Camcorder for YouTube - HF G10? - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 17 Old 03-20-2013, 12:15 AM - Thread Starter
Newbie
 
jamesb123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Hey guys,

I am starting a YouTube channel and I need a high quality camcorder to record my videos. I’ve done a bit of research and so far my first choice is the Canon HF G10: http://www.portagadgets.com/australia/product.php?productid=42515

But it is on the expensive side. Is the video quality on the HF G10 noticeably better than on less expensive models? I am willing to spend the extra few hundred dollars if it is, but if the difference will only be noticeable to professionals then I’d downgrade in a heartbeat.

I’d to love your opinions on the matter,
James

Also, I will be using the camcorder to record live subjects no more than a few metres away. No long-distance shooting at all (hope this info helps).
jamesb123 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 17 Old 03-20-2013, 03:39 AM - Thread Starter
Newbie
 
jamesb123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Also, these are the reviews on YouTube that are pushing me towards buying this.

http://youtu.be/2Ca7lnemBBs
http://youtu.be/MGY6fwxu6iw
http://youtu.be/t-2XA36XVFQ

I haven’t found another camera that can compete with these specs, but I’m open to suggestions.
jamesb123 is offline  
post #3 of 17 Old 03-20-2013, 08:37 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Ungermann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 3,787
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 40 Post(s)
Liked: 26
There is no such thing as a camcorder for YouTube. It is what and how you shoot, not where you watch it.
Ungermann is offline  
post #4 of 17 Old 03-20-2013, 08:52 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bsprague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: On the Road
Posts: 2,883
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 48 Post(s)
Liked: 94
Welcome to the forum!

As Ungermann points out, skill is more important than camera choice. "How to Shoot Video that Doesn't Suck" by Steve Stockman should be your first choice before buying a camcorder.

"What is the best camera for YouTube?" is a very common question here. Every camera discussed here has samples posted on YouTube or Vimeo. Please consider reading the topics. Canon's are not quite as popular here because many feel they should have an option for 1080p at 60 frames per second. Some don't see that as important, especially if the goal is YouTube.

Some asking first timer advice need a camera that looks like a video camera. They need lens hoods and big mics. Things like that can help, but they also broadcast that you are, without doubt, a videographer making videos.

Others seeking advice don't care what the camera looks like and only want good video results. Read the threads on the Panasonic FZ200 and Panasonic LX7. Both will make YouTube videos for a lot less money than the G10. Again, look at the samples posted.

If you read the thread on the Panasonic HC-V700 and it's current replacement the V720, you may see that there are some satisfied owners that have spent less than for the G10.
bsprague is offline  
post #5 of 17 Old 03-20-2013, 08:55 AM - Thread Starter
Newbie
 
jamesb123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Okay. But surely some camcorders are better suited for YouTube than others.

For example, the HF G10 has native 1080p, which means (apparently) that you don't have to convert the video into a useable resolution when uploading (as you would with a camcorder that does not have native 1080p).

This is the essence of my question - is the HF G10 better suited (in terms of video quality) for YouTube than other models with a lower price tag.
jamesb123 is offline  
post #6 of 17 Old 03-20-2013, 08:58 AM - Thread Starter
Newbie
 
jamesb123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Thanks! Really useful information smile.gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsprague View Post

Welcome to the forum!

As Ungermann points out, skill is more important than camera choice. "How to Shoot Video that Doesn't Suck" by Steve Stockman should be your first choice before buying a camcorder.

"What is the best camera for YouTube?" is a very common question here. Every camera discussed here has samples posted on YouTube or Vimeo. Please consider reading the topics. Canon's are not quite as popular here because many feel they should have an option for 1080p at 60 frames per second. Some don't see that as important, especially if the goal is YouTube.

Some asking first timer advice need a camera that looks like a video camera. They need lens hoods and big mics. Things like that can help, but they also broadcast that you are, without doubt, a videographer making videos.

Others seeking advice don't care what the camera looks like and only want good video results. Read the threads on the Panasonic FZ200 and Panasonic LX7. Both will make YouTube videos for a lot less money than the G10. Again, look at the samples posted.

If you read the thread on the Panasonic HC-V700 and it's current replacement the V720, you may see that there are some satisfied owners that have spent less than for the G10.
jamesb123 is offline  
post #7 of 17 Old 03-20-2013, 09:12 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bsprague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: On the Road
Posts: 2,883
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 48 Post(s)
Liked: 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesb123 View Post

Okay. But surely some camcorders are better suited for YouTube than others.
Good video comes for good light, knowledge, understanding and technique -- not camcorders. In the right hands connected to the right brain, an iPhone is better than a G10.
bsprague is offline  
post #8 of 17 Old 03-20-2013, 09:15 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bsprague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: On the Road
Posts: 2,883
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 48 Post(s)
Liked: 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesb123 View Post

... the HF G10 has native 1080p......
I have a "point-n-shoot" that has "native 1080p" at 60 frames per second. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong but the "native" in the G10 is 30 frames per second.

What's "native" mean in this context?
bsprague is offline  
post #9 of 17 Old 03-20-2013, 09:18 AM
Senior Member
 
dnoyeB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Southfield, MI
Posts: 437
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I believe that camera is overqualified for Youtube. That camcorder is basically semi-pro quality consumer camera. Once you upload to youtube any quality advantage of that camera has over its next lower sibling will be lost. Youtube is NOT television quality. The compression or the conversion that youtube uses is going to make that camera a waste IMHO.

Signature.
dnoyeB is offline  
post #10 of 17 Old 03-20-2013, 09:29 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bsprague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: On the Road
Posts: 2,883
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 48 Post(s)
Liked: 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesb123 View Post

..... that you don't have to convert the video into a useable resolution when uploading (as you would with a camcorder that does not have native 1080p)....
You say you are going to do a YouTube channel. I presume you expect to attract viewers to your channel. If you post untouched video that has not been converted, you are putting raw clips on YT with out titles, transitions, effects, imagination, skill etc. You aren't even trimming out the jiggles or mistakes.

Your channel will be nothing until you figure out what Non Linear Editing is. Figure out what Sony Vegas (mentioned for Ungermann) and Adobe Premier Elements are. After you figure out what and how to point your camcorder, you will have to figure out how to make what you shoot interesting. In the YouTube world you get about 10 seconds to hook your viewer and can only expect their attention to last a couple minutes.

"Useable" resolution for YouTube used to have specific settings and guidelines. There are lots of experts telling you how to get it right. YouTube processing has evolved and will display almost anything sent to it well.

1080p is in many ways not useable for YouTube. It takes high speed internet connections to watch it. I'm convinced that only a small fraction of YouTube videos are watched in 1080p because few have the connections for it. Further, YouTube servers default to lower settings to manage their loads. Unless a view forces it, it won't play at HD.
jamesb123 likes this.
bsprague is offline  
post #11 of 17 Old 03-20-2013, 09:30 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bsprague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: On the Road
Posts: 2,883
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 48 Post(s)
Liked: 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesb123 View Post

...........This is the essence of my question - is the HF G10 better suited (in terms of video quality) for YouTube than other models with a lower price tag.
No.
dnoyeB likes this.
bsprague is offline  
post #12 of 17 Old 03-20-2013, 11:03 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Ungermann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 3,787
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 40 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesb123 View Post

Okay. But surely some camcorders are better suited for YouTube than others.
Modern-day YouTube has the following notable traits:

* normal frame aspect ratio is 16:9 (not 4:3 like it was 5 years ago)
* YouTube player displays progressive video only, it cannot correctly deinterace on the fly like a regular TV when you watch 1080i programming. This means that you should not upload interlaced content, instead you should deinterlace yourself and not take chances with YouTube's deinterlacer.
* average frame rate is up to 30 fps (that is, ~24fps for 24fps sources, ~25fps for 25fps sources, ~30fps for 30fps+ sources), although peak frame rate can be higher
* YouTube may offer up to 4K resolution, but an average user may have problems with bitrate needed for such a resolution
* there is support for 3D, which I haven't explored

You can dance from here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesb123 View Post

For example, the HF G10 has native 1080p, which means (apparently) that you don't have to convert the video into a useable resolution when uploading (as you would with a camcorder that does not have native 1080p).
The G10 has native 1080p only for 24fps. If this is what you are looking for then fine. All videos which are at least half-decent are edited before being put up onto YouTube. So the "no conversion" benefit is not a benefit at all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesb123 View Post

This is the essence of my question - is the HF G10 better suited (in terms of video quality) for YouTube than other models with a lower price tag.
No. But this does not mean it is less suited for that. It all depends on what you want to do, it is much less depends on where you want to watch it. The single biggest problem is deinterlacing if you have an interlaced camcorder, but this issue can be solved, so it is not a showstopper.
jamesb123 likes this.
Ungermann is offline  
post #13 of 17 Old 03-20-2013, 11:43 PM
Senior Member
 
SD90's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 356
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 25 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesb123 View Post

This is the essence of my question - is the HF G10 better suited (in terms of video quality) for YouTube than other models with a lower price tag.

You havn't said what you are looking for in the way of video image quality. Or under what shooting conditions; e.g. indoor sports action, outdoor landscapes, etc. Camcorder video is inherently less bright and duller looking than still camera video, regardless of its techno-geek "specs". Here is an outdoor HF G10 video sample: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o3RHdUi5Vqw

Now here is an outdoor video that is brighter, crisper, more detailed and lively looking so you can instantly tell it was shot with some kind of still camera: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZsgPrLOlpY
Unfortunately the guys here (including me) are not experienced enough to know what brand and model still camera shot that outdoor footage that looks so clear, detailed and vividly yet accurately colorful even when viewed at only 360p on Youtube. I wish they knew because I would like to buy the gear that shot that footage.
SD90 is online now  
post #14 of 17 Old 03-21-2013, 08:05 AM - Thread Starter
Newbie
 
jamesb123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Wow, really blown away by everyone's fantastic responses! BTW, if you guys haven't noticed already, I'm brand new to this so I apologise if I am asking really basic questions.

I do, however, have a few more basic questions. Where can I find quality tutorials/information on:

* Non Linear Editing.
* Sony Vegas.
* Adobe Premier Elements.
* Deinterlacing.

Has anyone come across good info for the beginner on these topics?

Also, I have just bought 'How to Shoot Video that Doesn't Suck' and I'll be working my way through it as soon as I get my hands on it!

One more thing: I'm planning to use this camera in a variety of settings, both outdoor and indoor, low-light and well-lit areas. But I will always be focusing on a live subject a few metres away.
jamesb123 is offline  
post #15 of 17 Old 03-21-2013, 08:59 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bsprague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: On the Road
Posts: 2,883
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 48 Post(s)
Liked: 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesb123 View Post

Wow, really blown away by everyone's fantastic responses! BTW, if you guys haven't noticed already, I'm brand new to this so I apologise if I am asking really basic questions.

I do, however, have a few more basic questions. Where can I find quality tutorials/information on:

* Non Linear Editing.
* Sony Vegas.
* Adobe Premier Elements.
* Deinterlacing.

Has anyone come across good info for the beginner on these topics?

Also, I have just bought 'How to Shoot Video that Doesn't Suck' and I'll be working my way through it as soon as I get my hands on it!

One more thing: I'm planning to use this camera in a variety of settings, both outdoor and indoor, low-light and well-lit areas. But I will always be focusing on a live subject a few metres away.
I love it when someone actually takes my advice! The book has a good companion website too.

* Non Linear Editing: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-linear_editing_system and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_video_editing_software

Basically, there isn't much you need to know other than all common editing software is a NLE and it NEVER changes your original footage files. It only borrows from it to make entirely new files.

* Sony Vegas and * Adobe Premier Elements:

Both are very good. I like one and Ungermann likes the other. I think when you learn complicated software, and particular features, you tend to expect (or hope) it works them same in similar software. In other words, if you have a particular favorite technique in Word or Excel, will you get it to work without frustration in Google Docs? The same is true for NLEs. Ungermann is a master at Vegas (Pro) and seems to detest Premier Elements. I like Premier Elements better every time I work on a project and no nothing about Vegas.

My suggestion is to pick one. Flip a coin or read a review. It does not matter. Each will allow you to learn and use amazing tools. Trying to understand both thoroughly enough to make an informed choice will take and waste too much time for a beginner. I was a no nothing beginner two years ago. I wasted at least 6 months trying to find "the best" $100 or less NLE.

If you want a fast introduction to the workflow of an NLE and don't mind Premier Elements as an example, go to http://muvipix.com/pe11.php and look in the lower left for the 8 free video tutorials. If you want an efficient, thorough and fun course, spend $25 for a month's access to http://www.lynda.com/Premiere-Elements-tutorials/Up-Running-Premiere-Elements-11/109763-2.html . The "trick" at lynda.com is to give them your credit card for a subscription and cancel it the next day. It will run a month for access to everything and shut off without their regular and automatic monthly re-billing.

(I am a big fan of learning software by watching it work in a well organized course and having a coach explaining it. I'm working my way through Photoshop Elements and Lightroom at lynda.com and am amazed at what I'm learning. Books are for reference when you can't remember something.)

* Deinterlacing: (vs "p" for "progessive")

It is a left over from early broadcast TV where each frame only displays half the lines. Your eye interpolates. My cameras will shoot in "i" mode. The files are smaller and perhaps easier for my computer to handle. It works OK where there is not a lot of motion. But, I normally leave my cameras in the "p" mode where all the lines are captured in each frame.

Other than that, I have ignored the effort of learning "Deinterlacing" because my editing software "fixes" it if needed. When I output a product for a particular display device I can pick a "p" choice.

Bill
bsprague is offline  
post #16 of 17 Old 03-21-2013, 09:00 AM
AVS Special Member
 
flintyplus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: yeovil somerset
Posts: 1,231
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 31 Post(s)
Liked: 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesb123 View Post

Wow, really blown away by everyone's fantastic responses! BTW, if you guys haven't noticed already, I'm brand new to this so I apologise if I am asking really basic questions.

I do, however, have a few more basic questions. Where can I find quality tutorials/information on:

* Non Linear Editing.
* Sony Vegas.
* Adobe Premier Elements.
* Deinterlacing.

Has anyone come across good info for the beginner on these topics?

Also, I have just bought 'How to Shoot Video that Doesn't Suck' and I'll be working my way through it as soon as I get my hands on it!

One more thing: I'm planning to use this camera in a variety of settings, both outdoor and indoor, low-light and well-lit areas. But I will always be focusing on a live subject a few metres away.


Regarding the FZ200 which to all tence and purposes has the same outdoor recording capability as my FX150 , i also have an XA10 which video quality wise is the same as the G10,i can tell you even after being put on youtube or vimeo has better sharper footage with better colour,it is a question of if you want a cam/camera solely for online viewing and how much you want to spend.
flintyplus is offline  
post #17 of 17 Old 03-21-2013, 07:14 PM
Senior Member
 
SD90's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 356
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 25 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Well this is embarrassing but it turns out I was totally wrong in assuming that video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZsgPrLOlpY was shot with a still camera because at the 11:45 minute mark in the video one can see the two car reviewer guys in the video were using a couple Canon Camcorders, apparently an M40 camcorder with a http://img842.imageshack.us/img842/5378/m40i.jpg with a Canon SM-V1 5.1 Channel Surround Microphone attached to it: http://www.amazon.com/Canon-Channel-Surround-Microphone-Camcorders/dp/B0034AJ89M

Anyway this is causing me to rethink my previous assumption that camcorder video is inherently less bright, clear and detailed as compared to still camera video when played in standard definition (360p or 480p) on Youtube.
SD90 is online now  
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