Help with getting into digital video

Probably, but you'll want to have at least two, so you can quickly swap a discharged battery for a charged one when it gives out in the middle of a recording session.

Consumer camcorders do not have replaceable lenses. The zoom lens is a permanent part of the camera.

By way of the USB cable which is included with the camera.



A CD is included with has the appropriate software to be installed on your PC which will download video files from the camera.

Movie editing software is not included. Depending on what you want to do with your edited movie, Windows Movie Maker might be adequate. At some point you might want to invest in more sophisticated movie-making software. You'll probably want to get some software for recording your edited movies on DVDs, too, so they include fancy menus, etc.

I hope this helps a little.

p.s. You should seriously consider getting a second internal disk for your computer. The video files are extremely large and they should not be put on the same disk where you have all your other files. Video editing needs lots of RAM, too, so make sure your computer has as much as it can hold. In addition, the paging file (virtual memory) will need to be at least 4x the size of the RAM.

p.p.s
Oh, yeah, if you'll be sending hi-def (720p or 1080p) videos on disc to your friends & family who aren't comfortable watching them on their computers, you'll probably need a Blu-Ray recorder and they'll need Blu-Ray players. You can use regular DVDs for viewing hi-def video on computers, but they won't hold as much.

I'd suggest trying the camcorder first to decide if the zoom lens produces a wide enough view. Addon lenses like that always cause some loss of quality, although it may not be noticeable at most video resolutions.


Sorry: I'm not a Mac user, so I can't say for sure. My impression is that Apple tends to charge a premium when compared to comparable Windows computers, although their hardware design usually tends to be better. The user interface is enough different it might cause problems for someone used to Windows. Adobe Premiere is one of the better video editing software packages, and it's available for both platforms.

The Apple vs. Windows arguments are mostly highly emotional ones, so you should evaluate it for yourself.

moved to its own thread...

I don't use Windows nor a Mac, but if you are just starting, I would consider the Sony Vegas editor (Windows). I have read a lot of good things about it, and it sounds like it has a lot more features and is easier to use than Final Cut Pro Express (Mac).

By the way, I use Linux, and there are several free editors that work very well for that OS There are also a couple of pricey, high-end editors for Linux, that only the big studios use.

you don't have to buy any lens for it just because it has a permanent way of zooming, but if you wish to, I may recommend a DSLR (Digital Single Lens Reflex) it has a good power of zooming and make pictures look good, in terms of battery it is chargeable.


what do you mean of editing software? if you want to edit picture you may use Adobe Photoshop but if you want to edit a video, you may use Windows Movie Maker.

how I wish my information help you

I beg to differ. I have both and have used both, and I hate Vegas. Anyone that I have talked to that has used Vegas hates it. We use Avid at the TV station, and everyone that has used Final Cut, prefers Final Cut. I have FC Express and Pro for my business, and they are easy to use. The only thing with FCP that throws people off for the first time, is the projects and sequences are separate things (usually a project and sequence are the same thing in most consumer NLEs). So this maybe why you thought FCE was hard to use - it really isn't, it is so easy. Once you have completed a project on Final Cut, it would make sense to you, and you wouldn't be saying it is hard. But probably best to be a user of both editing systems before making an opinionated statement regarding the comparison of both.

I have mostly used Final Cut Pro (FCP) and some Avid, and on occasion some open source NLEs.

Interesting that the people at your TV station prefer FCP over Avid. Most of the professional movie editors that I work with prefer Avid -- it doesn't require one to wait for rendering as much as FCP does. In addition, one can customize (darken) the Avid window elements so that it is not as glaring as FCP.

However, most people probably prefer what they have been conditioned in using first.

I have never used Final Cut Express (FCE) nor Vegas. I base my recommendation on what I have read recently about Vegas and FCE. Here is an apparently fair review of Vegas: http://www.osnews.com/story/21606/A_...ny_Vegas_Pro_9 Evidently, Vegas also has a darker, more pleasant theme.

Certainly, Vegas is a great value at $45-$70. It has a lot of features, including XDCAM and Red support, and it can smart render AVCHD camera footage (which is the format that the OP will be using with his/her Panasonic HDC-TM300).

On the other hand, FCE is around $160, plus you have to have a Mac computer ($$) to use it. FCE has AVCHD capability, as well.

Keep in mind that FCE is not the same as a full-blown version of FCP.

Here is the Apple page on FCE: http://www.apple.com/finalcutexpress/

Here is the Sony page on Vegas: http://www.sonycreativesoftware.com/vegaspro

Yeah Avid is good for fast cutting, but not a whole lot of fancy stuff. There is probably a cost factor that TV stations are going for, but I certainly haven't heard anyone say they like using Avid more than FCP. My main concern with FCE is that the sequence settings are all automatic - With FCP you can have whatever sequence settings you want, and it will ask if you want it to be the same as the first clip that you put in. More often than not, your entire sequence will be sourced from the same codec. Which means FCP can have much faster render times than FCE. I wish you could just buy FCP on its own without buying the studio.

Okay. I'll pass that on to my friends/co-workers who are using Avid to edit network TV shows and feature films.



Funny. I have mostly encountered the opposite sentiment.

Yes as I said, Avid is fast. Use it for the news because about the fanciest thing you will do to a VO, is put dissolves. And the fanciest thing you will do to a SOT, is adjust the audio levels. You just want to get the footage in and have it timed correctly to the script. There maybe only a one to two hour window for getting the footage in for the news - all of it. So newscutting doesn't have the same requirements as docos or features. Avid also has the NCRS tool integration, you send out the footage from the edit bay to the control room with the ENPS/MOS ID. Final Cut needs a third party program to do this. You don't need this to make a doco or feature.
Final Cut Pro is much better if you are taking your time to make a documentary or a feature.
You can pass it on to your friends if you wish. I don't really care. I can either base my opinion on my own EXPERIENCES. Or I can believe what you say with very little experience, taking your word for it anyway. I think I will go from my own experiences.