I'm not biased either. I've used Canon for everything up til this point.

I quite agree. After my HV20... it's back to Sony. The HV20 was (and is) a great cam for PQ... but nobody makes a quality cam like Sony. My HC3 and HC9 work and look like new cams still (and they've been used twice as hard as my HV20). Meanwhile my HV20 has been in/out of the repair shop twice now

The SR11 I just bought hunts a little more while focusing than the average Canon.... but I'll gladly take that over the absolute crappy build quality that Canon puts into these consumer level cams. And the 16 vs 24 stuff... there's not much difference that I can see.

Hi

I am waiting to borrow one of the new cams from Canon Denmark, as soon as they get one available.

I will then make som test shots in defferent settings and upload them for you people to download.

I have 2 HF100 and a HV20 and they have all been good so far :-)

/Ulf

I've owned both Sony and Canon cameras at different points in time. Coming from the world of photography the only bias I have is for light. The more of it the better in my opinion. I always tend to gravitate to the video camera/still camera with a large sensor and good optics.

It'll be interesting to see how the best of breed of these new cams compare head-to-head. As for the bitrate I only find 16Mbps lacking when there is quite a bit of motion or with moving water. 24Mbps definitely isn't a bad thing though as long as the new Digic III processor is fast enough to put the extra bits to good use.

The thing with 16Mbps is that ideally I like to capture above the final bitrate that I will render to. Even if my final project is rendered to 12 or 14Mbps there may be spikes that could go to 24Mbps that would be missed if the ceiling on capture was 16Mbps.

Of course we're talking about consumer cams here and if you need real quality you need to move up to prosumer or pro gear. But it's great to see AVCHD developing so nicely. Not long ago I think it's safe to say that all of the AVCHD cameras were crap.

- Mark

Blink buddy, listen up. I've had 3 Sony VX series cameras in for $500 repairs because their tape mechanisms failed. And these are prosumer cameras, not the cheapy things you're using.

Those two words put together give me the eeby jeebies inside....

tape.......and........mechanism.

ugh. Sends shivers down my spine.

You guys are using a term that is not defined.

What is a "larger lens" and what is a "smaller lens"?

To me there are a couple of possible definitions. "larger" could mean "longer" but it could very well mean a larger maximum f-stop.

And if it *does* mean "longer" .. is the "range" of zoom, or the maximum focal length? The maximum length is only one factor in a zoom. The minimum focal length is a *big* consideration as well.

I'm sure Sony & Canon are both pretty decent cameras.
But as far as I know, these AVCHD formats are hell to edit on Vegas

Not if you simply convert them to another format first, CorTed, ala Neo Scene or similar. A bit time consuming, yes. But no big deal.

Brighterside,

Longer = greater focal length
Shorter = less focal length
Faster/Slower = Aperature range
Larger = great diameter

In general a 1/2.6" sensor will require a larger (greater diameter) lens than a 1/3.2" sensor. ie HF S100 vs HF100.

So a larger sensor means a larger lens. Larger lens means more light.

This is why full frame lenses on APS-C still cameras only expose a portion of the full image that could be resolved and hence the magnification factor of the APS-C "crop" cameras.

So yes. Big sensor and big lens = good. Unless the manufacturer puts some junk in there but I wouldn't expect that from either Canon or Sony. These guys are tops at putting out great products at a price point. They continue to leap frog one another, which of course is great for us.

As for tapes. Yeah enough. My last repair was my old Canon Optura Pi. $300 to fix the transport. Loved the 30fps true progressive mode on that camera.

Jeez I WISH Sony and Canon would stop putting their 30p modes in a 60i wrapper. It is virtually impossible to unwrap it to recover the 30p stream without jumping through software hoops.

Come on Sony and Canon 99% of the world has moved to purely progressive playback devices we don't need 30p in a 60i wrapper!

- Mark

"Blink buddy, listen up. I've had 3 Sony VX series cameras in for $500 repairs because their tape mechanisms failed. And these are prosumer cameras, not the cheapy things you're using."

My advice to you then would be to stop using pro level cams and start using the "cheapy things" that I'm using.... because I haven't had a tape mechanism fail yet ;)

I know I still have the Canon HG10 and love it, I just purchased a Glidecam 2000 Pro for the HG10 and it really makes a huge difference producing smooth movement either walking , running, or navigating stairs.....

"Jeez I WISH Sony and Canon would stop putting their 30p modes in a 60i wrapper. It is virtually impossible to unwrap it to recover the 30p stream without jumping through software hoops."

Right click media>Properties>Media tab> Field Order: None

Not quite impossible. I understand your frustration with removing pulldown, however, when it comes to 23.976p over 60i.

CorTed- "But as far as I know, these AVCHD formats are hell to edit on Vegas"

Please define what you would call "hell to edit". I've been working with AVCHD for some time now, and editing isn't that big of deal for me. I've only had a couple hiccups in rendering, but that was about it.

"Please define what you would call "hell to edit". I've been working with AVCHD for some time now, and editing isn't that big of deal for me. I've only had a couple hiccups in rendering, but that was about it."

It takes roughly 4.5 times longer to render as compared to mpeg2 for starters.
I can put A LOT MORE effects on a hdv clip without it slowing down as compared to avc.
There is no "no recompress rendering" so your quality suffers something AWFUL when you have to pre-render.
I NEVER have crashes when rendering HDV but do when I render avc.
I can render VBR with mpeg2 but not with avc
With avc on the time line (1920x1080 at 16Mb/s) the final render is MUCH cleaner when rendered over to mpeg2 (1920x1080 at 20/25/30Mb/s) as opposed to rendering it out back to its original format.

When I work with HDV the entire process from start to finish goes extremely easily. The workflow is there... it's fast...and it's consistently correct. But with avc there ALWAYS seems to be something interrupting the flow.

@blink- Thanks for the reply.

I wouldn't know how easy anything else is because all I've known is AVCHD to this point. I'm at a crossroads right now where I'm going to be getting a different cam. I know there's a lot of hardcore HDV fans here in the forums, but it just feels like taking a step back for me. AVCHD (or any solid state) still has its benefits over HDV like jumping right to a clip you recorded earlier, deleting on the fly and saving space, longer recording times without fear of running out of tape, and little to know mechanical wear, tear, and failures.

You have to give up one for the other. I know there doesn't need to be another argument or debate about this, we can just have our preferences. AVCHD doesn't bother me that much. I'm not impatient and my computer isn't exactly a slouch.

Typical blink.

Always be wary of someone who can't provide just one drawback to their approach, but can name numerous faults of alternative methods.

"I wouldn't know how easy anything else is because all I've known is AVCHD to this point. I'm at a crossroads right now where I'm going to be getting a different cam. I know there's a lot of hardcore HDV fans here in the forums, but it just feels like taking a step back for me. AVCHD (or any solid state) still has its benefits over HDV like jumping right to a clip you recorded earlier, deleting on the fly and saving space, longer recording times without fear of running out of tape, and little to know mechanical wear, tear, and failures."

Well... I'm not necessarily a "HDV fan"... I'm merely calling it as I see it. HDV is quite simply easier and faster on the time line.... and what I can see so far (and I'm an avchd cam owner) there is NO advantage at all to avchd other than size.

It is interesting to note that of the things you mentioned as an advantage... have NOTHING to do with avchd in itself and everything to do with the new media technology that the avchd cams provide. This goes to what I have said before.... we (myself included) are buying these cams for the new technology.... NOT for the avchd.

"Always be wary of someone who can't provide just one drawback to their approach, but can name numerous faults of alternative methods."

Typical Gates.... blind to the words read and off topic with the words written.

Before you go out and buy one of these Canon AVCHD babies, you should also check out the Panasonic DMC-GH1 Lumix hybrid:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0903/09030315panasoniclumixdmcgh1.asp

which appears, at least on paper, to be the "poor man's" version of the Canon 5D2 DSLR. It has a few things over the 5D2 in 24p and full manual control.

I don't really think it's a poorman's anything. I think it will be a great product at a great price and it will appeal to everyone regardless of money.

One of the main things that it does (from what they're saying) is that it will continue full AF when recording. That alone is fantastic when you want to shoot moving subjects that are just too much to deal with in manual focus mode. The key here is will it perform VISUALLY with the 5DMKII. Tough task. But with regards to functionality and features......it's already killing the 5D in many ways IMO.

The GH-1 isn't in wide circulation, so its not "killing" anything at the moment. The key concerns with it are the 4/3 glass and build quality. No one will be able to tell about either of those things, until the camera has been tested by a good number of independent reviewers. The GH-1 supposedly will use high end Canon and Nikon lenses, but how well that will work is still unknown.

Ok, so let me rephrase:
"on paper" in terms of "features", "functionality", and "pricing".....

it's killing the 5DMKII.

But I do agree that we need to see what the footage looks like because that is the biggest draw for the 5DMKII.