Canon HF G10, XA10, XF100, XF105 Owners Thread - Page 21 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 1Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #601 of 4142 Old 04-07-2011, 10:36 PM - Thread Starter
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
This is the XA10 backyard shot. Still plenty of light. Notice sharpness, color and retention of detail during panning as opposed to the 900.

http://vimeo.com/22104285 (XA10)
http://vimeo.com/22104308 (900)

Interior mall shot. Late day sun coming through some skylights. On this one pay attention to the white vertical wall panel that stretches right below the skylights. Not sure if Vimeo shows it, but if you download and play it on your HDTV, you can't miss it. The 900 blows this area out and the XA10 holds the detail. I've seen this repeated in other clips.

http://vimeo.com/22104367 (XA10)
http://vimeo.com/22104624 (900)

I keep getting a 'failed' on the last 900 clip. If I keep getting it, you'll even be able to see the blown out white area on the thumbnail which I believe gets retained even if the clip itself 'failed'.

I had to view the clips on my PC (no choice) but on a grey day the XA10 is pretty darn good. I just wonder how it will do with a bright sunny day with a lot of vibrant colors?

Also not any real motion clips. I uploaded all those rushing water clips and that is serious motion and the TM900 handled it but it would crash on my PS3.

Thanks for the clips. All that low light is way brighter than when I mean low light inside my house. I'm no where near that bright so probably very low light. No idea how many lux tho.
Steve Cebu is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #602 of 4142 Old 04-07-2011, 10:40 PM - Thread Starter
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
Thanks Dave. Yeah, the Canon is definitely a winner, I'm done with the A/Bs, now it's time to learn the camera.

It's weird that so many of the 900 clips fail, yet I did have a couple that were OK. I think that high bitrate is really a mixed blessing. It makes for problematic playback on the PS3 & many computers, issues with uploads, possible explanation for blurring on pans...the high bitrate is not necessarily the panacea that we might think.

And, who needs 'stinking 1080p' anyway'?! . Yeah, this flies in the face of conventional wisdom, but IMO here is a 1080i camcorder that is clearly better.

As I've always contended, it's the execution of the technology and not necessarily the technology itself. The 900 is still a great camcorder, no doubt about it, but I just have too much evidence the XA10/G10 are better.

I'm guessing that the variable bitrate is a mixed blessing. Yes it helps with motion but it can also crash whatever you are using it to play the file.
I do think 60p is the way to go but it certainly isn't perfect and likely will only get better over time.

I think the XA10 is going to get into trouble with fast action shots as I haven't seen a sigle clip anywhere that has a lot of motion in it. It's mostly static shots that could just as easily be done in 24p.
Steve Cebu is offline  
post #603 of 4142 Old 04-07-2011, 10:48 PM - Thread Starter
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 Jay968 View Post
Yeah, that does make a lot of sense! I had been wondering and wondering how you could not see the blurring with movement. At first I wondered if the shutter speed you were shooting at was just different, but then it dawned on me after I posted that part asking you about what settings you were using. So I went back and edited it with the thought about the plasma. Yeah that makes me feel better.
BTW, I can go up to 120hz on my TV but I just don't really like the look. I can somewhat live with the soap opera look but there are other artifacts that just make me want to turn it off all the time.

I wonder too if the other issues I had been seeing (having to turn down the sharpness a touch to get rid of them) also can be attributed to viewing on an LCD rather than a plasma. Seems as though LCD TVs do their very best when the source material is made up exactly as the TV expects it to be and when scaled otherwise, strange things sometimes happen.

Maybe my next set outta be a plasma.

I have a 3 year old Sony XBR LCD and if there is stutter, or artifacts or anything it will show them. I'm not about to buy a Plasma TV just for a Camcorder. I have 120Hz shut off as it makes everything look wrong and on older model TV's like mine it's really only 60Hz with some trickery.

The bad thing seems to be if you use an XA10 and you have a Plasma it will look awesome on YOUR set but if you take it to a friends house and he has an LCD it might not look very good.

Plasma has screen burn in and I wouldn't want to deal with that.
Steve Cebu is offline  
post #604 of 4142 Old 04-07-2011, 10:50 PM
Senior Member
 
ErLupo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: San Rafael, CA
Posts: 357
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Plasma *had* screen burn in.... :-)
ErLupo is offline  
post #605 of 4142 Old 04-07-2011, 10:55 PM - Thread Starter
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 luidoly View Post
Here is Movie #2
Comments welcomed, some how this looks a little better under Youtube
Luidoly
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mistqFbofTg

The XA10 does have very good low light capability. I cannot see a TM900 producing video with the gain set that high without looking like you are looking through 3 screen doors.
I might have to consider the Canon but I'd love to see real motion in the shots. Lots of things going on will artifact it or screw it up if it has a problem with action.

I do enough action shots that it's a priority for me.
Steve Cebu is offline  
post #606 of 4142 Old 04-07-2011, 10:58 PM
Senior Member
 
ErLupo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: San Rafael, CA
Posts: 357
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Cebu View Post
The XA10 does have very good low light capability. I cannot see a TM900 producing video with the gain set that high without looking like you are looking through 3 screen doors.
I might have to consider the Canon but I'd love to see real motion in the shots. Lots of things going on will artifact it or screw it up if it has a problem with action.

I do enough action shots that it's a priority for me.
Steve,

How about an AAU basketball tourney this weekend? Enough action for you? You'll have to deal with the fact that I am less than amateurish at composition and video making, but you'll get some action for sure...
ErLupo is offline  
post #607 of 4142 Old 04-07-2011, 11:02 PM - Thread Starter
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 ErLupo View Post
Steve,

How about an AAU basketball tourney this weekend? Enough action for you? You'll have to deal with the fact that I am less than amateurish at composition and video making, but you'll get some action for sure...

Yeah that would be great. The thing is are you going to edit it or post some actual raw footage minus the editing and music and YouTube compression?

I'm really liking the Canon but I just don't see any action shots with raw footage and I can only download 6 files every 24 hours from Vimeo so I ave to pick and choose which ones i grab.
Steve Cebu is offline  
post #608 of 4142 Old 04-07-2011, 11:07 PM
Senior Member
 
ErLupo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: San Rafael, CA
Posts: 357
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Up to you really... I edit for parents, but if raw footage is what you are looking for, I can upload that too.

If my G10 ships tomorrow, I won't be filming (saving money by sending the XA10 back). However, I really can't see that happening at this point. With the G10 at 1499, the XA10 is a better overall deal for me, future proofing my need to upgrade (unless I have to have 60p). If my G10 ships at the price I preorderd at, the difference will make me send the XA10 back. In either case, I will have a great cam.

So, unless someone beats me to the punch, pray that my vendor doesn't receive a shipment of G10s tomorrow.
ErLupo is offline  
post #609 of 4142 Old 04-08-2011, 01:03 AM
Newbie
 
gvon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 12
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Can any of these cams be used a "real cams"? Manual Shutter,Locked speed,manual wb and manual or at least push & locked focus?
gvon is offline  
post #610 of 4142 Old 04-08-2011, 02:21 AM
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
I have both plasma and 120 hz LCD and all my clips look great on both of them. I like the fast motion shots I have on my LCD the best. I had the pannys and sonys and the Xa-10 looks so much better in motion, day, night, color all around it's better. The only complaint I have so far is the touch screen but I have got used to it and I'm moving through the menus in manual mode faster.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Cebu View Post
I have a 3 year old Sony XBR LCD and if there is stutter, or artifacts or anything it will show them. I'm not about to buy a Plasma TV just for a Camcorder. I have 120Hz shut off as it makes everything look wrong and on older model TV's like mine it's really only 60Hz with some trickery.

The bad thing seems to be if you use an XA10 and you have a Plasma it will look awesome on YOUR set but if you take it to a friends house and he has an LCD it might not look very good.

Plasma has screen burn in and I wouldn't want to deal with that.
gso125 is offline  
post #611 of 4142 Old 04-08-2011, 04:40 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,032
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1039 Post(s)
Liked: 1149
Quote:
Originally Posted by T.Huntley

Ken, i'm finding it hard to believe that the Canon is sharper and more detailed than the TM900, even though I can see with my own eyes that this is the case

Have you adjusted the sharpness on the tm900? The video I used to take on my tm700 was razor sharp, i couldn't imagine anything else being sharper than that.... especially a 1080i camcorder. Perhaps your 900 is slightly 'faulty'?

CCI have tested the tm900 to be a sharper camera... this is all so strange
All settings are at default on both cams. I even checked during the tests to be sure. Remember I'm not the only who's had both cams that's found this. Keep in mind too that this was the third 900 I had and the best of the lot. I would say the sharpness of this 900 is identical to my first 900 that i returned due to beeping i would also say it's the same as the 700 I owned for a year. In bright outdoor light the 900 is still razor sharp. In fact, as I've mentioned, there are some clips where I gave the sharpness edge to the 900. But the thing that's surprised me from day one is that it's not happening with any degree of regularity. In fact in all around shooting, its the XA that's generally sharper.

It's important for everyone to understand (as I've now learned) that 1080p guarantees you absolutely nothing in terms of sharpness. In fact it guarantees you only one thing, your video will be shot at 1080p. To put this in perspective, let me put it this way, would you be surprised if a professional 1080i cam outperformed the consumer 700/900? Of course not. I'm certainly not saying the XA is a professional cam, far from it. What I'm trying to point out is it's not the 'p' or the 'i', it's the execution of the cam, how well the unit was designed by the manufacturer.

Take another 1080p cam, the CX700/560. Although I can't do an A/B at this point since that cam is gone for other reasons, I can guarantee you that the 1080i XA also beats that 1080p cam. How do I know? When I tested my current 900, it bested the Sony for sharpness and detail. In fact I had no issues with the Sony's sharpness, it was the color I couldn't live with, but the 900 was still sharper. So it just points out the fact the 900 isn't really a 'dud', it beat the 560 and CX700 for detail and sharpness. That's why I expected it to do the same with the XA. In my mind it was never a question of 'if' the 900 would be sharper than the Canon, it was a question of how much and could I be happy with the disparity.

You know it also brings me to another point that I've previously mentioned. If you look at Slashcam's comparison of the 900 vs the XA, you'll see the frequency response charts (a measure of visual detail), look almost identical in the two cams. If I just took those charts, the results I'm seeing shouldn't be too surprising. The two are very close in the brightest light, but move that lighting down to something other than very bright (and that includes some very ordinary lighting such as inside malls) and the XA comes out on top almost all the time.

You mentioned CCI. Keep in mind that they also felt the overall PQ of the XA was the best of any cam out there. In fact the only consumer cam to outscore the 700/900 in Slashcam was also the XA.

The bottom line is I'm not complaining, the results are what they are and I'm just as surprised as you, but pleasantly so. I now get the benefit of superb low light shooting (or should I say medium light too, that seems to be more accurate), with bright light performance that gives up nothing. Pretty nice, no?
Ken Ross is offline  
post #612 of 4142 Old 04-08-2011, 04:47 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,032
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1039 Post(s)
Liked: 1149
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Cebu

File size is duration and I don't like small limits being imposed, since there is no reason for it.
Software takes care of that Steve. But in your case I agree, you're just not ready. You're going to have to hope for a new format to deal with it if you're not willing to use the software, as well as equipment that's as good as the best we're seeing in the AVCHD world. It might happen, but I don't think anytime soon.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #613 of 4142 Old 04-08-2011, 04:55 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,032
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1039 Post(s)
Liked: 1149
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Cebu

I had to view the clips on my PC (no choice) but on a grey day the XA10 is pretty darn good. I just wonder how it will do with a bright sunny day with a lot of vibrant colors?

Also not any real motion clips. I uploaded all those rushing water clips and that is serious motion and the TM900 handled it but it would crash on my PS3.

Thanks for the clips. All that low light is way brighter than when I mean low light inside my house. I'm no where near that bright so probably very low light. No idea how many lux tho.
Steve, low light is not an issue. As everyone has found, you can not find a better low light cam. I don't think you've looked at all the clips that I and others have posted. Rapid pans are there, bright sunshine is there with brilliant colors, very low light clips, they're all there guy. Vimeo & YouTube are your friends. Even I've got panning clips that show how the XA holds detail better than the 900. It may not be as fast a pan as you'd like, but if the 900 can't beat the XA in a medium pan, why would you think it could in an ultra fast whip pan?

We both agree Steve, you're not ready, stop knocking yourself out.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #614 of 4142 Old 04-08-2011, 05:10 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,032
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1039 Post(s)
Liked: 1149
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Cebu

I have a 3 year old Sony XBR LCD and if there is stutter, or artifacts or anything it will show them. I'm not about to buy a Plasma TV just for a Camcorder. I have 120Hz shut off as it makes everything look wrong and on older model TV's like mine it's really only 60Hz with some trickery.

The bad thing seems to be if you use an XA10 and you have a Plasma it will look awesome on YOUR set but if you take it to a friends house and he has an LCD it might not look very good.

Plasma has screen burn in and I wouldn't want to deal with that.
Man Steve, you're living in the past. Plasmas have largely licked screen burn in for several years. I know many many people with plasmas and not one has ever had burn-in. As far as motion is concerned, it is an extremely well known fact that LCDs do not handle motion as well as plasmas. This is a fact pure and simple. It's the very reason companies have gone to higher 'hz' ratings to try to deal with this inherent problem. The problem is, this technology introduces its own artifacts. If you see motion issues, it's not the XA, it's your display. One of the biggest mistakes you can make in video is to blame your source device for problems that are caused by your display. I have yet to see an LCD that can show rapid motion without blurring with any source. It's inherent in the technology Steve and it's a well known fact. some are better than others, but none are as good at motion handling as plasmas.

So you don't buy a plasma for the XA, you buy a plasma for the best PQ available. This is not just MO, its the opinion of virtually every professional reviewer around. The only time I don't recommend plasmas to friends, is if their room has lots of uncontrolled bright lighting. In that case LCD bests plasma all the time. This is not to say that LCDs can't produce a 'knock your socks off' picture, some certainly do.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #615 of 4142 Old 04-08-2011, 05:12 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,032
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1039 Post(s)
Liked: 1149
Quote:
Originally Posted by gvon
Can any of these cams be used a "real cams"? Manual Shutter,Locked speed,manual wb and manual or at least push & locked focus?
Yes, it's called the XA10/G10. Full manual control.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #616 of 4142 Old 04-08-2011, 05:14 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,032
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1039 Post(s)
Liked: 1149
Quote:
Originally Posted by gso125
The only complaint I have so far is the touch screen but I have got used to it and I'm moving through the menus in manual mode faster.
yup! Give me buttons ANY day of the week. All of these guys saddle us with these damn menus.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #617 of 4142 Old 04-08-2011, 05:54 AM - Thread Starter
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 ErLupo View Post
Up to you really... I edit for parents, but if raw footage is what you are looking for, I can upload that too.

If my G10 ships tomorrow, I won't be filming (saving money by sending the XA10 back). However, I really can't see that happening at this point. With the G10 at 1499, the XA10 is a better overall deal for me, future proofing my need to upgrade (unless I have to have 60p). If my G10 ships at the price I preorderd at, the difference will make me send the XA10 back. In either case, I will have a great cam.

So, unless someone beats me to the punch, pray that my vendor doesn't receive a shipment of G10s tomorrow.

Hard decision having to decide between a big savings or future proofing for teh next couple of years. I wonder what would happen if Canon came out with a 60p mode next year?

Thanks for all the stuff you've uploaded. I'm just trying to see how motion is handled by this camera.
From What I've seen in various clips from many people, my idea of low light is drastically lower than average and my idea of motion is a lot more going on in the shot that what is considered average as well.
Steve Cebu is offline  
post #618 of 4142 Old 04-08-2011, 05:56 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,032
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1039 Post(s)
Liked: 1149
Quote:
Originally Posted by ErLupo View Post

Plasma *had* screen burn in.... :-)

Yeah, it's amazing how that myth still persists today, although more and more people are becoming aware that's not the case anymore. I blame the big box stores like Best Buy. I can't tell you how many times I'd see one of the sales kids tell a prospective customer to steer away from plasma because of burn-in or 'the need to refill the TV with plasma every so often'.

Many times I had to use great restraint in not going over to the kid and asking if he was saying this out of sheer ignorance or because he was told to push a different model. There were times I did go over to the customer after the sales guy left to inform them of the truth.

The misinformation out there is staggering. But most people just aren't that interested in reading up on these things, so it's understandable that they have these misconceptions. The videophile community OTOH is a very small number of people who for them, this is their hobby, so all this stuff is of great interest. They take the time to separate out the crap from the truth.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #619 of 4142 Old 04-08-2011, 05:58 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,032
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1039 Post(s)
Liked: 1149
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Cebu View Post

Hard decision having to decide between a big savings or future proofing for teh next couple of years. I wonder what would happen if Canon came out with a 60p mode next year?

Steve, in the wonderful world of electronics, the term 'future-proofing' has no meaning...even for a couple of years. This is the way it is. I buy these expensive toys with the full awareness that what I'm buying today will be a thing of the past in terms of performance & technology in 1 to 2 years.

For many people that's fine, it's 'good enough' and they can hold on to it despite that, but for dopes like me, I always 'need' to stay on the cutting edge. Sometimes I think it's a sicknees.

However, if Canon comes out with a 60p model, I'll take a look. IF it's better, I'll probably be first in line. Let me see if the doctor is in now.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #620 of 4142 Old 04-08-2011, 06:00 AM - Thread Starter
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 gso125 View Post

I have both plasma and 120 hz LCD and all my clips look great on both of them. I like the fast motion shots I have on my LCD the best. I had the pannys and sonys and the Xa-10 looks so much better in motion, day, night, color all around it's better. The only complaint I have so far is the touch screen but I have got used to it and I'm moving through the menus in manual mode faster.


It's too bad we don't have a camera place around here that is willing to let me test some footage, but no one has these cams around here anyway.
Lots of talk about how great plasma is. It looks good in teh showroom, but when i bought mine, plasma screens had a lot of trouble with screen burn in and to be honest I leave mine paused a lot so for me that would not be good to always have an image on there.

I'm trying to see if the XA10 is really worth getting over the TM900 but from all the scenic static shots I've seen it's not shooting like I would typically do. I do panoramics and fast motion outside and a lot of people shots is low light indoors and having a camcorder that on the HDTV looks like I'm looking through several screen doors was completely unacceptable.

Picky I know.
Steve Cebu is offline  
post #621 of 4142 Old 04-08-2011, 06:03 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,032
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1039 Post(s)
Liked: 1149
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Cebu View Post

Picky I know.

Steve, nobody is pickier than me. Ask some of the long time AVS members here. I believe 'anal' is the word. Who goes to the trouble like I have, getting God knows how many cams before picking the best?
Ken Ross is offline  
post #622 of 4142 Old 04-08-2011, 06:05 AM - Thread Starter
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

Software takes care of that Steve. But in your case I agree, you're just not ready. You're going to have to hope for a new format to deal with it if you're not willing to use the software, as well as equipment that's as good as the best we're seeing in the AVCHD world. It might happen, but I don't think anytime soon.


Ken, not all camcorders have a 2GB limitation. My guess is in a couple of years they will move away from FAT32 and move up to NTFS and that will solve a lot of these problems.
It's like having a media player than can only play 2 minute songs and saying it's ok because a good song shouldn't be any more than 2 minutes anyway.
But you can always flip the record and listen to side 2 if you want a 4 minutes song.

At least that's how it seems to me.

I do agree that you can join these together, but it's a step you shouldn't have to take, IMO.
Steve Cebu is offline  
post #623 of 4142 Old 04-08-2011, 06:08 AM - Thread Starter
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

Steve, low light is not an issue. As everyone has found, you can not find a better low light cam. I don't think you've looked at all the clips that I and others have posted. Rapid pans are there, bright sunshine is there with brilliant colors, very low light clips, they're all there guy. Vimeo & YouTube are your friends. Even I've got panning clips that show how the XA holds detail better than the 900. It may not be as fast a pan as you'd like, but if the 900 can't beat the XA in a medium pan, why would you think it could in an ultra fast whip pan?

We both agree Steve, you're not ready, stop knocking yourself out.


Ken you keep saying I'm not ready, but that's only true for the moment.
I have not yet seen any real action shots taken with the XA10. I have seen limited motion shots,, static shots, dogs and cats sleeping shots and some moderately moving water with no rapids shots. But nothing with a lot of people running around or fast action on Vimeo or even YouTube.
I will keep looking tho.
Steve Cebu is offline  
post #624 of 4142 Old 04-08-2011, 06:09 AM
Member
 
lilfurbal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 134
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ungermann View Post



If you don't know ins and outs, why don't you stick to what the manufacturer recommends, which is using bundled software to capture files onto a computer instead of copying them directly from a card. Bundled software solves this issue. Or you can use utilities like tsMuxer.


Hm, so I tested it out and installed the software that comes with the camcorder, the Pixela Transfer Utility? Then I imported a split up video. It detected it as a split video by putting a _1 and _2 at the end of each file that belongs together. However when all was said and done it never did stitch them together, just left them as separate files again.

However, at that point I decided to give tsMuxer a try. This appeared to have combined them all together perfectly. So something works. Thanks
lilfurbal is offline  
post #625 of 4142 Old 04-08-2011, 06:14 AM - Thread Starter
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

Man Steve, you're living in the past. Plasmas have largely licked screen burn in for several years. I know many many people with plasmas and not one has ever had burn-in. As far as motion is concerned, it is an extremely well known fact that LCDs do not handle motion as well as plasmas. This is a fact pure and simple. It's the very reason companies have gone to higher 'hz' ratings to try to deal with this inherent problem. The problem is, this technology introduces its own artifacts. If you see motion issues, it's not the XA, it's your display. One of the biggest mistakes you can make in video is to blame your source device for problems that are caused by your display. I have yet to see an LCD that can show rapid motion without blurring with any source. It's inherent in the technology Steve and it's a well known fact. some are better than others, but none are as good at motion handling as plasmas.

So you don't buy a plasma for the XA, you buy a plasma for the best PQ available. This is not just MO, its the opinion of virtually every professional reviewer around. The only time I don't recommend plasmas to friends, is if their room has lots of uncontrolled bright lighting. In that case LCD bests plasma all the time. This is not to say that LCDs can't produce a 'knock your socks off' picture, some certainly do.


Well my TV is not that old and Plasma 3 years ago had serious burn in issues that were well known.
I can't justify buying a new TV because the camcorder lacks the ability to look good on a decent Sony LCD screen.

Maybe the new Plasmas are great, I don't follow TV's until I am ready to buy one. I also only buy Sony as they have always been trouble free for me unlike any other brand.
My XBR was the best that Sony had at the time.

So I take it what you are saying is that the XA10 is a great camera provided that you have a plasma TV to watch it on?
I don't have a plasma and likely won't for a very long time so are you saying that I shouldn't consider the Canon as it will not look good on my LCD?

You have stated many times do not watch the Canon on your PC monitor.
For me that in iteself is very telling.
Steve Cebu is offline  
post #626 of 4142 Old 04-08-2011, 06:17 AM - Thread Starter
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

Yeah, it's amazing how that myth still persists today, although more and more people are becoming aware that's not the case anymore. I blame the big box stores like Best Buy. I can't tell you how many times I'd see one of the sales kids tell a prospective customer to steer away from plasma because of burn-in or 'the need to refill the TV with plasma every so often'.

Many times I had to use great restraint in not going over to the kid and asking if he was saying this out of sheer ignorance or because he was told to push a different model. There were times I did go over to the customer after the sales guy left to inform them of the truth.

The misinformation out there is staggering. But most people just aren't that interested in reading up on these things, so it's understandable that they have these misconceptions. The videophile community OTOH is a very small number of people who for them, this is their hobby, so all this stuff is of great interest. They take the time to separate out the crap from the truth.


Ken, Plasma back a few years ago did have screen burn in problems. I didn't buy my HDTV from Best Buy I bought it directly from Sony and had it shipped here.
You say things have changed with plasma but back in 2007-2008 it was still an issue.

I do agree that most of the people working at Best Buy are pretty clueless about most products that they sell.
Steve Cebu is offline  
post #627 of 4142 Old 04-08-2011, 06:21 AM - Thread Starter
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

Steve, nobody is pickier than me. Ask some of the long time AVS members here. I believe 'anal' is the word. Who goes to the trouble like I have, getting God knows how many cams before picking the best?


Ken, I would say you are picky and that's a good thing, but also understand that I am also very picky. The difference is good enough has to still be pretty darn good for me. It has to do what I want otherwise why buy it?
I own my own home, outright, same for my cars, and everything else I have.
I don't buy for the sake of buying but I do it to meet my needs.
A Camcorder in this case has to look good on my LCD TV otherwise it's useless to me.
No matter how good plasma might have become, I'm not going to plunk down $3k+ cash when my current Sony is still pretty damn amazing.
Steve Cebu is offline  
post #628 of 4142 Old 04-08-2011, 06:29 AM
Member
 
krzysiu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Texas, USA
Posts: 36
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
I am wondering if XA10 looks better than TM900 when viewed on HDTV LCD screen? Can someone answer this question?
krzysiu is offline  
post #629 of 4142 Old 04-08-2011, 06:36 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,032
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1039 Post(s)
Liked: 1149
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Cebu View Post

Ken, not all camcorders have a 2GB limitation. My guess is in a couple of years they will move away from FAT32 and move up to NTFS and that will solve a lot of these problems.
It's like having a media player than can only play 2 minute songs and saying it's ok because a good song shouldn't be any more than 2 minutes anyway.
But you can always flip the record and listen to side 2 if you want a 4 minutes song.

At least that's how it seems to me.

I do agree that you can join these together, but it's a step you shouldn't have to take, IMO.

Then Steve, the answer is simple, the format isn't for you. No biggie.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #630 of 4142 Old 04-08-2011, 06:46 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,032
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1039 Post(s)
Liked: 1149
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Cebu View Post

So I take it what you are saying is that the XA10 is a great camera provided that you have a plasma TV to watch it on?
I don't have a plasma and likely won't for a very long time so are you saying that I shouldn't consider the Canon as it will not look good on my LCD?

You have stated many times do not watch the Canon on your PC monitor.
For me that in iteself is very telling.

Steve, first off, I don't watch ANY camcorder footage on my PC, including footage from the 700 & 900. Is that also telling? It simply looks better on a big screen. I don't know how else to put it Steve. Read whatever you like into it. I don't watch 700 footage on it. I don't watch 900 footage on it. I don't watch XA footage on it. I didn't watch HDV footage on it.

Second, did you read one of the owner's saying the XA10 footage looked great on his LCD? I honestly don't think you should consider the Canon because if you read your posts (like the one above) it's almost as if you're looking for some rationale not to get it. Most of your posts have that "ah ha" comment in them, which makes you think you found something new as to why you shouldn't get it.

I'm not saying this to be critical, but if you're so negative about anything you're considering buying, just look for something else or wait. I can almost guarantee if you get it, you'll find something about it that will make you send it back. If you start off with so many negative feelings about anything (all of which frankly I see no validity to, but that's me), the odds of you liking it are next to nil. That's sure been the case with me.
Ken Ross 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