700k vs cx260v vs M500 which is the best choice?

You picked three good camcorders.

I'll vote for the Sony. It comes with software I like. Then the Panasonic. I'm not a Cannon fan because, unless something has changed, they don't include 1080p60 in their Versions of AVCHD.

Bill

HF M500 $299 @ B&H through December
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/838772-REG/Canon_M500_VIXIA_HF_M500_Full.html

It has very good stabilization, very good in low light, with an HD CMOS pro sensor.

No 60p, but does shoot 1920x1080.

I wouldn't rule out the Canon for lack of 60p frame rate. The Panasonic is sharper, yet most people just watching a video of the two would not be able to tell the difference. The Canon is clearly superior in low light, and as the years go by, you will run into more low light situations than you think.

Can anyone provide further insight between these three camcorders? I'm looking in this same price range and these three keep coming up in my research as well. Seems like there are distinct pros and cons of each, but I'm curious for opinions on real world shooting how much the lack of wide angle and 60p affects the M500 vs lack of great low light for the V700. I honestly don't know how the Sony compares at all. Thanks for any help!

You can't find anyone here that owns all three, so you won't get much further input like you are looking for. You will find people that have one of them, been successful using it and have become a "fan"of that camera.

I have a few cameras that do video in 1080p. They are very different cameras. I consider one a pocket video camera, another is my pocket "quality" photo camera and the third is my "serious" video camera.

I continue to have fun learning to use them. There are significant differences in the cameras I use, but most of the time I could use any of the three and get a clip that looks nice on a big TV. Some situations are unique and one camera will be better than another.

My point regarding this discussion is that the core functions and utility of all three camcorders being considered is so close that, once you buy one, you will find it suitable for high quality, general purpose, family and travel video. The quality of the video will depend far more on how you learn to use the camcorder and how you learn to do editing, than the camcorder itself.

Pick any camcorder from the list, then learn its features and limitations so that you can get what you want out of it. You can't get it wrong.

Again, I vote for the Sony and Panasonic. Or maybe the Panasonic and Sony. I like the software that comes with them for editing. The last experience I had with a Canon was called an Elph and I took usable video of a cattle branding on a ranch in Idaho.

Bill

PS: "low light" is a troublesome word because it is hard to define. Do we mean a room where there is enough light for people to keep from bumping into things like a restaurant. Or, a normally lit family room. Or, pitch black on a camping trip where you might like a flashlight to get around. All three cameras on this list will do "normal" low light. The Canon is reported to do better in pitch black.

Thanks for the response, Bill.

Now that I have researched some of these models, I started looking for comparison videos. One that I found on YouTube was titled "HC-V700 vs HF-M506". What I learned from watching that is that the Canon is probably not for me because of the lack of wide angle. Also, when indoors with what appears to be normal lighting, the Panny is probably workable, but the Canon beats it hands down. Most of my shooting will be indoors for the next few years. Any idea how the Sony compares in low light?

Hey maybe you already made your decision, but if you haven't the m500 will be $300 at B&H until the 31st.

I was worried about wide angle too, but I kinda liked the idea of not having to worry about vignetting with filters and lens hoods. That and a few other pros like low light made me go for the m500 over the Panasonic 700k and I don't regret it at all. I use the camcorder in my small bedroom all the time, looking at the viewfinder, it always sees what I want it too.

I guess maybe I just don't like a bunch of unnecessary stuff in my shots, I could see this being an issue if I was trying to get like a bunch of people in the frame but I mean a shot like that is usually for a photos it seems like? If you are walking around filming moving/active subjects it doesn't seem like you would need to get a bunch of stuff in the frame ever like that. That's just how I look at it.

Anyways it would only be an issue indoors. And I say the awesome low light capabilities this thing has outweighs the no wide angle thing. I don't think you would regret getting this camcorder at all

I added a $16 wide angle lens adapter for use inside for an angle equal to G10. I have a Panasonic FZ200 with awesome zoom, 24mm wide angle and high speed video but not as good in low light. The Canon is just that good indoors! Its a must have camcorder, especially for $300.

Sent from my HTC DNA using Tapatalk 2

Yeah, maybe I'm overthinking this decision here, but I really worry about the lack of wide angle for indoor shooting, but even worry about things like shooting a kids basketball game and not being able to get wide enough to catch all of the action and then only having the 10x zoom. Getting a solid picture in low light might be (probably is) more critical though, I agree.

How about the lack of 1080p/60? I've never had a camcorder and am curious how big of a deal that is? The sale ay B&H is tempting, especially since I don't see great deals on the other two currently.

Hopefully I didn't threadjack here. I'd be happy to start my own thread if so, but it seemed on topic and relevant still.

What lens adapter did you pick up Icyman? I wasn't aware that was an option.

Another question for you: How often do you find yourself reaching for your Panasonic for wide shots or to take advantage of the added zoom? What's your take on the 24 vs 60 fps differences? I don't want to regret whatever I buy as it will be something I have for quite a few years.

Yeah IcyMan where did you get your lens? I had heard they all distort the picture. But if you say its good and only $16 I will totally get one!

And Dre, well obviously the 60fps will be a little more than 2x smoother than the 24fps. I can't imagine a reason to use 24fps unless you are like... going for a cinema look. You know, making a film or something (which I am actually into, so this is a nice feature for me) Other than that, for home vids I want the smoothest video possible.

And yes, it doesn't shoot in 60p, only 60i. I don't really know what to say about that other than I don't understand it, the whole interlaced/progressive thing. I thought I knew how it worked, then I start looking at my videos. I record 2 videos in 30p and 60i. Now watching these 2 videos through the HDMI cable on my TV the picture doesn't even look interlaced and the fps is like day and night, 60i is WAY smoother. BUT on my computer its a totally different story because the interlaced picture looks really bad due to combing effect (I think this is because TVs have really good deinterlacers compared to computers videocards) Of course though, I want smoother video.

If I had really nice editing software it would probably not be an issue but I don't, SO I just think "Oh well I will put this 60i vid in handbrake and deinterlace it" (Handbrake is a video converter I use, its awesome and free) I just can't figure out how to deinterlace it without turning it into 30p, which would get rid of my smooth video. It is just a pain to figure out. And then Canon saves ALL their videos in 60i, so even if you record in 24p it takes those 24 frames a sec, does a 3:2 pulldown and then saves it as 60i. Same with 30p only it uses a 2:2 pulldown. I mean, those pulldowns are easy enough to undo, but I don't know how to tackle this 60i problem because there is no pulldown to simply reverse.

I actually have another thread where I brought up the 60i to 60p thing but no one has answered since I asked that...

I don't consider this 60i thing too much of a con though, the issue for me is not having better editing software really.

Sounds like a nightmare, rhcpepper. I certainly don't want to deal with having to convert videos. I know the Canon is a great camera, but there's too many cons to make me comfortable enough to pull the trigger.

How do other users deal with video? Just shoot at 1080p/24 and leave it as is? I read some reviewers state that not having 1080p/24 is a con against the Panny T700!

When I was considering the V700 one of the main things turning me away was that it only records in either 1080p/60 or 1080i/60. Well, it has the iFrame mode which is 540p/60 but who wants that unless you are a Mac user lol. And I just wanted to be able to record in 24 when I make short films.

Oh and hey guess what I found out today! M500 in MP4 mode can record in fully native 24p! Only downside to that is the max resolution for MP4 is 720p at 9mbps or 4mbps. But the video still looks really good when I watch it on my 32" TV so yeah. I was kinda happy to find that out.

Personally, I think the M500 is the best you will find right now at this price point. You did list your price range up to $650 but for the 3 you listed, the Canon is by far the cheapest. Panasonic V700 is up to $460 right now, and is actually out of stock and B&H but you can get it for about $20 more at Amazon still, and the CX260V is about $500 on both B&H and Amazon.

Before I settled on the V700 I searched in vain for a V700-260V head to head comparison. However, on camcorderinfo.com I came across this comment by one of the staff:

We tested and scored the HDR-CX580V in order to consider it for our Best of Year awards, but we have not written a full review at this time. In our testing, the Sony CX580V performed worse than the Panasonic HC-V700M and the Canon HF M52—two models that are in direct competition with the CX580V. In the mid-range market, we like the Panasonic HC-V700M the best,

Given the similarity between the 580V and the 260V that helped persuade me to buy the Panasonic. When I thought about my own needs I decided I preferred the V700's 1080p/50 and superior optical stabilisation over the Canon's 1080i/50 and superior low light performance. Without decent general video performance the Sony had nothing to offer me.

That's an extremely helpful comment Potoroo. Thank you!