Panasonic TM900 vs Sony CX560/700V vs Canon HF G10 Steel Cage Match Comparison Thread - Page 2 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #31 of 270 Old 03-21-2011, 03:37 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
Ken, Agreed.

chris m.
purplestinger is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 270 Old 03-21-2011, 06:02 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,569
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1381 Post(s)
Liked: 1495
I found this very interesting. This guy looks like the first consumer to get an M41 (far less manual controls, smaller lens, smaller LCD and less features than the HF-G10) and review it. What's interesting is he's comparing it to the Panasonic TMV700. He's had experience with the 700 and so the comparison is interesting.

To cut to the chase (you can read the full review below)- He found the low light of the M41 to be significantly better than the 700 and he's also found the good light picture of the M41 to be sharper at times than the 700 (slightly I'm gathering). He seems to feel the color is also better with less of a 'green tone' to the picture, although on one shoot he preferred the 700's color. My friend who sold his 700 about the same time I did, always felt the 700 was slightly greenish in terms of an overall color bias. I noticed that at times, but was never really bothered by it.

Assuming this guy knows what he's talking about, it sounds very encouraging and largely consistent with CCI. His biggest gripe from a pure picture quality standpoint, was that he wished the M41 had as wide a FOV as the Panasonic. Of course the HF-G10 will address that with an even wider FOV (slightly) than the Panasonic. Fun times ahead:

"I have used a lot of different cameras over the years, and just wanted to get a basic review of 24 hours of trying out this camera, and comparing it to some recent cameras I have used. The cameras I will compare to are the Panasonic SD600, TM700 (both of which are basically the same and will be referred to as Panasonic). Again this is a quick review, general scan of the manual, and usually I'm good to go, and yes there may be some finer points that are missed, or just poorly implemented out by Canon, that it takes more time to figure them out. This review is evolving as I have more time to check the two cams out.

First off, this camera performs nice in low light situations, I would give the camera 5 stars for this aspect. I just shot inside at a live performance, and yes their is much better detail in low light, but I must say the Panasonic on this shot had slightly better color performance to my eye. The Canon also looks much better then the Panasonic with any gain on. When using gain up in lower light, the Panasonic basically falls apart in anything usable as picture quality. This is in very low light, and if you manually use the camera and control the gain on the Panasonic, it can be avoided, but the Canon is better overall in low light.

Field of view, how wide the lens is. Panasonic, has a significantly wider image. This is a big deal, as you can fill the frame with much more subject matter, and closer up. Definite plus to Panasonic on this one. If you get the Canon, plan to add the cost of a wide angle for many shots. I believe it's 43mm for Canon, and 28mm for Panasonic. You may want to review the specs of each, to confirm these numbers.

Sunstars, the Canon has a 6 blade iris, the points of light have a six star pattern, the Panasonic has a 4 blade iris, and have 4 point star patterns. These cameras all use a small chip sensor to capture the image, and thus bright light sources, and every shinny thing (car lights, chrome, jewelry, you name it) is going to give little sparkles of light. I am beginning to think the Canon suppresses this slightly over the Panasonic. I am still out on preference to six or four point patterns, initially six points seem more distracting. They both suffer from this, I don't think either one has a preference in what I think of this. This aspect is one place a DSLR like a Canon T2i is much better, the larger chip does not show these annoying sunstars all over a bright sparkling image. This alone can make the picture very amateur looking.

Operation and control. Hands down, so far the Panasonic I prefer much more. The battery charges in a separate charger, then on board the camera, and charges faster from what I can tell. Touch screen control is more responsive on the Panasonic, and the menus are easier and much faster to work with. The Canon is awful for me to try and operate manually. Even with the SD600, which has the smallest screen of these cameras, my big fingers can control things with far less tapping, and the Panasonic's are much more responsive. The layout Panasonic uses is also makes much more sense to me for manual control. Focus, shutter speed, white balance, and iris, are the four controls I care about and are very easy to pull up in the bottom of the screen. On the Canon it's like target practice to hit the screen at the tiny point of control.
Another big thing here is Panasonic offers all manual control of shooting, shutter speed and iris, I can set it to what I want. As far as I can tell it's one or the other on the Canon, and then no info from the camera on what the shutter speed is doing if I select the F stop. The Canon will lock the exposure, but it does not tell me where everything is at, also no Zebra and luminance exposure info on the Canon.
I like the feel of the Panasonic better, it's slightly smaller and fits in my hand better.

Sharpness. The Panasonic is super sharp, maybe to the point of stair-casing issues, and perhaps should have sharpness dialed down. I need to play more with this issue. The Panasonic is sharp, and the Canon I now find sharp too, on later review, the Canon looks very good, and now maybe a little sharper. All of this is under review, and I will be changing the review as I discover differences. In many shots the Canon is starting to win the sharpness test, but it's all very subjective as to what is sharp.

Motion blur, trailing, and stabilization, haven't had enough time to fully test. The Panasonic and the Canon both suffer from vibration, thus image shake. When the Canon shakes, to me it looks worse, it looks like a wobble.

Color. The Canon has less of a greenish tone, the sky looks blue, and the color of my car was more accurate. However I have one shot, that the Canon is more washed out then the Panasonic. This probably relates to the fact that for me as stated, the Panasonic has better manual control operation then the Canon. The Canon has some guessing as to what the camera is actually doing, I have not found a way to manually set both Fstop and shutter speed both to manual at the same time. The display will show me Fstop, but so far I can not tell what the shutter is doing when I manually set the Fstop.

60p/30p. The Panasonic shoots 60p, that gives me a wide range of playback options, and it is progressive, the Canon is 30p in a 60i wrapper. The Panasonic, at this point has a difficult work flow. This alone could be a deal breaker for many people, as it requires a more extensive post production time investment. I also had to buy a third party software to work with it on my Mac, this may change soon with Final Cut 8 around the corner. For non professional use (which of course these cameras are for), the Canon might be easier, but comes at a price of some things the Panasonic does better.

Early and incomplete conclusion. The Canon has better low light performance, and somewhat better dynamic range, sharpness I am still testing. There are many things I like about the Panasonic, further testing shows a very good image now on the Canon. In some situations, this might be the reason to keep it. I will probably keep both, as each has distinctive functions and performance. I just wish the Canon had the function of the Panasonic wide lens, menus and form, I would easily then give it five stars."
Ken Ross is offline  
post #33 of 270 Old 03-21-2011, 06:36 PM
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:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post


To cut to the chase (you can read the full review below)- He found the low light of the M41 to be significantly better than the 700

Quote:
Originally Posted by Reviewer View Post



First off, this camera performs nice in low light situations,... much better detail in low light, but I must say the Panasonic on this shot had slightly better color performance to my eye. The Canon also looks much better then the Panasonic with any gain on. When using gain up in lower light, the Panasonic basically falls apart in anything usable as picture quality.

This is in very low light, and if you manually use the camera and control the gain on the Panasonic, it can be avoided, but the Canon is better overall in low light.


Early and incomplete conclusion. The Canon has better low light performance...



Again, these big broad statements that distort reality. There is no way to interpret this, accurately, as significantly better.

Simply better would be much more apt. Of course, with the wider FOV, the G10 will be even better than the M400 series, but that was not the point here.
workinghard is offline  
post #34 of 270 Old 03-21-2011, 06:44 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,569
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1381 Post(s)
Liked: 1495
Quote:
Originally Posted by workinghard View Post

Again, these big broad statements that distort reality. There is no way to interpret this, accurately, as significantly better. Simply better. Of course, with the wider FOV, the G10 will be even better than the M400 series, but that was not the point here.

I think based on what he said it's quite accurate to say 'significantly'. When he says in describing the low light "5 stars in performance" "much better detail in low light" "Canon looks much better than the Panasonic with any gain on" "when using gain up in lower light the Panasonic basically falls apart in anything usable as picture quality".

As far as his comments on manual use of gain to control noise on the Panasonic, sure you can, but at the expense of a usable, bright image. Hell, I've tried that with the 900 and I can cut the noise significantly by cutting gain, but the picture becomes too dark to be of much use.

With all of that it's absolutely no stretch to use the word 'significantly'. Is that what we'll find when we get it in our hands? Who knows, but I think his findings ARE consistent with CCI's and I have no reason to believe both are so off-base on this. As you said, the G10 should be even better.

As I've said many times, we shall see.

BTW, I find it very encouraging that there is an M41 out there. The bottleneck may finally be loosening.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #35 of 270 Old 03-21-2011, 06:59 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 Ken Ross View Post

I found this very interesting. This guy looks like the first consumer to get an M41 (far less manual controls, smaller lens, smaller LCD and less features than the HF-G10) and review it. What's interesting is he's comparing it to the Panasonic TMV700. He's had experience with the 700 and so the comparison is interesting.

To cut to the chase (you can read the full review below)- He found the low light of the M41 to be significantly better than the 700 and he's also found the good light picture of the M41 to be sharper at times than the 700 (slightly I'm gathering). He seems to feel the color is also better with less of a 'green tone' to the picture, although on one shoot he preferred the 700's color. My friend who sold his 700 about the same time I did, always felt the 700 was slightly greenish in terms of an overall color bias. I noticed that at times, but was never really bothered by it.

Assuming this guy knows what he's talking about, it sounds very encouraging and largely consistent with CCI. His biggest gripe from a pure picture quality standpoint, was that he wished the M41 had as wide a FOV as the Panasonic. Of course the HF-G10 will address that with an even wider FOV (slightly) than the Panasonic. Fun times ahead:

"I have used a lot of different cameras over the years, and just wanted to get a basic review of 24 hours of trying out this camera, and comparing it to some recent cameras I have used. The cameras I will compare to are the Panasonic SD600, TM700 (both of which are basically the same and will be referred to as Panasonic). Again this is a quick review, general scan of the manual, and usually I'm good to go, and yes there may be some finer points that are missed, or just poorly implemented out by Canon, that it takes more time to figure them out. This review is evolving as I have more time to check the two cams out.

First off, this camera performs nice in low light situations, I would give the camera 5 stars for this aspect. I just shot inside at a live performance, and yes their is much better detail in low light, but I must say the Panasonic on this shot had slightly better color performance to my eye. The Canon also looks much better then the Panasonic with any gain on. When using gain up in lower light, the Panasonic basically falls apart in anything usable as picture quality. This is in very low light, and if you manually use the camera and control the gain on the Panasonic, it can be avoided, but the Canon is better overall in low light.

Field of view, how wide the lens is. Panasonic, has a significantly wider image. This is a big deal, as you can fill the frame with much more subject matter, and closer up. Definite plus to Panasonic on this one. If you get the Canon, plan to add the cost of a wide angle for many shots. I believe it's 43mm for Canon, and 28mm for Panasonic. You may want to review the specs of each, to confirm these numbers.

Sunstars, the Canon has a 6 blade iris, the points of light have a six star pattern, the Panasonic has a 4 blade iris, and have 4 point star patterns. These cameras all use a small chip sensor to capture the image, and thus bright light sources, and every shinny thing (car lights, chrome, jewelry, you name it) is going to give little sparkles of light. I am beginning to think the Canon suppresses this slightly over the Panasonic. I am still out on preference to six or four point patterns, initially six points seem more distracting. They both suffer from this, I don't think either one has a preference in what I think of this. This aspect is one place a DSLR like a Canon T2i is much better, the larger chip does not show these annoying sunstars all over a bright sparkling image. This alone can make the picture very amateur looking.

Operation and control. Hands down, so far the Panasonic I prefer much more. The battery charges in a separate charger, then on board the camera, and charges faster from what I can tell. Touch screen control is more responsive on the Panasonic, and the menus are easier and much faster to work with. The Canon is awful for me to try and operate manually. Even with the SD600, which has the smallest screen of these cameras, my big fingers can control things with far less tapping, and the Panasonic's are much more responsive. The layout Panasonic uses is also makes much more sense to me for manual control. Focus, shutter speed, white balance, and iris, are the four controls I care about and are very easy to pull up in the bottom of the screen. On the Canon it's like target practice to hit the screen at the tiny point of control.
Another big thing here is Panasonic offers all manual control of shooting, shutter speed and iris, I can set it to what I want. As far as I can tell it's one or the other on the Canon, and then no info from the camera on what the shutter speed is doing if I select the F stop. The Canon will lock the exposure, but it does not tell me where everything is at, also no Zebra and luminance exposure info on the Canon.
I like the feel of the Panasonic better, it's slightly smaller and fits in my hand better.

Sharpness. The Panasonic is super sharp, maybe to the point of stair-casing issues, and perhaps should have sharpness dialed down. I need to play more with this issue. The Panasonic is sharp, and the Canon I now find sharp too, on later review, the Canon looks very good, and now maybe a little sharper. All of this is under review, and I will be changing the review as I discover differences. In many shots the Canon is starting to win the sharpness test, but it's all very subjective as to what is sharp.

Motion blur, trailing, and stabilization, haven't had enough time to fully test. The Panasonic and the Canon both suffer from vibration, thus image shake. When the Canon shakes, to me it looks worse, it looks like a wobble.

Color. The Canon has less of a greenish tone, the sky looks blue, and the color of my car was more accurate. However I have one shot, that the Canon is more washed out then the Panasonic. This probably relates to the fact that for me as stated, the Panasonic has better manual control operation then the Canon. The Canon has some guessing as to what the camera is actually doing, I have not found a way to manually set both Fstop and shutter speed both to manual at the same time. The display will show me Fstop, but so far I can not tell what the shutter is doing when I manually set the Fstop.

60p/30p. The Panasonic shoots 60p, that gives me a wide range of playback options, and it is progressive, the Canon is 30p in a 60i wrapper. The Panasonic, at this point has a difficult work flow. This alone could be a deal breaker for many people, as it requires a more extensive post production time investment. I also had to buy a third party software to work with it on my Mac, this may change soon with Final Cut 8 around the corner. For non professional use (which of course these cameras are for), the Canon might be easier, but comes at a price of some things the Panasonic does better.

Early and incomplete conclusion. The Canon has better low light performance, and somewhat better dynamic range, sharpness I am still testing. There are many things I like about the Panasonic, further testing shows a very good image now on the Canon. In some situations, this might be the reason to keep it. I will probably keep both, as each has distinctive functions and performance. I just wish the Canon had the function of the Panasonic wide lens, menus and form, I would easily then give it five stars."



KEN, where I can I see or view this report on the M41, it must have slipped by me. Was this at CES 2011 in las Vegas? if it was I can't find it out there to see what this guy has said. Please forward me a link to that review at your soonest convenience.


thanks, chris
purplestinger is offline  
post #36 of 270 Old 03-21-2011, 07:06 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 think everything is a compromise in the best sony excellent day and night
excellent stabilizer and great colors
djandrea is offline  
post #37 of 270 Old 03-21-2011, 07:13 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
Quote:
Originally Posted by djandrea View Post

I think everything is a compromise in the best sony excellent day and night
excellent stabilizer and great colors

I don't like the lack of detail and sharpness, and the washed out colours in the Sony's.... that's why i'm still considering going with the Panny, and perhaps getting the JVC for low light
T.Huntley is offline  
post #38 of 270 Old 03-21-2011, 07:53 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 T.Huntley View Post
I don't like the lack of detail and sharpness, and the washed out colours in the Sony's.... that's why i'm still considering going with the Panny, and perhaps getting the JVC for low light

Same here plus I dislike the slow autofocus and the step zoom.
I think Canon could very well win this round even without 60p. But we will have to wait until it comes out.

CCI is finishing up their review of the CX700 so that should be an interesting read fairly soon.
Steve Cebu is offline  
post #39 of 270 Old 03-21-2011, 08:08 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,569
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1381 Post(s)
Liked: 1495
Quote:
Originally Posted by purplestinger View Post
KEN, where I can I see or view this report on the M41, it must have slipped by me. Was this at CES 2011 in las Vegas? if it was I can't find it out there to see what this guy has said. Please forward me a link to that review at your soonest convenience.


thanks, chris
Chris, it was an owner's report on amazon. I quoted his review in its entirety.

http://www.amazon.com/Canon-M41-Camc...owViewpoints=1
Ken Ross is offline  
post #40 of 270 Old 03-21-2011, 08:09 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
Provantage has the new JVC GZ HM860 for $646 :0

I think the big question is going to be how good the JVC lense is. I'm not sure you'd be able to put it in the same league as a Leica (Panny) lense, but hopefully we will soon see!
T.Huntley is offline  
post #41 of 270 Old 03-21-2011, 08:15 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
Did any of you watch my video? Basketball Game

I used the CX560. Loved the light, but hated the soft focus on all subjects... It's 720p on vimeo, but I watched it at 1080p and it didn't fare much better. My Canon HF-S100 was much sharper than this, but had horrible OIS (none, really).
ErLupo is offline  
post #42 of 270 Old 03-21-2011, 08:16 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,569
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1381 Post(s)
Liked: 1495
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Cebu View Post
Same here plus I dislike the slow autofocus and the step zoom.
I think Canon could very well win this round even without 60p. But we will have to wait until it comes out.

CCI is finishing up their review of the CX700 so that should be an interesting read fairly soon.
I played with a 560 over the weekend and found much like what I found with the CX700. In low light the Sony blows the Panasonic away, but in good light the Sony's colors are just odd, generally too blue/magenta. The AWB is as shifty as I've seen a camcorder in recent years. You really must either use MWB or one of the presets. Additionally, although the sharpness certainly isn't bad outdoors, it's not up to the Panasonic.

If the colors were good, I could probably have lived with the it given the low light, but there were too many other things going against it. Interestingly the autofocus of this 560 was better than the CX700 I had.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #43 of 270 Old 03-21-2011, 08:17 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
Quote:
Originally Posted by ErLupo View Post
Did any of you watch my video? Basketball Game

I used the CX560. Loved the light, but hated the soft focus on all subjects... It's 720p on vimeo, but I watched it at 1080p and it didn't fare much better. My Canon HF-S100 was much sharper than this, but had horrible OIS (none, really).
For me the Sony is out of the running at the moment. Yes, it's good in low light, but if the Jvc is the same or even better, then that's a saving of around $300-400, which i could use to put towards the TM900 for outdoor shooting. The 60p on the Sony doesn't impress me, the JVC doesn't have 60p, so it looks like 2 cams is the way to go for me, at least then I wouldn't have to worry about upgrading for a while
T.Huntley is offline  
post #44 of 270 Old 03-21-2011, 08:17 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,569
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1381 Post(s)
Liked: 1495
Quote:
Originally Posted by ErLupo View Post
Did any of you watch my video? Basketball Game

I used the CX560. Loved the light, but hated the soft focus on all subjects... It's 720p on vimeo, but I watched it at 1080p and it didn't fare much better. My Canon HF-S100 was much sharper than this, but had horrible OIS (none, really).
Yup, I saw that ErLupo, generally pretty soft, but I wasn't sure how much of that was due to the 720p. I see it wasn't much better in 1080p.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #45 of 270 Old 03-21-2011, 08:17 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
Thanks for the reply, But who is this guy? and where is he from what country, as this sounds like a left over pre production run Cam, I don't know how reliable this guys review is, and I'm not putting much into it, as it looks like most of the info could have come from Canon's website. Besides where are all the other reviews about this model? BS I think.just my opinion.

chris m.
purplestinger is offline  
post #46 of 270 Old 03-21-2011, 08:20 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,569
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1381 Post(s)
Liked: 1495
Quote:
Originally Posted by T.Huntley View Post
Provantage has the new JVC GZ HM860 for $646 :0

I think the big question is going to be how good the JVC lense is. I'm not sure you'd be able to put it in the same league as a Leica (Panny) lense, but hopefully we will soon see!
It may be a performer in low light, but I gotta say T.Huntley, that is one ugly camcorder.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #47 of 270 Old 03-21-2011, 08:24 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,569
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1381 Post(s)
Liked: 1495
Quote:
Originally Posted by purplestinger View Post
Thanks for the reply, But who is this guy? and where is he from what country, as this sounds like a left over pre production run Cam, I don't know how reliable this guys review is, and I'm not putting much into it, as it looks like most of the info could have come from Canon's website. Besides where are all the other reviews about this model? BS I think.just my opinion.

chris m.
I think he's legit Chris and given the M41 IS available, I believe him and don't have any reason to think he had a pre-production model. I think he gave enough details, comparisons and findings that were in keeping with CCI, that unless I found out otherwise, I'd say he's legit.

It's hard to believe someone would take that trouble to write a lengthy review that was fabricated.

As to where all the other reviews are on this model, keep in mind that only CCI has a review on the 900 to the best of my knowledge and that's been out longer than the M41.

Of course this is one person with one opinion, but it is similar to what they said over at CCI.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #48 of 270 Old 03-21-2011, 08:52 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
Quote:
Originally Posted by T.Huntley View Post
I don't like the lack of detail and sharpness, and the washed out colours in the Sony's.... that's why i'm still considering going with the Panny, and perhaps getting the JVC for low light
that are more faded -..... REAL ... if you want to fake colors, they increased in post ..
The Canon has the same sharpness of cx550 (painful) and then with belonging to the canon manual controls you have everything .. even worse than the stabilizer. the focus (again)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=44aamrIy2Y4

in this video there are some dark parts but still ... always focus well with zoom, was defective sample that you tried
djandrea is offline  
post #49 of 270 Old 03-21-2011, 09:16 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
I played with a 560 over the weekend and found much like what I found with the CX700. In low light the Sony blows the Panasonic away, but in good light the Sony's colors are just odd, generally too blue/magenta. The AWB is as shifty as I've seen a camcorder in recent years. You really must either use MWB or one of the presets. Additionally, although the sharpness certainly isn't bad outdoors, it's not up to the Panasonic.

If the colors were good, I could probably have lived with the it given the low light, but there were too many other things going against it. Interestingly the autofocus of this 560 was better than the CX700 I had.

Well if the autofocus is better in the 560 vs the 700 that is worrying.
What has happened to the quality from these companies?
Steve Cebu is offline  
post #50 of 270 Old 03-21-2011, 09:28 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,569
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1381 Post(s)
Liked: 1495
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Cebu

Well if the autofocus is better in the 560 vs the 700 that is worrying.
What has happened to the quality from these companies?
Steve, it really is sad. I shot a few clips today with my 900 and in one of them the beep was as loud as it was with my first one. I initially thought this one was better in that regard. Unreal. Man, I hope Canon does a better job with QC than these guys.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #51 of 270 Old 03-21-2011, 10:58 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 maybe its a bad batch from Panasonic? just curious though? what state do you live in? I'm wondering if NY.NY received a load of bad examples where Ken Lives, I havn't heard about any thing you guys are describing from any of the Sony 560's in Northern CA. It just might have been a bad lot from a disruptive day on the manufacturing line that day that sneaked through QC?

purplestinger
purplestinger is offline  
post #52 of 270 Old 03-22-2011, 05:11 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,569
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1381 Post(s)
Liked: 1495
Quote:
Originally Posted by purplestinger View Post

Steve maybe its a bad batch from Panasonic? just curious though? what state do you live in? I'm wondering if NY.NY received a load of bad examples where Ken Lives, I havn't heard about any thing you guys are describing from any of the Sony 560's in Northern CA. It just might have been a bad lot from a disruptive day on the manufacturing line that day that sneaked through QC?

purplestinger

Keep in mind that these are cams ordered online, so they're coming from outside the NY area. Others outside the NY area also have the 'beepers'. This problem also occurred in Panasonic's $15,000 camera, so it's not a new issue for them. Interestingly, we never heard of this issue in the 700, so something changed. Complaints of fan noise were heard with the 700, but not beeping. To me the beeping is far worse.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #53 of 270 Old 03-22-2011, 08:42 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
Using the cx560 feels a lot slower in the wb,zoom and focus areas so far compared to mg tm900. Low light is much better on the cx560 than the 900, I'll try to use them side by side today and see how they compare in good light on my plasma tv. So far other than low light I like the feel of the 900
gso125 is offline  
post #54 of 270 Old 03-22-2011, 12:28 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
It sounds like a software issue? maybe?? Look for a FW up date soon?? probably NOT! knowing Panasonic's customer services approach to consumer grade products. Tuff S%^*T has been my personal experience from them. Thats why I quit buying there products all together. Even if it is a good one.

Generally there is a crossed signal, setting off the beep which should only go off under a warning statice, to shut down Cam or a low battery warning signal. Could be something like that too. Hopefully NOT, because that would mean recalling all of the Cam's and a nice loss for Pana.

chris m
purplestinger is offline  
post #55 of 270 Old 03-22-2011, 12:41 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
another user on another forum (ignaziogss) did a test with a CX700 and
a TM700 and sharpness and nearly =

http://www.ipuddu.it/altri/PanasonicMira1.jpg
http://www.ipuddu.it/altri/SonyMira1.jpg


the sides of the panasonic loses definition
djandrea is offline  
post #56 of 270 Old 03-22-2011, 02:07 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,569
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1381 Post(s)
Liked: 1495
That is pretty bad on the sides and similar to what I've experienced with my 2nd sample, though much less visible outdoors. Apparently smaller lens openings make it less of an issue, but indoors you're not so lucky.

But one thing that's easily seen from the charts and not discussed much, is edge enhancement on the Panasonic and a lack of same on the Sony. This helps contribute to a sharper look on the Panasonic, but also contributes to the negative effect of edge enhancement. You can minimize this by dropping the sharpness in the presets of the 900, but then you will lose some apparent sharpness.

With that said, I absolutely did not like the Sony's colors outdoors and the very shifty AWB.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #57 of 270 Old 03-22-2011, 02:47 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
Ken, can't you manually set and (LOCK) the WB on both Cam's that would alleviate any shift in WB, also check the cinematic options on the cx560 and set to off? if the white balance is shifting that much in auto then there is a serious problem with the Cam, especially if your shooting inside under the same constant lighting or outside in normal clear sky's or clouds, period. Its plainly a bad unit. Maybe Panasonics had some small Tremors at there Plant in Tokyo upsetting something during the development or assembly of these first batch units?

chris m
purplestinger is offline  
post #58 of 270 Old 03-22-2011, 02:49 PM
Member
 
ErichGS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 143
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

and the very shifty AWB.

This is the only so far that really annoys me about the Sony. I was almost content just to stick with the Sony, but after the shifty AWB showed up a couple of times I decided to put a pre-order in on the Canon. Hope that they show up sooner rather then later.
ErichGS is offline  
post #59 of 270 Old 03-22-2011, 02:52 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
but if the balance is PERFECT ...... sony .. mah! get well
canon as a definition that is 0 = as the cx550 and not have 50-60p
djandrea is offline  
post #60 of 270 Old 03-22-2011, 02:56 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
You Can NOT make pre orders, that has all ready been discussed. Its because there Plants have shut down to re route electricity and power to residential areas that are with out power in Japan due to the disaster. it will be several months from what I'm reading. B&H has already refunded me my money on there acct, explaining too me that Canon has pulled all release dates for the AX10 and HFg10 coming from Japan.

purplestinger
purplestinger is offline  
Reply Camcorders

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


Forum Jump: 

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

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