You need a fast CPU for AVCHD.. that's the problem most people run into. Much the same thing HDV was, when it was first out... the typical user's PC wasn't fast enough to make editing HDV much of a joy.

I have one AVCHD camcorder, and I don't have any particular issue with editing AVCHD... I also have a 2.8GHz Quad-core Q9550, though. And the 2.8GHz matters more than "quad-core" here, since Vegas isn't mulithreading the video preview... or using the handy, dandy GPU complete with video acceleration that allows me to play Blu-Rays on the same PC with only like 20% CPU utilization. But I digress.

It also depends on how much editing you do. If I have lots of work on lots of AVCHD video (unlikely.. this is like my "C" camera, but it's also handy for instant transfers to the PC, unlike my two HDV models), I convert it to an intermediate format first (CineForm, XDCAM), rather than waste as much time editing as it can take, even on a very fast computer.

Those are the issues. They vary by person based on your CPU horsepower and your patience + expectations.

No camcorder does great in low-light... some are just worse than others.

The Canon HV40 is about as good as they get, much better than the small-chip Panasonics (the new TM-300 kind of redeemed Panasonic, but most of their HD models have been awful in low light).

You'll get better low-light performance on the HV40 if you shoot at 24p rather than 30p or 60i... it enables a lower shutter speed.

Like most consumer models, the HV40 uses a large single-chip sensor. Large is good, but the single chip means there's a Bayer pattern filter on the sensor... one R,G, or B filter per pixel. This means, only about 1/3 of the light that hits the sensor makes it through to any given pixel.

This used to be a problem with color, in the SD years, but it doesn't really hurt HD to the same degree... we just don't see color all that well (6 million color sensors, 120 million luma sensors, in the human eye).

But take a 3-chip camcorder with the same 1/2.8" (or whatever) sensor... it uses a diachroic prism to split the incoming light into R, G, and B... 1/3 of each sent to one chip. So, other than a tiny loss for more complex optics, a 3-chip camera with the same sensor size gets 3x the light. Being more expensive, a 3-chip camera may also offer an f1.4 or f1.2 lens, rather than the f1.8 or worse you often find on consumer models... another doubling-or-so of the light.

I recently bought a Sanyo HD2000 for a trip to Alaska based on the Camcorderinfo.com review mentioned above. I expected a toy, but found it supprisingly capable. It is a bit more expensive than the VPC-FH1, but it has an external mic jack (albeit without VU metering) and a few other extras, at a modest increase in cost (now selling for about $500 on ebay). It has quite good low-light performance if you turn on its internal noise-reduction circuitry (always shoot with it on). I find it also gives better resolution than mentioned in the Camcorderinfo.com article - see a sample taken from a shot of a test pattern:



To my eyes, it's almost 800 lines, not the 650 lines mentioned in the article. (Actually, it's a little better than shown in the image above, for my camera was a little too far from the test pattern when I took that shot and the test pattern didn't quite fill the frame width.)

It also has full control of ISO, shutter speed, and aperture. Manual focus also is available, but it's so clunky that it's not useable. Instead, I let it autofocus, the press the "up" arrow on the remote control to lock the focus when I don't want it to vary. Autofocus is a bit slow, but accurate.

60 full frames per second (not fields) for true 60p made it easy to get good slow-mo of salmon jumping. Colors are pretty decent, zoom is good (16x), it fits in my pants pocket, F1.8 lens is OK and doesn't decrease much with zoom. The worst feature is electronic image stabilization, but the new deshaker fixes it fine. It also shoots pretty good stills.

It came with what appeared to be a toy tripod (a "free" gift from the ebay vendor); but it was so handy and worked well enough that I never took my carbon-fiber tripod out of the suitcase. All in all, I'm very pleased.

I had a Pana GS200 too. Still have it's a pretty good camera for a mini DV format.

Now I have my shiny new Canon Legria HF-S10 (this is its name here in Europe) and maaan! It does look like all clips've been shot on a broadcast camera.

I almost don't need to use any color correction. None at all when I use the handt dandy DSC Camalign ChromaDuMonde Chart.

Best stuff ever!!!

Regards,
MadPax

>Now I have my shiny new Canon Legria HF-S10 (this is its name here in Europe) and maaan! It does look like all clips've been shot on a broadcast camera.<

Shoot in cine mode, tweak the settings and you'll be amazed at what that can produce. Cine mode will retain more highlights by-the-way.

I'm in the market for an HD Camcorder for in the $1,000 range (or less).

Is there anything out there that records to flash memory and has a viewfinder?

...Jerry

Jerry, you might want to do some research here: http://www.camcorderinfo.com

Sony SR11 and SR12 both have view finders and record to Flash memory sticks or internal flash drive.

I have both the Canon HG10 as well as the HG21 and love both, I look forward to bringing my HG21 on my upcoming 12day Med cruise in January , I will being visiting ports in Italy, Barcelona, Greece, Turkey , Egypt, Malta, aboard the Norwegian Jade and with my 120Gig HD as well as my 32Gig SDHC card I will be able to film well over 21Hrs of High Def footage....Should get some awesome footage of the great pyramids.....

I loved my Sony HDR-SR11, unfortunately so did someone else, and I had to replace it, and fell for the HDR-XR500. Both are in your price range if I'm not mistaken.

The XR500/520 cameras have a very good low light performance as far as I've seen. Better then the HR11/12.
It's 120GB HDD is plenty for even long trips, and it can also use Sonys Memory Stick flash mem. Additionally it have a Microphone in and head set out 3.5mm plugs, and it's active optical image stabilizer takes away the worst of the minute shakes that handheld videos are bound to have.

If I were looking in the $1100 range for a flash-based camcorder, I'd probably save up another $200 and buy a Panasonic HDC-TM300. Possibly also consider the Canon HF-S10/S100... basically Canon's answer to the same question. Oh.. but wait.. there's no viewfinder on the Canon...that thing that looks like an eyepiece is actually a control knob.

So I was right about the Panny.. the TM-300 still offers a viewfinder. Also, a lens ring, as on my Sony HVR-A1.. so you can focus or zoom from the ring, rather than some silly lever (though I think both Canon and Sony are addressing this with knobs near the lens.. maybe ok, I haven't used those).

I have far, far too many SDHC cards lying around to consider a Sony. Their entry in this same niche is the HDR-CX520V... more similar to the Canon, with a large 1/2.88" single sensor at 6.631 Mpixels (4.500 in video mode) and no more viewfinder. Also, apparently no 24p mode.. that's a dealbreaker for me... even worse than the Memory Stick vs. SD issue.

Or maybe I'll just wait until the SDXC upgrades come out... but beware! It sure looks like this class of camcorder is dropping viewfinders like there's no tomorrow. All three of my HD camcorders have viewfinders, and I use both viewfinder and panel, depending on the shoot.

"If I were looking in the $1100 range for a flash-based camcorder, I'd probably save up another $200 and buy a Panasonic HDC-TM300.

Yeah, I was looking at that, however it IS more expensive and the CNET review was less than glowing (they didn't like the touch screen). Other opinions?

Also, What about the Canon HG21 - it's hard drive, but quite a bit cheaper. Thoughts here?

...Jerry

Edited for fat fingers s/b HG21

Have been following the thread with interest as my 9 year old Digi 8 just died. Not worth even considering a repair as the cam which interests me Sony HDR-XR500 is half what I paid for the Digi 8. A question tho on th HDR-XR500, can it be turned on without opening the screen to use the viewfinder? I much prefer using viewfinders :) also assume the HDR-XR500 will film in SD (mpeg2).
Thanks all Brian

brianw:

Yes, pull out the viewfinder and the xr500 is on and ready to use.

The viewfinder on the xr500 is locked in place, and you release it by pulling it outward (about 15mm) at which point you can angle from 0deg to approx 20deg upwards as usual.

SD recording is in MPEG-2, up to 9Mbps.

The camera is recording interlaced only. I had hoped Sony had adopted the progressive mode this year. And it is locked to 50i or 60i frame rates depending on where you buy the unit.

If you want something small and unremarkable for unnoticed vacation video shots I have before recommended the SONY T500 which does very good 1280x720p video.
Yesterday I received a successor - the SONY WX1 and must say that I got surprised how SONY succeded to make the video part of that camera clearer and sharper and with noticeable less digital noise.

I am receiving the TX1 (Same electronics inside but with a built-in lens) next week for shots in rougher environments (skiing, sailing etc)

Here is the ratings summary for the cameras tested at Camcorderinfo. You can sort it by sensor size, etc and also click on the cameras for their full review.

John

Reply by: LReavis
Date: 9/14/2009 9:52:07 AM

I recently bought a Sanyo HD2000 for a trip to Alaska based on the Camcorderinfo.com review mentioned above. I expected a toy, but found it supprisingly capable. It is a bit more expensive than the VPC-FH1, but it has an external mic jack (albeit without VU metering) and a few other extras, at a modest increase in cost (now selling for about $500 on ebay). It has quite good low-light performance if you turn on its internal noise-reduction circuitry (always shoot with it on). I find it also gives better resolution than mentioned in the Camcorderinfo.com article - see a sample taken from a shot of a test pattern:


Wow Alaska! I'd like to visit that place one of these days!

I'm interested in this camera also for it's good low light capabilities. Did you notice any flaring (pink / blue striping) on bright objects or on videos taken in the sun or bright light?

sunlight is in short supply this time of year in Alaska and on the cruise ship going up there from Seattle. However, in Seattle, I did notice a tiny bit of blue fringing around the Space Needle tower, which appeared nearly black against the white clouds, in STILL shots (which, at 5mp, provide enough pixels to notice such things). Otherwise, images seemed pretty free from artifacts.

I have read that the lens is especially sensitive to bright lights (sun, car lights at night, I suppose), so I bought a rubber lens hood before using the camera and avoided angles that would allow the sun to hit the lens.

We did get some sun in Victoria, Canada, late one afternoon, and according to my cursory viewing, images look good. I'll know more after I get some additional experience with it.

I have a Sony T500 too, and it takes great shots and video. I also bought a Sony HDR TG1 when it was new last year. It is very good too. Although I paid $NZ1600 new for it a year ago, I picked up a second one (2nd hand) on Ebay Aus for $AU500. If you look at the new HDR model (the one with the gps) it is more than $NZ2000.00. So the 2nd hand one was good buying. Superb video from a titanium cam that fits in your shirt pocket.

Thanks for the reply LR! Very helpful and informative.

RE: the flairing, the fireworks display in this video kind of answers the question for me.

[link=]http://www.vimeo.com/5006240[/link]

Thanks!

not sure if you want a durable camcorder that takes stills; or a durable still camera that takes video. . . perhaps the Olympus Stylus TOUGH might fit your needs... only 3X zoom - nothing to compare with your 700X optical (really digital) zoom... really only 10X optical...

I just bought my daughter that camera, actually the one below it that is only good to 10 meters underwater instead of 30. Only 640x480x30p video but what a great camera! You can drop it from about 10 feet onto concrete and it is designed to keep working. You can shoot video under water. The pictures look great. The video looks about as good as any SD camcorder. there's an automatic lens cover so you can stick it in your pocket. The edges that will hit the ground if you drop it are all some sort of high impact plastic and the insides are shock absorbed. If you're underwater and wearing gloves there is a mode where you can just tap the case instead of fiddling with the buttons. I have a 16gb micro SD card in it that I got for $60 from Radio Shack so there is lots of room for pictures and video. Online I found the camera for about $230 in a white color that my daughter really likes. I got the cheapest shipping but it was there about two days later anyway. What a great camera. I wouldn't use it for a pro production obviously, but my daughter has been having a blast with it. The underwater feature alone makes it worth the cost of admission, ;-)