HD vs. 3CCD

cpalermo wrote on 11/22/2007, 6:06 AM
This may be a dumb question; if so I apologize for my HD ignorance but hopefully someone can impart some wisdom on me!

I'm looking to upgrade my current single chip miniDV camera and wondering if I should go with a 3CCD or HD. I currently do everything with a standard, single chip miniDV camera, capture to the computer as AVI and then ultimately render as MPEG2 for final publication on DVD.

If I were to purchase an HD videocamera but still planned on MPEG2/standard DVD as the final means of publication, are there any gains?? I know it wouldn't be the same as if I were to go full HD all the way - but at a minimum, shooting with an HD camera, won't the picture on standard DVD look a little better??

Or should I just go with the 3 CCD if my end product will not be something HD?

Thanks for any guidence!

Comments

Chienworks wrote on 11/22/2007, 6:08 AM
I think the concensus around these parts lately is, if you're not doing HD now you will be soon. I have a feeling that if you bought an SD camera now you'd come to regret it in the pretty near future.
CClub wrote on 11/22/2007, 8:24 AM
I sold my 3 CCD chip cameras over the summer at a reasonable price, so I guess there is still a market out there for SD cameras, but if you're upgrading, I would HIGHLY recommend going with HD. You're not going to get good SD cameras at rock bottom prices anyways, so for the price difference (not as much as you'd think), you have so many more options.

When I've gone over HD footage with customers, even if the final product will be SD, they are so much more impressed with what I'm producing when they see it in HD. Some here on the forum have said that they aren't getting customers asking for HD, and I really don't either. But when I proactively am showing them their project in HD, it's showing that I'm on the front edge of what is available out there (at least tech-wise). In addition, even if they are distributing the final product on SD DVD's, they then can post the HD (wmv, mp4) etc on their websites, or even distribute HD data discs, and they look like the cat's meow.

Edit: Also, in looking back over your posting, my 3 chip HD down-rezzed to SD looks so much better than what my 3 CCD SD footage looked like.
Spot|DSE wrote on 11/22/2007, 9:33 AM
An HD camcorder may have three CCDs, three CMOS, single CCD, or single CMOS. These days, camera manufacturers are migrating to CMOS for most cams, simply because a lot more can be managed with a CMOS imager vs CCD. CCD technology is very proven, but it's also very old.
your comment about being pro-active is spot on. IMO, clients don't know to ask about HD in most situations, you need to demonstrate it if you want the upsell. It usually only takes a few seconds.
ushere wrote on 11/22/2007, 11:19 PM
spot is spot on as usual.

i shoot everything in hd - and happily show it to clients whilst confessing that i can't, as yet, get it to their tv. pc yes, but until the bun fight between bray and hdvdv wears itself out, and prices for all aspects of producing a hd disc come down to reality, they'll have to wait. of course, the pics are better in sd from a hd camera, and there's the future 'cost' of converting whatever i shoot back into hd at some future time.

meanwhile, sd still reigns supreme, but apparently now in 16:9, so going hd now is probably a good investment, as long as you don't splurge out on a camera that isn't going to amortise itself before the next model (that you REALLY have to have) comes along.

i'm somewhat cheesed off with the fact that sony is churning out new models faster than mac donald's hamburgers, but not giving us the buns to deliever it to the customers. i know, crappy analogy, but what the heck...

leslie
kkolbo wrote on 11/24/2007, 5:51 PM
If the money is there, go HDV even if you are only working in SD. The better the acquisition, the better the final product no matter what the resolution the final. The HDV offerings also give you the resolution to crop or fudge the composition of the shot when delivering in SD.

I know this sounds strange for someone who just bought 5 PD170 SD camcorders and 5 consumer camcorders, but I needed the durability and couldn't go up to the price of the durable HDV ones.

Udi wrote on 11/24/2007, 10:40 PM
Maybe some other view.

Shooting HD is not just the camera, and it depends on your shooting needs.
Low light, field monitor and/or focus isuues are something to consider when shooting HD.

Also, the editing workflow will be different, unless you convert all sources to SD while capturing (in Camera or rendering to DV format). If you will edit in HD, you will need HD monitor, more disk space for intermidiate files, and you will do more rendering - so a more powerfull PC.

Shooting HDV and delivering SD-DVD will get you, in most cases, a slight imrovement. In some cases, like low light or fast moving/panning - a good SD camera will get you the same or better image.

Udi