Canon HF20 / HF200 Official Owner's Thread - Page 3 - AVS Forum

AVS Forum > Other Areas of Interest > Camcorders > Canon HF20 / HF200 Official Owner's Thread

Camcorders

Drdiaboloco's Avatar Drdiaboloco
04:49 AM Liked: 10
post #61 of 817
09-01-2009 | Posts: 30
Joined: Jun 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Francois Caron View Post

Second, the info on the HF21 is now available. The only significant difference I could find aside from the built-in memory is the OIS, which is called SuperRange Optical Image Stabilization on the HF200, and Dynamic SuperRange Optical Image Stabilization on the HF21.

I see that the built-in memory is now doubled as compared to the HF20, 64gb as opposed to 32gb. If it sells for the same street price as the HF20, it might be a worthwhile upgrade to the HF200 because now the price difference narrows considerably with card purchases in mind. Four cheap 16gb cards are half the $300 price difference between the HF20 and the HF200....

Not to mention the cooler paint job.

Then again, does this mean that we can look forward to an HF210? The super-duper image stabilizer probably isn't going to be enough of an upgrade for them to release a new model. I'm guessing that Canon figured out what the consumers already figured out, that the giant price difference between the 20 and the 200 was hard to justify when you realize how many memory cards you can buy for those hundreds of dollars.
Ingeborgdot's Avatar Ingeborgdot
07:14 AM Liked: 10
post #62 of 817
09-01-2009 | Posts: 1,244
Joined: Feb 2002
For you guys that own the HF200 I have a question. How do you think the AVCHD is compared to HDV format? What does it require to make it work well on your computer? Thanks for any info you are willing to give. I was told I should avoid AVCHD.
lurewars's Avatar lurewars
10:34 AM Liked: 10
post #63 of 817
09-01-2009 | Posts: 17
Joined: Aug 2009
Hi again all. Sorry about the break in the action here, but I wanted to give my Canon DM-100 Microphone Review as I've had it hooked up to my HF200 for the past week.



First off: Right out of the box I loved the look and feel of this quality little microphone. It looks great on the camcorder, not big and goofey like some of the other mic pictures I've seen on these cameras. The Mic is pretty light too, adds a little weight but not bad. And as most of you know, it fits right into the accessory shoe on top of the camera and pulls it's power from the camcorder battery, so you have no wires or extra battery to worry about. Everything looks and fits nice and clean.



Now for the performance. Outside on a moderate to windy day this mic performs awesome. I slip on the wind muff and it elliminates almost all the wind distortion. You can still hear people and other sounds, and you can hear the wind gusting but it sounds natural, not the krinkling crackling noise of the wind pushing against the mic. That's the good part.

Now the not so good, the indoor performance. I've tested this mic's 3 settings; Shotgun, 90 degree, and 120 degree stereo against the built-in internal mic. I've recorded people talking, music playing, video games, and TV. As much as I would love to say it makes a huge improvement, I can't say that. You can tell a difference when using the dm-100, but I can't say it sounds much "better". A tad more bass and depth to the sound. But that's it. But to be fair, I have not done enough real life situational testing to really say for sure about it's benefits. Also I need to do more research on the mic settings to know where the ideal mic level would be. It's just so hard to find anything.

In conclusion, I like this microphone and am going to keep it. It's exceeded my expectations for outside shooting and under-whelmed me for inside recording. However, I still believe I will be able to extract better performance out of this Mic once I learn all the ins and outs. The bottom line is I think it should be cheaper, more like 100 dollars. At a little over $150 it seems like a bit much. I'm not recomending this mic but I'm not saying it's a bad purchase either. Hope my rambling has helped someone.

Would appreciate any advice on how to get the most out of this mic and I will share more as I learn.
Jan J's Avatar Jan J
07:03 PM Liked: 11
post #64 of 817
09-01-2009 | Posts: 1,465
Joined: Dec 2004
Actually its 4 custom settings..
Go into Settings prior to Menu/Image Effect, and move over to last selection, CUSTOM EFFECT

And in that there are 4 trim settings, each with +0- settings:
Color Depth
Sharpness
Contrast
Brightness
rgdigital's Avatar rgdigital
07:34 PM Liked: 10
post #65 of 817
09-02-2009 | Posts: 396
Joined: Jan 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Audio_Newbies View Post

Can you fit the HF200 in a pants pocket without it sticking out? From what I gather it's about the size of a soda can? Is that a fair assessment?

Careful, saying "about the size of a soda can" got Clarence Thomas into trouble...

I put my HF200 in my shorts pocket during most of our last vacation -it fit just fine -and not too heavy either.
rgdigital's Avatar rgdigital
07:48 PM Liked: 10
post #66 of 817
09-02-2009 | Posts: 396
Joined: Jan 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ingeborgdot View Post

For you guys that own the HF200 I have a question. How do you think the AVCHD is compared to HDV format? What does it require to make it work well on your computer? Thanks for any info you are willing to give. I was told I should avoid AVCHD.

AVCHD is capable of higher bitrate recording with more color depth (4:2:0 vs HDV's 4:1:1 [4:4:4 is the best]), but at the cost of much more computer horsepower needed when ingesting and editing footage. I do mine on a new iMac with 2gigs of RAM and Final Cut Pro with no problem

The other big advantage is the files can be imported as fast as your computer can handle them, vs HDV (or any DV's) real-time import.
rgdigital's Avatar rgdigital
07:50 PM Liked: 10
post #67 of 817
09-02-2009 | Posts: 396
Joined: Jan 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by lurewars View Post

Hi again all. Sorry about the break in the action here, but I wanted to give my Canon DM-100 Microphone Review as I've had it hooked up to my HF200 for the past week.

Thanks for the review -good info.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Jan J View Post

Actually its 4 custom settings..
Go into Settings prior to Menu/Image Effect, and move over to last selection, CUSTOM EFFECT

And in that there are 4 trim settings, each with +0- settings:
Color Depth
Sharpness
Contrast
Brightness

Nice! Thank you.
thptrek's Avatar thptrek
07:42 AM Liked: 10
post #68 of 817
09-03-2009 | Posts: 126
Joined: Jan 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by rgdigital View Post

Careful, saying "about the size of a soda can" got Clarence Thomas into trouble...

I put my HF200 in my shorts pocket during most of our last vacation -it fit just fine -and not too heavy either.

Is that a camcorder in your pocket or are you just glad to see me. Sorry but I couldn't resist, lol.
Audio_Newbies's Avatar Audio_Newbies
11:33 PM Liked: 10
post #69 of 817
09-03-2009 | Posts: 59
Joined: Dec 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by rgdigital View Post

Careful, saying "about the size of a soda can" got Clarence Thomas into trouble...

I put my HF200 in my shorts pocket during most of our last vacation -it fit just fine -and not too heavy either.

Were your wearing long baggy shorts, or short shorts? I'm just trying to really gauge the size. Did it noticibly stick out? Maybe someone has some reference pics they could post? Sorry for the questions, but for me portability is an extremely big issue.
Francois Caron's Avatar Francois Caron
06:20 AM Liked: 10
post #70 of 817
09-04-2009 | Posts: 251
Joined: Apr 2002
I just use a deep camera pouch from Lowepro. Or my Case Logic netbook shoulder bag if I need one of my microphones.
Jan J's Avatar Jan J
06:56 AM Liked: 11
post #71 of 817
09-04-2009 | Posts: 1,465
Joined: Dec 2004
I actually used a 8-9" Lowepro telephoto foam lenz case to take the camera, hdmi cable, and mini tripod to work... It fit fine.
jtdwab's Avatar jtdwab
09:24 AM Liked: 10
post #72 of 817
09-04-2009 | Posts: 27
Joined: Mar 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drdiaboloco View Post

I see that the built-in memory is now doubled as compared to the HF20, 64gb as opposed to 32gb. If it sells for the same street price as the HF20, it might be a worthwhile upgrade to the HF200 because now the price difference narrows considerably with card purchases in mind. Four cheap 16gb cards are half the $300 price difference between the HF20 and the HF200....

Not to mention the cooler paint job.

Then again, does this mean that we can look forward to an HF210?

I had hoped the same for a 210 but history in the same line shows that the upgrades don't come to this level to the next full model cycle. I did find out from Canon why we couldn't find much on this camera. Its a Best Buy exclusive and is scheduled to release on 9/14. I checked and you can find it there. Its 100 over the HF20 on there site which is above online prices.

I would have prefered if it had come out as a general release. There will be no way to price match (if BB even will anymore). Unless they start with a sale which I don't expect you will be paying full MSRP. I'm not sure what to do. I found some .mpeg download of the image stabalization on the HF21 out of Japan. These appear to be real since they don't have the exact same footage in them like other demos I have found. The dynamic image stabalization looks really good if you going to walk at all but I don't know if its worth the extra price.

If online vendors would price the HF S11 down for competition it would be tough not to move up to that but I am guessing Canon will hold prices for a few weeks or months to get the initial high profit.
sailakfan's Avatar sailakfan
01:18 PM Liked: 10
post #73 of 817
09-04-2009 | Posts: 18
Joined: Nov 2002
Hello,

A new proud owner of HF200. I need suggestions for a Sandisk card. I can get a 8GB Extreme III Class 6 for the same price as a 16GB Ultra II Class 4. Since the manual suggests anything Class 4 or above, what are my drawbacks of using the Class 4 instead of Class 6?
Thank you
Jay7's Avatar Jay7
01:49 PM Liked: 11
post #74 of 817
09-04-2009 | Posts: 305
Joined: Dec 2005
I posted a separate thread after not finding my answer here but no one answered that thread so maybe know one knows the answer. I really want a double duty camera (video and stills). Is technology better than it was a bunch of years ago when I bought a 5 megapixel camera. The HF200 appears to do about 3.9 megapixels for stills. I bought the 5 mp about 5 years ago (give or take) because I could tell the difference on a 4X6 print out between a 4mp and 5mp. Is the 3.9 mp listed for stills the same as a 4mp camera? Not sure if they are talking about apples to apples or apples to oranges. Also, has anyone printed a still? If it is still not great for still images like the older digital cameras used to be, I may just go with the hf100 and save a few bucks since I can't get both or wait another year or as I would assume by then the camcorders would be shooting at least 5 mp stills.

Another thing, can someone explain how these camera's can shoot HD video but can't produce a still can't shoot better than 4 mp stills when a cheap camera can easily do this?
Francois Caron's Avatar Francois Caron
03:19 PM Liked: 10
post #75 of 817
09-04-2009 | Posts: 251
Joined: Apr 2002
A single HD frame is the equivalent of a 2 megapixel image. Many camcorders use higher resolution imaging sensors, but they usually stop at about 4 megapixels.

A sub-$100 photo camera can have an image sensor of at least 7 megapixels, but the sensor is totally unsuitable for recording video.

A camcorder is for recording video. A digital camera is for taking pictures. Don't mix the two.
barry v s's Avatar barry v s
12:28 PM Liked: 10
post #76 of 817
09-05-2009 | Posts: 312
Joined: Feb 2004
I recently purchased the HF200 and am taking a 8 day trip to WDW next saturday. I dont have alot of time to experiment with it and would like to know if there are any particular settings I should change for recording certain events like fireworks, night parades, indoor shows etc.

Should I set recording to 17 mbps FXP to get the most efficient/quality use of my 16GB SDHC cards? Is 24mbps overkill?

Should I use Cine mode?

What frames per second should I use 24p or 30p or 60i?

I am just short on time and i think i am tech savy so any help would be greatly appreciated.

thanks
lurewars's Avatar lurewars
12:56 AM Liked: 10
post #77 of 817
09-06-2009 | Posts: 17
Joined: Aug 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by barry v s View Post

I recently purchased the HF200 and am taking a 8 day trip to WDW next saturday. I dont have alot of time to experiment with it and would like to know if there are any particular settings I should change for recording certain events like fireworks, night parades, indoor shows etc.

Should I set recording to 17 mbps FXP to get the most efficient/quality use of my 16GB SDHC cards? Is 24mbps overkill?

Should I use Cine mode?

What frames per second should I use 24p or 30p or 60i?

I am just short on time and i think i am tech savy so any help would be greatly appreciated.

thanks


Good questions. I'm not trying to pass myself off as any kind of expert here but I'll give you my opinion.

I've tried several times to tell the difference between 17 and 24mbps recording. I hook my canon HF200 directly up to my Sony Bravia 46" 1080P tv via HDMI cable. Both recording modes look great, but I can't see a difference. I've asked other people to watch, and they can't see any difference either. The footage observed was from my trip to Arizona, and my wife's parents farmland in Nebraska.

I love cine mode. looks great in low light and in many indoor settings. It looks less grainy, but it tends to darken the footage so you don't want to use it in too low of light.

I've had the best luck shooting in plain old 60i. Not sure about the benefits of 30p and 24p. Canon says those modes are good for fast action footage and will make it look smoother. But, when I did some shooting while riding a four wheeler out in the country, I noticed the footage looked much more jerky in 30p mode verses 60i. Which makes sense, because 30p cuts the framerate in half, so It seems only natural that fast action would jerk around more with half as many frames recording. There must be some benefit to 30 and 24p, just not sure when to use them.
Jan J's Avatar Jan J
06:39 AM Liked: 11
post #78 of 817
09-06-2009 | Posts: 1,465
Joined: Dec 2004
I played around with Cine Mode.... and noticed that in bright light it made the video appear to have greater dynamic range, by compressing the light and dark areas of the video.
But like the last poster, dark scenes were darker... I think more involved testing is necessary...
Since I had no issues with drive speed, I left the bandwidth at 24Mbsec.... My thinking is the least compression recording will show the most detail with least artifacts.
Francois Caron's Avatar Francois Caron
08:42 AM Liked: 10
post #79 of 817
09-06-2009 | Posts: 251
Joined: Apr 2002
If you film a water fountain, you WILL notice a difference between 17 mbps and 24 mbps. But in other scenes with much less randomized fine detail, you'll be hard pressed to see any difference. Just don't go below 17 mbps. The recording's resolution drops from 1920x1080 to 1440x1080.

As for the other settings, use "P" mode at 60i for all daytime shots. For evening and dark indoor shoots, switch over to 30p and Tv Mode with a 1/30 sec. frame rate. That will help the camcorder produce a better image under difficult lighting conditions.
theaxledentaldj's Avatar theaxledentaldj
06:59 PM Liked: 11
post #80 of 817
09-06-2009 | Posts: 142
Joined: Aug 2006
Just got my first Canon HF21 from Best buy today.
thptrek's Avatar thptrek
11:07 AM Liked: 10
post #81 of 817
09-07-2009 | Posts: 126
Joined: Jan 2008
Do what Francois recommends. For any action shots use 60i. I just filmed a night football high school game and used 60i and Sports mode. It was low light and fast action from the stands and had no problems and it looks great on my 50" Panny. For those who have questions about the stabilization, it worked great even when I used telephoto. I was sitting in the stands with no tripod or monopod.

If going to WDW I would buy yourself some extra SDHC cards. They are so cheap you can easily have a few extra.
barry v s's Avatar barry v s
04:08 PM Liked: 10
post #82 of 817
09-07-2009 | Posts: 312
Joined: Feb 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by thptrek View Post

Do what Francois recommends. For any action shots use 60i. I just filmed a night football high school game and used 60i and Sports mode. It was low light and fast action from the stands and had no problems and it looks great on my 50" Panny. For those who have questions about the stabilization, it worked great even when I used telephoto. I was sitting in the stands with no tripod or monopod.

If going to WDW I would buy yourself some extra SDHC cards. They are so cheap you can easily have a few extra.

Thanks for everyones help. I only get one shot at some of the footage i am going to take, and wont know if it is good or bad till i get home. I have six 16gb cards and 3 batteies (2 of them are 819's). I hope that is enough for 8 days.
hdvideoreviews's Avatar hdvideoreviews
06:09 AM Liked: 10
post #83 of 817
09-08-2009 | Posts: 4
Joined: Sep 2009
I want to buy a camcorders that can use in low light. Does Canon HF20 has this feature?
rgdigital's Avatar rgdigital
04:46 PM Liked: 10
post #84 of 817
09-08-2009 | Posts: 396
Joined: Jan 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Audio_Newbies View Post

Were your wearing long baggy shorts, or short shorts? I'm just trying to really gauge the size. Did it noticibly stick out? Maybe someone has some reference pics they could post? Sorry for the questions, but for me portability is an extremely big issue.

Cargo shorts -not too baggy, but not short running shorts either. I'm used to carrying my wallet in that same front pocket, so it wasn't that much heavier or bulkier.
barry v s's Avatar barry v s
04:06 AM Liked: 10
post #85 of 817
09-09-2009 | Posts: 312
Joined: Feb 2004
One more thing. Is 60i the standard mode, without changing any settings?
thptrek's Avatar thptrek
09:36 AM Liked: 10
post #86 of 817
09-09-2009 | Posts: 126
Joined: Jan 2008
Yes, when I got mine out of the box and put the battery in the settings were P (Program mode) and 60i.
oilblue's Avatar oilblue
02:26 PM Liked: 10
post #87 of 817
09-10-2009 | Posts: 278
Joined: Mar 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by sailakfan View Post

Hello,

A new proud owner of HF200. I need suggestions for a Sandisk card. I can get a 8GB Extreme III Class 6 for the same price as a 16GB Ultra II Class 4. Since the manual suggests anything Class 4 or above, what are my drawbacks of using the Class 4 instead of Class 6?
Thank you

Class 4 is fast enough for the highest recording speeds of the HF200. From the SD Association:
Quote:


Class 4 guarantees a minimum transfer speed of 4 MB/s

- 4MB/s = 32Mb/s (8 bits per byte)
- highest quality setting on the HF200 is 24Mb/s

So Class 4 is fine. If it wasn't, Canon firmware wouldn't let you record with it...

Which brings us to Class 10, and a huge problem with Canon's current firmware for all Vixias. Class 10 is faster than Class 4 and Class 6. Appears to fit the recommended Class 4 or above. However, Canon's firmware rejects recording onto Class 10 at 17Mb/s and above. Unbelievable, but true. It currently accepts only Class 4 or 6.

Class 10 is relevant to your question because SanDisk has switched the designation on Extreme III cards from Class 6 to Class 10...and the packaging/printing on the box hasn't necessarily been updated. See posts 9, 13, and 14 on the first page of this thread for more.

So, if you do go with an Extreme III card, make sure you actually get a Class 6 card inside the box, not a Class 10.

Canon clearly needs to update their firmware. Whether they will or not...
Drdiaboloco's Avatar Drdiaboloco
11:29 AM Liked: 10
post #88 of 817
09-11-2009 | Posts: 30
Joined: Jun 2009
My new HF20 arrived before my 16gb class 4 cards, so I tried out an older 2gb Sandisk Extreme III card (with no class ratings but with the imprint "20x") originally used in still cameras. It and a no-name 1gb card worked just fine in the HF20.

I don't think you'll have to worry at all about class 4 cards.
Jan J's Avatar Jan J
07:49 PM Liked: 11
post #89 of 817
09-14-2009 | Posts: 1,465
Joined: Dec 2004
I was un-aware that a problem existed with Class 10 cards....
Did you inform Cannon Support, and what did they say???

Jan


Quote:
Originally Posted by oilblue View Post

Class 4 is fast enough for the highest recording speeds of the HF200. From the SD Association:

- 4MB/s = 32Mb/s (8 bits per byte)
- highest quality setting on the HF200 is 24Mb/s

So Class 4 is fine. If it wasn't, Canon firmware wouldn't let you record with it...

Which brings us to Class 10, and a huge problem with Canon's current firmware for all Vixias. Class 10 is faster than Class 4 and Class 6. Appears to fit the recommended Class 4 or above. However, Canon's firmware rejects recording onto Class 10 at 17Mb/s and above. Unbelievable, but true. It currently accepts only Class 4 or 6.

Class 10 is relevant to your question because SanDisk has switched the designation on Extreme III cards from Class 6 to Class 10...and the packaging/printing on the box hasn't necessarily been updated. See posts 9, 13, and 14 on the first page of this thread for more.

So, if you do go with an Extreme III card, make sure you actually get a Class 6 card inside the box, not a Class 10.

Canon clearly needs to update their firmware. Whether they will or not...


idocmike's Avatar idocmike
04:31 PM Liked: 10
post #90 of 817
09-17-2009 | Posts: 2
Joined: Sep 2009
cool forum, i just got a hf200 myself.

has anyone been able to view the video on their computer with out any choppiness?
i record in 24 mbs and 60i and when i try and watch it, it looks choppy.
i also put it on a dvd in avchd format and played it on my ps3. the video looked choppy
also. i have a pc with core 2 duo 3.06 ghz with 3gb of ram.

what program do you use? the pixela software it came with is what i've been using.

Reply Camcorders

Subscribe to this Thread

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3