What's the best HD Camcorder under $1000

Xavion wrote on 4/16/2009, 8:11 AM
I'm looking for an HD camcorder for under $1000 to shoot and edit small projects from home. I will use the camera to record and edit my kids Judo & Wrestling tournaments. I will also do some green screen compositing.

Would I be better off going for a HD miniDV or HD hard-drive?

Thanks in advance for any recommendations!

Comments

Hulk wrote on 4/16/2009, 8:30 AM
There are two camps right now in this segment. 1 large sensor or 3 smaller ones. Both have advantages and disadvantages. I am in the 1 larger sensor camp and have the Canon HF100. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/539291-REG/Canon_2708B001_VIXIA_HF_100_AVCHD_Flash.html
$550 right now. A pretty darn good buy.

There is a new model with an even larger sensor and a 24Mbps recording mode for $1100. http://www.amazon.com/Canon-HFS100-Memory-Camcorder-Optical/dp/B001OI2YZQ/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1239895402&sr=8-1

Looks like you will be doing indoor shooting of high action which means you need good low light performance so I would not recommend a camera with three tiny 1/6" sensors. Panasonic does make a 3 chipper (1/4" sensors I think) that is getting pretty good ratings.

As I said I'd personally go with one of the Canon models I mentioned.

And I'd also go with HD. Since you're posting here I assume you have Sony Vegas Pro and have the know how to deal with HD video or downconvert it to SD for DVD if need be.

That's my two cents.

- Mark
busterkeaton wrote on 4/16/2009, 8:46 AM
HD would be the way to go.

However, you will want to make sure your computer is up to editing HD. You need horsepower to be able to push all those pixels. Also if you go avchd, it's very heavily compressed, so just to decode it takes a lot of computational power. The faster your computer, the better your HD editing experience.

rmack350 wrote on 4/16/2009, 9:06 AM
I'm assuming part of the question is tape or tapeless. You'll probably be happier with tapeless but some tapeless camcorders do their own thang as far as file formats. If someone here recommends a camera as being trouble-free with Vegas you should take that to heart.

Rob Mack
Hulk wrote on 4/16/2009, 9:31 AM
Vegas Pro 8 will accept the Canon HF100 files natively. I have even edited straight from the SDHC card when in a hurry.

- Mark
blink3times wrote on 4/16/2009, 9:31 AM
It depends on which way you want to go.... tape or tapless

For tape you can't beat the Canon HV series cams in terms of quality (although I do have a complaint on their build quality). Easy cams to operate, less than $700, and easy to edit.

For tapeless you have the new Sanyo cam HD200 i think it was? for less than $1000. Good quality picture but a pain in the ass to edit. The Sony SR series cam has now been discontinued... but you can still find a few around. I got mine for $700. Great quality. My only real complaint about it is that the focus tends to do a lot of hunting before settling in. But once again... a pain in the ass to edit.

In full daylight I don't notice a difference between the 1440 of the canon and the 1920 of the Sony... but in low light there is a slight advantage to 1920.

Most of the other tapeless cams are $1000 and up.
richard-courtney wrote on 4/16/2009, 11:43 AM
I'm with Hulk on the Canon HF-100 while I hate those microscopic
connectors it has an HDMI port.

These small lens cameras (<47mm) are fantastic for adding low cost
accessories. If you want to get artsy I built a friend a DOF adapter and the
picture look fantastic. Buy a rubber sunshade and a ND filter set.

Sound is rather not exciting but it does have a mic jack for external mics
or a wireless.

Get the best tripod you can afford as HD really shows the shakes.

Overall I think you will be happy.
hazzardm wrote on 4/16/2009, 12:52 PM
The Sony HDR-CX12 is out there for approx. $720 these days. Lot's of good reviews/reports on it. I have been using Sony HC3 miniDV cam up to now to shoot kids basketball footage, but I am looking to go tapeless to avoid the capture time needed with tape.
blink3times wrote on 4/16/2009, 1:51 PM
"but I am looking to go tapeless to avoid the capture time needed with tape."

Not really a good reason to go tapless. The extra time you same in capturing is used up (and then some) on the time line and in rendering.

I have a HC3 as well and the real time capture sure is a pain... but then I also have a SR11 and simply dragging the video off the HDD sure is nice... but then it gets tougher on the time line. In the end i think I would have to say dealing with the HC3 is easier.
Xander wrote on 4/16/2009, 1:57 PM
I have a Canon HF11. It was around $850 when I got it. Buttons are a little small, but it produces good image and color matches well with my Canon 5D.

Footage drops right in Vegas 8c, but I use Neo Scene to aid editing.
hazzardm wrote on 4/16/2009, 2:18 PM
but then it gets tougher on the time line. In the end i think I would have to say dealing with the HC3 is easier

Very good point, but not enough to shy me away from a new toy! I anticipate batch converting with Neo Scene, and this sounds like a good excuse/reason/alibi to give the family for a new Core i7 build :-) Thanks for the input.
Terry Esslinger wrote on 4/16/2009, 3:21 PM
<<<but I am looking to go tapeless to avoid the capture time needed <<<with tape."

<<<Not really a good reason to go tapless.

How about to avoid drop outs which I am finding to be a big problem with HDV recording.?
stopint wrote on 4/16/2009, 7:26 PM
i just got a refurbished sony cx7 for a good price...cx12 is out now and that is under $1000...a used or still new canon hf100 or the new line of canon's are under $1000...
VanLazarus wrote on 4/16/2009, 7:34 PM
My vote is for the Sanyo HD2000 (I just bought one from Hong Kong for $569 USD).

Not only is it the first consumer camcorder that can record 1920x1080 60fps in progressive, but it has great low light performance. Read the review at www.camcorderinfo.com. It also has a relatively large sensor 1/2.5 inch.

It uses SDHC cards (you can pick up a 16gig card for under $50), so no moving parts for tapes or a hard drive... this also makes it smaller in size.

This camera also takes better still pictures (8mp) than most of the competition.

If it has one drawback, it doesn't have optical image stabilization hardware... stabilization is done in software, which is not as effective.

But for me, one that HATES interlaced video, the progressive 60fps HD video is the main reason I recommend this inexpensive camera.
farss wrote on 4/17/2009, 2:08 AM
Seeing as nobody has mentioned this and my apologies in advance if you already know this. Don't forget to buy a good tripod. None of the cameras mentioned above perform well if the camera is shaking. When shooting HD it's going to be 16:9 so getting your camera level is vital. You should aim for a tripod with a bowl and spirit level. A good tripod is an investment, a camera is an expense. Spend your money accordingly.
Even if you're just shooting family events and holidays it's pointless shooting stuff no one will want to watch. You're time would be better spent enjoying the event than peering through a viewfinder.

Bob.