaging, so I can't test the HF11 to see if I like it or not w/o being charged a 15% restocking fee.

I'm still waiting to see more video samples taken with the HF11. I'm also keeping an eye on the prices since it appears to get lower day by day on Amazon.
djgcue is offline  
post #9 of 347 Old 10-07-2008, 08:37 PM
AVS Special Member
 
NJ3118's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Northern New Jersey
Posts: 1,223
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by djgcue View Post

Today, I purchased the HF11 from Best Buy. It was on sale and I had a 10% coupon, so I got an okay deal. I have 14-days to decide if I'm going to keep it. Best Buy puts a sticker on the packaging, so I can't test the HF11 to see if I like it or not w/o being charged a 15% restocking fee.

I'm still waiting to see more video samples taken with the HF11. I'm also keeping an eye on the prices since it appears to get lower day by day on Amazon.

I had the same situation. The HF11 hands down take better video...I have tested in several situations. Most importantly without the need for any editing or filters post filming. It has amazing picture from camera to TV..

Only gripe is not about the camera but about the AVCHD format...Final Cut Pro 2 has a hard time rendering this format....it accepts it but its a pain even with a MBP and 4GB memory...

I have a fever and the only cure is more Blu-Ray....
NJ3118 is offline  
post #10 of 347 Old 10-09-2008, 05:48 PM
Newbie
 
husky91's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by anthony11 View Post

I too have been trying to decide among the
Some early reviews laud the HG21's 24p recording mode, but I've read posts that claim that it's not real 24p, and that there really isn't any point to it.

Check out the review of the HG20 on camcorderinfo.com. They rave about low light capability when using 24p and 30p mode. In fact, this is what makes these camcorders (hg20, hg21, hf11) stand out against the Sony. I personally am leaning heavily toward the HG21 only for the viewfinder. I have an old camcorder and the flip out screen is inadequate in bright daylight. I can't imagine not having a viewfinder. I'd really like to hear how others are dealing with not having one. I can imagine that the new generation of camcorders have far better screens. I would go for the HF11 if it had a viewfinder or if I could be convinced it would work fine in bright sunlight.
husky91 is offline  
post #11 of 347 Old 10-09-2008, 07:15 PM
Senior Member
 
August1991's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Montreal
Posts: 299
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
I chose my SR11 because of the 5.1 sound. The built-in mikes are good and when you play any video (SD or HD) produced from the SR11, because of the sound, people will immediately feel that they are there.

I think Canon dropped the ball on the sound issue.
August1991 is offline  
post #12 of 347 Old 10-25-2008, 07:18 AM
Newbie
 
bemx2k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: London SW19 . UK
Posts: 13
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
August1991

But Canon HG20 Won in most reviews
I mean Video quality

SAMSUNG UE65HU8500
bemx2k is offline  
post #13 of 347 Old 11-12-2008, 09:45 AM
Newbie
 
Razz2o4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Dearborn mi
Posts: 3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
So does anyone have the HG21 Yet? I too am on the fence between the SR-12 and the HG21
Razz2o4 is offline  
post #14 of 347 Old 11-12-2008, 09:23 PM
Member
 
ozziegt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 131
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
I decided to get the HG20 over the SR11 because of the low light focus issues with the SR11/SR12. I'll get it in a few days.
ozziegt is offline  
post #15 of 347 Old 11-29-2008, 11:58 AM
Senior Member
 
thecodeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 449
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Bump, any new information?
thecodeman is offline  
post #16 of 347 Old 11-29-2008, 01:46 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
djgcue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 289
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I repurchased the HF11 and saved myself $300 (Amazon) from the time I originally purchased it at BB.

My target price was 30% off retail, Amazon is at 37%. The price will probably drop another $50-$100 by XMas and drop even more sometime after CES, but I need the camera for the holidays.

My decision was based on Canon's excellent video capturing abilities, flash memory and form factor.
djgcue is offline  
post #17 of 347 Old 11-29-2008, 10:59 PM
Senior Member
 
kam1996's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 447
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I am surprised no one has mentioned the HF100 as a much cheaper alternative.
From everything I have read so far it seems like the BEST deal on the market.
kam1996 is offline  
post #18 of 347 Old 11-30-2008, 07:16 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
Don Landis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 11,164
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 278 Post(s)
Liked: 156
Just a word about the sound on the SR12.

While you can set the audio for a file set of 5.1 ( meta data) the only actual sound will be on 5 tracks. The LFE track has no volume. I've imported a number of videos with the 5.1 sound turned on and it never has any low audio from the subwoofer nor does it show any in the audio track for the LFE channel, using Sony Vegas Pro. Any connection to add external mics to the camcorder will cause the file to default back to stereo. I believe there may be an external 5.1 mic that will connect to the hot shoe but I have not tried any of these. It may require a special mic to pick up the LFE audio.

Some other issues I too have with the SR12 is it does indeed lack low light sensitivity without video noise. I have not compared to any other camcorder so this may be just the nature of the beast of these little camcorders in general. Usually, I shoot in adequate light if the shoot is critical production or just shoot family stuff and it is not so much of an issue for me.

What I considered real important was the ease of use and adaptability to accessories. I have good results with XLR adapters for two wireless mics. good hard wired remote control and a choice of recording between memory stick and hard drive for both still pictures and video. Recently it was pointed out to me that I could record SD at 4:3 AR and have a good use for that too. The USB transfer to laptop and various recording modes was also important. It lacks 24P but I would NEVER use that anyway.

I'll have to check out the Canon mentioned here as I have not seen that model. But I thought I'd post a few comments that I didn't see listed earlier.
Don Landis is offline  
post #19 of 347 Old 11-30-2008, 08:21 AM
AVS Special Member
 
NJ3118's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Northern New Jersey
Posts: 1,223
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by August1991 View Post

I chose my SR11 because of the 5.1 sound. The built-in mikes are good and when you play any video (SD or HD) produced from the SR11, because of the sound, people will immediately feel that they are there.

I think Canon dropped the ball on the sound issue.

Well chances are not everyone has a 5.1 setup to enjoy that (perk). Its not a selling point for me because I have an editor that can create its own sound channels...but even if I diddnt...5.1 is more of a gimmick than anything.

I have a fever and the only cure is more Blu-Ray....
NJ3118 is offline  
post #20 of 347 Old 12-02-2008, 06:28 PM
Member
 
timdg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 136
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I notice the Canon's say you can plug in a headphone and monitor the sound being recorded - does anyone know if the SR12/SR11 does that?

Thanks!
timdg is offline  
post #21 of 347 Old 12-02-2008, 10:59 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
Don Landis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 11,164
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 278 Post(s)
Liked: 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by timdg View Post

I notice the Canon's say you can plug in a headphone and monitor the sound being recorded - does anyone know if the SR12/SR11 does that?

Thanks!


Yes, standard 1/8" stereo mini plug
Don Landis is offline  
post #22 of 347 Old 12-03-2008, 03:12 AM
AVS Special Member
 
flintyplus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: yeovil somerset
Posts: 1,292
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 55 Post(s)
Liked: 23
If the canons take hands down better video i am surprised tv companys dont use them,i doubt if any of the modern cams stand out to a noticable extent,my SR 12 takes lovely footage with great colour better than my big FX7.It has a viewfinder which is a MUST for people who use reading glasses, sound is ok but i always use a good external.As for low light i dont know if cams vary but all the poor talk regarding the SR 12 amazes me as i find it good,mine is far better than a panasonic DX100 3 chip mini dv cam i have and at least as good as my FX7.
flintyplus is online now  
post #23 of 347 Old 12-08-2008, 05:07 PM
Newbie
 
javanaut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Hello, I'm new to this forum.

Sorry if this is obvious, but I'm trying to understand why the HF11 costs so much more than the HG20.

The HG20 does support recording to the SDHC card at 24mbps doesn't it?

So if someone wants the least expensive Canon that will record to flash at 24mbps, wouldn't the HG20 be the one?

Thanks !


------------------- background info ---------------------

I really have no desire for the hard drive in the HG20 (unless they're cheap to replace down the road), and would much prefer the HF11.

I'll be a newb to HD when I get my next camcorder. I was extremely close to pulling the trigger on a HV30 (and still might), because at the time I still thought I loved tape, and thought these HV30 gems might dry up soon at this price.

But then I starting dreaming about a world without tapes, and no moving parts except zoom.

I've been using digital 8 for many years, and Hi8 before that, and thus I'm used to tapes and have a lot of respect for the quality of my old Sony TRV320. And in many ways, the tapes do make a great archive. So I'm still confident that the HV30 would be a very good way to go for me.

But now I'm leaning toward the HF11, for home video of the family growing up on me, but it's out of my price range. The HG20 is an option, but my heart isn't into it.

I'll be glad to leave behind the motor hum that I get in my TRV320 audio (unless I get the HV30 afterall).
javanaut is offline  
post #24 of 347 Old 12-09-2008, 05:44 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,560
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1376 Post(s)
Liked: 1488
I thought I'd throw in my 2 cents on this since I currently have both the SR12 and the HG21.

To put things in perspective, I've had the SR12 since it came out and I had also tested the HF10 later on. My testing, which always consists of doing A/Bs on the same scene at the same time, showed what was IMO, better color on the SR12. It seemed that the color on the SR12 was more consistently accurate to the very blue leaning color of the HF10. Although the 'apparent' sharpness of the HF10 was a bit better at times than the SR12, there was no discernible increase in actual detail that I could see. So I kept the SR12 and returned the HF10.

Last week I tried the HG21 and immediately saw a big difference relative to my SR12. The HG21 has both greater apparent sharpness (significantly so at times) and a definite increase in actual detail. At times the difference can be truly striking...enough so that it actually makes some of my SR12 A/Bs look as if there was somewhat of a 'haze' on the SR12 footage!

The color on the HG21 also appears more accurate at times, if not a bit cooler than the somewhat warmer SR12 footage. Although I really think the HG21 footage is more accurate, I could see some people preferring the SR12's warmer colors.

I was doing an A/B in our kitchen and showed the results to my wife, not telling her which camera was which. My wife's usual response to these A/Bs are "I don't know, they both look good". This time, when the HG21 footage came on, her response was "WOW!". Just to make sure, I asked her what did she mean. She said the 2nd clip (HG21) was much sharper, brighter and had better colors.

Autofocus on the HG21 is superior to the SR12 as all the Canons tend to be. This is not to say I had any real issues with the SR12 focusing, but the Canon is simply quicker and its accuracy extends much further down as lighting diminishes. I often have hunting issues with the Sony as the lighting gets worse.

On the plus side for the SR12, I think its sound is better than the HG21 with the onboard mikes.

My A/Bs have ended and I'm keeping the HG21 and putting the SR12 on Ebay.

Don't get me wrong, the SR12 is still a great camera, but I really think the HG21 footage is superior.

Just a note on the networks and their choices in cameras. I don't believe that Canon is actually in the studio camera business (I could be wrong), but they are most certainly in the high-end studio and professional field lens business. You'll often find Canon lenses on Sony camera guts. I almost always see the Canon lens on broadcast cameras at any ballpark I've gone to. I think this is due to the fact that Canon does make a better lens than Sony. The sourced Zeis lens for the consumer Sonys are not as good as the Canon lens on their consumer cams. As I was doing my testing, I often wondered if the disparity I was seeing was due to the lens or better imaging chips & electronics in the Canon. My gut is that much of it is the lens. Although there are times that Canon lenses exhibit a bit of chromatic aberration, the HG21 seems to be pretty much free of that. I haven't seen any significant purple fringing that often alerts you to this issue.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #25 of 347 Old 12-09-2008, 10:19 AM
Member
 
negitoro7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 38
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I find it strange that the HG21 footage looks so different from the HF10 one, and you aren't the first to point that out. I wonder if the HF11 and HG21 footage would look the same, especially given equal bitrate. I would think so, since the only differences are supposedly the viewfinder and hard drive storage of the HG21.
negitoro7 is offline  
post #26 of 347 Old 12-09-2008, 02:54 PM
Senior Member
 
Jugdish69's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: N.E. Wisconsin
Posts: 316
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I, too, find that strange........according to camcorderinfo.com, they all use the same sensor. As a matter of fact, the hf11 scored slightly less than the hf 10............

Who's your daddy?
Jugdish69 is offline  
post #27 of 347 Old 12-09-2008, 05:47 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,560
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1376 Post(s)
Liked: 1488
Quote:
Originally Posted by negitoro7 View Post

I find it strange that the HG21 footage looks so different from the HF10 one, and you aren't the first to point that out. I wonder if the HF11 and HG21 footage would look the same, especially given equal bitrate. I would think so, since the only differences are supposedly the viewfinder and hard drive storage of the HG21.

It surely did to my eyes. The HG21 was clearly superior to the results I got with the HF10 with better color, sharpness & detail. As far as the HF11 & HG21, I would assume their PQ would be the same. For me the HG21 was the clear choice as the result of its viewfinder.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #28 of 347 Old 12-09-2008, 06:05 PM
Senior Member
 
kam1996's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 447
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jugdish69 View Post

I, too, find that strange........according to camcorderinfo.com, they all use the same sensor. As a matter of fact, the hf11 scored slightly less than the hf 10............


The HF11 , HG20 and HG21 all are the same, NOT the HG10..Doesnt the HG10 have a different size sensor also?
kam1996 is offline  
post #29 of 347 Old 12-09-2008, 06:11 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,560
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1376 Post(s)
Liked: 1488
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jugdish69 View Post

I, too, find that strange........according to camcorderinfo.com, they all use the same sensor. As a matter of fact, the hf11 scored slightly less than the hf 10............

Actually CCI said about the HF11 "It's better than any AVCHD camcorder to date". They also rated its video performance a bit higher than the HF10. To my eyes the difference is not subtle.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #30 of 347 Old 12-09-2008, 06:13 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,560
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1376 Post(s)
Liked: 1488
Quote:
Originally Posted by kam1996 View Post

The HF11 , HG20 and HG21 all are the same, NOT the HG10..Doesnt the HG10 have a different size sensor also?

No, they are not all the same. It's safer to say the PQ of the HG21 and HF11 should be the same, but the HG20 is the earlier model and more closely aligned with the HF10. Also, only the HG21 has a viewfinder...very important to some!
Ken Ross is offline  
Reply Camcorders

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off