Canon HF G10 for a novice? Or TM900 or CX700??

I've been super busy with my other hobbies and also taking videos. I'm sure others have been busy as well.
I have a Canon HF G10, I also owned a Panasonic TM900 and tried out but flat out rejected a Sony CX700.
Your question could easily have been answered if you had done a search on here as this question has been answered literally hundreds of times.
I'm going to answer it once more.

It a nutshell

Sony CX700 is decent in low light, has great OIS, but has really awful autofocus.

Panny TM900 is incredible in bright and I do mean Bright Sunny day type of light. Inside where you have low ambient light it's not so good. It does have a good OIS and of course it is 60p. It also has a fan which can sometime be heard in your videos if taken in quiet places.

Canon HF G10 excellent in low ambient light, decent sound, only 60i, and it's Dynamic OIS is utter crap so basically you can't use AUTO mode for anything if you move at all.
It's Standard OIS is pretty good and if you do see some wobble you just need to zoom in a bit to remove it.
True the Canon is not for point and shoot users, like anyone in my entire family.
But if you are willing to learn you can easily grow into this camera.
If you just want a camcorder that you literally point it at something and press record, buy a GoPro HD Hero or a Panasonic TM90 (not a TM900)

The only thing is the GoPro needs a lot of light and well the Panny is still not king of lowlight anything.

For my needs I really need the flexibility that the HF G10 provides. If I just wanted to hand my wife a camcorder she could use the TM90 is the one I'd buy for her.

My biggest lament is the lack of 60P which would really elevate the Canon to the best camera available.

Hope this helps.

"1. For a novice like me.. what should you suggest?" - iPhone. I bet you already have one. It is not the camera, it is how and what and when you shoot, I am saying this as an owner of more than 10 camcorders (not at once). Equipment does not make a shot.

"2. How good is the low light from G10?" - You need a qualitative answer? The sensitivity numbers make no real sense. If you want comparison, go to a comparison website, like camcorderinfo.com or slashcam.com and see for yourself.

"3. How good is the outdoor shooting in G10?" - What sort of answer are you looking for?

"4. How is image stabilization in G10?" - It exists. Is it the best eh-var? No one knows for sure as there is no single adopted way to test for it.

"5. Can i use few different manual settings and controls and stick with it if i have to use indoor shooting and a different one for outdoor shooting?" - AFAIK, you cannot have presets on the G10. On older Canon camcorders you can switch to manual, change settings, then switch to auto, then when you switch back to manual all your old settings would be active again. Not sure about the G10. Panasonic is a different story, it forgets manual settings once you switched to auto. Get a pro camcorder if you want multiple storable presets.

"6. Are these settings easily found on this forum." - see above.

Apparantly you want a different answer than you've been given. I hope you find the answers you are looking for.

It's not up to us to assess what you should use, you need to do that for yourself

Steve has pointed out the pros/cons of each camcorder; so it's up to you to decide what features are important to you, and which ones aren't

Like a bunch of us on here we have owned the cameras you have asked about. I suggest the hf g10 because I tried a ton of them and for me and what I like its the best. Most pro on line stores have a great return policy so pick the 2 you think what and compare. Just return the one you don't want.

You may want to consider a Sony NEX-5N.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonynex5n/

It will cover the areas you mentioned, especially the low light as it has a "23.4 x 15.6 mm Exmor APS HD CMOS Sensor". Can shoot HD 60P video and most importantly they are small like a point and shoot camera. You can leave a favorite lens on there all the time.

I'm suggesting this, as camcorders are kind of bulky to have to take out spontaneously to capture moments.
The 5N is the best of both worlds; small size and image quality. It's also a 16 megapixel still camera.

Actually, Ungermann gave you some excellent advice, especially with his answer to your question #1.

His answer to #1: "Equipment does not make a shot."
Watch this video and you'll see Ungermann's point: http://www.digitaljuice.com/djtv/detail.aspx?sid=88

You say you are a novice yet your questions, especially regarding the G10, suggest that you have more than a novice interest. If you just want to record life events with a simple to use camcorder that gives you quality images, then any of those you have been researching will suffice. However, if you're willing to take the time to learn HOW to use your camcorder to it's fullest potential, you'll be more than pleased with the G10. It produces great images right out of the box, yet provides flexibility as your skills develop.

Good luck with your choice!

7th Angel

"the camera (G10) is best of both the worlds for both low light and daylight shooting."

I am sorry, that is just wrong. The TM900 is far better than the G10 in good light - much sharper, better color. And for action too - 108060p rather than the outdated 108060i.

The light has to get very low for the G10 to beat the TM900, which has a sharpness edge in all light, dim or not. You have not done your homework even on specs or based on videos.

I agree as well as disagree.
I do agree that in bright light the TM900 clearly wins, also having 60p wins over the HF G10 BUT the light does not have to get all that low before the HF G10 starts to move quickly ahead of the TM900.
Action is better on the TM900 providing you have enough light.
For filming indoors using what most people consider enough light the TM900 falls down right there. It's awful once the lumens drop.

I film a LOT inside I even lighetd my subject pretty dan well and the TM900 still had a screen door look on all the video.
The HF G10 has no issues at all with that type of light.

I completely agree with Steve! I have had the TM 900 and now I use the HF G10 as my primary camera.

I am working on a documentary right now using the HF G10 and Panasonic FZ150 (mainly for b-roll and shooting 60p).

I was showing some collaborators the footage this past weekend and honestly as a professional I know what 60p is but to the untrained folks in the room it was too sharp and most of them complained about the "video" look compared to the 24p from the Canon.

I always think it is interesting to get the opinions of people who have very little clue about the frame rates. 60p always seems to lose when judged by the untrained eye. When I was using the TM900 the same thing happened. The TM900 does look great and is a great camera from the money but it is no comparison to the HF G10 in low light or basic indoor shooting...

Damn! why do we keep having this discussion over and over???

I know that this topic has been discussed a zillion times, and this is not the best thread to discuss it again, but:

1) I do like 24p for fiction movies. I hate it when it is used for documentaries, especially for nature panoramas, I switched off the very first disc of Ken Burns' National Parks exactly because of 24p judder. And I did not watch it further. Modern 120Hz or higher rate TV sets can smooth this out, but I do not intend putting fake frames into something that could be shot in 60p or at least in 30i at the first place. And by the way, no one prohibits using shallow DOF for artistic effect with 60p for smoothness killing both birds with one stone. At least for docos.

2) I don't think that 1080p60 from Sony and Pana camcorders is too sharp. Finally it is sharp enough to look like an image through a window, not like some blurry semi-HD stuff, which HDV and early AVCHD was labeled by networks like BBC and Discovery HD.


Seems like it.

Hopefully the 60p footage wasn't coming from the FZ150 that they were seeing because the TM900 would be a bit better. Also, if it's too sharp than I guess I'll be good if they never see full 4K footage from either a RED EPIC or Sony F65.

I agree with Steve you should get a TM90/SD90. Offers good indoor low light performance, very sharp, detailed 1080/60p video, has a wide angle lens for indoor shooting, PLUS an incredible 40X outdoor zoom range, incredibly good image stabilization (far better than Sony Nex5N) and its small, feather light and pocketable. Inexpensive too, so you can resell it on ebay if you don't like it for within $100 of what you paid.

"as a professional I know what 60p is but to the untrained folks in the room it was too sharp and most of them complained about the "video" look compared to the 24p from the Canon."

Too sharp! If you want to pretend to be shooting film, using the jerky motion 24p and inaccurate, muted colors, then the unsharp Canon is your best bet. Video cameras take video, and the look is to accurately portray reality - like looking through a window.

And, indoors does not mean dim light.

OK, here are two videos taken with the TM900. The first shoots outdoors in NYC and in the NYC subway and in Grand Central terminal at night. Low light enough? Problem? The second shoots in Philadelphia, outside and inside Independence Hall and in Reading terminal Market indoors. Indoors, get it. Problems?

http://vimeo.com/21552224

http://vimeo.com/34347925

You can download the original 108060p vidoes and look on your biggest screen.

If you need a camcorder now then disregard my advise but anyway if you're willing to wait, theirs also the X900 coming out. It'll be good to read comparisons to the TM900 and G10 once it's out but it might take 1 to 2 months. A radical option would be to pair up the GH2 to the Leica 25mm f/1.4 lens. I've read reports that it auto focuses faster when shooting video than the 20mm f/1.7 lens. Still wont be as easy to hold as the X900 or G10 at first.

I guess the baby has already been born?

Generally speaking, Sony models have the best image stabilization and perform very well in auto mode, making it a good choice for a novice user. However, they usually lack many manual options which can be found in competitor cams, especially audio control. All manufactures purposely withhold features on consumer cams for their higher end products, but Sony tends to be the worst in this regard.

Sony has the worst autofocus in the industry! It's worse than a 4 year old cell phone. I still have videos that show how painfully slow it is to autofocus.
It does have a great OIS tho and is pretty good in low ambient light. Just expect that you will have to manually focus every shot.

I am a photography novice who wanted to get as good an HD picture as possible from a camcorder without carrying a ton of equipment around and seeming like I was shooting a reality tv show. You will ALWAYS get a better picture, the more light you have, but some compromises must be made for aesthetics, and I didnt want to be a guy who stuck out everytime I pulled out my camcorder to shoot something and have everyone notice... especially because they were all only going to be home movies. After reading posts on this forum and amazon, I got the G10.

I just got back from visiting relatives in India and shot about 4 hours of footage on the G10 and WOW I could not be more impressed with the results. I left the camcorder in manual mode in MXP mode (highest quality recording setting) and set the exposure to shutter priority, shooting at no less than 1/60 at night. Every time I changed rooms, I'd get out my white card and set the white balance. That's it. Just two simple settings will guarantee a perfect picture every time.

It was a bit daunting when I first got the camcorder and saw the instruction manual and all the settings on the camcorder, but now its super easy to understand and control. The learning curve isnt bad at all. Like I said, just two simple settings are all you need to play with.

I've had Sony camcorders before and I can attest to how terrible the autofocus is in the dark, the canon is rock solid.

my advice: go with the G10, get 2 or 3 32gb SDHC cards, an external microphone with a wind cap (I have always hated the wind noise that microphones picked up when you shot things outside, completely eliminated with an external mic, we got canon's surround mic) and the wide angle lens attachment. The wide angle lens attachment is best for shooting indoors because usually the space is confined and its hard to get everyone in the frame with the stock lens. This is the only accessory I wish I had gotten before the trip. Anyway, that's my two cents. I am simply floored with this camcorder

I've not owned any of the specific models mentioned, but know only what I've read or know of closely-related models.

The top-end Canon model has good low light results, relative to the others, but it also costss disproporionately more. The margin of difference does not count for much, either, since low light is often bad light too, so you'll have a white balance problem and noise, and the lay viewer won't think any of it looks fantastic. WB adjustment can't fix everything, since artificial illumination (sodium vapor lamps, etc) is chromatically skewed or rotten. If the light source is 90% red, and low at that, there simply won't be enough blue or cyan to boost, and your efforts to tweak the WB may simply turn reddish shots into something that looks like a Frankenstein remake.

One good thing about the TM900 is that the iris / aperture is relatively constant across the zoom range: from f/1.5 to f/2.8. I think you lose more at the long end with the others, so perhaps (alas, the reviews don't test this) the TM900 might beat the Canon at the long end in low light. The TM900 has a sensor crop mode, too, which allows one to obtain an 18X zoom (over 600mm equivalent) without the IQ loss associated with digital zoom, although you need good light.

Until recently, Sony's OIS beat the others, but one can claim the TM900's dual stabilization matches or exceeds it. Meanwhile, Sony offers some wireless remote mic gear that the others do not, or which cost more if you obtain from other sources.

The TM900 offers perhaps the most manual controls, even manual control of audio levels, if one wants. It may be the only one with time lapse mode. I regret that the spec sheets don't always draw attention to this occasionally wonderfully useful tool.

The TM900 has three sensors, which may explain why it has a fan. The noise will intrude on the audio only in situations (like low volume sequences of a performance) where you'd probably want to use a remote mic anyway. The noise at social gatherings or outdoor events is high enough to lower the on-board mic gain enough so that it won't register any sound from the fan.

Only the TM900 has a digital noise cancellation function, which helps squelch wind noise a bit better than the low cut settings on the others, though none offers a snap-on "dead cat," which might be the best and cheapest fix.

1080 60p, after two years on the market, remains hard to share, so one must usually downconvert it when editing, and the 28mbps bitrate vastly exceeds what YouTube allows or what many people's Web connections allow.

All the cameras are good. Get one at a low price and you need not worry. If you consider time lapse interesting, pick one that offers that.

Viewers will value the video mostly on the basis of subject or clever editing. If you are skillful, you might produce something a stranger will find entertaining or informative. Just accept the fact, though, that the top compliment you may get will be something like this: "Hey, nice music. Where'd you find it?"

There is some truth to the statement that a phone with video is an optimum choice. The low light results are only fair, there is no zoom, and the audio may be tinny. But it fits in your pocket and always be with you, and you can send a cute clip to friends right away. Don't try that with 1080 60p stuff.

It is possible to create nice video with barely any hardware investment at all, or buy high-end system cameras and be overwhelmed or learn the downsides of lack of portability or the mountains of time it takes to turn stuff into a story.

A file is a file.

Equally, YouTube does not play interlaced video, and even 12 Mbit/s of some earlier AVCHD camcorders is still higher than 3-8 Mbit/s that YouTube allocates for 1080p videos.

"Thanks for all your input guys, i am dropping the ball today, and getting myself the G10."

"How does the G10 fare against cx700v while walking and shooting... does the movies shake?? I have seen cx700v shooting almost flawless even when the recipient is walking. Not sure if G10 is shaky.
Can someone chime in?"

OK, you started an interesting *comparison* thread, and got a lot of useful answers. For some reason your faith in the G10 was unshaken, and now you say you have made up your mind, if you had not already.

So, for questions on the G10, go to the G10 thread. I would recommend that instead of asking more questions, especially more comparison questions, you actually get a camcorder and use it. Then come back with questions, and maybe even some videos, in another thread. Good luck shooting.

A bit like children arguing over toys at times,i dont own either but all the footage i have seen the G10/XA10 win for colour and low light,60Ps no good for Blu Ray which is a big minus.Glad we have 25p which in a wrappEr is great for BD.

St

Strange i have the FZ150 as a b camera to my GH2 mainly due to its great lens for nature but mine shows no more sharpness in AVCHD P than 50i,it would be a canon cam though if i was purchasing one now.