Looking for HD Camcorder

[hotwire132002]

I'm trying to find a cheap HD camcorder that is compatable with Final Cut Pro HD. As far as I can see, FCPHD only works with DVCPRO-HD. Am I correct on this? If not, can anyone tell me of any MiniDV HD camcorders that work with FCPHD? I seem to recall one from JVC for around $3500. Also, does Apple have a compatiblity list? Again, I seem to recall seeing one back when FCP3 was top-of-the-line.

Edit: I found the "qualified devices" list, but I can't find any HD cameras on it!

[2jaded2care]

I attended an Apple seminar recently, the rep said FCP3 supports DVCPRO-HD, specifically referring to Panasonic pro grade hardware as mentioned on the FCP page.

If you look at the FCP page, they allude to coming JVC HDV support (HD over FireWire using MPEG-2), which should handle the JVC GR-HD1 consumer HD camcorder (List $3500, street price around $2200) or the new JVC JY-HD10U prosumer HD camcorder (List $4000, street price around $3000). Also note the links on the FCP page to third-party HDV support for FCP by Heuris and Lumiere, which seem to allow this now.

Sony will have a sub-$5000 HDV camcorder soon; I'm sure others will follow.

[LethalWolfe]

I'm trying to find a cheap HD camcorder that is compatable with Final Cut Pro HD. As far as I can see, FCPHD only works with DVCPRO-HD. Am I correct on this? If not, can anyone tell me of any MiniDV HD camcorders that work with FCPHD? I seem to recall one from JVC for around $3500. Also, does Apple have a compatiblity list? Again, I seem to recall seeing one back when FCP3 was top-of-the-line.

Edit: I found the "qualified devices" list, but I can't find any HD cameras on it!

You probably can't find any HD devices on it 'cause HD at the consumer/prosumer level is very, very, very new (that and Apple's list isn't update very often). HD at the pro-end requires (at this time) a third party capture card (So you find an HD capture card that is compatible w/FCP and use that as a "bridge" to capture HD). HD is still a very new format that is just starting to flesh out and trickle down into the masses.

FCP HD will work w/all flavors of HD, but it handles Panny's DVCPRO - HD natively. So if you shoot DVCPRO-HD it will stay DVCPRO-HD in FCP HD. But if you use HDCAM (Sony) it will get encoded upon capture to an HD format FCP can work with.


Lethal

[hotwire132002]

OK, I *REALLY* want the new Sony 3-CCD HD camera, but at $3700, it's out of my price range. I'm sick of 1-CCD quality, so I'm looking at buying a couple of these:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=NavBar&A=getItemDetail&Q=&sku=314960&is=REG&si=feat#goto_itemInfo

What do you think? Anybody tried one? How's the quality?

EDIT: Never mind. It doesn't have a widescreen mode. So, any ideas for an inexpensive 3-CCD camera?

Oh, and what do you think I could get for my current camcorders (Canon ZR-10 and ZR-60)

[cb911]

hey, shouldn't this be in Buying Tips?

anyway, that camera - the Panasonic GS120, you linked to isn't a HD camera. it's still a MiniDV camera. HD cameras are something quite different, much more $$$. the GS 120 would be pretty good, i guess.

i just got a Panasonic GS 400, it seems pretty good so far.

and about the 'widescreen' mode, don't worry about it. it's much better just to capture your normal 4:3 footage, and then you can put your own 'bars' on the top and bottom to make it widescreen. if you record in widescreen mode, it doesn't change the resolution that the footage is recorded at, it just ads the black bars on automatically, and you have much more ability to edit/tweak the footage if you've got more to work with from the start.

'cinema mode' isn't all that great either. it just records in 16:9, so you automatically get those black bars on top & bottom, but it also flickers a bit as well. maybe good if you don't want to mess about with effects & editing, but i'm sure you could get a much better result if you just did those sort of effects yourself.

probably best to look up lots of different DV sites. here's a few that helped me out when i was looking to buy...
http://dvfreelancer.com/
http://www.camcorderinfo.com/
http://www.dvspot.com/

the DVfreelancer forums were also very helpful for me as well. :)

edit

just a note about the 'lux' rating... this refers to the light levels a camera needs to record the picture.

but dont' rely on that too much. just remember that anything you record needs to be lit properly. even if you want to record a dark scene, you need to light it properly. i didn't understand this at first, but something good to take a look at are the special features on the Underworld DVD, it is explained pretty good there. :)

and if you're lucky enough to be in Japan, or thereabouts, you could pick up a black model MiniDV camera of your choice. :D oohhh.... black... :p

[LethalWolfe]

hotwire132002,
First off, what is your budget? Secondly, when it comes to inexpensive 3CCD cameras (like the one you linked to) there is a trade off compared to similarly priced 1CCD cameras. All other things being equal the 3CCD chips will give you better color quality, but will have a lower amount of overall image detail than a 1CCD camera. This is because they typically use 3 1/6" CCDs where as the 1CCD camera will typically use a 1/4" chip (prosumer cameras use 3 1/3" CCDs and professional cameras use 3 2/3" CCDs). You might want to look for used Canon GL-1's/2's, or Sony VX-1000's. Assuming it's still in good condition even a 4 or 5 year old "prosumer" camera will be better than a brand new consumer camera.


if you record in widescreen mode, it doesn't change the resolution that the footage is recorded at, it just ads the black bars on automatically, and you have much more ability to edit/tweak the footage if you've got more to work with from the start.

Different cameras may handle "widescreen" mode differently, but in my experience if you shoot in "widescreen" mode the image is shot in 16x9 and you convert it to a letterboxed 4x3 image in post (unless, of course, you have a 16x9 TV then you don't need to mess w/it). The down side to this is that your image quality takes a hit (how bad varies by camera). Anytime you shoot 16x9 w/a navtively 4x3 camera you'll have quality loss.


Lethal

[hotwire132002]

hotwire132002,
First off, what is your budget? Secondly, when it comes to inexpensive 3CCD cameras (like the one you linked to) there is a trade off compared to similarly priced 1CCD cameras. All other things being equal the 3CCD chips will give you better color quality, but will have a lower amount of overall image detail than a 1CCD camera. This is because they typically use 3 1/6" CCDs where as the 1CCD camera will typically use a 1/4" chip (prosumer cameras use 3 1/3" CCDs and professional cameras use 3 2/3" CCDs). You might want to look for used Canon GL-1's/2's, or Sony VX-1000's. Assuming it's still in good condition even a 4 or 5 year old "prosumer" camera will be better than a brand new consumer camera.




Different cameras may handle "widescreen" mode differently, but in my experience if you shoot in "widescreen" mode the image is shot in 16x9 and you convert it to a letterboxed 4x3 image in post (unless, of course, you have a 16x9 TV then you don't need to mess w/it). The down side to this is that your image quality takes a hit (how bad varies by camera). Anytime you shoot 16x9 w/a navtively 4x3 camera you'll have quality loss.


Lethal

I think I may just have to save up for a camera with a widescreen CCD--like the $3700 Sony HD camcorder I was looking at. I *REALLY* need the widescreen capability, and since I frequently shoot for projection at a theatre, the HD capability would be nice. Anyone who want's to donate to the "Get hotwire an HD camcorder" fund, PM me ;)

[caveman_uk]

hotwire132002,
Different cameras may handle "widescreen" mode differently, but in my experience if you shoot in "widescreen" mode the image is shot in 16x9 and you convert it to a letterboxed 4x3 image in post (unless, of course, you have a 16x9 TV then you don't need to mess w/it). The down side to this is that your image quality takes a hit (how bad varies by camera). Anytime you shoot 16x9 w/a navtively 4x3 camera you'll have quality loss.
Lethal
Some camera's record 'widescreen' by merely not recording some of the data from their 4:3 CCD.

[hotwire132002]

Some camera's record 'widescreen' by merely not recording some of the data from their 4:3 CCD.

Which is what my current camera does. I really do need a better camera, and because I use widescreeen so often, I really need a 16:9 CCD. Has anyone tried the JVC 1-CCD HD camera (I can't remember the name at the moment, but I think it's something-HD1)? Anyone know how its quality is? Would you say go for that, or the Sony 3-CCD HD camcorder (which costs almost twice as much)--or a 3-CCD standard-def camcorder?

[LethalWolfe]

Some camera's record 'widescreen' by merely not recording some of the data from their 4:3 CCD.

I think that's how they all do it, the question mark in my mind was how the camera ouputs it (i.e. does it output a "squeezed" 16:9 image or a letterboxed 4:3 image). In my experience I've always gotten a squeezed 16:9 image that I've then had to change into a letterboxed 4:3 image in post. But I don't know if all cameras record the 16:9 image to tape or if some cameras record a letterboxed 4:3 image to tape.

hotwire132002,
It all depends on your needs and your budget. What types of projects are you working on? With todays tech and all other things being equal a 3CCD camera will always render a better image than a 1CCD camera. Why not buy a camera that is able to accept an anamorphic lens? That way you end up w/a true 16:9 aspect ratio w/o taking a quality hit.


Lethal

[hotwire132002]

I think that's how they all do it, the question mark in my mind was how the camera ouputs it (i.e. does it output a "squeezed" 16:9 image or a letterboxed 4:3 image). In my experience I've always gotten a squeezed 16:9 image that I've then had to change into a letterboxed 4:3 image in post. But I don't know if all cameras record the 16:9 image to tape or if some cameras record a letterboxed 4:3 image to tape.

hotwire132002,
It all depends on your needs and your budget. What types of projects are you working on? With todays tech and all other things being equal a 3CCD camera will always render a better image than a 1CCD camera. Why not buy a camera that is able to accept an anamorphic lens? That way you end up w/a true 16:9 aspect ratio w/o taking a quality hit.


Lethal

In the way of projects, it varies widely--from television news to weddings to movies. I like the idea of a camera that takes an anamorphic lens. Any ideas of cameras that will take one? I'd prefer to go for under $1000, but the $2000 range is OK. Oh--and the more manual controls, the better. I need at least white balance and focus (pretty standard), but the more, the better. I also would REALLY like a camera with a manual focus ring--I hat the manual focus knob on my current camcorders. I'm thinking save HD for when the price drops--what do you all think?

[Hoef]

Checkout this article .... Good info for the budget challenged:
http://digitalproducer.com/articles/viewarticle.jsp?id=28719

[blackfox]

Lethal, isn't the Sony VX-1000 devoid of firewire ports? I feel that is a poor choice...did you mean the VX-2000?

Hotwire, carrying Lethal's recommendation for quality used equipment, I would look around for a Sony TRV-900, a great entry-level prosumer camera, which can probably be found for under $1000 now. Stay away from it's replacement, the TRV-950, however.

If you can deal with a shoulder-held camera, look for a used Canon XL-1, although depending on what you want to do with it, be aware of it's lack of XLR inputs(iirc) and the need for a external fix to this problem which will make it difficult to lay the camera flat for some shots. On this subject, I heard the BBC made a great solution to this problem a while back, but I guess that is off-topic.

I am afraid I have been out of the camcorder using game for a little while, but the newer Panasonic and JVC models seem very cool, but a bit pricy.

Still the rule-of-thumb is to buy the best camera you can possibly afford, as it makes things easier in post.

Sorry I am not very helpful addressing the HD question, after my time...

[live4ever]

FCP HD doesn't natively support editing the HD mpeg2 files of the consumer HDV cams. You have to use a workaround with www.lumierehd.com

The next version of FCP (5?? - or it may be a free update) I heard will support consumer HDV cams though.

[hotwire132002]

Checkout this article .... Good info for the budget challenged:
http://digitalproducer.com/articles/viewarticle.jsp?id=28719

Very helpful! Any ideas as to a good 3-CCD camera that will take a widescren lens? I'd like to go for the less than $1000 range, but I think I can manage up to the ~$2000 range with a bit of saving up.

What do you think of this camera (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=NavBar&A=getItemDetail&Q=&sku=314960&is=REG&si=spec#goto_itemInfo)? I really like the price! Even with an optical 16:9 lens, it clocks in at just over $1000. What do you think? I think I'm tempted . ;) Anyone have any ideas how the quality would compare to my current camera (Canon ZR60)? How about to a higher end ($1000-2000) 3-CCD camera like this one (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=NavBar&A=getItemDetail&Q=&sku=319788&is=REG&si=spec#goto_itemInfo)?

[Hoef]

What do you think of this camera (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=NavBar&A=getItemDetail&Q=&sku=314960&is=REG&si=spec#goto_itemInfo)?

Yeah I like that camera too .... I justed started my orientation but the Panasonic scores high with the 3ccds. Ideally I like to have a camera that can work PAL as well as NTSC ... I never saw one though ... Maybe it is not a problem with FCP nowadays. HD camera's don't seem to have the PAL vs NTSC choices.

[hotwire132002]

Yeah I like that camera too .... I justed started my orientation but the Panasonic scores high with the 3ccds. Ideally I like to have a camera that can work PAL as well as NTSC ... I never saw one though ... Maybe it is not a problem with FCP nowadays. HD camera's don't seem to have the PAL vs NTSC choices.

So... think it's a good buy?

[LethalWolfe]

Blackfox,
The VX-1000 does have firewre i/o.

hotwire132002,
I would really recommend saving up for something in the $2k range. You can get a used Canon GL1 for around $700 and up. A used GL2 will go for 'round $2200. An anamorphic lens for the GL1/2 runs around $700-800. A used Canon XL1 is around $1,500. Also look for used Sony PD-150's, VX-1000's, and/or VX-2000's.

The best way to see if you can get an anamorphic lens for a specific camera is to just google for: "CAMERA NAME" "anamorphic"

I'm by far not a camera expert, but if need a camera to do my own shooting I'd look at the cameras I mentioned first. I can't say anything good or bad about the $1500 JVC you linked to but there's probably a reason you don't see it used like you see the Canon's and Sony's I mentioned.


Lethal

[caveman_uk]

What do you think of this camera (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=NavBar&A=getItemDetail&Q=&sku=314960&is=REG&si=spec#goto_itemInfo)? I really like the price!
I've got that camera! Well the PAL version of it anyway. It's very nice. The picture quality is pretty good and you don't get any motor noise. The image stabiliser isn't all that though so either you keep the camera steady to start with or fix it afterwards (the first option being the best). It's low light performance is best described as average. There is a GS200 which has better (higher res) CCDs, a focus ring and can be used as a pass thru AD converter - which the GS120 won't.

It took a while to locate in the UK as over here it's mostly Canon/Sony.

[hotwire132002]

I've got that camera! Well the PAL version of it anyway. It's very nice. The picture quality is pretty good and you don't get any motor noise. The image stabiliser isn't all that though so either you keep the camera steady to start with or fix it afterwards (the first option being the best). It's low light performance is best described as average. There is a GS200 which has better (higher res) CCDs, a focus ring and can be used as a pass thru AD converter - which the GS120 won't.

It took a while to locate in the UK as over here it's mostly Canon/Sony.

I think I'll have to save up for the GL2. --Sigh-- :( . It'll be worth it in the end, though! Thanks for the help, everyone!

[hotwire132002]

OK, I'm looking now at this (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=NavBar&A=getItemDetail&Q=&sku=347712&is=REG&si=spec#goto_itemInfo) camera. How do you think it would compare to the GL2? I like the fact that it has XLR inputs, and I also REALLY like the fact that you get such a big camera for that price--I've been looking for something like that for a long time, because I prefer the feel of shooting with a big camera that with a shoulder mount to the feeling of shooting with a little dinky handheld one. My only concern is quality. What do you think?

[blackfox]

Hotwire, here a a couple of links you might find useful:
http://www.bealecorner.com/trv900/
http://www.dvinfo.net/index.shtml

The first link is dedicated to the Sony trv-900, a now discontinued camera that I recommended in my first post. There are a number of reviews and screenshot comparisons of various cameras plus links and other good stuff.

The second link is just a good resource site for all things DV.

A note about Sony vs Canon. Generally Canon cameras have a softer picure than Sony and more saturated color. It is in the eye of the beholder which is better - personally I like Canon. Also, Sony often hides many of it's manual features in menus which are a pain in the ass, while Canon usually assigns them to external buttons/knobs/switches. Ergonomically, Canon is very good. Nevertheless, I still recommend the TRV900 if you can find one. If you can afford the lenses, the Canon XL 1 is a better buy than it's smaller brother the GL1 (or 2).

FWIW

[hotwire132002]

Hotwire, here a a couple of links you might find useful:
http://www.bealecorner.com/trv900/
http://www.dvinfo.net/index.shtml

The first link is dedicated to the Sony trv-900, a now discontinued camera that I recommended in my first post. There are a number of reviews and screenshot comparisons of various cameras plus links and other good stuff.

The second link is just a good resource site for all things DV.

A note about Sony vs Canon. Generally Canon cameras have a softer picure than Sony and more saturated color. It is in the eye of the beholder which is better - personally I like Canon. Also, Sony often hides many of it's manual features in menus which are a pain in the ass, while Canon usually assigns them to external buttons/knobs/switches. Ergonomically, Canon is very good. Nevertheless, I still recommend the TRV900 if you can find one. If you can afford the lenses, the Canon XL 1 is a better buy than it's smaller brother the GL1 (or 2).

FWIW

Well, being as indecisive as I am, I'm (once again) thinking I'll go for an HD camera, partly for quality, and partly because (IMO) anything non-HD will be obsolete in a few years, and I really don't want to spend $2000-$3000 on a camera that will be obsolete within a few years.

So, what do you think--should I get the JVC 1-CCD, the Sony 3-CCD, or wait for newer models? (Though I'll have to wait a while anyway while I save up...)

[LethalWolfe]

Well, being as indecisive as I am, I'm (once again) thinking I'll go for an HD camera, partly for quality, and partly because (IMO) anything non-HD will be obsolete in a few years, and I really don't want to spend $2000-$3000 on a camera that will be obsolete within a few years.

So, what do you think--should I get the JVC 1-CCD, the Sony 3-CCD, or wait for newer models? (Though I'll have to wait a while anyway while I save up...)


For the price you are looking for you aren't going to get a true HD camera. HDV is coming around the corner though (and I would stay away from that JVC 1chip). Is the 3 chip Sony keep refering to their HDV camera that is going to come out soon?

Honestly, I would not buy a camera right now because it doesn't sound like you know what you want. If HDV takes off the way people want it to then probably in 3 years or so there will be good, low-end prosumer cameras in the $2-$3000 range. But, and this is just me, I tend to stay away from rev A products (especially ones that are completely new beasts like HDV). Is it worth your time and money to be on the bleeding edge? Can you surive the down time and growing pains that will occur w/such brand new tech? Tried and true pays the bills. There are still Avids based on 9600 PowerMacs out there earning their keep. Why? Because they deliver. Nothing is obsolete as long as it delivers. The switch from standard def to hidef is going to take a number of years so a solid 4:3 camera still has some legs left in it, IMO.

I think you've really just got to sit down and figure out why you need a new camera, and what you need in a new camera. Specificly list what gaps you need to fill then research cameras to find out which ones meet your needs then compare prices and pick the best camera you can afford.


Lethal

[hotwire132002]

For the price you are looking for you aren't going to get a true HD camera. HDV is coming around the corner though (and I would stay away from that JVC 1chip). Is the 3 chip Sony keep refering to their HDV camera that is going to come out soon?

Honestly, I would not buy a camera right now because it doesn't sound like you know what you want. If HDV takes off the way people want it to then probably in 3 years or so there will be good, low-end prosumer cameras in the $2-$3000 range. But, and this is just me, I tend to stay away from rev A products (especially ones that are completely new beasts like HDV). Is it worth your time and money to be on the bleeding edge? Can you surive the down time and growing pains that will occur w/such brand new tech? Tried and true pays the bills. There are still Avids based on 9600 PowerMacs out there earning their keep. Why? Because they deliver. Nothing is obsolete as long as it delivers. The switch from standard def to hidef is going to take a number of years so a solid 4:3 camera still has some legs left in it, IMO.

I think you've really just got to sit down and figure out why you need a new camera, and what you need in a new camera. Specificly list what gaps you need to fill then research cameras to find out which ones meet your needs then compare prices and pick the best camera you can afford.


Lethal

Thanks for the help. I definately think it's a good idea to sit down and figure out exactly what I need. I'll keep you updated!

[Cooknn]

I've got a 3CCD Panasonic PV-GS200 (http://www.beachcamera.com/shop/product.asp?ref=pricewatch&sku=PNPVGS200) and although it's not Hi-Def, I can shoot with the widescreen mask on the 2.5" LCD screen. I bring it into Final Cut Express using an anamorphic preset, then when done with my sequence I distort it to remove the black space at the top and the bottom. This creates a 16:9 movie that will play full screen on your widescreen TV and letterboxed on a 4:3 TV (if you check that option).

It's the only affordable way that I could find to do widescreen with a 3CCD camera.

[hotwire132002]

I've got a 3CCD Panasonic PV-GS200 (http://www.beachcamera.com/shop/product.asp?ref=pricewatch&sku=PNPVGS200) and although it's not Hi-Def, I can shoot with the widescreen mask on the 2.5" LCD screen. I bring it into Final Cut Express using an anamorphic preset, then when done with my sequence I distort it to remove the black space at the top and the bottom. This creates a 16:9 movie that will play full screen on your widescreen TV and letterboxed on a 4:3 box (if you check that option).

It's the only affordable way that I could find to do widescreen with a 3CCD camera.

How's the quality on that camera? I REALLY like the price, but I'm concerned that the quality will suffer because of the price. I do like the fact that it's a 3-CCD camera. I'm thinking I could go with a couple of these for a couple years and then upgrade to a Hi-Def camera when prices come down and HDV matures. I really want a 3-CCD camera, but I don't want to spend $2000+ when I'd like to upgrade to HD within a couple years.

[hotwire132002]

How's the quality on that camera? I REALLY like the price, but I'm concerned that the quality will suffer because of the price. I do like the fact that it's a 3-CCD camera. I'm thinking I could go with a couple of these for a couple years and then upgrade to a Hi-Def camera when prices come down and HDV matures. I really want a 3-CCD camera, but I don't want to spend $2000+ when I'd like to upgrade to HD within a couple years.

Also, have you used the reseller you linked to? It's about $100 cheaper than B&H (where I usually buy from), but if someone can confirm that they're reliable, I'd go for that in a second!

[blackfox]

Not to further complicate your choices Hotwire, but here is another model to consider: PANASONIC PV-DV953.

It seems to well reviewed and reasonably priced. Funnily enough I remember being intrigued with it's PAL version the mx300 several years ago, which many people were importing because of it's features/quality.

Camcorderinfo has a review (linked earlier in thread).

It is not HD, nor is it the best in it's field, but it does hold it's own against the likes of the Canon GL2 and Sony TRV950 (which despite my misgivings, you might like).

Priced between $800-1300 w/ most online retailers.

FWIW

**EDIT** reading your above post, I will add:

- yes, there are widescreen lenses available.
- B&H actually sponsored a contest between three cameras priced between $1000 and $1400...the pv-dv953 won hands down.
- It has since been replaced by the PV-GS400, which is supposedly even better.

Either camera would be good. See camcorderinfo for more info on both cameras. I would provide links, but the site makes Safari want to crash for some reason...

[Cooknn]

Also, have you used the reseller you linked to? It's about $100 cheaper than B&H (where I usually buy from), but if someone can confirm that they're reliable, I'd go for that in a second!The quality is excellent - and so is the reseller. I bought mine from Beach Camera. No problems and saved a bunch.

[LethalWolfe]

Also, have you used the reseller you linked to? It's about $100 cheaper than B&H (where I usually buy from), but if someone can confirm that they're reliable, I'd go for that in a second!

I would stay away from gray market retailers like Beach Camera and Abe's of Maine. The potentional to have your shopping experience turn into a royal PITA is much more likely than at a retailer that's completely on the up and up. I've considered buying from gray market places before because of the lower prices, but in the end I've always decided to purchase from a retailer I can trust. Too many horror stories w/the grey market places.


Lethal

[srdashiki]

HD, pointless.

Only broadcast is HDTV.
DVDs, not HDTV.

So unless you are planning on going directly from camera, to computer to broadcast. YOU DONT NEED HD!!!

HD is stupid right now 4 different standards and none are perfected.

Why does anyone want HD? Ooooh i can say I got an HD camera. Go buy a 3CCD camera with an anamorphic lens, thats all you need. Until ALL CHANNELS ARE HDTV it is pointless to shoot in HD, cuz I bet none of you are ever going to put yer **** on television.

[hotwire132002]

HD, pointless.

Only broadcast is HDTV.
DVDs, not HDTV.

So unless you are planning on going directly from camera, to computer to broadcast. YOU DONT NEED HD!!!

HD is stupid right now 4 different standards and none are perfected.

Why does anyone want HD? Ooooh i can say I got an HD camera. Go buy a 3CCD camera with an anamorphic lens, thats all you need. Until ALL CHANNELS ARE HDTV it is pointless to shoot in HD, cuz I bet none of you are ever going to put yer **** on television.

A) I happen to work for a television station.

B) I happen to be an independent filmmaker--and I can really use the HD.

[hotwire132002]

Not to further complicate your choices Hotwire, but here is another model to consider: PANASONIC PV-DV953.

It seems to well reviewed and reasonably priced. Funnily enough I remember being intrigued with it's PAL version the mx300 several years ago, which many people were importing because of it's features/quality.

Camcorderinfo has a review (linked earlier in thread).

It is not HD, nor is it the best in it's field, but it does hold it's own against the likes of the Canon GL2 and Sony TRV950 (which despite my misgivings, you might like).

Priced between $800-1300 w/ most online retailers.

FWIW

**EDIT** reading your above post, I will add:

- yes, there are widescreen lenses available.
- B&H actually sponsored a contest between three cameras priced between $1000 and $1400...the pv-dv953 won hands down.
- It has since been replaced by the PV-GS400, which is supposedly even better.

Either camera would be good. See camcorderinfo for more info on both cameras. I would provide links, but the site makes Safari want to crash for some reason...

I'll have to check that camera out. I've pretty much decided on the Panasonic (Whatsit?)-200. Great price, and it should be fine for me for a few years, after which I'll upgrade to HD.

Off-topic, but cool: I'm typing this from an iMac G5 at the nearest Apple retailer to me (about an hour away in Traverse City)--the first time I've seen one in person--and they RULE! It's a really cool system. I talked my neighbors into getting one. Their first Mac :D !

[LethalWolfe]

HD, pointless.
Really?

Only broadcast is HDTV.
If you mean only broadcast TV is HD you are wrong. If you mean "HDTV" will only exist in broadcast TV then are you right and very good at stating the obvious (it's called HDTV for a reason).

DVDs, not HDTV.
Of course DVDs aren't going to be HDTV, but relatively soon there will be HD-DVDs.

So unless you are planning on going directly from camera, to computer to broadcast. YOU DONT NEED HD!!!
Wrong.

HD is stupid right now 4 different standards and none are perfected.
That comment is just ignorant.

Why does anyone want HD?
Significant increase in quality maybe?

Ooooh i can say I got an HD camera. Go buy a 3CCD camera with an anamorphic lens, thats all you need.
How is your computer w/640k of RAM treating you these days?

Until ALL CHANNELS ARE HDTV it is pointless to shoot in HD, cuz I bet none of you are ever going to put yer **** on television.
So it's pointless to shoot in HD even though there are HD cable channels and more and more stations are broadcasting SD and HD content side-by-side? It's pointless to shot in HD even though shooting in HD and down converting to SD will yield a higher quality image than shooting in SD to begin with?

Also, I would be careful what you bet on 'cause right now yer dead wrong.


Lethal

[Hoef]

cuz I bet none of you are ever going to put yer **** on television.

I am a video artist and most of my fellow artists exhibit in HD.... Have to compete!

[Rod Rod]

For the price you are looking for you aren't going to get a true HD camera. HDV is coming around the corner though (and I would stay away from that JVC 1chip). Is the 3 chip Sony keep refering to their HDV camera that is going to come out soon?

hotwire132002, I own the JVC HD10. You can use footage shot on the HD10 in Final Cut Pro, even without buying the Heuris or Lumiere solutions. It takes a couple of intermediate steps though.

First you have to download the FireWire SDK from Apple, and install the utility called DVHSCap. With that you'll be able to control playback and capture your footage. It works sort of like iMovie, as you have to attend to it the whole time and there is no batch capture, but there is no preview of what you're capturing on the screen so you have to watch the camera's flip-out LCD.

Next you'll have to transcode the MPEG2 TS you've just captured into a Final Cut Pro codec. I forgot the name of the utility that does that transcoding but I believe it's freeware. DVCPRO HD is a good choice, but if you have the hardware you could also transcode to 10-bit uncompressed HD. I think you can use DVHSCap to record a flie back out to your camera but I'm not sure.

I own LumiereHD, and it is excellent for automating the above tasks. Even better, it allows you to edit in an offline codec and then reconnect to a camera original format output, and then output to the camera (as well as a JVC D-VHS deck, which makes more sense because the maximum tape length the HD10 takes is 80 minutes, whereas you can get something like 2.5 hours on a D-VHS tape at full quality).

The limitation LumiereHD has is it loses audio synch for clips over 1000 frames long. That's because of Apple's MPEG2 codec, according to the folks at LHD. Hopefully Apple will fix the MPEG2 bug before including HDV in FCP... otherwise there'll be a lot of dissatisfaction all over the place, instead of where it is right now (among the few of us doing long format productions with the JVC HD cameras).

I've seen HD1s go for $1900 and HD10s go for $2200 on eBay. If I were you I wouldn't bid any higher than that. You should be able to get a good deal because a lot of early adopters seem to be "dumping" their JVCs in favor of the upcoming Sonys.

I would love to get the Sony HDV camera. The consumer version is coming out in November, and the pro model comes in February 2005. The only problem I have with it is that it has no progressive shooting modes (the "Cineframe" modes are 24 fps interlaced). Both Sony HDV cameras shoot 1080 60i.

The best thing about the Sony HDV cameras is their low light performance. With the JVC you better be shooting in daylight, or if you're shooting indoors you need a camera light or studio type lighting to get decent results. I mostly do outdoor shooting in broad daylight.

[hotwire132002]

hotwire132002, I own the JVC HD10. You can use footage shot on the HD10 in Final Cut Pro, even without buying the Heuris or Lumiere solutions. It takes a couple of intermediate steps though.

First you have to download the FireWire SDK from Apple, and install the utility called DVHSCap. With that you'll be able to control playback and capture your footage. It works sort of like iMovie, as you have to attend to it the whole time and there is no batch capture, but there is no preview of what you're capturing on the screen so you have to watch the camera's flip-out LCD.

Next you'll have to transcode the MPEG2 TS you've just captured into a Final Cut Pro codec. I forgot the name of the utility that does that transcoding but I believe it's freeware. DVCPRO HD is a good choice, but if you have the hardware you could also transcode to 10-bit uncompressed HD. I think you can use DVHSCap to record a flie back out to your camera but I'm not sure.

I own LumiereHD, and it is excellent for automating the above tasks. Even better, it allows you to edit in an offline codec and then reconnect to a camera original format output, and then output to the camera (as well as a JVC D-VHS deck, which makes more sense because the maximum tape length the HD10 takes is 80 minutes, whereas you can get something like 2.5 hours on a D-VHS tape at full quality).

The limitation LumiereHD has is it loses audio synch for clips over 1000 frames long. That's because of Apple's MPEG2 codec, according to the folks at LHD. Hopefully Apple will fix the MPEG2 bug before including HDV in FCP... otherwise there'll be a lot of dissatisfaction all over the place, instead of where it is right now (among the few of us doing long format productions with the JVC HD cameras).

I've seen HD1s go for $1900 and HD10s go for $2200 on eBay. If I were you I wouldn't bid any higher than that. You should be able to get a good deal because a lot of early adopters seem to be "dumping" their JVCs in favor of the upcoming Sonys.

I would love to get the Sony HDV camera. The consumer version is coming out in November, and the pro model comes in February 2005. The only problem I have with it is that it has no progressive shooting modes (the "Cineframe" modes are 24 fps interlaced). Both Sony HDV cameras shoot 1080 60i.

The best thing about the Sony HDV cameras is their low light performance. With the JVC you better be shooting in daylight, or if you're shooting indoors you need a camera light or studio type lighting to get decent results. I mostly do outdoor shooting in broad daylight.

Thanks for the advice. However, for budget reasons I am going with a low-end standard def 3-CCD camera--I can pick a good Panasonic up for about $780. In a couple years I'll upgrade to HD, but for now I'm sticking with standard def.

[Rod Rod]

Thanks for the advice. However, for budget reasons I am going with a low-end standard def 3-CCD camera--I can pick a good Panasonic up for about $780. In a couple years I'll upgrade to HD, but for now I'm sticking with standard def.

you're welcome. that's a good plan. hopefully someone out there will make an optical 16:9 adapter for smaller cameras and make it cheap.

check vanns.com for Panasonics. they won't try to upsell you the way those East Coast dealers do (some of them withhold the included battery and charger unless you pay them extra ... there are all sorts of horror stories about those outfits at sites like epinions).

[hotwire132002]

OK, I'm just about ready to get my new camera--I plan to go for the Panasonic PV-GS200. I can get it for $780 from B&H. It's not HD, but it IS a 3CCD camera, and I figure it will last me a good few years, after which the price of HD will (hopefully) have come down and I can upgrade. Before I buy the camera, though, I'm wondering if anyone here who has used one can give me a review. I've read good things, and according to camcorderinfo.com it's going to be a much better camera than my current ZR60. If someone can give me a good pros/cons review, that'd be awesome!

[Cooknn]

OK, I'm just about ready to get my new camera--I plan to go for the Panasonic PV-GS200. I can get it for $780 from B&H. It's not HD, but it IS a 3CCD camera, and I figure it will last me a good few years, after which the price of HD will (hopefully) have come down and I can upgrade.I bought the PV-GS200 for the same reason. The most bang for the buck with a 3CCD camcorder. It's a great camera and I couldn't be happier - until someday I get an HD Camcorder :D For detailed reviews, camcorderinfo.com is as good as it gets.

[hotwire132002]

I bought the PV-GS200 for the same reason. The most bang for the buck with a 3CCD camcorder. It's a great camera and I couldn't be happier - until someday I get an HD Camcorder :D For detailed reviews, camcorderinfo.com is as good as it gets.

I've heard mixed things about low-light performance--how do you find it works in low-light situations?

[Cooknn]

I've only had to adjust the brightness on a clip in FCE a couple of times, but that's no big deal to me. I shot about an hour of footage at a night race at Indianapolis Raceway Park last spring and it looked great.

[hotwire132002]

I've only had to adjust the brightness on a clip in FCE a couple of times, but that's no big deal to me. I shot about an hour of footage at a night race at Indianapolis Raceway Park last spring and it looked great.

Thanks for the help! Hopefully I'll get one of these soon. I really need a new camera!

[unixkid]

Ur obviously new and wanting to shoot HD...U r asking the wrong people on the wrong site... Goto Here (http://hdforindies.com) for ALL of ur HD needs and questions.

[hotwire132002]

Ur obviously new and wanting to shoot HD...U r asking the wrong people on the wrong site... Goto Here (http://hdforindies.com) for ALL of ur HD needs and questions.

I am by no means "new".

I'm not even sure what you mean I'm new to, but if it's this site, definately not. If it's video, definately DEFINATELY not.

[GeneralAntilles]

A buddy of mine at work has a friend who works for Turner's Dinner & a Movie. They recently purchased half a dozen of the Sony cameras . . . they're ****. Noisy, with very poor color quality and definition. HD is the hype right now and you'd do best to avoid HD digital cameras, even the big movie studies with their $100k-$200k USD HD cameras don't quiet match up to 35mm. If you want a decent camera, look at something like the Canon XL2 or GL2. The Panasonics mentioned here are also decent performers. Overall 24p really doesn't even compare to 35mm or Super-16mm and isn't ready for film-level production.

[Hoef]

Overall 24p really doesn't even compare to 35mm or Super-16mm and isn't ready for film-level production.

Good comments, though people would just be happy to buy HD anyway ... It must be surely better than the alternative for that money?

[Rod Rod]

Good comments, though people would just be happy to buy HD anyway ... It must be surely better than the alternative for that money?

Yup.. HD is better than DV. What DV has on its side though is a number of nice camcorders such as the Panasonic DVX-100A, Sony PD-170 and Canon XL2. When the first wave of miniDV cameras came, there were plenty of people who were happy with their analog video8 cameras such as the Canon L2. We're seeing a similar phenomenon with people comparing mature miniDV cameras to the first wave of HDV cameras. In both cases, the new format is superior to the old, and the new cameras aren't nearly as mature as the old ones. This shouldn't take too long to change.

It takes a little bit of work to get your HDV footage to look great, and it's worth it. As for GeneralAntilles' report about the Sony HDV cameras being "noisy," well those people should look into buying an isolator for their camera-mounted shotgun mic. The people using the cameras should also learn how to use the manual controls.

unixkid, hotwire132002 is an old-timer. :)

[GeneralAntilles]

As for GeneralAntilles' report about the Sony HDV cameras being "noisy," well those people should look into buying an isolator for their camera-mounted shotgun mic.


I'm speaking of the image, not the mic. The image quality on the Sony is of a very poor quality, and in most cases worse than a similar MiniDV like the XL2.

[LethalWolfe]

The raw FX1 footage (shot in HDV, not DV mode) is more impressive than any raw DV footage I've seen. It is a true 16:9 camera (it has 16:9 CCDs, as opposed to 4:3 CCDs and a 16:9 "mode"), but it can't shoot true 24p and I find its "cineframe 24" mode to be too choppy (but I'm kinda anal about that sort of thing). Interesting to see if anything comes of the Panasonic/NAB rumor...

GeneralAntilles, you'll have to excuse me for taking the word of your friend's friend w/a grain of salt. ;)


Lethal

[Rod Rod]

I'm speaking of the image, not the mic. The image quality on the Sony is of a very poor quality, and in most cases worse than a similar MiniDV like the XL2.

Based on FX1 user reports it has chroma noise in blues. Based on my experience the JVC HDV camcorders have chroma noise in reds. The solution to this problem is proper lighting and failing that, a bit of extra work in post. I get noise-free reds with my JVC HD10 when everything's sufficiently lit.