I've used the HV20 extensively over the past year as a 2nd camera angle to my Sony V1U. If you're outside or if you light things indoors EXTREMELY well (see some comments on this http://www.sonycreativesoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?MessageID=585465&Replies=9Here[/link]), it does quite well. The outdoor footage on a sunny day from the HV20 is amazing. With poor lighting, the limitations of a lower end HDV camera begin to show.

I must admit, though, I borrowed a friend's Sony HC7 recently to do a 3 camera shot, and Sony's do feel sturdier. Not quite sure what it is, but they just feel built better; quite a subjective statement, obviously. That aside, the Canon may not FEEL as sturdy, but I've found it to BE sturdy; I've done some taping in difficult weather conditions without problems.

I chose the HV20 over a hard-drive camera because of the much lower cost. I'm not excited about the expense of buying good tapes (about $8 a piece) but the results are amazing, so I put up with it. This is my only experience with an HD camera so I can't compare, but I really like the HV20's output. I will never shoot SD footage again.

There are some "gotchas" of which you should be aware documented on hv20.com. The big one for me was that common fluorescent lights and CMOS sensors do not get along. You can get a faint green banding across the video. But this issue is not unique to the HV20. Any CMOS camera will produce it.

The camera is typically noisy so you must use external mics. I've used the Rode mono video mic ($150) and an inexpensive wired lapel mic ($25) with great results. The camera has a mic input level, and a headphone port, so you can control the input.

I've noticed that left to it's own designs, it often will overexpose an image. But maybe most consumer cameras do this. My older Sony miniDV handycam is notorious for this. It's very easy to turn down the exposure though to correct the image.

As for the sturdiness, yeah, I guess you could say it's a little less sturdy than a Sony. But that goes for a lot of products. I've never felt the camera was too delicate for typical use, however.

I think the lens produces a typical amount of chromatic aberration (purple fringing). Being careful about high contrast lines in your scene is a good way to minimize this.

I really -- really -- like the instant auto focus.

As for lighting levels, it does well in typical indoor light, but the image looks amazing if you can give it plenty of light.

I use Vegas 7.0 to edit the HV20's video. Works great. Only issue is related to Vegas, not the HV20, in that HD projects can crash depending on effects applied. I've only recently gotten into editing HD and discovered this "gotcha". It's documented quite a bit elsewhere on the forums.

I bought a high-powered quad core because I thought it was required to capture and work with HD footage (and still enjoy life). It does work great, but I had occasion to capture on my much slower laptop, an AMD x2 5000, and I was amazed that I could. Simple editing (cuts/fades) was also possible.

I like the camera's size, even though it will never impress a client. I would definitely choose it as a vacation cam. I would consider the Rode stereo mic for vacation use, though. Looks a little big for the cam, but the results will be much better than the camera whine you'll get otherwise.

Bottom line: My next camera will be a another HV20.

dmcmeans - be aware that you'll pick up more motor noise with the Rode SVM than with the mono videomic - because the SVM is less frontally-directional. This has been discussed recently on the HV20.com forums (a really good HV20 resource, btw).

I've successfully edited (simple cuts, fades, titles) HD from my HV20 on V8 running on a IBM T23 laptop with a PIII 1.2Ghz cpu. As you might expect, preview is a little jerky, but it can be done!

I have said this before...

I have the HC3, HC7, and HV20. Overall I prefer the Sony's MUCH more.

The Canon has a slightly better quality video especially in low light, but it just plain is not built anywhere near as good as the Sony's. I have had the HC3 since they first came out and it has been handled pretty hard... it's still going like it was just out of the box. The canon on the other hand is only a year old and it's been repaired twice... once for the door clasp and once for the auto lens cover. There is a bit of motor noise in the recordings, and when rewinding or FF'ing, the sound is loud and unsmooth. The lcd screen is also quite "noisy" compared to the Sony's.

In short...If I had to it again... it would be another HC7.... I'm done with the Canon HV series... at least until they can build them a bit better. It's too bad too.... because they do take some pretty good quality video.

Coming from a Sony TRV-18 and a Panny GS-500 to the HV-20, I was shocked by the motor noise. Totally inexcusable, IMO, but the Sonys had other issues for me....

HV20 is an impressive piece of work along with Vegas Pro 8 of course. What I find great is combining the HV20 with a ZOOM H2. Bigger is not necessarily better anymore.

Cheers

Radio Guy,

You use the Zoom H2 as an external sound recorder? Does it keep time correctly with the HV20?

I tried my Olympus DS-2 as an external recorder, and was disappointed to discover that it is a little faster compared to the HV20. You must slip the audio forward a fraction of a second every so often. Works, but makes editing more time consuming.

The Zoom H2 doesn't do this? I would like to purchase an external recorder, was thinking maybe a mini disc would be better, but an SD solution would be even nicer.

I mostly use the Zoom H2 as a "on-camera" mic, mounted with a Delvcam bracket to the HV20. I have also used the H2's own sound, as it can be in 4 channels. It's fairly easy to sync up the HV20 video/audio and the H2 audio with clapping. I generally just use Vegas to stretch the audio to match. My H2 is off ~ 5-7 frames of HV20 video every 30 minutes, which is not good, but it still can be synced.

Pretty much all cheaper external recorders will be out of sync with the camcorder. Take a look at the Sony PCM-D50. It's a little better quality than the Zoom units and it might sync better, although I've only seen one in a store.