Sony CX12 or Canon HF20

[downunder]

Howdy - looking at purchasing one of these two camcorders. The Sony looks to have slightly higher resolution, especially in still photos. The Canon however offers a 24P Cinema mode that Sony doesn't seem to offer. Is that a big deal?

 

[MrLatte23]

24P only matters if you're going to use it.

If you're into the "cinematic look" then it's a decent feature. Depending on what level of editing you plan to do or if you're just going to watch it raw you may really enjoy it. It's not best for fast moving objects like kids and animals.

 

[downunder]

Thanks

Appreciate it... not sure I really understand what the "cinematic look" would be, but from your description it sounds more "smooth"

 

[KeithPratt]

Quite the opposite really. If you don't know what it is it's highly unlikely you want it.

 

[michelepri]

Sony makes excellent video cameras over $5000 but anything below that leves is usually not up to standards with the competition. First of all stay away from interlaced cameras. Even if you are not looking for cinematic look a progressive camera will give you higher definition and better low light performance. Computers, LCD and plasma are all progressive devices. Interlaced is a dead technology but Sony keeps pushing it on its consumers because they invested so much in it. Since the founder of Sony died a few years ago the company has lost their edge. Nothing beats an HV20 in its price range. Maybe just the HV30. Don't pick the sony just because of still photos, they will never be that good anyway. And the Canon, when used in progressive mode, you can extract still frames that will probably look better than sony still images.

 

[Courtaj]

First of all stay away from interlaced cameras.

Interlaced cameras? I agree, camcorders that are tied together would be a PIA. If you meant interlaced video - your advice is bollocks.