AVS › AVS Forum › Other Areas of Interest › Camcorders › Baby on the way, need a camcorder & reading all these reviews is making my head hurt
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Baby on the way, need a camcorder & reading all these reviews is making my head hurt

post #1 of 28
11/4/09 at 7:27pm
Thread Starter 
OK, I know there are 10,000 of these type posts, but I've been reading reviews for 2-4 hours a day for 3 days straight and my head is about to explode so I'm just going to tell you what I'm looking for and see what the recommendations are.

First born on the way in 10 days. I've never owned a camcorder in my life, never felt like I needed one.

What I'm looking for:

1. Under $700 (preferably in the $500 range, but I am willing to splurge), with good video quality.

2. Pretty good in low light. Would like to make a "look how cute the baby looks at 4 am when he's sleeping" video as well as low light videos with the wife to sell to TMZ (I'm only half kidding)

3. Camera spits out the video in a format that isn't going to drive me bonkers trying to find editing software that will work decent. Nothing fancy; titles, cuts, dissolves etc. If anyone knows of some free software that works well with said camcorder suggestion, that would be great too. Every review of every camcorder I have read has a review that says "1 STAR, Camera sucks. Doesn't work with Movie Maker", "1 STAR JVC spits out the video in a format that will only work with JVC video software and their software sucks!" ... you get the idea.

4. Somewhat easy ability to get the video out of the camera and into a format that will allow me to get it up on youtube for relatives in far away lands.

5. Probably not HD. I don't have a superfast computer, but it's good. I don't own a blu-ray player, though I do have a 50" plasma.

6. I own a digital camera that takes pictures just fine so video is mostly what I'm looking for as far as use out of this.

I think that's it

Suggestions? Thanks guys!
Reply
Reply

AVS Top Picks

post #2 of 28
11/4/09 at 9:47pm
From father to future father, I beg you reconsider HD again. Here are the reasons:

1. You won't have much time to edit videos over the next year or two (your hands will be busy with your new bundle of joy). Most of the clips you're going to send to youtube and to family and friends don't need serious editing anyway. So don't worry about your current computer for editing.

2. While your family and friend will be extatic to see your new baby's face via video sharing like youtube and facebook, you're not personally going to cherish those videos until a few years later IMO, when you'll want to remember how small he/she was. And while we're still in HD transition and you don't own a bluray player at the moment, you can bet that HD will be everywhere in 2-3 years, with HDTVs everywhere and bluray players at $60 at Walmart. Now imagine in 5 years? 10 years?

3. Do you have footage of your youth? If so, depending on how old you are, I imagine that it would probably be 8mm film, Hi-8 or maybe VHS? How much would you pay to be able to have this footage in DVD quality right now? That's exactly how your kid(s) will feel about your DVD-quality SD footage in 20 years. Who knows... that may be how they will feel about HD-quality in 20 years, when SuperHD or UltraHD are common in every house.

My point is: get the best PQ you can get for your money right now for memories you'll enjoy in the future. Do yourself a favor: get something HD.

At the $700 range, there are good options on the market, like the last-gen Canon HF200 (if I remember right, you can get one locally at Costco for about $560 with an SD card), or the Sanyo VPC-HD2000A or VPC-HF1A ($500-600 MSRP). If you can afford a little more, I would check either the current gen HF-S100 from Canon (~$900) or the Sony XR500V (~$930) that got great reviews. All of those are using AVCHD format, which might not be the easiest format to edit, but is getting serious traction on all the current software editors. Note that both iMovie on the mac side, and Windows Live Movie Maker and the free version of Expression Encoder are supporting AVCHD on Windows 7 (which has no problems playing back those files BTW), and for $50 more, there are more options software-wise. Finally, note that all those camcorders are coming with basic editing software that will let you convert AVCHD into web-friendly formats and/or simple DVD authoring, so you're not without free options.

I'm sure others will have other suggestions for you. But I personally would not even consider SD for precious family moment capturing if I were you. I just wish I had these options when my first one was born (in 2004)... :/
Reply
Reply
post #3 of 28
11/4/09 at 10:08pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericjut View Post


3. Do you have footage of your youth? If so, depending on how old you are, I imagine that it would probably be 8mm film, Hi-8 or maybe VHS? How much would you pay to be able to have this footage in DVD quality right now? That's exactly how your kid(s) will feel about your DVD-quality SD footage in 20 years. Who knows... that may be how they will feel about HD-quality in 20 years, when SuperHD or UltraHD are common in every house.

Before my 2nd child was born, I splurged and spent $1200 on a Sony 101 Hi8 cam (back in '93). It was the first cam with ois, had stereo,etc. Made good video, some even look better than my DV tapes. Always get the best.
Now, speaking as a father, I suggest getting a Sony- to my knowledge, only Sony offers night mode (infared) This is the best way to video low light and works wonders for Halloween.
One thing you could do it loom for a cheap used Sony HDV cam (I have an HC3). They have night mode and with HDV, you can tape, store the tapes and edit when you are ready. I had like ten years of hi8 tapes before i got a pc and started burning them!
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 28
11/4/09 at 10:58pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericjut View Post

From father to future father, I beg you reconsider HD again. Here are the reasons:

1. You won't have much time to edit videos over the next year or two (your hands will be busy with your new bundle of joy). Most of the clips you're going to send to youtube and to family and friends don't need serious editing anyway. So don't worry about your current computer for editing.

2. While your family and friend will be extatic to see your new baby's face via video sharing like youtube and facebook, you're not personally going to cherish those videos until a few years later IMO, when you'll want to remember how small he/she was. And while we're still in HD transition and you don't own a bluray player at the moment, you can bet that HD will be everywhere in 2-3 years, with HDTVs everywhere and bluray players at $60 at Walmart. Now imagine in 5 years? 10 years?

3. Do you have footage of your youth? If so, depending on how old you are, I imagine that it would probably be 8mm film, Hi-8 or maybe VHS? How much would you pay to be able to have this footage in DVD quality right now? That's exactly how your kid(s) will feel about your DVD-quality SD footage in 20 years. Who knows... that may be how they will feel about HD-quality in 20 years, when SuperHD or UltraHD are common in every house.

My point is: get the best PQ you can get for your money right now for memories you'll enjoy in the future. Do yourself a favor: get something HD.

At the $700 range, there are good options on the market, like the last-gen Canon HF200 (if I remember right, you can get one locally at Costco for about $560 with an SD card), or the Sanyo VPC-HD2000A or VPC-HF1A ($500-600 MSRP). If you can afford a little more, I would check either the current gen HF-S100 from Canon (~$900) or the Sony XR500V (~$930) that got great reviews. All of those are using AVCHD format, which might not be the easiest format to edit, but is getting serious traction on all the current software editors. Note that both iMovie on the mac side, and Windows Live Movie Maker and the free version of Expression Encoder are supporting AVCHD on Windows 7 (which has no problems playing back those files BTW), and for $50 more, there are more options software-wise. Finally, note that all those camcorders are coming with basic editing software that will let you convert AVCHD into web-friendly formats and/or simple DVD authoring, so you're not without free options.

I'm sure others will have other suggestions for you. But I personally would not even consider SD for precious family moment capturing if I were you. I just wish I had these options when my first one was born (in 2004)... :/

I am not a professional videographer but am an enthusiast and I whole-heartedly agree with the above post. I just want to share that I am done with SD video; I have a 2 yeard old Sony MiniDV camcorder that sucks in picture quality. Mind you, two years ago, HD camcorders were very expensive so this was good then, when I had a 20" TV. The smallest TV now is 37", the second is a 46"; not to mention I have a projector that gives me an 8 foot image! The point is, SD is dead; it just won't give you what you are looking for. I have never been able to transfer my video from tapes to the PC, leave aside editing. Playing an AVCHD file from your camcorder (Flash or HDD) is not going to really damage delicate mechanics because there is no tape drive; HDD is different).

Bottom line, go for an HD camcorder. Trust folks like eric, shadow7 and Tom Gull to give you good advice. Take the plunge and go for it. I am considering the JVC HM200 ($ 399 at Costco warehouse) as my needs are nearly like yours. You have 90 days to try it out; see how that works out. It is not the best camera money can buy but something I am considering as a stop-gap before I find a camera that meets my specs in an affortable price range. Hope this helps
Reply
Reply
post #5 of 28
11/5/09 at 3:29am
Don't worry about HD. You can always convert it to SD. And that DOESN'T require a fast computer. It just requires software that runs on YOUR computer. And a bit of patience. Even with a somewhat FAST computer you're still looking at several times the length of the footage to convert it to whatever format you desire in the end. GO HD!!! (Or else be forced to have more kids to shoot in HD later)

HD requires good stabilization. OIS is preferred. Otherwise always shoot from a tripod, monopod, or something like a spider brace. (especially if you've drank as many beers as I have in my lifetime). SD requires it too, but it's a lot more obvious in HD.

Not a fan of Sony myself, but they do make SOME decent camcorders. Not a fan of interlaced footage, which Sony seems to fantasize over. And then there's the bluray licensing stuff that Sony is responsible for. Not to mention SACD / DSD on the audio side. Although Vegas is Sony's little baby, so I'm sure that there cams integrate nicely with that piece of software.

Kind of a fan of Canon, but they're way too overpriced IMO. And not that well supported by Canon IMO. But focus is fast, stabilization is good, and you get some good features for the money.

Panasonic and JVC, have some decent cams, but not always on the same level as those other two. Samsung, Casio, Sanyo, and others are kind of in the same boat. Although each pumps out a shining star on rare occasion.

Infrared might be a little hard to come by. Something about some pervs using it poolside to achieve a sort of Xray vision. So it's not that common (or good) on recent offerings.

AFAIK, Sanyo FH1 / HD2000 and Panasonic GH1 are the shining stars for low light at the moment.

Software wise, ffmpeg is free and can handle most formats (with quirks). If you're willing the download the latest and greatest version and maybe even do some compiling from source. Or just wait a year-ish for the current version to have a packaged release. It's not like your footage is going anywhere once shot.
Reply
Reply
post #6 of 28
11/5/09 at 8:29am
Thread Starter 
Thanks for the sound advice guys. I haven't been here much over the years, but I know I can always come here and get some good info. AVS has never let me down.

I'll agree that I probably won't have a lot of time for editing over the coming years and go for HD. I just can't justify spending $900 on the camcorders Eric recommended for a toy I haven't needed in my 40 years of existence. I'll have to look around and try and figure out something good in the $500-$700 range.
I don't know anything about HD camcorders or camcorders period for that matter, so this is probably a stupid question. Can I do simple edits from the camera?
Reply
Reply
post #7 of 28
11/5/09 at 9:49am
FWIW, I personally have a total of about 10 minutes of content I shot before 2002. I didn't even own a video recording device myself until my wife was 6 months pregnant. I have for about an hour worth of video content before my first kid was born in 2004, and I've been piling up over 10 hours of good content a year ever since. Trust me on this, I'm pretty sure your video recording habits will drastically change over the next few months. And if not, you're doing something wrong and you'll regret it later (as I am right now for not having taken more shots of my first one when she was just a few months old).

As for your question about in camera editing: it depends. Some AVCHD camcorders have split, delete and you can set it to have fades on start and end before you record, but that's more or less it. The latest Sony models (XR200, XR500, CX500) also have a "make a movie" feature, which will pick parts of clips of a selection (date range) and will add transitions and a soundtrack to make a "music video" style output. See it as a slideshow for videos. It's actually a great feature to show an instant "music video" recap of your outing to your family. The catch: you can only play it back from the camera and there is no way to export the "project" out of the camcorder other than the HDMI output. I hope in the future Sony will enable exporting those slideshows as an AVCHD file out for users to put on DVD or AVCHD disks.

Another thing that Sony has that might help the "don't-want-to-edit-on-a-PC" crowd is this: http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/...ab=featuresTab
It lets you author either a video DVD or AVCHD disk without any use of a PC and lets you do minimal editing (like choosing your clips, menu style, etc). Available at around $170 at your local Costco, I see this as a great option for people with humble editing needs that don't have a PC or don't want to deal with one for video editing.

If the XR500V is too expensive but like some of those features above, there's always the Sony XR200V, which doesn't have as good sensor as the XR500V, but is about $200-$250 cheaper (~$725).

Sorry if I sound Sony centric... it's just the cams I know best since I own one. I'm sure Canon and Sanyo owners will be happy to chip in their opinions here too.
Reply
Reply
post #8 of 28
11/5/09 at 10:38am
a few thoughts from a new-ish father (a toddler and an infant):
-money is always tight w/new kids, so do what's best for you. there are good options at all price points
-my setup works well for me: i have a HD camcorder for the big/special events and have a digital camera that records in HD (720p) for most of the daily stuff. with two kids (and even with just one) you've gotta be quick on the draw and my HD camcorder is just not as accessible as using the digital camera.
-my videos are easily watchable on my few-years-old computer and easily shared with others (in HD!)through Vimeo. elaborate editing of HD video may be difficult for some but straight transcoding to other formats or to to SD resolutions are pretty easy enough to do.
-possible upgrade that i am considering is maybe upgrading to a dSLR that has video recording like the canon T1i. better pics and full HD in one cam seems like a great option.

good luck with your choice. regardless of what cam you do get, make sure you have it easily accessible to capture all of the great random moments and absolutely make sure your wife is able to use it. if my wife couldn't easily shoot video of our kids, I'd be in big trouble!
Reply
Reply
post #9 of 28
11/5/09 at 11:35am
I am not a new father but an old one and was getting the same headaches reading reviews, etc. I decided on a Canon HF200 (as someone else suggested). I bought it on line for a little over $500 including a 16 gb memory card, but maybe Costco has some as well. There is a seperate thread on this forum from owners you may want to check out. A caution, some reviews said the low light performance is lacking so if that is important maybe it isn't the correct choice. I won't have mine until next week so it will be too late to give you any direct feedback. Congrats on becoming a Dad. It's a great experience.
Reply
Reply
post #10 of 28
11/5/09 at 12:09pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow_7 View Post

Infrared might be a little hard to come by. Something about some pervs using it poolside to achieve a sort of Xray vision. So it's not that common (or good) on recent offerings.

That was true for the first cams with night shot. Sony took notice and quickly "fixed" the problem, so you can't get any boobie shots with night shot!
I never understood how they got that, but night shot worked well on my hc3. Sony even makes an infrared light that attaches to the camera so you can get good range out of it.
Reply
Reply
post #11 of 28
11/8/09 at 7:50pm
Thread Starter 
Has anyone who commented in this thread checked out the new Sanyo VPC-HD2000A ? or have any thoughts on it?

The price is definitely up my alley. Do I need a MAC to take advantage of the I-Frame technology it boasts for editing?

Is there a local retailer that anyone knows of off-hand that carries it? Baby is coming on Friday and I don't want to have to express ship it if I can just pick it up in store tomorrow. Plus it gives me a couple extra days to figure it out!

What are peoples thoughts on this "gun style" camcorder? Since I've never owned a camcorder I figured I would be fine with it, without ever holding one, but I was wondering what someone who has used both, thinks of it? Any reason to think that I would hate it?

Lastly, can someone educate the camcorder newbie. The description says it has "digital image stabilizer", but no "optical image stabilizer" ... what's the difference??
Reply
Reply
post #12 of 28
11/8/09 at 10:43pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crow331 View Post

Lastly, can someone educate the camcorder newbie. The description says it has "digital image stabilizer", but no "optical image stabilizer" ... what's the difference??

In a nutshell, optical image stabilzation is better. My second cam was a SOny 101 hi8, first consumer cam with OIS. It worked by sending image through a gyro controlled prism. When motion was detected, it would move it and thus, minimize shake. Downside? Slightly decreased battery time. A magazine compared it to electronic stabilized cams and found it superior. Electronic (eis) systems are cheaper to make (no mechanical parts or fancy optics). They way they work is they blow up the image and crop. A better way to visualize this is to play with a deshaking program. Camera with eis can might offer less detail (maybe not that much though). In all fairness, some are better than others. My old Panny PV120 DV cam had eis that was so bad, I couldn't see the different between it turned on and off. My old Sony HC3 HDV cam had eis, but actually worked ok. My current Canon HV40 has ois and it works a bit better, but not that much so. My Panasonic FZ35 has new improved OIS and it so good that you could probably have a siezure and still get a picture!
So, in a nutshell, ois is better than eis and some ois systems are better than others.
Reply
Reply
post #13 of 28
11/9/09 at 5:33am
iFrame is just an extra option, you don't even have to use it. And why would you? 1080p60

OIS is generally better. Although it depends on usage. Handheld, or tripod? EIS is more likely to be horrid. But that's not always a given. And there's trade offs. Battery life / component life.

I got the FH1. Almost the same as HD2000. Different optics and no audio input. And beer can shaped.

Unless you live in a megalopolis with some sort of super store. I wouldn't count on buying anything recent off the shelf. And even if you do, you're going to pay way more markup than you would for rush shipping for the same thing.
Reply
Reply
post #14 of 28
11/9/09 at 6:25am
Quote:
Originally Posted by dclark View Post

.........
So, in a nutshell, ois is better than eis and some ois systems are better than others.

I would have agreed with this wholeheartedly until last night, but now I think OIS plus effective EIS is noticeably better than OIS. I have a new Sony CX500V said to have improved low light and stabilization over last year's models. So I took it to a fairly low-light HO model train exhibit Saturday and also did some outdoor filming of real trains, including one at dusk. I had my tripod with me but decided not to use it to test the stabilization.

Last night, I watched clips on a 46" HDTV taken with a Sony HC7 in the same places and time of day two years ago, except for the last train coming through after the sun set this Saturday. But the model train layout video was directly comparable.

Result: the stabilization is phenomenally better than last year's Sony CX12 or the earlier HC7. Either that, or I have become a master videographer without practicing.

I actually winced when I saw my HC7 film of the HO trains. Aside from being grainy because it's generally a low-light layout, there was a lot of jerkiness caused by hand movement. In the CX500V footage, there was none of that even though I was zooming, pivoting, and even walking to get some of the video. It was close-to-tripod steady. In fact, I'm sure a casual watcher couldn't tell the difference.

The outdoor train footage was just about as good except there was a stiff wind blowing that made my hands move a bit. But the camera compensated for that extremely well.

So regardless of the merits of this particular cam, I think we're moving into an era where digital post-processing is going to significantly stabilize the video we shoot. The sensors can now have pixel counts that are high enough to surround the frame you're shooting with extra pixels well beyond the HD resolution. That lets raw processor horsepower damp minor movements down successfully as long as the chips are fast enough, and it's looking to me like we're there or almost there.

So I agree with your OIS assessment for all except these latest Sonys, and I'd be surprised if the other manufacturers don't match this level of EIS stabilization very quickly. Then the combination of OIS and top-flight EIS will be unbeatable.
Reply
Reply
post #15 of 28
11/9/09 at 8:21am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow_7 View Post


I got the FH1. Almost the same as HD2000.

Do you like it? Anything you hate about it? Any regrets?
Reply
Reply
post #16 of 28
11/9/09 at 11:41am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crow331 View Post

Do you like it? Anything you hate about it? Any regrets?

Regret not having it sooner.

Regret not waiting a bit to get it at it's current price.

Would like to have audio input, but the audio on the thing is pretty decent. Decent enough to sync with my external audio device (MANUALLY).

Would be nice to have better stabilization. Would be nice to have a higher bitrate codec. Would like to have more zoom, but 16x in video mode is sometimes overkill. Just not for critters an acre plus away. Stabilization really sucks at those zoom levels though. But that's a given.

Hate the 4GB delay between continuous recording at about 23 minutes, but that's about the only thing that would drive me to buy something else.

Love saving HUNDREDs for the same basic functionality. Love (and hate) the codec. It saves me many hours in conversions. But it has it's quirks.

Wish it was waterproof like the WH1.
Reply
Reply
post #17 of 28
11/9/09 at 12:12pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Gull View Post

I would have agreed with this wholeheartedly until last night, but now I think OIS plus effective EIS is noticeably better than OIS. .

I don't think that using both is necessary. You can add deshaking after you shoot if you want and it could look better than what is done in camera with eis.
My Lumix FZ35 even came with a ois demo mode just to show off how good it is. It is interesting trying to get some shake into it. if you ever see one on display, give it a try. It works quite well, even at 18x zoom (long zooms really seperate the men from the boys when it comes to stabilization performance).I have no reservations about using it, I even saw a review that said that they were able to take a clear picture in almost dark conditions with the shutter open for almost a second- that's unreal!
Reply
Reply
post #18 of 28
11/9/09 at 1:21pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by dclark View Post

I don't think that using both is necessary. You can add deshaking after you shoot if you want and it could look better than what is done in camera with eis.
My Lumix FZ35 even came with a ois demo mode just to show off how good it is. It is interesting trying to get some shake into it. if you ever see one on display, give it a try. It works quite well, even at 18x zoom (long zooms really seperate the men from the boys when it comes to stabilization performance).I have no reservations about using it, I even saw a review that said that they were able to take a clear picture in almost dark conditions with the shutter open for almost a second- that's unreal!

Understood, but I'm not talking about a Lumix camera or Canon camcorders or Panasonics or older Sonys - I'm just relaying what I saw with a late-model cam and talking only about stabilization in this thread. I think stabilization just changed on us for the better. I was OK with the CX12 stability except at full zoom where I tried applying anti-shake afterwards in editing software without much improvement. With the CX500V, I'm not even worried about it.

Check the stabilization info halfway down the page in this camcorderinfo review. The interesting thing to me is that they used the word "impeccable" for the stabilization overall but seemed to find no benefit from the Active (read new EIS) stabilization over the supposedly unchanged OIS. I find that hard to swallow given what I just saw on the TV last night. I may have to try things with the Active stabilization off to see if I can tell the difference. But assuming that the CX500V and CX12 OIS are the same, the stabilization either magically improved this year, or the EIS really is effective. A friend showed me some very effective experimental EIS in post-processing on the Internet recently, so I'll bet that's the extra oomph here, packed into the actual flow of recording or playback. I'm sure someone will dig into this in depth soon because the improvement is so great someone will want to analyze it.

http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content...ng-amp-Use.htm

Note on the Lumix you mention and stabilization: that is a camera that also does some video, not a camcorder, operating at 720p HD instead of the full HD. It also is a 12 MP camera. So what it has to stabilize is both smaller pixel-count-wise than what all the Full HD cams are stabilizing, and also starting off with a larger pixel count on its sensor. While I'm sure its OIS is great, I'd be surprised to learn that there is no EIS or in-camera processing going on to increase the stabilization. They won't advertise it but that doesn't prove whether or not it's there, so the question is "if it improves their image, would they use it"?

Here's the Sony marketing blurb: "Optical SteadyShot™ with Active Mode further improves image stabilization by allowing the camera to compensate for greater degrees of camera shake to deliver stunningly smooth video. Plus, innovative 3-Way Shake-Canceling adds electronic roll stability making your video capture unbelievably smooth."
Reply
Reply
post #19 of 28
11/9/09 at 3:18pm
Stabilization is only problematic hand held. Which you pretty much never want to do in HD. The difference between hand held and spider brace ($70) is stunning. Better than any OIS or EIS can do IMO. But then again you can't really do much if you're camcorder is hard mounted to a running car engine.

It's why Scarlet 3K or better is so alluring. 3,000 pixels horizontal gives a bit of elbow room to digitally stabilize on X, Y, and Z. Where even a good OIS system will still keep that bobble head motion for those with flimsy wrists.
Reply
Reply
post #20 of 28
11/9/09 at 5:22pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Gull View Post

U
Note on the Lumix you mention and stabilization: that is a camera that also does some video, not a camcorder, operating at 720p HD instead of the full HD. It also is a 12 MP camera."

Uh, i consider 720p hd (as do a few networks). I have seen nothing to indicate that the Lumix also incorporates eis with its ois. I'll have to dig the thing out. If it has a telephoto setting for the ois, I'd be more inclined to believe it. My Sony had two settings for the eis, telephoto presumably sacrificed some pixels for better stabilization when using a telephoto lens. My experience with panasonic eis is limited and ois that makes think that they don't know how to do it (my panny had horrible eis!) but they sure got into ois with a bang starting with the old pv400 DV cam and going from there.
When it comes to eis, I think Sony might be the best-I read somewhere that the cmos chip in my HC3 had built in eis in it, two things in one. If there is anyone who could combine ois and eis, it'd be Sony. The Lumix does pretty good video, it just needs a bracket of some sort for shot times longer than a couple of minutes. The same can be said for most small cams. The problem with these new small cams is that they are to hold steady and have (if you are getting a cheap one) crappy eis .
Reply
Reply
post #21 of 28
11/9/09 at 7:31pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by dclark View Post

Uh, i consider 720p hd (as do a few networks). I have seen nothing to indicate that the Lumix also incorporates eis with its ois. I'll have to dig the thing out. If it has a telephoto setting for the ois, I'd be more inclined to believe it. My Sony had two settings for the eis, telephoto presumably sacrificed some pixels for better stabilization when using a telephoto lens. My experience with panasonic eis is limited and ois that makes think that they don't know how to do it (my panny had horrible eis!) but they sure got into ois with a bang starting with the old pv400 DV cam and going from there.
When it comes to eis, I think Sony might be the best-I read somewhere that the cmos chip in my HC3 had built in eis in it, two things in one. If there is anyone who could combine ois and eis, it'd be Sony. The Lumix does pretty good video, it just needs a bracket of some sort for shot times longer than a couple of minutes. The same can be said for most small cams. The problem with these new small cams is that they are to hold steady and have (if you are getting a cheap one) crappy eis .

Don't mean to disparage 720p, it is HD officially. But the "Full HD" resolution (advertising term) is the 1920 x 1080 pixel resolution and I was just noting that you're processing a lot more pixels at that resolution than at the 720p resolution. And you get more detail as a consequence.

My thought on the Lumix is really applicable across the board on digital cams and cameras of the last year or two. If they don't suck up all the processor cycles on other features, I'd think all of them must do some kind of EIS, but some more extensively than others. Your thought about it kicking in more zoomed in makes perfect sense.

I have no reference point for prior Sonys vs other cams - you may be right that they were best but I didn't get that impression from reviews. I'm thinking it's the latest Sony cams (XR and CX, maybe 500s and above only) that have jumped to the head of the pack, and I bet any vendor out front will have to fight tooth and nail to maintain that position.

The Sony advertising seems to say the Active mode is OIS, and deals with vertical or horizontal movements. The twisting movements in the "3rd dimension" (simultaneously left or right / up or down / and maybe a little back and forwards from being in a flat plane) are where the improved EIS supposedly kicks in.

I just watched HC7, CX12, and CX500V footage again on the 46" TV and I think top-notch stabilization is going to be the norm for upcoming HD cams pretty quickly (low years). All the pieces are coming together - sensor size beyond what is needed for the output resolution, processor speed, in-cam memory for intermediate calculations, and actual computing algorithms that will run on "low-end hardware". The advances in graphics processors due to the digital photography, videography, movie, and game industries are on the computer hardware power curve, not the optics power curve.

Re the comment in the thread about this being academic because HD requires shooting with a tripod, again, that's exactly what I would have said a week ago and now I think it will be only partly true in the near future. I'm sure there will still be times when the tripod is necessary. But it's basically a pain for most amateurs (including me) and I'm wondering if I will even take one on my next trip to the Rockies. I've stuck a full-size one in my big suitcase for each trip west so far where we're using a car on the far end. But I've never used one for places like Disney World. If this CX500V is good enough over time, I'm thinking the tripod may get a lot less use. Whatever works!
Reply
Reply
post #22 of 28
11/9/09 at 8:31pm
Tom Gull- all this talk about stabilization made me break out the Lumix FZ35. I went through the menues and found a tele photo lens and a macro lens setting.
Hmmm...
I found the the stabilization mode and there are actually four (!) options. They are:
1) Off
2) Auto
3) Mode 1
4) Mode 2

I don't know what these modes are as the manual is on a cd-rom that is buried somewhere in my closet, but I'll assume that they have something to do with distance. Maybe one is enhanced with eis, dunno. I look for the cd tomorrow.
Reply
Reply
post #23 of 28
11/10/09 at 7:57am
FWIW, I'm pretty sure the XR500 line also has EIS within their Active mode (which is probably the difference between their standard and active modes). It just that Sony never came out in the open like they did with the CX line and it doesn't compensate for rotation on the XR line.

Why do I think it does? Check one of my videos done with the XR500V inside a waterproof encasing: http://www.vimeo.com/4989267. Check specifically around 1:06, you'll see drops of water (which dropped on the case front) dance around which are definitely not a characteristic of OIS stabilization, which dampens movement instead of moving erractically like software EIS. That and the fact that I have footage in similar conditions of my older SR11, which has OIS but no Active mode: http://www.vimeo.com/6558438 (around 1:40).
Reply
Reply
post #24 of 28
11/11/09 at 7:21am
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericjut View Post

FWIW, I'm pretty sure the XR500 line also has EIS within their Active mode (which is probably the difference between their standard and active modes). It just that Sony never came out in the open like they did with the CX line and it doesn't compensate for rotation on the XR line.

Why do I think it does? Check one of my videos done with the XR500V inside a waterproof encasing: http://www.vimeo.com/4989267. Check specifically around 1:06, you'll see drops of water (which dropped on the case front) dance around which are definitely not a characteristic of OIS stabilization, which dampens movement instead of moving erractically like software EIS. That and the fact that I have footage in similar conditions of my older SR11, which has OIS but no Active mode: http://www.vimeo.com/6558438 (around 1:40).

Someone pointed out that the marketing specs and promotions for the CX500V mention "3-way Shake Cancellation" where the XR specs and promotions don't. I have confirmed that is correct. I've sent a message off to Sony to find out whether the XRs and CXs actually are different in this respect, or whether someone just added info to the CX blurb that was left out of the XR side.
Reply
Reply
post #25 of 28
11/11/09 at 7:30am
As I said, they are different... the CX line added "roll" (rotation) compensation in their EIS software. It is unclear to me how much better the stabilization system is on the CX over the XR line, as I haven't seen side by side tests.

But I'm certain the "Active" mode, which was added in the XR line this year, involves EIS on top of OIS from what I'm seeing in my footage.
Reply
Reply
post #26 of 28
11/11/09 at 8:49am
I had the Lumix FZ28 and it had good ois. THe FZ35 replaced it and it boasted better ois and it does. Looking at the camera, it looks identical to the FZ28 save for a video record button. The 18x lens is the same. Now that I think about it, the improvement came from adding eis. The camera is relatively cheap and I think it would be easy and cheaper to add eis than improve an already effective ois system.
Reply
Reply
post #27 of 28
11/12/09 at 7:18pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericjut View Post

As I said, they are different... the CX line added "roll" (rotation) compensation in their EIS software. It is unclear to me how much better the stabilization system is on the CX over the XR line, as I haven't seen side by side tests.

But I'm certain the "Active" mode, which was added in the XR line this year, involves EIS on top of OIS from what I'm seeing in my footage.

I'm dipping my foot in YouTube upload waters for the first time to post some clips that maybe give some indication of CX500V performance. I posted one short one of two pets just to try things out, and then two clips of a model train (one HC7 one CX500V) and one of a real train. I haven't gone through video selecting the best examples, these were just ones close at hand.

If you go to YouTube at this URL:

http://www.youtube.com/

and Search for ThomasAlexHD, you'll see at least the two model train clips and maybe more if there's some kind of indexing lag (all four). These were HD clips but don't seem to show up that way automatically, so you may want to spot and hit the HQ button to the bottom right of the player. All of these were handheld, so in the CX500V ones you'll see some gross movements the stabilization won't damp, but not much jittering. In the HC7 clip played back at full HD, it's jittery even when my hand was relatively stable. It actually looks less so at this lower resolution...

Assuming you have high-speed Internet, you'll also want to make sure you specify that in your Playback Settings. And I just realized that the button to the right of HQ switches the playback to full screen mode where the stabilization quality is more obvious, I think. I see minor jerkiness in the real train moving left to right but I know that's hesitation in the playback buffering as opposed to the clip...
Reply
Reply
post #28 of 28
11/13/09 at 6:23am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Gull View Post

These were HD clips but don't seem to show up that way automatically, so you may want to spot and hit the HQ button to the bottom right of the player. Assuming you have high-speed Internet, you'll also want to make sure you specify that in your Playback Settings. And I just realized that the button to the right of HQ switches the playback to full screen mode where the stabilization quality is more obvious, I think. ...

I can't find all the clips via YouTube searching so here are the direct URLs:

Amtrak Capitol Limited
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JuJzXZTSkTY

CSX freight
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xQE_dR3t8zQ

HC7 model train
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsf9Cuhr9g8

CX500V model train
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ne0LWKNs7UU

Cat meets glider
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0iPXuhvT6Y4
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Camcorders

AVS Top Picks

AVS › AVS Forum › Other Areas of Interest › Camcorders › Baby on the way, need a camcorder & reading all these reviews is making my head hurt