Thanks for the link; I'll take a look.

On cnet I read this:

"For the M series, Canon has refined the microlenses and color filters on the sensor, and says it delivers 20 percent better low-light performance--down to 1.2 lux from 1.5 lux. In fact, [b]Canon claims the new models will outperform the G10 in low light.[b]"

I have yet to read any review, or watch and sample footage that substantiates that claim from Canon.

I have looked at comparison between these camcorders and the Panasonic X900 & TM900, and the Sony CX550 and CX760 - the low light footage/screenshots showed the the M52/G10 were much better: brighter and less noisy.

--------

The G10 also has focus peaking, zebra (75% & 100%), build in ND filters and bars & tone. However, the menu system is clunky, apparently, so even though it has more features, they may be awkward to access. Also, ND filters are not available in Tv (shutter priority) mode.

I do use zebra patterns on the HV20, so I'll miss them, and the focus peaking would be very useful (I use it on my Alpha 57 when using manual lenses)... But are these two features worth an extra £350? For that I could buy a 2nd hand wireless lav. and a couple of after-market batteries...

Having compared the camera on slashcam, then assuming the cameras has matching settings the M52 does seem to have the edge. At least, that's what my eyes tell me.

You might want to look at the M500. Same as the M52 but it has no Wi-Fi, no internal memory and is even cheaper. Here's a comparison test I did with an M500, HV30 and an XL-2. https://vimeo.com/40381549 For the money it's an amazing little camcorder.

Thank you for the link... In the UK I think the alternatives are the M56 and the M506.

I have looked at those - I am not interested in wi-fi and I would prefer to use memory cards rather than internal memory. However, the 56 and 506 have no mic input AFAICT, and that is a deal-killer for me. If I can't connect an external mic and have control over the audio, then that camcorder is not for me!

(One for the Sony models that caught my attention had a mic input, but not manual control other that hi and lo levels. I can't recall the model, but with no manual control it was no good to me.)

That's a bummer. The M500 has a mic input and audio control. Have you downloaded the 506's manual from Canon? That would answer the mic question.

Definitely no mic input on the M56 or M506. I've just taken a look at the Canon USA site, and you have more choice than we do in the UK.

Yes, a real bummer.

After doing the comparison of my current HF100 against the M500 in the 12lx low light scene there was just no comparison. I bought one.

Depends what you are going to use it for...

If you're just going to point and shoot on auto, then there's no benefit to the HF G10/it will be a similar image on auto to the HF M52.

If you want something closer to a prosumer camcorder that will give you full manual control, a focus ring, zebra stripes, focus peaking and dual card slots - then the HF G10 would be worth it.

If for just messing around, vacations, family video, etc. the HF M52/50/500 will suffice. If for paid event work or artistic endeavors like short films, music videos - the control over the image with the HF G10 (or DSLR/M43) is a must.

I had the G10 for some time (upgraded to XF100 now), and I loved it a lot, but wanted another camera with the XF format to go along with my XF300, that's why i upgraded.

I have not tried the m52, so I cannot comment on that, sorry.

Ulf

The G10 doesn't truly offer FULL manual control, as I understand it. You can either control shutter, or you can control iris, but you can't control both.

My use would be mainly shooting my family, and usually indoors. However, I always use a microphone, set the audio level and white balance, and tend to set the shutter to 50. I find the strobing from higher speeds unnatural.

So, I need some control.

On balance, if the G10 were cheaper - say £200 more than the M52 - then there would be no competition. Perhaps when the G25 is readily available it will drop in price...

Yes I'm using this camera like 80% indoors for my small children. It's perfect for that and with some filters I'm sure I'll be able to get some good outdoor shots. My HF100 has served me well for the past 5 years but it's time for it to find a new home on ebay.

- Mark

From the Canon website:

http://www.canon.co.uk/For_Home/Product_Finder/Camcorders/High_Definition_HD/LEGRIA_HF_G10/

_Lenny_ :

The HF M52 has this issue with only one or the other; you can manually set the shutter/it will adjust aperture for you or you can set aperture and it will adjust shutter. (Shutter Priority/Aperture Priority modes.)

The HF M52 does have a microphone input, audio level, manual and preset white balance.

Thank you for the correction. Than user guide confirms what you say.

I came very close to going for the G26 (the difference in price between the G10 and G25 (G20 in North America) is negligible) on account of its low light performance. But so does the M-series; so I have opted for the M52. FWIW, the M52 was EISA camcorder of the year 2012.

Canon is ambiguous as to whether the low light improvements are due to a new sensor or improved circuitry. They claim to use the HD CMOS Pro in one breath, then use Enhanced HS CMOS Pro in the next.

If I've made the wrong choice, Amazon offers a good returns policy ;-)

My Canon M500 came in today. I didn't get a chance to really give it a workout but here are my opinions so far.

It is much lighter than my HF100. More "plastic-y" feeling. It's good that it's lighter but I miss the metal feeling of the HF100. Also the battery protrudes more from the M500 than the HF100. There is a cutout in the HF100 for the battery. Not so much for the M500.
Turn on is a little faster for the M500 but nothing to write home about.

The touch screen is nice. Not too sensitive, you have to push a bit to engage it. Many of the functions are available right from the screen.
I only shot a little bit inside my house under low light conditions. No comparison between this and the HF100. Under the same conditions the HF100 would show tons of chroma noise and very low resolution. The M500 holds up amazingly well. It's always hard to estimate these things but in photographic terms I'd say the difference seems to be about 3 stops. Really, it's huge. Perhaps even 4 stops. Imagine shooting at ISO 3200 and bringing it down to 200 or 400.
Max bitrate is 24mpbs vs. 17mbps for the HF100. I've had problems with macroblocking when shooting the ocean and other water scenes so I'm hoping these extra bit help there.
If you move the camera around when it's off the internal lens makes a rattling noise. Canon says it's normal but it's a little disconcerting. The HF100 did it as well but to a lesser extent.

Basically the huge improvement in low light performance makes any drawbacks over the HF100 pretty minor.
If Canon could
1 - Include a real 30p progressive mode. Not 30p in a 60i wrapper that nobody knows how to unwrap.
2. Get the battery more in the camera body.
3. Fix the rattling noise when the camera is off
4. Include a way to clear the display of all icons and text

This camera would be close to perfect in this price range. As it is, it's low light performance punches way above it's weight class.

- Mark

My M52 arrived a couple of days ago. I've not had much change to play with it, but in low light, if you set it correctly, the images are superb.

You can limit the maximum gain applied to prevent the camera over-boosting low light images. the maximum gain is 24dB. After about 18dB the noise really starts to show through.

Under a single 12W fluorescent light, only the shadows gave away the fact that I wasn't shooting in daylight. White balance was spot on. Also, the colours appeared quite neutral to me; neither over nor under saturated.

Once you get used to the menus, it's quite easy to control the camera.

Niggles - the darn mini hotshoe. It's only marginally smaller than a standard one. If you set the A/V output to headphones, the speaker will not work during playback. Headphones and mic sockets are on the body where the LCD is, so you have to disconnect them when the camera is not in use.

Stabilisation is much better than the HV20. I don't think the M52 feels overly plasticy.

It is small enough to fit in my coat pocket, and isn't so light as to feel like a toy. To my mind it has a weight that is just right.

My initial impressions are that it is a great camera.

Oh, and flares have six points, not four, and bokeh is hexagonal, not diamond shape, which make the video look more pro than that from the HV20 or any consumer level camcorder from Panasonic. Thank you Canon for the 6 blade iris!

Love this little camera!

The G10 has been reduced by £80 to £650 on Amazon. Quite a bargain given it's more pro-focussed controls.

M500 update

I did some comparisions of my old HF100 vs the M500 and as far as lowlight performance as I said above I confirmed a huge difference. I ended up pushing the color to +1 in the camera as this is what I would have done in post anyway.

The one small complaint I have is the auto white balance is just a little cooler than the HF100, the HF100 appeared more neutral. It's not a big deal but I rarely if ever needed to correct white balance in the NLE with the HF100. On a positive note it's really easy to set a manual white balance with the M500.

And the price on Amazon just dropped to $319 so I got a $30 credit.

That's an absolute bargain of a price. Why cant the UK have such generous pricing (there are too many taxes levied!)

I did some very low light tests last night...

In a large room illuminated by a single shaded, very low powered energy saving fluorescent light bulb (most bulb in my home are 9W, this one was probably 5W at most), I set the camera to a maximum of 18dB gain, with a shutter speed of 1/50, and with exposure locked, the camera managed to correctly white balance the scene, and produced very little noise. Focus was spot on.

The HV20 in identical conditions would produce a huge amount of noise and focus hunting could sometimes occur.

But that's not all. In the same room, when mixed lighting was introduced - the addition of an LED lamp - the M52 maintained an accurate white balance. On the built-in LCD screen it looked very blue, but replaying it on my PC shows an accurate gamut of colours.

My gripe now is that VLC stutters when playing the files, so I have to use Windows Media Player instead. Can't blame the camera for that.

Really chuffed with this little camera. The M5x series are seriously good.

These cameras are quite a bargin and you may want to apply some of the money you saved toward the Canon TL H43 and WD H43 lens. I've used both on an M500 and find them quite useful. They also make the camera easier to hold steady and give it a bit more of a professional look if that's a concern. There's even a menu setting to check if you are using these lens.

There are very cheap hot shoe adapters available to allow physically connecting a standard hot shoe device like a mic but you loose the "hot" feature.

While you are experimenting with the camera check out the still photo feature. It's certainly no DSLR but it's better than a cell phone.

@flyingski - Thanks, I'll check them out.

@Lenny - We don't want to get into a political thing here but it's always tough for a state to find the right balance. Go too far in one direction and you you create a nanny state of the helpless living off handouts. Go to far in the other direction and you have the rich controlling the game and end up with the French/Russian Revolution.

Luckily if you live in a democracy you can vote which direction you think the needle needs to swing. 'Nuff said.