You can always use HDVSplit to capture. It's free and simple to use. Can name each scene file according to recording time and date.

I wouldn't leave home without it. :)

+1 for HDV Split. The Vegas HDV capture has ALWAYS been poo.

I've captured and editied quite a bit of my HDV material recently, in VP13. Perfect captures, smooth playback at 25fps Best quality. 12 was good but 13 is better for me and playback with GPU ON works fine.

HDV playback in 13 is better than H.264 mp4 files from my Canon XA10. I get excellent playback of these files with GPU ON. I was also able to play back 4K footage in 13 from a Panasonic Lumix G4 and the Sony NEX-FS700 see my reviews at www.australian-videocamera.com

13 hasn't crashed once (12 was also stable for me with the final release) and I'm just getting on with my projects. Smiles all round!
David

When you capture HDV with scene detection on in V13, are the cuts ragged or smooth? I'd be amazed if Sony had fixed that problem now - just when tape has pretty much died as a capture format.
HDV Split gives perfect cuts with scene detection.

I've always used HDVSplit for my tape captures. It just works.

HDVsplit with tape cams here too. Final product is DVD, so HDV is just fine, very easy to work with. All us True Artists can deliver using positively archaic tools.

just to pick up on riredale's comment....

i have had many conversations with my clients regarding 'quality', ie, finished visuals. most of which revolved around distribution via dvd, and nowadays mp4 via intra / internet, and, at my instigation, what could be done to 'improve' it, such as 'better' quality acquisition. their first question was always, 'will it cost more?'

after showing them various examples they weren't that impressed if it was going to cost more and / or take longer.

my basic (totally unscientific) conclusion is - i have yet to find anyone outside of the industry who can see any 'significant' difference between hdv, avchd, xdcam, etc (when shot on comparable cameras), or even care. most seem to simply categorise stuff as either youtube, professional video, professional tv, or film quality. and they don't really care as long as it fulfills its purpose (whether to entertain, educate, illuminate, train, etc).

i consider myself to be in a fortunate position where my main two clients still demand tape (easy archiving, reliable storage, etc.,) so hdv has proven its usefulness as an everyday workhorse. and, as much as i hanker after an arri, i know that even if i could produce the shots it's worthy of my clients wouldn't really care - what THEIR concerns are are fairly straight forward - a good script that does what it has to without superfluous / superficial elements, clean camera work, good sound, produced quickly and without drama, and most importantly, produced within their budget.

for 40+ years i've been following these criteria, and am still being sought after - though i am now semi-retired.

so afaic, 4k, dslrs, 4:2:2, colour-grading, fx, etc., etc., and all the other stuff our industry is so obsessed with nowadays is thankfully of little concern as long as hdv continues to pay my bills, i'm happy.

[tongue in cheek]
Leslie, you should fully retire, the world has moved on from the days of "the customer is always right". These days you sell what is best for you.

As Melba is reported to have said to an English contemporary regarding Australian listeners, "Sing 'em muck, it's all they understand".

[/ tongue in cheek]