OT: Trying to pick an HD camera

tcbetka wrote on 9/26/2008, 1:35 PM

I would like to ask for some opinions here... I apologize in advance for the long post, but I think it will help explain our needs for a camera.

My wife & I have a 14 year old daughter who absolutely LOVES volleyball, and is quite good at. And my wife loves it as well, and is the typical "soccer mom" for our daughter. They go to extra practices at the Y, go to pick-up games at school 2-3 times per week at the school over the summer...well anyway, you get the picture. And myself, I am a computer nut and love to mess with audio recording (SONAR and Pro Tools) and also recently purchased the Vegas Pro suite, and built a quad-core PC running XP, especially suited for processing audio & video.

So the natural course for us was to purchase a video camera. As a physician, I typically research different options before making a purchase such as a camcorder. So we ended up with a Sony DCR-SR45 with a 30gb hard drive, and it's certainly OK...but nothing to write home about. I read the reviews about how its picture quality is not the best, but we liked the camera and after looking at them in the store and recording with them (and watching the recording on the small monitor), it didn't look terrible to us, so we bought it. But the only one they had left was an open box, so they gave us a discount--after we checked it out thoroughly in the store. Everything seemed to work fine. But when we started using it, the factory-supplied battery...it doesn't hold a charge. Also the camera doesn't link up with XP all that well, even with the latest Sony XP driver. We also bought a wide-angle lens and a 30-to-34mm adapter.

Well, after using this camera several times and being underwhelmed with the picture quality, and the gyrations we go through to get the camera to sync with my PC and XP, I think it's time to make a change. We can still take the thing back, as we haven't had it for 30 days. And the fact that it was an open-box unit makes me think that someone else had the same problem maybe? There was no explanation from the salesman, other than "well, if we have it in the cabinet for sale, then someone has checked it out." And indeed--the camera works fine. It's only when you try to sync it up with XP that there's an issue.

So finally... I need some opinions on an HD camera. I really like the looks of the Sony HDR-SR11, and the benefits of buying one would be that we can use the same extra battery and wide-angle lens from the unit we have now. But the other camera that I have been looking at is the JVC Everio GZ-HD7. Some of the reviews have been luke-warm, but it seems as those were from people that maybe thought it was a "point & shoot" kind of a rig. But both my wife & I are the type of people to read the manual and learn the device, and how to obtain the best results...learning as we go.

So can I get some opinions of these two cameras? I think for us that the Sony might be the best choice--as we can use the other accessories that we've already purchased. And I think that the price is a few hundred dollars less than the Everio's will be. But I like some of the results I have seen online with the Everio, so it's worth at least considering. We have decided that having an eye-piece is important to us, but frankly I know there are features of each that we might not be considering--simply because we aren't familiar with their function or purpose. But you have to start somewhere, and that's why I thought I should ask here.

Thanks for taking the time to read this long post and render your opinion.

TB

Back to post

Comments

tcbetka wrote on 9/28/2008, 7:55 AM

My point about the AVCHD not going away was not meant to be from the angle of ease of editing as being the reason it fails or succeeds. Rather I meant that the software companies were going to have to really tune up their game to handle AVCHD...because it's not going away.

In other words, if the majority of new cameras in 2 years feature the AVCHD format, then the software company that offers the app with the "best" AVCHD editing features will likely gain market share. So if Vegas Pro wants to keep up, we should be seeing fewer & fewer folks complaining about difficulties editing AVCHD. And indeed my review of the forum archives over the past 6-8 months shows that there seem to be fewer complaints of AVCHD-related issues. Now whether or not that translates to fewer actual user problems I don't know--but at least there seemed to be fewer threads devoted to that (and fewer expletives used as well, lol...).

TB

blink3times wrote on 9/28/2008, 8:41 AM

"AVCHD...because it's not going away. "

We'll see.
The consumer side of things is certainly getting all wrapped up in avchd.... but the pro side isn't. Sony just brought out their new line of semi pro cams.... all of them are HDV.... NONE are avchd

Many consumers that have now bought into avchd are giving it a second guess and crossing the fingers in hopes of an editor that will actually work on this stuff.

From my perspective... really the only advantage these avchd cams have over hdv has little to do with the format, but rather the MEDIUM to which that format/codec is being captured to.... in other words hard drives and flash cards.

It is not impossible to create a mpeg2 based hi definition, hard drive or flash cam. In fact JVC has already produced one but unfortunately it wasn't received well (poor PQ in low light among other things). My guess is that if Sony and Canon took the HC series and the HV series cams (both mpeg2 based) and stuck hard drives into them, we would see avchd fade into the back ground pretty fast. The Canon HV series cams would even be able to capture at their NATIVE 1920x1080 resolution if a hard drive was used instead of tape. Now... why this isn't happening.... I don't know.

tcbetka wrote on 9/28/2008, 9:01 AM

Great post blink...I had the same thougt yesterday several times while reading through the specs for several of Canon's camcorders. Why are the HG-20/21 series Canon units the "weakest" of their upper line; the design is apparently not as sturdy and the HDD cameras not as well rated as there tape-media siblings. If the HV-30 was offered with a hard drive...we wouldn't be having this conversation. I would have bought one yesterday! Reading the reviews and looking at all the test screens, the HV-30 truly does offer a noticeable improvement over the Sony SR11/12 units. (I realize of course that those test screens may not represent the difference you'll see on your TV, but it's the best I've got to differentiate between the two right now.)

At this point in my videography "career," I am nothing but a consumer-level hobbyist; and in fact am not likely to graduate to the "prosumer" level for quite some time. So for me the AVCHD format will be quite important, seeing as how I truly prefer the HDD media over tapes. Earlier this summer I spent about 2 weeks, 3-4 hours per day, transferring a whole pile of miniDV tape volleyball footage from last spring over to PC...one minute at a time. After about a week of that I decided that the HDD system was for me, and that's simply all there is to it. You professional folks can have your tape archives, and I have no problem with that. But you won't have to worry about me buying the last miniDV tapes in front of you in the media store. I am going HDD, period. So indeed, unless I go with a JVC unit that offers MPEG-2 format, I will have to deal with AVCHD. But UpShift looks very promising, so there is indeed hope if Vegas 8c doesn't work for me.

Thanks for post!

TB

blink3times wrote on 9/28/2008, 9:19 AM

"But you won't have to worry about me buying the last miniDV tapes in front of you in the media store. I am going HDD, period. So indeed, unless I go with a JVC unit that offers MPEG-2 format, I will have to deal with AVCHD. But UpShift looks very promising, so there is indeed hope if Vegas 8c doesn't work for me."

And THAT is the way that I think most people are looking at this. The hard drive/flash medium is REAL attractive.... and they'll "put up" with the avchd in order to get it.

Sooo... will avchd stick around? IMO.... it completely depends on whether or not they get serious about mpeg2 based HD hard drive cams.

tcbetka wrote on 9/28/2008, 9:41 AM

So doesn't it seem likely then, if AVCHD is going to stick around, that the NLE software companies will have to deal with it? They're simply going to have to improve their products' capabilities at dealing with importation and editing of this format. There's no other way around it, as I see it.

I certainly could be wrong, but I don't see any other way for them to keep selling software in a market that is (quite probably) increasingly gravitating towards AVCHD. The other option of course, is if they simply target the professional or prosumer folks, and continue to focus on the HDV and MPEG-2 formats. Maybe they presume that the consumer levels folks buying AVCHD camcorders will just use the $125 Pinnacle Studio 12 types of apps. But I think this is a huge mistake personally--there have to be a whole lot more potential consumer-level folks buyers, then there are prosumers/professional folks.

Hey, $549 is $549. It doesn't matter what qualifications the buyer has--as long as the CC number is good. Right?

TB

GregFlowers wrote on 9/28/2008, 12:25 PM

I think all NLEs including Vegas will improve their ability to edit avchd video soon. HDV was troublesome at first to import, edit, and print to tape as well. It wasn't until Vegas 6 that you could natively import and print HDV footage. That's one reason Cineform HD (Neo HD) developed its niche.

AVCHD seems to be following the same route that HDV did i.e. no support > support with some limitations (now) > full support. Hopefully soon, avchd editing will be just as painless as editing with hdv, which is still painful for many ;) Then the latest and greatest HD flavor will come out and start the cycle anew.

teaktart wrote on 9/28/2008, 12:45 PM

OK, let me throw a stinker into the pile....

A lot of us do not edit with the m2t files that come off an HDV camera. We convert those to "intermediate" avi files for better editing performance and color correcting, etc. If you have a very fast computer (quad core) you can capture and convert with the Cineform product known as NEO HDV in almost real time.

With the CFDI intermediates your preview performance is greatly improved although you will also need twice the hard drive space as an hour of CFDI files will use about 30 GB of space vs. about 13 GB for the m2ts. Do a search here on CFDI/ intermediate avi/ Cineform and you will get lots of user opinions, also visit the website for more technical explanations of why this is a preferred route to go.

I just recently bought a Sony V1 cam which is tape based but also allows for the incorporation of an external hard drive attached directly onto the camera so you can record in dual format ,or just to tape or just to the hard drive. Check out the Sony HVR DR60. I thought I would want to get this unit but its pretty pricey. Then I realized that even if I directly transferred the m2t files off the drive I would still want to convert them to the CFDI intermediates for editing and would actually not save any time as that conversion process takes a fair bit of time.

So, even if tapeless acquisition is your method you will still want to convert to another format for better editing performance and that conversion process is where you will be adding time again to your workflow....

One step forward, one step to the side....hey, kinda like Salsa dancing, moving all the time but not really going anywhere quick!

Eileen

tcbetka wrote on 9/28/2008, 1:00 PM

Thanks for those names Eileen, I will certainly take a look at them...

TB

Earl_J wrote on 9/28/2008, 2:03 PM

Not to add any more confusion to your decisions . . . (grin)
1 - don't simply discard your second camera once you get the new one ... you can use the HD for wide shots (especially if you can get to the press box and learn to use the remote for the new camera) and use the older, lighter one for following the action (perhaps even down at floor level) - which can be used as inserts (b-roll) once you get more advanced in your editing skills; and want to provide more detailed action of controversial/winning plays. . .
2 - if ease of transfer is the primary focus; how about taking a laptop with Sony Vegas Platinum as the capture program to the games - you may be able to get an inexpensive laptop and Vegas Platinum (~$125) for less than the cost of an HD camera... it captures to avi format and then it's a simple matter to drag and drop files from the laptop to the editing suite, no?
3 - you may want to look into a video hard drive that you can hook up directly to the camera as you record (I believe it has been mentioned before)... not sure which format they record to, but worth a peek.
4 - I'm a Canon camera, Sony Vegas, and mini-DV kind of guy. Why? No one can yet match the 20X zoom of the Canon cameras - I do dance performance recording primarily - so I can zoom to a solo dance routine from the back of the auditorium without any trouble... I use a laptop to record directly from the camera -with the confidence that if the computer glitches any, I have a backup on the tape. Sony Vegas speaks for itself - easy to use, moderate learning curve, a complete package of effects and audio tools, and excellent results.
So, I'm not much help with video storage cards, Sony brands of cameras, and other software editing packages... but I would encourage you to not forget using both cameras.
I'm from Maui and have spent much of my life playing volleyball at one level or another - I fully understand the tempo of a well-played, well-matched competition - so although two cameras might present a few more obstacles of its own, I think the resulting video would more than compensate for the hassle. . .

Good luck with the decisions. . . let us know how it all works out ... until that time. . . aloha y'all. . . Earl J.

tcbetka wrote on 9/28/2008, 2:26 PM

Well, ironically we have just made the decision to keep the first camera--so your post is very timely. We are simply not ready to make the decision on which HD unit to buy, and the 30-day return period is down to 3 days remaining on the existing camera. There's nothing wrong with the way it works really, once you know which sequence of buttons to push to get it to interface with XP--it's just a bit of a pain. With Vista it's just like the manual says, but not with XP. But we will have to exchange the battery that came with the camera as it doesn't hold a charge; but then all will be good. So I feel somewhat at ease though, as I now can buy the model that suits us best--not what I think I need because time is running out. I must say that the Sony SR11 is still looking mighty good though--the more I read about it compared to the Canon units, the less difference I really think there is...practically speaking.

I have decided to go tapeless though, even though it means dealing with AVCHD codec. But there seems to be enough people reporting some luck with Vegas Pro v8c (especially with the Sony SR11 & SR12 cameras) that if I go that way, I believe I will be fine. But I do have a couple laptops already, and I do own two Vegas Pro licenses, as I first bought a stand-alone copy and then purchased an upgrade in order to get DVDA Pro...so laptop recording is not out of the question by any means. I also have a Glyph 120GB external recording hard drive, so there's that possibility as well, but that is simply a USB device so unless the camera's software will actually find it, I would need to choose it as a destination from within a Windows OS.

But thanks for the post Earl, I appreciate your ideas.

TB

Earl_J wrote on 9/28/2008, 6:20 PM

By the way, I believe each Vegas license will permit loading it to 3 machines. I currently have my version on two without a problem. Then later, when you need faster rendering times, you can look into network rendering. . .

Glad you're getting close to a decision - I think Sony wants all their bandwidth back ... ("lol out loud" as Monk would say)...

Until that time. . . aloha y'all ... Earl J.

tcbetka wrote on 9/28/2008, 6:52 PM

Glad you're getting close to a decision - I think Sony wants all their bandwidth back ...

I hear that. I am really getting tired of looking at camera specs! I think I could sell these darned things now--I certainly know more about most of the HD stuff than the average Best Buy salesperson does...

And I expect a nice discount from SCS on my next purchase, for generating all the extra traffic flow on their website this weekend ;-)

TB

Steve Mann wrote on 9/28/2008, 11:36 PM

TB:

For what it's worth, I shoot HDV with the Sony Z1 camera, and tapeless recording with the DVR-60 unit. (Look on the Sony site for current rebate programs. I got my DVR-60 with a $500 rebate from Sony, bringing the price down to a little over $1,000). I just plug the DVR-60 into the PC USB port, and it appears as a disk drive on "My Computer". Drag and drop to the Vegas timeline or the projects folder.

However, everything I produce is in DV. No one, repeat *no one* has asked me for HD yet.

DV, whether recorded on tape, a laptop running Scenalyzer or to an HDD unit, is AVI. Editing AVI is a relatively easy task for the editing program because each frame of video is complete. No forward or backward looking as in encoded video such as MPEG, HDV or AVCHD. Which is the bane of all editing programs.

All of the HDD cameras you are looking at encode the video. It's compressed and a compromise of storage space over image quality.

As you do your research into AVCHD, you will hear the terms P-, B-, and I-frames. These are how the various CODECS compress the video into smaller space. Note that virtually all CODECS are "lossy", meaning that the encoded video will *always* be inferior to the original full-frame source. The better CODECS minimize this loss of data (color, luminosity or sharpness), and the casual viewer can't tell the difference.

However, compressed video is problematic for all editing programs because in order to edit the video stream, the editor needs to look forward and backward in the video to generate a new I-Frame at the edit point. Unless you get lucky and edit on an I-Frame, but the odds are against that. Since every CODEC makes its decisions of where to make a B-Frame or a P-Frame differently, the editing program has to know the CODEC details in order to reproduce an I-Frame.

This is why many professionals do not like to use a compressed video for editing.

BTW, now that I shoot with the Sony Z1 camera I have a Sony PD-150 and a VX-2000 that I no longer use, but they have served me well. Yes, HDV is an MPEG2 compressed stream, but I doubt that many of us on this forum can afford the uncompressed version of HD used by the Hollywood studios and the million-dollar production shops.

Glossary:

A P-frame is not a Full Frame. It is a Predictive video frame and follows an I-Frame and only stores the data that has changed from the preceding I Frame.

B-Frames are not full frames and are predicted by both the previous frame and the next frames.

An I-Frame is a Full Frame. This Frame does not need any information from the frame before it or after it to be played back properly.

An AVI file, like we've all used in DV is all I-Frames. Every frame is complete on its own. The editor doesn't ave to use a lot of processor horsepower to look ahead and behind to generate a new I-Frame.

John_Cline wrote on 9/29/2008, 1:38 AM

"However, everything I produce is in DV. No one, repeat *no one* has asked me for HD yet."

Initially, no one asked me for HD either. I put on my marketing hat and sold them on the idea. It wasn't a particularly hard sell and everyone, repeat "everyone" has thanked me for making HD available to them.Even those that don't yet deliver in HD see the value of building a library of HD material for use in the future.

I suppose that if you're shooting a low-budget car commercial with a life of about a week on the air before its history, then HD doesn't make much sense.

tcbetka wrote on 9/29/2008, 6:03 AM

Great posts Steve & John. Wow--Steve...Thanks for the information! I looked for the Sony Z1 and DVR-60, but didn't see it on their site. All I found was the FX1000 and the VX2100, so there must be another site that I am not finding. I will look more tonight after work. I really like Sony's stuff, and feel that it is made as sturdily as anyone's is. JVC's Everio HD7 looks to be really well-made, but there's no hope of finding one around where I live, and they really aren't reviewed all that well. But they use the MPEG-2 for their HD format, so I presume this would be minimal fuss when it comes to edit time.

I really like the build of the Sony SR11, but cannot discount the Canon gear--simply because of all the great recommendations I have gotten here. So I'll just keep doing my homework, and as someone suggests other cameras, I will look at those too. But by keeping our Sony SR45, we have plenty of time to make the right choice.

Thanks again for the posts guys.

TB