Upcoming Sony Hx9v as a top camcorder

Great specification aside, what about manual settings in video mode? Do you have any details?

Not sure how anyone could say at this point that the new Sony is a 'better choice' than the larger Panasonic camcorders.

For one thing the Panasonic TMV700 and the newer 900, are camcorders that are built to take video. Most digicams are compromises for video and are really designed as still cameras first. They also don't provide nearly as many manual options as small digicams.

So many who look at these small cameras as a 'better choice' than a larger dedicated camcorder that will be used primarily for video, may well be disappointed. For those who are looking for something to throw in your pocket that can take nice video and stills, then the small digicam may well be a great choice.

Would the WX10 with f2.4 be much better in low-light, than the HX9v with f3.3 lens? Does the 60i vs real 60fps affect results? Both seem to have the same sensor.

So essentially you are comparing a few specs to make your assumptions while leaving out other relevant info. Are you on Obama's staff?

What about sensor size, optical zoom, image stabilization, manual controls, 3 sensors vs 1, mic input, view finder? Not too mention the most important thing, picture quality! A lot if things look good on paper, but don't deliver in the real world. I'm sorry but a point and shoot is not going to dethrone any of the top consumer/prosumer camcorders.

If the new CX700V indeed offers true manual controls, then it will be better than the Panasonic's 600/700/800/900 series.

As for this digicam, the specs look nice, but the resolution is way high. I still use my oldish Canon camera with 3.1MP. I have the Nikon 40D with "only" 6.1MP sensor. Here comes this toy with how many? 14MP sensor? There is no real need for that.

Nah, not really, I am selling my 700.

But I stand by my contentions. Yes, bitrate 'can' be important, but it is certainly not the most important consideration in PQ. Do I welcome 1080p in these small digicams? You bet I do and, believe it or not, I will probably buy the HX9 and see if it's a good fit for my wife.

I have been disappointed with the small Sony digicams from a pure picture (not video) standpoint. I had tried the WX5, and although it shot some very nice video for such a small camera, its pictures were very disappointing once you began to zoom in on a subject. I suspect some major compromises were made with the lens that resulted in soft pictures when zoomed. I compared it to the Panasonic Z7 and the Z7 simply ran circles around the Sony in terms of picture sharpness. OTOH, the Sony was clearly better for video.

So hopefully the HX9 does not have this issue.

All very true. If everything on paper turned out how it spec'd out, we'd all be very very happy campers. Sadly, it rarely turns out that way.

Once again, we are going by specs only. If the PICTURE is better than the 700/900 AND includes manual controls, then yes, it may indeed be better. But if it has manual controls and it still doesn't measure up to the 700/900's PQ, then IMO it's not better. Some of you guys are always forgetting the importance of lens quality in the final equation, and that does vary considerably with any of these cameras.

You guys are missing the glaringly obvious; sensor size/type.
The Sony uses a CMOS chip, while the Panny's use a 3MOS chipset. Big difference in quality, especially with motion.
As far as codecs are concerned; Sony and Panasonic jointly own the AVCHD codec. So, it appears the Sony needs to relay more information, per Mb than the Panny, which isn't necessarily a good thing.

But, the Panasonic's effective sensor resolution is much higher than the single Sony CMOS chip?? Why?? Because with CMOS, 2/3rds of your pixels are devoted to only 1 color-green. Look up Bayer Interpolation and learn more.
With 3MOS, the sensors can all decode each of the 3 primary colors...hence you have at a minimum of 3 times the color resolution of a comparable CMOS chip camera.

So, who had the better camcorder right now?? Panasonic, by a large margin. The TM700/SD600/HS700 will kick the Sony to the curb. Just wait and see.
Your comparing an Orange with an Apple. And, while both may be fruits, that is the only similarity.

So, do some research on Google or Wiki, and learn a little more about the differences in sensors, Bayer, Raster, etc.

How motion is different?
What do you mean by "more information per Mb"? And how come that Sony needs to "relay" more?
One 9 MP sensor is pretty much equivalent to thre 3MP sensor. At any rate, I have two Canon camcorders each one with a single 3MP sensor and video they produce looks great. I care more for fluidity of movement, ease of editing and scaling and absence of noticeable artifacts like macroblocking. I do not care much for very slight if any differences in color resolution.
The 700 has issues with ergonomics, this why I sold it. Let's see what Sony is going to offer. And the Sonys will have native 24p and much wider lens.

If Panasonic fixed the ergonomics issues, made the lens wider and offered native 24p it will have remained the leader. But Panasonic did not care doing this. Panasonic's loss is Sony's gain.

Oh goodie, Sony is now doing stuttering video too. I know some love it, but personally I have no use for 24p. Anyone using this camcorder as a 'run & gun' unit, will not be happy with the stuttering of 24p and will use the same 60p that's been on the Panasonic for over a year now. 24p calls for careful scene setup, limited panning & very careful attention to motion within the frame. Otherwise you might get nauseous watching your video.

I still don't believe most people buying camcorders such as these are producing Indie movies. Are some? Sure, but not the average buyer IMO. They're more likely to buy a camera like the GH2.

And you must understand that 'ergonomics' is a very personal thing. One man's good ergonomics is another's miserable ergonomics. You don't seem willing to accept that.

There's also a limit to how much 'glass' a manufacturer will include at a given price point. So although I agree it would be nice to have a larger lens, it's not likely at a low price point. There's also no guarantee that one company's 2.8 lens will produce better low light video than another's 3.4 (or whatever it is). Electronics play a key role in good low light too. That's an area that Sony has been very good at. Lenses? Not so much.

What I meant by motion is CMOS jello effect. The 3MOS is just better able to handle fast moving objects.
The only reason the Sony would need more Mb/second for the resolution is noise or artifacts. It's got something extra tagging along. It remains to be seen what it actually is.

Not sure what ergonomic problems you have with the Panasonic. Sure, it's small, but I use it on a mono-pod-not a problem. The touch screen and the controls are NOT user friendly. And, the EVF is all of about useless.

When looking at sensors, resolution isn't necessarily the controlling factor. It's pixel size/spacing, especially with CMOS. You can make a CMOS chip that is 1/10th of an inch, and have a resolution of 30-mega pixels. But, the resulting image will look terrible, due to bleed over, pixel size, and a host of other electronic issues.

Why do you think little pocket sized camera's have 15 mega-pixel sensors?? Because they're tiny sensors. While a DSLR 10 mega-pixel camera will kick it to the curb, quality wise.
I also forgot to ad that the lens on the Panasonic stops down to F/1.5!!! Which is an equivalent of about T 3.0.....which for the a camera this size, is outstanding.

Oh, and don't get all wrapped around the axle about Leica lenses......give you a hint; Leica makes lenses for still camera's, really well. Video is not their strong suit. So, even though it says Leica on it, doesn't mean it's a great lens. The lens on the Panny is a good lens, but it's not para-focal, and does tend to breath a bit. But, due to some internal software magic in the camera, chromatic aberation and breathing are kept to a minimum.
It's a complex issue. But, if 60P isn't your thing, then go with what works best for you. I have plenty of frames to get to 24P, and can do that at normal motion, with software conversion.
Also, the Panny 1080/60P video is a relatively short GOP, with I-Frame. That is outstanding for such a small camcorder, and it allows the stream to hold a lot of information for it's size.

I forgot to ad that the Panny has an F/1.5 lens, which is equivalent to about T 3.0...in a camera this size, that's outstanding!!!

Why? Because there are fewer photosites to scan within the same timeframe? Maybe, if they are scanned simultaneously. Maybe this is another reason Canon has returned to 2MP sensors.

I still don't get what you are talking about. Most people admit that Panasonic's 17 Mbit/s AVCHD is acceptable at best, while Sony's 16 Mbit/s looks much better, which means that Sony might have a better AVC encoder (its MPEG-2 encoder is a totally different animal). Sony can go up to 24 Mbit/s in regular AVCHD mode and it is nose to nose with Panasonic in 60p mode (28 Mbit/s).

I mean the single Super-Duper Control button that controls everything and does it poorly, resetting your exposure settings when you do not want it.

Sorry, I did not get this either.

You cannot do this without dropping and blending frames, and the result will never look as clean as true 24p recording.

What is the length of GOP in 60p mode? Is it different from the regular 15 frames? And sure each GOP has an I-Frame, so I don't get your point about I-Frame.

What is the relationship between camcorder size and stream type?

Side by side, the TM700 is about half a stop slower than the 2006 HDC-SD1 according to my own testing.

Believe it or not, I presently use 24p to shoot family-type videos, and it works out pretty well. Because my parents and friends have DVD players, but very few of them have BD players. 24p holds much better in DVD-video form, while 60i looks noticeably worse than 1080i60 or 1080p60.

I dont really care to get into this cat fight, because I had my socks knocked off by my SD600 (not to mention that it doesnt seem to have the bondi blue issue, but thats a different discussion) and you guys are way beyond me in overall comprehension of these matters. But...I can never resist a good cat fight.

So, on that note...who are these people. "Most people" is pretty broad, and fails to match up with what nearly anyone I have met or read says ...so...I am a little miffed.



Really? nose to nose in Mbit/s maybe....if thats all that matters? Of course...17% is something to note as well, if that really is the cats pajamas...bees knees...whatever your saying may be.




Dont forget we are talking about the Sony Digicam the OP listed...and from what I understand we dont even know if it HAS manual controls...

Does take a little time to reset the Iris after changing shutter, but def. helps newbs like me zone in on optimum settings faster.

I thought we have switched to the CX700V

I'll take your word for it since I've never down-rez'd for a regular DVD player. But using 24p for 'family-type' video would sure make me nauseous regardless of resolution. I don't see how the stutter would disappear at a lower rez. You'd just have low rez stutter, still not my cup of tea.

I just can't imagine how 60i wouldn't look better for family videos than 24p. Perhaps if you're shooting very elderly people that don't move much, 24p would work. But for kids, pets, sports, panning, action, 24p makes me sick.

WOW! On that we totally part company Ungermann. Who are these 'most people' that admit that Panny's 17mbit 1920X1080p is just 'acceptable' at best? Almost all reviews that have been written about the 700 have said it was the best picture they'd ever seen.

This is precisely why I don't ascribe as much weight to camcorder bitrate as most people. I think it's down on the list as to what constitutes a great picture. If the 700 can produce a picture like it does at 17mbps, who cares that it's not 24mbps?

You've got to define 'most people'. They surely aren't the reviewers or owners I've known and read about.

Hmmm..I just had an idea. Maybe this is more an indicator of his camcorders inability to process well in low light? Thus, 24p would look significantly better, and he has thereby drawn false conclusions in thinking that it is the actual fps, rather than the shutter speed/light reception?

I mean, there are times where I decide to use 1/30th, though I try to just turn on a couple of lights as even one or two more will make a huge difference. But...if necessary, and indoors of the family, I would be more than happy to drop it to 1/24 and at least have a nice image, if not quite as smooth, you know? Maybe not, but I suppose it is a possiblity. I am not even sure what cam we are talking about anymore.

EDIT: I decided this third paragraph was a stupid comment....

No. It looks better because it is progressive, hence the video has full 480-line resolution, not 240-line resolution like regular 60i has. DVD-video has no provisions for native 30p or 60p, even 24p is not exactly native, but it can be decoded correctly by most modern DVD players.

Sorry, I did not get this one.

? I still cant see how, other than having more light, the 24p would be superior after conversion. 1080p60 would have full lines of resolution too, right? Not saying that it would be better in 1080p60 either, but just...your explanation appears at first glance to be at some odds with your prior statement.

I was talking about DVD-video, which is 480i60 or 576i50. 24p is possible because modern progressive-scan DVD players can retrieve the original 24p frames from the video and send them as 24p or 60p stream to a TV, which then displays them as progressive. Detection of 30p is less widespread, and 60p is simply not possible.

You are again making the mistake in assuming you are getting 1/2 the vertical resolution in 60i, that's not true for the majority of good HDTVs.

You should really take a look at some of the camcorder resolution tests of the many camcorders that record in 60i.

Here's a cool video:
http://www.vimeo.com/23717999

I'm still waiting on the damned hx100v which is the big brother of this with the 30x Zeiss lens.

Best but charged my CC 3 weeks ago and they're STILL backordered.

Edit: just shipped!!!!

Nice. And amazing that a $300 point and shoot hybrid has a way more usable active IS mode than a $1500 canon dedicated video camera.

(NOT knocking the canon overall, I think it's amazing, just that one aspect of it)