New Sony HDR- HC3 Compact HDV 1080i Camcorder!  

This camcorder, if it is released, will be cheaper than the HC1 and smaller; it will be geared towards more of the point and shoot crowd. The HC3 is the only HDV camcorder to have an HDMI output port. The FX1 and HC1 only outputs HD through FireWire and Component video.

Well, I read somewhere that Sony sold close to 60,000 HC1, much more than anticipated, smaller size and lower price could make HC3 sort of mainstream camcorder and since there is no competition right now to speak off, I think they'll push this cam into the market as soon as they can, they would be stupid not to. The only question is, will this replace HC1 or be sold alongside. I would expect street price of HC3 to be around 1k and if that's the case, it wouldn't make sense for anybody in the market for higher end consumer camcorder to buy SD cam instead of this jewel. I may even get one myself as companion to my HC1 which I have right now.

http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content...Camcorder-.htm

It's official, the HDMI-output equipped HDR-HC3 HDV 1080i camcorder WILL replace the HDR-HC1 and will be $300 MSRP cheaper.

I'll keep my HC1, at least it looks a little bit more professional.
I'll recommend HC3 to my friends though who've been staying away from already sub-$1000 priced HC1 mostly due to price.

I bought an HC1 literally the day before I read about the HC3 and its April 2006 release.

The only thing that HC3 has over HC1 is 1/4 speed video recording so don't feel bad, besides usually most places have 7 day return policy. I would probably still pick HC1 over HC3, just for manual focus ring and other manual settings like shutter speed which HC3 doesn't have. Most other things are wash: for example HC3 has 200k LCD screen, which sounds better than 100k LCD on HC1 until I found out that HC3 has 100k viewfinder and HC1 has 200k viewfinder and here is a kicker, I use viewfinder 85% of the time, so for me higher resolution viewfinder is much more important than LCD. I guess you can't have it all.

The HC3 has a 5 lux rating while the HC1 is 7 lux. (The FX1 is 3 lux.) What real world difference that makes I could not say.

Really, that might be the only useful thing about HC3, because HC1 really sucks in dim light.

Does a 2 lux difference make that much... erm... difference?

That's why I bought a video light to pair with my HC1. I intend to bring this cam with me on a cruise, so I thought having a video light might minimize the noise in dim lighting situations.

One thing I've noticed though, playback via firewire connected to TV is cleaner (less noise) than component video even the shots in dim lighting.

First of all let's look at lux and skip scientific definition which for most of us would be meanningles. 10 lux would be amount of light emited by 60 W light bulb at 10 ft away. But the problem with camera's rating is two fold: a) it just means that camera can record visible picture at such low light, it does not tell how the picture looks like and how much noise is there. Assuming that Sony used exactly the same criteria for testing both cams we come to second issue: I believe Sony rates camcorder's lux capability at maximum gain. HC1 has maximum gain of +18 dB, I don't know what gain HC3 has, it could be higher and therefore more noisy. My point is: lux rating is just indication of low light performance and doesn't tell whole story. I would also disagree with HC1 having very poor low light PQ. It is worse than twice as expensive FX1 (which btw has 3 CCD and therefore is much easier to clean video noise), but pretty good comparing to most other consumer camcorders. As a matter of fact if you limit maximum gain to 9-12 dB the video is very clean. Since I have not seen any direct comparison of low light video between HC1 and HC3 I would wait with judgement of which one is better until then. If I had to speculate, I would expect both cameras to be pretty similar in PQ.

If the HC1's firewire connection is less noisy than component for shots in dim lighting, I wonder how well the HC3's HDMI output will do.

Transport streams captures from the camera via firewire have the same low light noise/problems, so its obvioulsy not the "component or HDMI" output problem.
It just the fact it has a single CMOS sensor, which makes things bad in low light.

Another thing that happens in low light with this camera is auto-focus gets confused and focuses in and out of the picture rapidly - AND - you cannot detect this through the extenal LCD - maybe only in viewfinder if youre paying attention - as theres not enough resolution to show focus going in and out and you'll only see it when you playback/capture the tape :D

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0601/06...earvidcmos.asp
http://www.imaging-resource.com/NEWS/1138169251.html

I found some articles that seems to explain what the new ClearVid CMOS sensors are about. Somehow, I feel better about having the HC1 if it has more red and blue pixels for every green versus the HC3's ClearVid CMOS. They explain that in ClearVid sensors, there are more green pixels than red/blue, which would do better in low light, but may sacrifice color quality. I felt that explanation seemed similar to complementary color filter arrays, in which luminance is better than primary color filter arrays, but lack good color reproduction. I guess for CMOSes, there were no complementary color filter arrays and ClearVid is the best way to improve luminance.

Actually, I think the ClearVid chip will give better low light performance in reduced gain noise and color rendering due to it's better purported dynamic range in dim light. Here's a vid that shows some low light clips from it:

http://citv.dip.jp/hd06/light2.wmv


The vid is posted in this thread and was taken from a Japanese forum:

http://www.sonyhdvinfo.com/showthrea...8&page=1&pp=10


It's not the best example but the video does look be pretty clean and still retains good color range.


ron

Is that from HC3?
Or HC1?
Either way, the video looks very filtered + brightened. There's a color/saturation control on HC1 that was probably turned way up for this.

Thanks for those links. They have turned the pixels diagonally, so they have one row of RGB, one row of GGG, one row of RGB, etc...

I can understand the argument for turning the pixels diagonally to increase the coverage in the spatial coordinate system that ours brains use (left and right, up and down).

I don't know what to think of it yet...

I would like to see an HD camcorder based on the Fovean chip, then I think we would really have something.

http://www.foveon.com/index.php

-Dave

Pete, pretty much how I feel. I also saw some posted clips of the HC3 vs the HC1 and although the color saturation of the HC3 appears greater, the HC1 appeared sharper to my eyes. This may be the net result of the lower pixel count of the HC3's imager. I've also never experienced any issues with color saturation of the HC1, so that to me was pretty meaningless. I was looking seriously at the HC3 for its improved low-light performance, but I won't trade if the HC3 doesn't have the sharpness of the HC1....afterall, that's what this format is all about, sharpness! :)

I guess we won't know for sure until the HC3 is released.

The clips here pretty much sums your comment. These are raw HDV files from tape from an HC3 and HC1 in a Japanese electronics store. I played these files through the MyHD card. The HC1 looks somewhat brighter but the HC3's color looks more saturated. What's not commented is the stereo audio; the HC1's seperate mics produce better separation than the bunched up stereo mics on the HC3.

You can adjust color saturation on HC1. I think I left mine on +1, since I felt it looks more pleasant to eye than factory settings, which are kind of undersaturated. I think HC3 is lacking microphone inputs as well.

Even though I couldn't tell much in the viewfinder, I do set my color to +1. I've had my HC1 for nearly four months and I'm always amazed at the videos it makes. The HC3 lacks a microphone and headphone jack; but it adds an HDMI jack - not really a first, since a JVC ProHD deck also has HDMI, but a first for a consumer camcorder. Some Sony HDTVs can already play back HDV video with a FireWire connection.

Any "TV" with firewire (sony or not) will play HDV through firewire.
Not all of them will allow controlling camera (because their firmware doesn't support this type of subunit), but if told to connect the camera by an outside controller, they will work.
THis is the situation with my SHarp LC5 tv.

Timecop,
My Mits TV will control my HC1 but it can not properly decode the HDV signal. I get a screen that seems to be random blotches of color. John

Weird, becuase HDV is just mpeg2ts w/1440x1080i video and 384kbit mpeg2 audio.
Actually, I've only tested with japanese equipment - TX1, LC5 and TT-D2000, and all 3 played it, however 1440x1080 is a valid ISDB resolution, but I dunno if that's the case with ATSC.

Are you guys going as far as to say you PREFER the HC1 to the newer HC3?? I was going to buy the HC1 today but they are all gone for the most part. I could drive an hour to grab one from a Best Buy in Maryland. Should I??

There is still availability from online dealers, including reputable B&M ones, but be careful who you purchase from.

Yup. The more I read reports from Japan (as well as see clips from the two cams) from owners, the more it seems the HC1 takes superior videos.

I pretty much echo the glowing endorsements other HC1 owners make. This cam produces stunning videos in sufficient lighting conditions. I have also seen its performance in low lighting and it's not pretty. Video light is a must.

I have only owned this cam for over a month and I think it is far better than my Canon GL2. I have not made a comparison with low-light performance but perhaps the GL2 may be a little better because it is rated at 6 lux.