The Official Panasonic HDC-TM900 Owners Thread - Page 7 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #181 of 1366 Old 03-18-2011, 09:31 PM
Member
 
purplestinger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 95
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Steve I really don't think that there is much more to figure out with that camera, You're a pretty sharp fellow. You have studied it as much as the rest of us have and you even said and voiced your disappointments in this and other threads. BTW I am not loyal at all to any one Brand. I exercise patients, always plan ahead and always have a plan B in my back pocket if all well fails. Something I've always done through out my life, so I never end up running around at the last minute trying to fix something that can't be fixed. But thats just me. I'm not slamming you here just hoping for the best for you. And this will be my first Canon. I do own a bunch of Leica camera's though. M9 X1, and a VLux-20


purplestinger
purplestinger is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #182 of 1366 Old 03-18-2011, 09:44 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Steve Cebu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,971
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by workinghard View Post

You should be able to turn auto slow shutter on, if you go to manual, then go to menu, then scroll until you find it. Should still be in there somewhere. This wil allow you to drop it to 1/30, though I generally try to avoid this.

Also, why would you have to close the iris-just keep the gain under 12, or maybe at 12...but I prefer under on my cam, and it should look quite smooth.

How much light do you call low light? It is impossible to tel on youtube, but I have not seen anything in this thread that my sd600 can not do quite well....so...I am pretty confused, lol.


I dropped the shutter to 1/60 but can't get it to go lower than that. I dropped to 9 dB and it cleared up a lot of the noise. This room is not that dark. It's like 20' long x 13' wide and has a 1600 lumen bulb at one end and a 700 lumen bulb in the middle.
I don't upload these to YouTube but I will upload them to Vimeo.
So it does smooth out but not as good as the Sony.
Steve Cebu is offline  
post #183 of 1366 Old 03-18-2011, 09:47 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Steve Cebu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,971
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by purplestinger View Post

Steve I really don't think that there is much more to figure out with that camera, You're a pretty sharp fellow. You have studied it as much as the rest of us have and you even said and voiced your disappointments in this and other threads. BTW I am not loyal at all to any one Brand. I exercise patients, always plan ahead and always have a plan B in my back pocket if all well fails. Something I've always done through out my life, so I never end up running around at the last minute trying to fix something that can't be fixed. But thats just me. I'm not slamming you here just hoping for the best for you. And this will be my first Canon. I do own a bunch of Leica camera's though. M9 X1, and a VLux-20


purplestinger


Well I am a believer in getting what works. No real reviews on the TM900 yet, none on the new Sony's. The Canon HF G10 has been reviewed, but you can't buy those yet.
I only waited until the cameras became available and a few reviews out. Lots of delays this year. I'm sure your wife will love the Sony, it's a good cam except for the autofocus. You can download the clip I put on Vimeo and see how slow the autofocus is. The left side didn't want to focus at all, the right side was ok.
Steve Cebu is offline  
post #184 of 1366 Old 03-18-2011, 09:52 PM
Member
 
djandrea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 180
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I've never had problems with the autofocus 560ve indeed ... is fast
the only problem is true in low light but low light that is dark .. you do not see anything .. It is also normal .....
djandrea is offline  
post #185 of 1366 Old 03-18-2011, 09:59 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Steve Cebu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,971
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by djandrea View Post

I've never had problems with the autofocus 560ve indeed ... is fast
the only problem is true in low light but low light that is dark .. you do not see anything .. It is also normal .....


I already got yelled at for posting TM900 stuff in the Sony thread. I'm trying to keep TM900 stuff in this thread and the Sony CX560 in that thread.
Ok?

Tell me how many lumens equals low light I know how dark, dark is.
Small room about 2,500 lumens equals low light. That's how bright this room is regardless of which camera you use.
Autofocus is slow, download the raw video and see for yourself. Maybe it's fast and I am expecting too much?

http://vimeo.com/21193452
Steve Cebu is offline  
post #186 of 1366 Old 03-18-2011, 10:08 PM
Member
 
purplestinger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 95
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Cebu View Post

Well I am a believer in getting what works. No real reviews on the TM900 yet, none on the new Sony's. The Canon HF G10 has been reviewed, but you can't buy those yet.
I only waited until the cameras became available and a few reviews out. Lots of delays this year. I'm sure your wife will love the Sony, it's a good cam except for the autofocus. You can download the clip I put on Vimeo and see how slow the autofocus is. The left side didn't want to focus at all, the right side was ok.

Steve, I don't know what to say to you, but you can not expect auto focus to work that great in the dark fon a camera of this stature. I see absolutely no problems or issued at all with the Sony cx560v based on the threads and posts to date along with my own analysis, period. It delivers what one would expect from a (consumer grade Cam), I think your expectations are a little too much here. Your asking for something that only the $100,000.00 Pro Cams can deliver when it comes to (FAST Focusing in Low Lighting conditions) I think you would probably feel better?? if you just returned the TM900 and "rented a pro Cam" for your wife's ceremony, And hash it out latter on what will be acceptable for you after all the family business is done. Just a suggestion Steve, I'm not telling what to do. That way time has passed and you be able to read about the great things all of these Cams can do.

purplestinger
purplestinger is offline  
post #187 of 1366 Old 03-18-2011, 11:58 PM
Senior Member
 
T.Huntley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 251
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Hey everyone!!

I've been looking on this forum for the last couple of weeks and decided to finally join up. Lots of informative discussions can be found here, keep up the good work!!!

I recently sold my TM-700 as although the outside footage was unbelievable, the video i was taking in nightclubs wasn't turning out so well at times (although i did manage to get a few excellent results, depending if the club had a decent lighting rig). i was hoping that Panasonic wasn't telling a white lie when they said they had improved noise by 45%, but this doesn't seem to be the case based on what most of you have had to say on here.

However, i recently found this video on youtube (slashcam), and there does seem to be quite a difference between the tm700 and tm900. I wonder what this is attributed to? Perhaps a different WB? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DaafBD-hzU

T.Huntley is offline  
post #188 of 1366 Old 03-19-2011, 07:07 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 23,786
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 850 Post(s)
Liked: 915
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Cebu View Post

Yes much more blurring with a pan on the TM900 and I'm actually very good with hand held pans (lousy with just holding it) but pans work out for me. It seemed jerky.
I think it's not a 1080p issue because I could see the jerkiness on the LCD screen. It's a very tough cam to pan. Too bad the Sony CX560 had so many focus issues. The right side would be in focus the right wouldn't be. The video I posted on Vimeo shows this.
I would love to spend a day at one of the big camera places like B&H Photo and test out the various cams. I think it's about bit rate and how the sensor is setup. Testing an XA10 at 24p versus an XF105 at 60i isn't a fair comparison. I think the XA10 or the XF100 will be the cams to have this year.
If they ever get released.

My wife said I can get the XF100 or the XA10 if they will do everything well and provided she can use it.
Half the stuff we do is inddors in low light and the other half is bright outdoor light. CF cards are Sooooooo expensive!

You probably should reconsider the Sony (CX700 or 560) given your shooting needs. I may take another look at it myself. I was looking back at the clips I still have from CX and they're really pretty good, sharper than I remember. My video buddy always accuses me of making rash, too quick decisions.

But yes, the focusing thing in low light was probably the biggest issue. I think I also preferred the colors of the Panny outdoors, but frankly, the colors of the Sony may have been better indoors...and it was sharper indoors. The focusing thing is not a shock if you've owned Sonys before. I can't ever recall having a Sony that came close to the autofocus of the Canon's IAF system.

My comment on the 1080p was not meant to blame 1080p for the blur, but rather to show that blurring can still occur with 1080p. I think some people think that 1080p eliminates blurring with motion and is one of the prime advantages of 1080p over 1080i. I'll stand by what I said before, give me a well-engineered 1080i cam over a 1080p cam that isn't as well-engineered.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #189 of 1366 Old 03-19-2011, 07:12 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 23,786
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 850 Post(s)
Liked: 915
Quote:
Originally Posted by purplestinger View Post

Return it asap! to many complaints. Is there anything good about this Cam? I have read not.

purplestinger

Sure this is. With a good one (apparently hard to find), you can get great detail, good color, a nice LCD & VF and pretty good manual controls. But as I've found, you may well get your share of grief too.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #190 of 1366 Old 03-19-2011, 07:14 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 23,786
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 850 Post(s)
Liked: 915
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Cebu View Post

Ok we get it, but most of us are trying to figure out what we currently have and what we can do about it. I know you are a Canon fan. I own Canon cameras myself. But there aren't any new Canon cameras any of us can buy yet.

Steve, have you figured out how to get the camera in full manual where you can set the iris, leave it at the aperture you select and then go to shutter while having the iris stick and then adjust the shutter speed?

Mine behaves differently or I'm doing something wrong. You set the iris or shutter speed and then the other value returns to automatic.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #191 of 1366 Old 03-19-2011, 07:17 AM
Senior Member
 
T.Huntley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 251
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

Steve, have you figured out how to get the camera in full manual where you can set the iris, leave it at the aperture you select and then go to shutter while having the iris stick and then adjust the shutter speed?

Mine behaves differently or I'm doing something wrong. You set the iris or shutter speed and then the other value returns to automatic.

From memory (based on my tm700), if you adjust the shutter speed first, then you can adjust the iris without the shutter speed changing.
T.Huntley is offline  
post #192 of 1366 Old 03-19-2011, 07:25 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 23,786
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 850 Post(s)
Liked: 915
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Cebu View Post

I dropped the shutter to 1/60 but can't get it to go lower than that. I dropped to 9 dB and it cleared up a lot of the noise. This room is not that dark. It's like 20' long x 13' wide and has a 1600 lumen bulb at one end and a 700 lumen bulb in the middle.
I don't upload these to YouTube but I will upload them to Vimeo.
So it does smooth out but not as good as the Sony.

I really wish the cam had an independent gain adjustment. That, more than anything, is the most valuable feature in getting the least noise in your video. The 900 as well as most other cams, have their gain tied to aperture, not the best way to do this. The top-of-the-line Canons often have independent gain adjustments.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #193 of 1366 Old 03-19-2011, 07:28 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 23,786
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 850 Post(s)
Liked: 915
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Cebu View Post

I don't upload these to YouTube but I will upload them to Vimeo.
So it does smooth out but not as good as the Sony.

I'll be curious to see if you can actually upload 1080p 900 videos to Vimeo. I've tried about 10 times without a single success.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #194 of 1366 Old 03-19-2011, 07:31 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 23,786
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 850 Post(s)
Liked: 915
Quote:
Originally Posted by djandrea View Post

I've never had problems with the autofocus 560ve indeed ... is fast
the only problem is true in low light but low light that is dark .. you do not see anything .. It is also normal .....

I would generally agree with that djandrea. I didn't notice any major issues with autofocus in good light with the exception of a momentary loss of focus as I'd pull back from full zoom.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #195 of 1366 Old 03-19-2011, 07:36 AM
Member
 
djandrea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 180
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

I would generally agree with that djandrea. I didn't notice any major issues with autofocus in good light with the exception of a momentary loss of focus as I'd pull back from full zoom.

strange, to me he's never done
djandrea is offline  
post #196 of 1366 Old 03-19-2011, 07:42 AM
AVS Special Member
 
markr041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,115
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 105 Post(s)
Liked: 124
"From memory (based on my tm700), if you adjust the shutter speed first, then you can adjust the iris without the shutter speed changing. "

This is correct.

"You set the iris or shutter speed and then the other value returns to automatic."

This is incorrect. Order matters, as stated above. I made this mistake the first time I used the camera.

On gain setting: The Panasonic TM700/900 does not increase the gain from base value until the iris is wide open. This is desirable, obviously. Once you set the iris to wide open you can then set the gain to any value you want.

There might be situations where you might want to close the iris and increase the gain - like to get more dof in low light, so having independent gain and iris is better. But, given the large dof of small-sensor camcorders this is not a big deal usually. Canon allows this, and of course the Sony camcorders do not even let you set the iris and shutter independently. Ah, the choices.
markr041 is offline  
post #197 of 1366 Old 03-19-2011, 07:46 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 23,786
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 850 Post(s)
Liked: 915
Quote:
Originally Posted by T.Huntley View Post

Hey everyone!!

I've been looking on this forum for the last couple of weeks and decided to finally join up. Lots of informative discussions can be found here, keep up the good work!!!

I recently sold my TM-700 as although the outside footage was unbelievable, the video i was taking in nightclubs wasn't turning out so well at times (although i did manage to get a few excellent results, depending if the club had a decent lighting rig). i was hoping that Panasonic wasn't telling a white lie when they said they had improved noise by 45%, but this doesn't seem to be the case based on what most of you have had to say on here.

However, i recently found this video on youtube (slashcam), and there does seem to be quite a difference between the tm700 and tm900. I wonder what this is attributed to? Perhaps a different WB? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DaafBD-hzU


I sometimes take some of their tests with a grain of salt. In looking at their 700 vs 900 tests, I'm actually not sure which I prefer. The 900 is obviously darker and less saturated. You probably could get similar results with the 700 by simply dropping aperture and adjusting WB. Either way, the WB sucks in both of them.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #198 of 1366 Old 03-19-2011, 07:47 AM
Member
 
vziera's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Elysium
Posts: 38
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Who here would trade his/her TM900 for my TM750
*runs away*
vziera is offline  
post #199 of 1366 Old 03-19-2011, 07:52 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 23,786
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 850 Post(s)
Liked: 915
Quote:
Originally Posted by markr041 View Post

"From memory (based on my tm700), if you adjust the shutter speed first, then you can adjust the iris without the shutter speed changing. "

This is correct.

"You set the iris or shutter speed and then the other value returns to automatic."

This is incorrect. Order matters, as stated above. I made this mistake the first time I used the camera.

On gain setting: The Panasonic TM700/900 does not increase the gain from base value until the iris is wide open. This is desirable, obviously. Once you set the iris to wide open you can then set the gain to any value you want.

There might be situations where you might want to close the iris and increase the gain - like to get more dof in low light, so having independent gain and iris is better. But, given the large dof of small-sensor camcorders this is not a big deal usually. Canon allows this, and of course the Sony camcorders do not even let you set the iris and shutter independently. Ah, the choices.

IMO the best setup is the one that lets you set a ceiling for gain. I've always set 12db as my gain limit and that usually provides a noise-free picture. This keeps your settings simpler and at the same time assures a clean picture.

I'm not sure the G10 allows this or not although I'm pretty sure it allows independent gain adjustment.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #200 of 1366 Old 03-19-2011, 07:52 AM
AVS Special Member
 
markr041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,115
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 105 Post(s)
Liked: 124
"I sometimes take some of their tests with a grain of salt. In looking at their 700 vs 900 tests, I'm actually not sure which I prefer. The 900 is obviously darker and less saturated. You probably could get similar results with the 700 by simply dropping aperture and adjusting WB. Either way, the WB sucks in both of them."

I agree with this. Indeed the Slashcam reviewer also shows if you go to the detailed review of the TM900, when they use manual WB they get a much better result. I have not found a consumer camcorder or camera yet that does auto WB very well in low light.
markr041 is offline  
post #201 of 1366 Old 03-19-2011, 07:55 AM
AVS Special Member
 
markr041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,115
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 105 Post(s)
Liked: 124
"IMO the best setup is the one that lets you set a ceiling for gain. I've always set 12db as my gain limit and that usually provides a noise-free picture."

Not necessarily a good technique. Most pros agree that you fix the shutter (say at 1/60th for 108060). If you set the max gain at 12 there will be low light situations where the iris will max out and your pictures will be too dark. If you let the camera lower the shutter below 1/60th you will then get some awful-looking trailing and other bad effects.

I certainly agree that having that option is better, but I am not sure I would ever take it.
markr041 is offline  
post #202 of 1366 Old 03-19-2011, 08:00 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 23,786
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 850 Post(s)
Liked: 915
Quote:
Originally Posted by markr041 View Post

I agree with this. Indeed the Slashcam reviewer also shows if you go to the detailed review of the TM900, when they use manual WB they get a much better result. I have not found a consumer camcorder or camera yet that does auto WB very well in low light.

You'd think after all these years and the technology available, this would have been addressed by somebody!
Ken Ross is offline  
post #203 of 1366 Old 03-19-2011, 08:02 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 23,786
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 850 Post(s)
Liked: 915
Quote:
Originally Posted by markr041 View Post

"IMO the best setup is the one that lets you set a ceiling for gain. I've always set 12db as my gain limit and that usually provides a noise-free picture."

Not necessarily a good technique. Most pros agree that you fix the shutter (say at 1/60th for 108060). If you set the max gain at 12 there will be low light situations where the iris will max out and your pictures will be too dark. If you let the camera lower the shutter below 1/60th you will then get some awful-looking trailing and other bad effects.

I certainly agree that having that option is better, but I am not sure I would ever take it.

I wouldn't let the camera go below 1/60th, I never do (I always turn off slow shutter). For the vast majority of lighting situations though, I've found that 12db max gives a very nice image. Of course 12db in all cams is not created equal and other factors such as lens speed, processing etc. factor in. The bottom line is that if I encounter a special situation where the image does appear too dark, I simply raise the gain and cut off the gain limit.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #204 of 1366 Old 03-19-2011, 08:02 AM
Advanced Member
 
workinghard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 633
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
[quote=Steve Cebu;20172853]I dropped the shutter to 1/60 but can't get it to go lower than that. QUOTE]

Well, I m not necessarilly saying that this is the best solution, but rather that it is an opton. Iprefer to keep 1/60 when possible, and always set my wb manually indoors at night. It is entirely possible that the sony is doing better in low light, but from what I have seen on this thread I wouldnt say it is as clear as people are making it out to be, leaving me quite confused. But, anyway, if somone wanted to film primarily at a club they should wait for the hm40 series, imo.

But, as to the slow shutter, I took the time to check the manual. Look on page 82. The following attachment is from the manual on th PAL version, but the function is the same, it will just be 1/30 instead of 1/25. The important part to recognize, Cebu, is that you have to actually follow these steps exactly:

-Go to manual mode
-Go to menu
-Turn auto slw shtr ON
-Then you can lower the shutter to 1/30, and it will do it automatically while in manual mode, IF you leave the shutter in auto mode.


As to the shutter in automtic mode while in manual mode (different than iA), as the fellow above pointed out, on the 600/700/800/900 cams you can set shutter, by doing so you put the shutter in a locked manual position (the only way to change it back is to go back to iA or maybe completely power down the cam), the iris will still adjust automatically until you set it. But if you then go back to adjust the shutter AFTER adjusting the iris then the iris will readjust for exposure.
LL
workinghard is offline  
post #205 of 1366 Old 03-19-2011, 08:04 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
gso125's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Princeton, MA
Posts: 595
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
In all honesty I think the panny 900 is a good to great camera. If I wasn't looking for the beeps I most likly would have not noticed them. The fan noise is only noticeable also but only with my headset and the volume cranked up. I havnt noticed any focus problems even chasing my son in circles from room to room from bright to low light. The focus problems for me appear in play back on a ps3 not played direct from the camera onto my plasma or LCD tv's. I'm with you guys on having the best for our money but knowing myself nothing is trully going to make me happy except some form of a procamera. My wife used to shoot weddings and back in the day we would drop 5k to 15k on kodak, nikon, canon, camera bodies and they all had there specialty areas for her to shoot in churches to very bright out side shots, back in the 90s the digital stuff was now where as good as it is today. She wants me to keep the 900 and remember I'm no pro so I don't need pro stuff. Lol Ill give it a few more days before I decide on this one.
gso125 is offline  
post #206 of 1366 Old 03-19-2011, 08:29 AM
Senior Member
 
Philip_L's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 318
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Hi

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

You probably should reconsider the Sony (CX700 or 560) given your shooting needs. I may take another look at it myself. I was looking back at the clips I still have from CX and they're really pretty good, sharper than I remember. My video buddy always accuses me of making rash, too quick decisions.

But yes, the focusing thing in low light was probably the biggest issue. I think I also preferred the colors of the Panny outdoors, but frankly, the colors of the Sony may have been better indoors...and it was sharper indoors. The focusing thing is not a shock if you've owned Sonys before. I can't ever recall having a Sony that came close to the autofocus of the Canon's IAF system.

My comment on the 1080p was not meant to blame 1080p for the blur, but rather to show that blurring can still occur with 1080p. I think some people think that 1080p eliminates blurring with motion and is one of the prime advantages of 1080p over 1080i. I'll stand by what I said before, give me a well-engineered 1080i cam over a 1080p cam that isn't as well-engineered.

Of course there will likely be blur in motion especially with camera pans, as a lot will then come down to the shutter speed. Try panning the most expensive digital SLR camera with a shutter speed of 1/100 or 1/50 and take a photo, it's going to be blurry. All these cams are doing is taking 50 or 60 full 1920x1080 resolution photographs a second, freeze frame a single snap shot and it is equivalent to a single photograph taken with a camera being swung through the air at a slowish shutter speed. Just because you have 60 taken a second and it's video, isn't going to stop the rules of normal photography applying.

If you want ultimate sharpness while panning at any speed you need to up the shutter rate, the higher the better, light permitting. Downscale it though to interlaced and you'll notice even more the 50% drop in resolution at the start of the pan, and the benefits of 1080P surface even more.

I've never heard beeps in the audio, and if you are, I'd suggest making sure your mobile is away from the camcorder. Now we use higher 3G frequencies and phones can have Bluetooth constantly advertising their availability, it could be those higher frequencies causing audible beeps. We are all probably familiar with 2G mobile phones interfering and being heard and would recognise it as such, but Bluetooth and 3G will are different beasts.

I would like to add there are several posts from people around the net with perfectly working 900 series camcorders, I'm one of them, and I'm sure there will be thousands of others.

Judging by the all the deliberation and picking of faults on all the various HD cams, it would appear no one seems 100% happy with any of them for one reason or another. These are consumer camcorders, and faulty ones aside, they aren't going to be perfect, but compared to what we had available just a few years ago for much more money, these small camcorders recording to solid state memory, are absolutely fantastic.

Regards

Phil
Philip_L is offline  
post #207 of 1366 Old 03-19-2011, 08:48 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 23,786
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 850 Post(s)
Liked: 915
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Cebu View Post

Well I am a believer in getting what works. No real reviews on the TM900 yet, none on the new Sony's. The Canon HF G10 has been reviewed, but you can't buy those yet.
I only waited until the cameras became available and a few reviews out. Lots of delays this year. I'm sure your wife will love the Sony, it's a good cam except for the autofocus. You can download the clip I put on Vimeo and see how slow the autofocus is. The left side didn't want to focus at all, the right side was ok.

Steve, I saw a post that made me recall an important option. The Canon M41 IS available and utilizes the same sensor and should have the same great low light as the HF-G10.

This may be the fall back option I've been looking for if the G10 is not available.

Edit: Sorry guys, the M41, like the G10, isn't currently available. Bummer.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #208 of 1366 Old 03-19-2011, 08:58 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 23,786
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 850 Post(s)
Liked: 915
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philip_L View Post

I've never heard beeps in the audio, and if you are, I'd suggest making sure your mobile is away from the camcorder. Now we use higher 3G frequencies and phones can have Bluetooth constantly advertising their availability, it could be those higher frequencies causing audible beeps. We are all probably familiar with 2G mobile phones interfering and being heard and would recognise it as such, but Bluetooth and 3G will are different beasts.

Phil

Phil, even if the phone is causing the issue, I always keep mine in my pocket and it's never affected any other camera I've ever used. If that were to be the case with the 900, then I have what is essentially an unworkable situation. When I'm out shooting, I don't have the luxury of leaving the phone somewhere else nor do I want to be in a situation where every time I hit 'record', I have to hand the phone off to someone that happens to be nearby.

I suspect this would not a good situation for most people either. This is simply poor engineering.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #209 of 1366 Old 03-19-2011, 10:29 AM
Member
 
ttmatsu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: SoCal
Posts: 140
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Cebu View Post

Yes much more blurring with a pan on the TM900 and I'm actually very good with hand held pans (lousy with just holding it) but pans work out for me. It seemed jerky.

Steve,
Did you have OIS lock engaged? If so, try turning it off then panning. Disengage OIS altogether and try panning. The panasonic literature states that "considerable blurring is generated by the shifting of the corrective lens when the camera is panned or tilted".

I asked panasonic what would happen if I tried recording while on a zip line and they told me the camera would automatically stop recording due to fast panning and possible drop detection.
ttmatsu is offline  
post #210 of 1366 Old 03-19-2011, 01:59 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Steve Cebu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,971
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

You probably should reconsider the Sony (CX700 or 560) given your shooting needs. I may take another look at it myself. I was looking back at the clips I still have from CX and they're really pretty good, sharper than I remember. My video buddy always accuses me of making rash, too quick decisions.

But yes, the focusing thing in low light was probably the biggest issue. I think I also preferred the colors of the Panny outdoors, but frankly, the colors of the Sony may have been better indoors...and it was sharper indoors. The focusing thing is not a shock if you've owned Sonys before. I can't ever recall having a Sony that came close to the autofocus of the Canon's IAF system.

My comment on the 1080p was not meant to blame 1080p for the blur, but rather to show that blurring can still occur with 1080p. I think some people think that 1080p eliminates blurring with motion and is one of the prime advantages of 1080p over 1080i. I'll stand by what I said before, give me a well-engineered 1080i cam over a 1080p cam that isn't as well-engineered.


I went to Best Buy again and had more time to shoot a few minutes and the guy didn't pressure me at all. The CX700 is just not worth the money if all you get is 32GB of memory and a 4:3 aspect viewfinder, not for an extra $200
I'll look over the footage again and I have bright and low light raw files to check out. I will post my findings when I have a chance to see them.
Steve Cebu is offline  
Reply Camcorders

User Tag List

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