Time to get a HD camera?

Daveco2 wrote on 11/25/2007, 7:54 PM

I'm thinking of getting a Canon HV20, but have heard that the video has to be reformatted in Vegas, and after finally outputting from DVD Architect, the result isn't much better than going DV all the way.
Anyone have experience with this procedure? Is it worth the time and expense at this point?
I know I should probably wait to get a better camera, software, etc; but I'm headed for a once only mountain climb and would like to get the best shots possible.

Thanks for any help on this,

Dave

Comments

Ivan Lietaert wrote on 11/25/2007, 9:03 PM

The hv20 is one of the best hdv camera's there is. If you want to appreciate it in full glory, you need a tv screen labeled 'full hd'. Also be aware that you need a very powerful computer to edit and render hd movies comfortably. You also need some device to play it on your full hd (ps3, hd player or blue-ray player, or media playing hard disk).
If you film in hd, but play back in mpg2 (the standard dvd format), there won't be much difference.
I'm sure that Eugenia will tell you more on this when she's back from her trip.

Eugenia wrote on 11/26/2007, 1:22 AM

DVDs made from HD footage look better than from DV footage, however, if DVDs is all you after, maybe HD doesn't worth your trouble (yet). More here:
http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2007/11/07/the-added-cost-of-hdvavchd/

4eyes wrote on 11/26/2007, 5:51 AM

but I'm headed for a once only mountain climb You answered your own question, get either a Sony HDV cam or the Canon HDV cam. The HDV format is easier to work with compared to the new AVCHD format.
My choice would be a Sony HC3/HC5/HC7 HighDef Cam.
These are tape based cams so you will have to decide if using tape is a problem.
I would go High Definition recording, you won't regret the footage after it's all said & done.

Daveco2 wrote on 11/26/2007, 9:18 AM

Thanks for all the great information. As I thought, a complicated situation. But I'd like to ask a couple of bottom line questions:

If I capture to my PC, edit in Vegas, make a DVD in Architect, and play it on my HD (1080i) Panasonic 50" plasma TV , will I be able to see (a) a big improvement over SD, (b) a modest improvement, (c) a "why did I bother to spend the money" improvement, or (d) a negligibly small improvement?

And if I do the same thing as above except play through one of the HD devices mentioned here, would I see (a), (b), (c), or (d)?

Thanks again,

Dave

Eugenia wrote on 11/26/2007, 10:01 AM

You will see a pretty big improvement over SD. And a huge improvement when played back via an HD device.

ADB wrote on 11/26/2007, 1:15 PM

Dave,
If you do decide on SD for your climb, I've heard that mini DVD cameras have problems on high mountains because of the effect of low pressure on the r/w head. I assume tapes are OK as long as you keep the camera warm.

4eyes wrote on 11/26/2007, 6:46 PM

Good point, I just looked in my Sony HC3 owners manual.
It says Operating temperature 0C - 40C , that's 32F-104F. Same specs on the battery.
You better climb in the summer........or don't climb to high.

Ivan Lietaert wrote on 11/26/2007, 9:51 PM

I'm feeling pretty dumb here, but what do you guys mean with 'SD'?

Eugenia wrote on 11/26/2007, 10:28 PM

SD= Standard Definition (NTSC, PAL and DVD 480p resolutions)
HD= High Definition (540p, 720p, 1080i, 1080p)
2k= Super high def (2048x1024)
4k= Super high def (4096x2048)

Daveco2 wrote on 11/27/2007, 8:51 AM

I appreciate all the comments very much. Sure learned a lot in the last few days here on this forum. A great resource.

Right, I've seen lots of cameras have problems at high altitudes. But my Sony mini DV tape has held on at least to 19,000 ft. Should be ok at 23,000. The same goes for my Canon SD700. I keep both under my parka, and if it were to get too cold for them, then I guess I would be in trouble too. So far, so good.

By the way, I usually shoot in 3:2 format. What's everyone elses favorite?

Dave

ADB wrote on 11/27/2007, 1:29 PM

At 23,000 ft I'd be much more concerned about the operator than the camera ! At just 12,000 ft you're supposed to have half the mental ability as at sea level.

Make sure your camera is fully warm before turning it on ... or as I have discovered, it may be the last time it runs.

9:16 is good for panoramas ... but not so good for showing us your trip on youtube.

Daveco2 wrote on 11/28/2007, 6:18 AM

My wife would argue that I operate at 12,000 ft most of the time.

As for the camera warmup problem, was that with a mini DV tape?

rustier wrote on 11/28/2007, 6:41 AM

now I am really curious - climbing/filming in Tibet, Nepal or Pakistan?

Daveco2 wrote on 11/28/2007, 10:10 AM

Last year it was Kilimanjaro. This time it's Aconcagua in Argentina; and if that goes ok, then next year it'll be Tibet. My idea is to get about 3,000 ft higher each year until either my camera or I malfunction.