I own the CX700, and just love it.
The USB cable works for me, although most of the time I would have liked a longer cable. I have to set the camera next to my laptop to get it to plug in directly, as the cable io sonly a couple inches long.

One of the features I am really impressed with is the build-in optical stabilization, it is just wonderfull, and creates a very smooth picture.
It can record HD, 1920x1080 - 60p and the video quality is stunning.

On the negative side, it does NOT have a manual focus ring, but instead uses a small 'ring' next to the lens you can turn for focus, which is not really handy to use.


Ted

>> the build-in optical stabilization<<

I own and use the cx-560v as one of my 3 multi camera projects. The stabilization feature is great.. you can actually walk with the camera and get good results although I usually have it on a tripod. Audio is excellent and recording in night club lighting is acceptable. I video rock bands and this camera, with the larger battery, will record 4 hours without stopping as there is no tape to change. It is a great camera for the price. I have owned it less than a year and have had no problem with the USB cord setup.

In some parts of the world (like in Europa in Germany - but not in Scandinavia) Sony sells a CX700E model but without GPS and internal storage - called CX690E.
It is much, much cheaper than the CX700E (some 25 percent) - and precisely what I need after my fantastic CX505 and CX550VE - and because the video quality of the CX700/690 is even better than the CX550.

CX690E would be just right for me as I never record to internal storage - I like the feeling of unplugging the SD card, plug in a new one - and knowing that my footage is safely in my pocket. Of course one never depends on the SD cards - but copy them to a laptop plus an extra USB-stick backup every evening. Better safe than sorry.

But check if a CX690 is available for you. It does not have the USB-thingy that bothers you a little.

I've had the 560 for a while and have had no problems whatsoever with the USB interface. It tucks nicely into it's housing and stays put and out of the way.
I chose the CX560v because I think you get the most bang for your buck. It has the same size Exmor R CMOS chip and all else as the 700. Your end product is exactly the same. If your really need a viewfinder rather than looking at the flip screen, then you want the 700 and pay $200-$300 more.

Thanks to everyone on the responses.

The Sonys tend to be best suited physically to fit on the tray that goes in my housing. I'll need to do a little design/build with a machine shop to modify an HC-9 tray for the 560v or 700v. Not sure what I would need to do with another brand but it's worth investigating.

This camera would go in my underwater housing, which uses a mirror to view the flip screen. As a result, the screen on the camcorder would be flipped and stay flipped. For my housing camera I move the flip screen as little as possible. So I like the external USB cable as long as it's durable.

Questions:

I've looked at the 700V in the store. I did not see an external USB cable. Is it there and I simply overlooked it?

The specs on the 560V and the 700V were the same in terms of the video sensor, Exmor R CMOS sensor, etc. The only difference was the view finder, which I wouldn't use in the the housing. Am I missing any other differences?

Great advice on scoping out the European model for less $$$. I will do some checking!

Thanks again everyone.

Regards,

Kimberly

Info from SonyStyle.

CX700V has

96GB embedded Flash Memory for up to 40 hours of recording
The built-in 96GB1 embedded Flash memory can record and store up to 40 hours of high definition video footage (HD LP mode).

Advanced controls with expanded focus, zebra, and peaking

The HDR-CX700V provides advanced capture and control features that are often considered the domain of professional cameras including expanded focus for precise manual focus control, zebra and peaking for precision focus and exposure adjustments.

The CX-560V has 64GB for up to 26 hours of recording.

I would get the CX700v for the expanded focus, zebra, and peaking. How could those who have the CX700V overlook this important difference?

Has anyone compared picture quality with these newer 60p Sonys versus the TM700? I would love to find another compact camcorder...

"Has anyone compared picture quality with these newer 60p Sonys versus the TM700? I would love to find another compact camcorder..."Camcorderinfo.com did a comparison between the Sony CX700V & the Panasonic TM900 here: Sony CX700V vs. Panasonic TM900 Comparison

The TM900 beat the Sony in every category except battery life, However, they complained that, "We were disappointed by the HDC-TM900, but not because it is a bad camcorder. Instead, we were upset by Panasonic’s lack of progress with its new flagship model.". I guess they thought the margin should have been wider. Go figure!

...Jerry

Camcorderinfo.com is a severely biased site that accepts advertising dollars. They started out right by not doing so but money talks louder than facts!

"Camcorderinfo.com is a severely biased site that accepts advertising dollars. They started out right by not doing so but money talks louder than facts!"So, on their homepage, they list the top 10 camcorders: 3 Panasonic, 3 Sony, 2 Canon & 2 JVC. I guess GoPro & Sanyo must be taking their adverts elsewhere [before you jump all over this, I'm joking; just joking!]

...Jerry

Is there a "pro version" of the CX-700V?

I have been very tempted to get the Panasonic TM-700, and more recently the TM-900, but there have always been a few "flaws" in their specs that don't match my workflow. The CX-700V seems like it has just about everything I have been looking for, but the limitations in the manual controls (can't control f-stop/shutter speed/ISO independently) are close to a deal breaker for me. One review on Amazon stated that there might be a pro version of this camcorder at a later date (see last paragraph of the review):

Fantastic HD camera, May 21, 2011

This of course could be bogus info, but I thought I'd ask.

Of course if anyone knows how to work around the manual control issue, that would be good enough for me.

Finally, if anyone else has any experience with the CX-700 (European or NTSC version) that they'd like to share, I am eager to hear about it.

Thanks!

"I have been very tempted to get the Panasonic TM-700, and more recently the TM-900, but there have always been a few "flaws" in their specs that don't match my workflow."I've recommended the Panasonic TM700 here before and really like it, however there are some things I'm not particuarly fond of. From what I've read, the TM900 is not significantly different. In any case, here's my subjective summary.

Likes:
..o Great Picture quality, particularly at 1920x1080 60p.
..o Light and easy to "run-and-gun"
..o Great optical stabilizer. Used in conjunction with Mercalli V2 it can be mistaken for tripod mounted.
..o It has a focus ring.
..o One of the few 3 sensor consumer cameras
..o I like the Zebras & Manual focus assist
..o It has a viewfinder.
..o Records to SDHC cards

Dislikes:
..o Image Quality of viewfinder and LCD is not great
..o Manual menu settings are not intuitive to my thought process.
..o I'd like more hardware knobs & switches rather than software based controls.
..o Mic picks up slight fan noise.
..o Can't switch mic to stereo from 5.1 in the "auto" mode.
..o And probably my biggest "issue" is that the auto WB & exposure is slow to respond.

I might edit this post to add more as I think of more pluses & minuses.

...Jerry

Thanks for the pro/con list, Jerry. Very helpful.

I have not used either camera, but here are some of the things that I either like or dislike about the specs (I'll use the TM-900 in my comparison below because that is what I'd get at this point):

TM-900

Like:
Manual Audio. This is a big shortcoming on the CX-700.
3-chip sensor. (Although I don't know if this still has the same implications as in the "early days" of video)
12x zoom. (I'd prefer even more)
Crisper 60p video (than the CX700)

Dislike:
Fan noise. This is always mentioned, although it is supposed to be better than the TM-700

Gimmicks:
3D capable - I could care less, and so could all of my clients.
Pre Record - This could be a BIG deal for me. I do a lot of "run-and gun" video (sports events, reception, etc.) and I can't count the number of times I've missed the first two words of something important. I've learned the art of covering these "oversights," but it sure would be great to not miss things. Of course with 96 GB of internal storage and a big battery, the solution is to simply not turn off the recording.


CX-700V

Like:
Record SD video (it is a pain to down-res in post)
1440x1080 mode (easier to match with my FX1)
Big internal storage (96 GB)
Wider angle (26mm 35mm-equivalent)

Dislike:
No manual audio controls. This is close to a deal-breaker.
No independent manual exposure adjustment. Another deal breaker, actually more important for me than the lack of manual audio, especially since there is at least a "little" manual exposure adjustment.
Only 10x zoom - My film transfer system requires 12x, but the "extended zoom" might be sufficient for that purpose
Smaller display. I can't see too well any more, and a bigger display would be good.

Gimmicks:
Smooth Slow Record - I've used this on the Sony SR-12, and it is useful, but it sounds like CX700 still only captures slow-mo in SD quality, so it will only be of limited usefulness

Nightshot - My trusty old TRV-11 has this and it has saved my rear end a few times when recording at wedding receptions and camera lights are not allowed. I usually de-saturate the greenish IR color to B&W in post and the client thinks I am being "artsy." The quality is usually MUCH better than what I get trying to de-noise the non-IR (i.e., regular) video.

GPS - I don't know if this would be useful, but I have friends who use it all the time with their still cameras and iThingies. They like it.


Dislikes on both:

CMOS sensor -- I haven't had to deal with "jello" and I really don't want to be forced into dealing with it. I'm not sure I have any choice at this point in a high-end compact camcorder. Price is no object (OK, I'd like to stay under $5K), but I don't think any company makes a non-CMOS compact camcorder at this point.

Not clear:
Some reviews claim the TM-900 is better in low light, and others say the CX-700V has the edge. I have no idea.


The camcorder.info site claims that the TM-900 is better in low-light and has better motion stabilization, but most other reviews seem to say the opposite on both features. Both are very important features for me since I have to often deal with available light, and often shoot hand-held (and because of all my hand-held footage, that is why you will find so many hits when you Google my name and "Deshaker"). However, Jerry seems to confirm that the TM-700 (essentially the same as the TM-900) does indeed have really good stabilization.

"CMOS sensor -- I haven't had to deal with "jello" and I really don't want to be forced into dealing with it."You know, I just haven't noticed this on my TM700, except rarely when I have Mercalli V2 stabilized a clip (and then the "Rolling Shutter Correction" fixes it). Tomorrow (w/ sunlight), I may try to do a fast pan of my deck fence and post the results back here.

...Jerry

I may try to do a fast pan of my deck fence and post the results back here.No need ... someone already did the same thing, and it ain't pretty (although I like the music):



and, of course, there is this excellent side-by-side showing the other problem associated with CMOS (actually I think this is what most people call the jello effect):

I think the signature quality of the TM700/900 is its sharpness. This is a native 3-chip HD cam, and it shows, delivering very close to a full 1080 lines of resolution.

But every time I compare TM footage on a TV to my DLSR or a single chip Pro cam, the other footage subjectively looks better, despite the worse resolution. You get kind of married to the sharpness of the TM, and it's hard to let go of it for a cam this small, but in the end, there's more to picture quality than vertical lines.

I hate the Pansonic's color--always a fight with freakish green tints. The lens isn't quite wide enough, and it gives images a 'plastic' look to my eyes. Midtones tend to be dark and muddy. Levels/color corrections quickly show the limits of AVCHD at this depth & bitrate. The stabilizer doesn't correct rotational motion, which is a big issue handheld on these tiny consumer bodies.

On the plus side, I think the fan noise issue only relates to the hard-drive version. I have the flash version, and there is no fan I'm aware of. Take the time to manually dial in the image, and you can get very impressive results for such a small consumer cam. And it's sharp!

I stumbled on to this site where you could download some raw files from the TM700 and other related cameras if you want to try them.

" (although I like the music)"

Its from La Traviata.

Thanks for the links to TM700 footage. I've looked for that in the past and have been able to download a few clips from Vimeo, but have had to take whatever happened to have been uploaded in the previous 48 hours (they convert to something else after that). When I have downloaded these clips in the past, I too found the colors to be slightly un-pleasing, if that's a word. Not bad, but somehow not quite right. Of course, I have no idea what attempts were made by the shooter to properly WB, etc.

@johnmeyer: That tic-tac-toe demo was just plain ugly. So... I just had to try to duplicate it, and I don't see the effect. I see he was using higher shutter speeds, so I made my test at 1/500 sec. I also, see that he specified "Conditions: Lower than just low light." If the objective was to prove that you get lousy results with high motion, high shutter speed & low light, there's no surprise there. My test had good light. In any case, here it is:



Of course, YouTube is notorious for stutter and will not operate at 60p, so I wasn't happy with the motion. Therefore, I put up a 60p JW Player video here. Much, much smoother motion.

Finally, if you'd like to play with my source footage, it's here: 00048.zip

Enjoy!
...Jerry