OT: Which new Camcorder -Idiots Guide to HD AVCHD?

kraz wrote on 7/12/2008, 12:07 PM
Hi Guys,

I am definitely on the enthusiasts - side of things here and nowhere near pro or semi-pro - but I love videoing and editing and using Vegas and I enjoy this group even if I am a bit "junior" for a lot of the stuff in it.

Have been using miniDV for about 4 years and and pretty happy with it. I burn DVDs import to Vegas do whatever I want.

I am in the Market for a new camcorder - (family/fun sports - some paid stuff of peoples affairs - but nothing serious) and honestly my main reason is the cool factor and simple to carry and encorage me to use more. (capture to memory card or drive - quick copy to PC - new features etc.)

(I live in Israel and almost no one has HD TVs - almost no one has 16:9 etc.) The videos I make for people (usually either presentations for their family events -or of their family events) seem to be fine using miniDV raw from a consumer camera - input and regular DVDs/mpeg2 and even Youtube output. I don't yet have Blu-Ray and very few people have them here - nor do they have PS3s)

I know it is better today to capture things in a better format so that in the future when needed I have better source to work with.

WHAT SEEMS to blow me away from what I keep reading - is that to do the simple workflow that I do today .. Video it - import to Vegas - Edit - make a DVD of it - seems TO BE MUCH HARDER if I switch to a newer "better" format. HD or AVCHD.
I need to run conversion software to downgrade the quality of my video -so I can use it on my Dual core machine running vegas -etc. Must jump through hoops to make regular DVDs that are not Blu-Ray etc ..

Then I read other articles about getting worse quality from AVCHD than I am used to with mini DV because of compressions issues proprietary formats etc.

I am really impressed (from reading not seeing) with the Canon Vixia HF-100 and the Sony HDR-SR11(which may be too expensive) and just saw the JVC GZ-HD30 - but I am wondering if (given that this is not a need- but rather a "want") it is just not a completely baked technology and buying today will be frustrating?

So after the ramblings here are the questions /issues

1. Is there a simple well written Idiots guide to understand the various HD and Psuedo HD formats?

2. Is there a normal simple way to just as easily as I do today make and edit videos and DVDS that play on normal players - while still saving high quality footage that I can do better things with in the future.

3. Is AVCHD is real standard or is it a transitional technology that will not last long and is not so good to have now.

4. What is the best "fun" cool gadgety camcorder to get today - 6-700 max that will give me good quality video - in an easy NON-proprietary format ...

Thanks for listening to my ramblings - but I bet I may not be the only one ...

Allen

Comments

JackW wrote on 7/12/2008, 3:47 PM
I haven't had an opportunity yet to go through this in detail, but TheHDSurvivalHandbook (http://www.proappstips.com/) just came on line (you can't buy it in print) and for $15 US looks well worth the cost. It appears to deal with virtually every facet of HD.

Jack
DavidMcKnight wrote on 7/12/2008, 4:35 PM
Check out http://thefullhd.com/ for all things HD. And it's even in print! :)
Grazie wrote on 7/12/2008, 10:59 PM
I want to see a GRAPH with all the variations plotted and what they accomplish. If there are overlaps then I can SEE it. If there are GAPS and VOIDS in what can be achieved, then all the better.

Too much to ask for?

Oh yeah, the same for SCREENS too.

Grazie
JohnnyRoy wrote on 7/13/2008, 7:24 AM
> 1. Is there a simple well written Idiots guide to understand the various HD and Psuedo HD formats?

Yes.

> 2. Is there a normal simple way to just as easily as I do today make and edit videos and DVDS that play on normal players - while still saving high quality footage that I can do better things with in the future.

Yes, you could shoot HD but capture as SD DV Widescreen. This will give you the same editing experience as today yet allow you to go back to the HD footage later to re-capture and re-edit. You can also purchase a plug-in for Vegas like GearShift that will convert your HD footage to DV Widescreen AFTER you capture it and allow you to switch between DV and HD depending on what your output requirements are.

Note: in the interest of full disclosure, GearShift is my product so of course I prefer it but it was created for people to edit HD on PC's that were less powerful.

> 3. Is AVCHD is real standard or is it a transitional technology that will not last long and is not so good to have now.

It is a "real" standard. HDV is a tape based format and AVCHD is a tapeless format so depending on the camera you choose you will get one or the other. How long it will be around for is anyone's guess.

> 4. What is the best "fun" cool gadgety camcorder to get today - 6-700 max that will give me good quality video - in an easy NON-proprietary format ...

Well... in the "fun" cool gadgetry category there is the Aiptek GO-HD for $185. It's not the best quality and is definitely just a fun gadget and not for serious work.

$700 is just below some interesting cameras at $799. If all I had was around $799 to spend, I'd look at the Canon HV30 because it still shoots HDV (M2T on miniDV) and has pseudo 24p and 30p modes. This avoids the editing problems with AVCHD but you have to capture tapes. If you want an AVCHD camera that uses a hard drive or memory card then go with something like the Sony HDR-CX7 or HDR-SR10.

~jr
kraz wrote on 7/14/2008, 2:06 AM
well if my first post talked about how complex this whole HD world is - I feel like the replys just prove my point :) - especially is I want to to 3:4
blink3times wrote on 7/14/2008, 5:05 AM
"It is a "real" standard. HDV is a tape based format and AVCHD is a tapeless format so depending on the camera you choose you will get one or the other. How long it will be around for is anyone's guess."

That's not REALLY true.... or at least it does not have to be. Although JVC is the only company so far to work outside the box, they have produced a "tapless" HD/HDV cam.

To say that either format is restricted to a particular media type I think is a bit of a stretch. The TREND seems so far to be avchd = tapless, but I think it's more because tape is now being looked at as "old" technology.

My HOPE is that more companies follow in JVC's footsteps and start producing more mpeg based hard drive HD/HDV cams, because (IMO), avchd is just not ready for prime time.
seanfl wrote on 7/14/2008, 10:49 AM
Allen

nice topic and I'll share that I recently bought a Sony HDR-SR11 and love it. Slightly above your price target (I found it for $925 online us1camera). I use it for family stuff and quick and easy workflow; the quality is very good at medium to high record rate. I also have a sony FX1 HDV that is getting used less and less for many family things.

So...I think you'll find the new crop of AVCHD cameras to be great to work with. Heard great things about the canon that is mentioned above too.

Sean
JohnnyRoy wrote on 7/14/2008, 1:12 PM
> To say that either format is restricted to a particular media type I think is a bit of a stretch.

Well... it's not really a stretch when you consider that HDV and AVCHD have very specific meanings because they are standards with approved specifications. I did not mean to be too restrictive to imply that alternative capture methods could not be used, but here is what the specs say:

The HDV spec requires that cameras claiming to be HDV *must* support the DV/miniDV cassette tape format. That was the whole point of the HDV standard; i.e., that it was backward compatible with DV and used the same tapes. If you don't have a DV/miniDV tape transport, you cannot call your camera "HDV". You can call it HD or ProHD or make up any marketing name you'd like, but you can't call it HDV. Therefore HDV is a tape based format by definition. You can alternatively capture to anything you'd like, but the camera itself must support DV/miniDV tape and the DV format to be called HDV.

If you take a look at the HDV spec you will see:

Media: DV and/or Mini DV cassette tape

The AVCHD spec is very explicit about the media formats it supports and does not make any statement about supporting tape, and no manufacturer has produced an AVCHD camera that uses tape, which is why I referred to it as a tapeless format.

If you take a look at the AVCHD spec you will see:

Recording Media: 8cm DVD media/SD Memory Card/"Memory Stick"/Built-in Media

So this is not a "stretch". It is what the specifications say and is a general "rule of thumb".

If JVC is branding their cameras as HDV and it does not support tape, then they are in violation of the HDV spec. I don't think those JVC cameras use the HDV logo. They use FullHD or ProHD or something else.

~jr
kraz wrote on 7/16/2008, 3:45 AM
Thanks Sean,

This is the kind of feedback I was looking for.

Can you describe for me your flow from
videocam -> PC -> Vegas -> DVD (hopefully not Blu-ray)

(and what format you keep the data in for each ..)



Thanks
Jeff B wrote on 7/16/2008, 7:33 AM
I shoot my videos on a Sony HDR-CX7 at the camcorder's highest resolution/bitrate. I extract the source video off the camcorder to the computer at a 4 to 1 rate (1 hour video takes just under 15 minutes to transfer). I edit the source files directly in Vegas Pro 8, and render to mpeg-2 for DVD or for uploading to YouTube.

Here's a youtube I did this week:


Compared to ten years of using mini-DV and MediaStudio, this setup is a little bit easier for the mundane, consumer level stuff I like to do, mostly because it's tapeless. I only went this route to go tapeless, and hopefully be forward compatible into Hi-Def pursuits later on.
Joe Balsamo|LVX wrote on 7/16/2008, 8:32 AM
Jeff,

Have you tried uploading your videos in different resolutions? How about Sony AAC?

I'm currently testing out the Panasonic HDC-SD9. Really wish the new CX-12 was available. It looks like a beautiful camera. CX7 is very nice as well. So is the Canon HF-10/HF-100.

My ultimate goal is to use these small cameras to be able to capture HD video from mountain peaks that I bag and remote areas I run or fastpack to.

You say you extract the source video off the camcorder to the computer. I'm assuming you are doing this via USB cable? Is there a reason you are doing this rather than simply using the memory stick in your computer?

I'm still learning a lot of this stuff. Here is a terrible hand-held video of my girlfriend's dog, Tasha. I only share it because it is an HD shot from the HD9 and uploaded to Youtube to take advantage of the full screen and HD format.



And, yes, I NEED a tripod!

My Best,

Joe
kraz wrote on 7/16/2008, 11:54 AM
thanks Jeff - you touch on one of the things I don't understand.
What format are your files?
From other things I read I thought you can't take the digital file and use it directly into Vegas - how are you able to? what format is the file?
Daveco2 wrote on 7/16/2008, 8:01 PM
Joe,

Do you mean the Pana SD9 flash drive cam that just came out? If so, I'd like to know how your testing goes. I'm also interested in that one for the same reasons as you. I took a Canon HV10 to Aconcagua last Feb and would like to reduce size/wt.

Some reports say that there are problems using the SD9 files in Pro 8b.


Dave
ingvarai wrote on 7/17/2008, 3:26 AM
blink3times:

I recently acquired a Canon HF 10, and IMO the result is fantastic. Great pictures,lots of features in a device I can stick in my pocket.
When transporting the footages to my PC, I can then (if I wish) convert them to any other format Vegas can handle. IOW, regardless of AVCHD being "ready for prime time" or not, I can easily do whatever was done before AVCHD entered the scene.

I am not sure what you mean with "ready for prime time"! Can you explain? (I am new to video editing)

Ingvarai
blink3times wrote on 7/17/2008, 3:42 AM
"The HDV spec requires that cameras claiming to be HDV *must* support the DV/miniDV cassette tape format. That was the whole point of the HDV standard; i.e., that it was backward compatible with DV and used the same tapes."

Interesting. I didn't know that, but it does kind of make sense.
blink3times wrote on 7/17/2008, 4:00 AM
"I am not sure what you mean with "ready for prime time"! Can you explain? (I am new to video editing)"

You're new to video editing.... that explains why you don't get the meaning "not ready for primetime".

The avchd format in itself isn't bad. In fact avchd is more efficient than mpeg2 is. I don't think at this stage it looks quite as good as mpeg2.... not that you'll notice any HUGE difference. But if you look carefully enough you'll see a little bit more break-up in the avchd on faster pans and movements. That however I can live with, but it is quite difficult to edit and work with in most any NLE..... and that I can't live with since mpeg2 is there and available

As I said, avchd is more efficient so you can play with the bitrate a little more without affecting quality as drastically, and you can get more on a disk.... and at this stage of the game anyway..... the only real advantage to avchd is size.

But that advantage has pretty much been eaten up by the new technology in optical media and Hard drive cams. With 60 gig harddrive cams, and blu ray media, there simply is no need to concern yourself with size. Of course it is true that blu ray disks are quite expensive..... but that's changing pretty fast.

So the way I see it with avchd is that you're pretty much stabbing yourself in the heart and making life unnecessarily difficult on the time line..... for no reason at all. Mpeg2 (right now anyway) produces a more stable image and is just plain easier to work with.

I wish both Sony and Canon would follow JVC's footsteps and put out a HDD HD cam in the mpeg2 format. In fact I believe that if they took the picture quality of the HV20 and HC7 and combined it with a mpeg2 hard drive concept..... they would have another real winner on thier hands. Not too sure that would happen though.... Sony is really pushing avchd and I don't think they really want to overshadow that.
kraz wrote on 7/17/2008, 5:15 AM
Thanks Blink - this is the kind of thing I guess I was concerned about -

what do I gain by leaving mpeg2? If the quality is not better and may even be worse I guess that is bad.

Also if I have AVCHD that has pixilation issues etc. I assume once I record something like that - a change in technology is NOT going to help my already recorded material.

so more money -worse results ... but damn!!! its so cool ...
Joe Balsamo|LVX wrote on 7/17/2008, 5:26 AM
Hi Dave,

Yes, I'm referring to the Panasonic HDC-SD9.

So far, it seems pretty good, but I want to compare it directly with the Canon HF-10 before I make a final decision.

There was a problem with the SD9 AVCHD files being recognized by Vegas 8, but the new DLL which was made availble here on the forum about a week or so ago seems to have solved that problem. Presumably the next version of Vegas (8c?) will officially solve that issue.

I'm able to work with the AVCHD format, but it does require a fairly robust system, it would seem.

My biggest concern right now with the SD9 is that you cannot shoot in 24P mode without it also forcing it to use "Digital Cinema", which is a special color mode which supposedly works best with the Panasonic Viera HDTV's. I suppose one could color-correct this, but I understand on the Canon, you can "decouple" the two modes, which you can't do on the Panasonic, which is really too bad.

I haven't had a chance to physically handle the Canon yet, so the final verdict is still out, but I will definitely keep you posted.

Joe
blink3times wrote on 7/17/2008, 5:32 AM
Sorry.... there's one other thing I forgot to mention about avchd cams.... In fact, hardware cams in general.... You can't capture (or download in the case of a HDD cam) as one file. The scenes are split whether you like it or not. This is good or bad, depending on who you are and what you're doing.... but with tape you have the option of capturing as a whole or as scenes. This sometimes makes a BIG difference depending what you're doing on the timeline.
Daveco2 wrote on 7/17/2008, 10:57 AM
Hi Joe,

Great. I'm very interested in what you find out in your comparison. I'm not overly concerned about functionality tradeoffs, but I would like good video. For me, at 20,000 ft, it's all about just getting the shot; and a simple-to-use backlight function would be worth a lot.

Is there a thread somewhere about solving the SD9 problem with the new DLL? That's what has really put me off the SD9 for the moment.

What kind of system and camera are you now using to work AVCHD? What's your workflow? Do you do anything with Bluray?

Thanks,

Dave
Joe Balsamo|LVX wrote on 7/17/2008, 1:33 PM
Hi Dave,

Yes, my main criteria is good video in a package I can actually use in sometimes difficult situations. This, BTW, is one of the reasons I'm so impressed by some of the teams who've dragged Imax cameras into incredible places. That is hard work!

The official thread on installing the DLL is:

HDV users: please read


About half way down is a message by ForumAdmin which gives the full instructions on how to access and download the DLL.

I can personally attest to the fact that this DLL does work with the Panasonic HDC-SD9

Right now, the HDC-SD9 is it for my camera, though I am going to have access to a Canon HF-10 later today (hopefully!) Up until obtaining this camera, I've been simply using the video mode on my Panasonic DMC-TZ3. An excellent still camera, but really only mediocre for videos.

My computer system is a Sony Vaio VGN-AR890U. 2.5Ghz Duo Core T9300, 4GB RAM, 500MB RAID drive system, 17" display running 1920x1200, Blu-ray burner. It does a good job on editing the AVCHD's. Workflow is, basically, from the SD card to my disk, drag and drop onto the timeline, edit, and out to either WMV or AAC. So far, final product has only been test stuff, so I haven't burned any DVD's or Blu-ray discs, yet. Still experimenting with best file-type for places like YouTube and Vimeo. I'm getting *excellent* clarity, though, in files setup for Blu-ray. Experimenting with that is next.

Hope that helps. I'll have more to say as my testing continues. Please feel free to contact me here or via email if I can be of any other assistance.

Joe
blink3times wrote on 7/17/2008, 6:45 PM
You may want to read this:
Are AVCHD Camcorders The Next HD Lie?
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Ou/?p=998
Harold Brown wrote on 7/17/2008, 7:18 PM
Good reading. The article "Here’s what fake HD video looks like" is also good.
John_Cline wrote on 7/17/2008, 8:13 PM
When I first heard about AVCHD, I though, "great! better looking picture at the same 25Mbps bitrate as HDV" Yeah, well, it's a worse looking image at 1/2 to 3/4 the bitrate. This is no leap forward at all. Now AVC at 25 megabits/sec looks pretty good, although MPEG2 at 25Mbps looks pretty good, too, and it takes less horsepower to edit. I think I'll stick with MPEG2.