|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
Need a new camcorder. - 5/4/2008 10:25:58 PM
|
|
|
Brandy
Posts: 1355
Joined: 4/7/2005
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline
|
Anyone have a favorite?
Under $700 for general use new baby family stuff.
Needs to be Hard drive based.
_____________________________
~Brandy
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Need a new camcorder. - 5/5/2008 12:59:45 AM
|
|
|
GrapeApe
Posts: 8497
Joined: 6/5/2006
From: the Land Where My Jokes come From.
Status: online
|
Sony DCR-SR45 HDD Handycam.
Works fine for recording basic stuff.
_____________________________
your love cuts like a knife into the darkest part of me.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Need a new camcorder. - 5/5/2008 3:14:50 AM
|
|
|
PolarBear
Posts: 875
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Moving to San Antonio!
Status: offline
|
Why does it "need" to be hard drive based? The first (and maybe only) "big" question is if it should be high definition or not. That makes a lot bigger difference than where the media is stored. Either high definition or standard definition can be stored on hard drives or tapes, just fine. (I would personally avoid DVD camcorders.)
There are good reasons to prefer tape. Tape is cheap for archival and is much more durable than hard disks. It's still easy to capture video from DV tape into a computer. I think I personally will be preferring tape for some time in the future.
Just stuff to think about. This site is the place to go for camcorder reviews:
http://camcorderinfo.com
_____________________________
My current ministry dream:
http://victorymuseum.org
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Need a new camcorder. - 5/5/2008 10:41:10 AM
|
|
|
Brandy
Posts: 1355
Joined: 4/7/2005
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline
|
RatherDashing,
That's actually a model we've been looking at. Seems goof for basics, now we have to decide just how basic we want to record.
Polar ,
It needs to be hard drive based because we want it to be. After using MiniDV in college, I abhor tapes. Abhor. And DVD burning is not efficient for my liking. So in comes HDD.
As to Hi-Def or not.. that's something we have been discussing.
For immediate playback of plugging into our HDTV that sounds great.. But after compressing everything to put online or send to family it seems like we would lose the HD quality in the long run so why buy it ? I'm just not sold on it, yet.
Thanks for the site, oodles of info. Now I can read the reviews and maybe amend the budget and see what happens.
_____________________________
~Brandy
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Need a new camcorder. - 5/6/2008 7:04:02 PM
|
|
|
GrapeApe
Posts: 8497
Joined: 6/5/2006
From: the Land Where My Jokes come From.
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Brandy
RatherDashing,
That's actually a model we've been looking at. Seems goof for basics, now we have to decide just how basic we want to record.
The DCR-SR45 is fine in quality, much moreso than expected. For still shots, not so much, but video is quite decent. If you didn't like the preset, you can manually change the settings, which I do, to match your preference.
_____________________________
your love cuts like a knife into the darkest part of me.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Need a new camcorder. - 5/7/2008 8:25:20 AM
|
|
|
PolarBear
Posts: 875
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Moving to San Antonio!
Status: offline
|
Another issue in tape vs hard drive might be quality. Video stored on DV tapes is about 14GB per hour, uncompressed. Hard drive cameras use an MPEG format to compress videos, and uses about 2GB an hour I think, the same as DVDs. That might sound good, but the compression is lossy, so at least theoretically you're not getting as much information in the picture. When you work with the video in an editor and MPEG-compress it again to make a DVD, you're losing more quality.
Admittedly I don't know how big a deal this is in practice, as I haven't done a lot with hard drive camcorder video.
I did get to play with a hard drive camera last month, and one annoyance was that every time you pushed start/stop on the camera, it saved the video into a different clip. With my MiniDV, I can import the whole string of shots as one file. Maybe it's easy to concatinate the MPEG files, I don't know, but I think DV is more intuitive here.
Then there's reliability. If you're out shooting for a day, and your camera hard drive crashes, you'll have a problem. A tape would survive almost any kind of beating.
Granted, all my reasons mean more for professionals or semi-pros than people shooting videos of their kids to send to grandma. For the later group, an HD camera may actually be better. (Perhaps a DVD camera would be better still, but again I wouldn't touch those with a 10 foot pole.)
Edited TOS 5
< Message edited by Kath -- 5/10/2008 1:00:10 PM >
_____________________________
My current ministry dream:
http://victorymuseum.org
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Need a new camcorder. - 5/8/2008 7:10:39 AM
|
|
|
iluvatar
Posts: 1321
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: PolarBear
Another issue in tape vs hard drive might be quality. Video stored on DV tapes is about 14GB per hour, uncompressed. Hard drive cameras use an MPEG format to compress videos, and uses about 2GB an hour I think, the same as DVDs. That might sound good, but the compression is lossy, so at least theoretically you're not getting as much information in the picture. When you work with the video in an editor and MPEG-compress it again to make a DVD, you're losing more quality.
...
I did get to play with a hard drive camera last month, and one annoyance was that every time you pushed start/stop on the camera, it saved the video into a different clip. With my MiniDV, I can import the whole string of shots as one file. Maybe it's easy to concatinate the MPEG files, I don't know, but I think DV is more intuitive here.
We have a pair of Canon XL1's (IIRC) at work that we got direct-to-edit recorders for so we wouldn't have to deal with tape. Having a different file every time you hit stop/start did seem kind of odd at first, but it's still pretty easy to work with. I don't know how you work with your videos, but we edit all of ours in Final Cut anyways, so starting off with multiple clips isn't any harder than having it all in one file. And we don't have to import them in real-time.
-Dan.
_____________________________
It's not that I'm lazy, it's that I just don't care.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Need a new camcorder. - 5/10/2008 9:37:10 PM
|
|
|
TMeeks
Posts: 1356
Joined: 1/27/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Brandy
Anyone have a favorite?
Under $700 for general use new baby family stuff.
Needs to be Hard drive based.
Hi Brandy,
I would hesitate buying a hard drive based video system... and, I would NEVER, EVER buy a drirect to DVD video camera. Like Polar Bear, I am still a fan of mini-DV tape. As much as you may abhor tape, if you want the origina;s of those baby pictures to be around in 10 years then stick with tape.
I've been shooting and editing video from 1968, having begun in the 1/2" reel-to-reel era. Fifteen of those years were professional, shooting for clients like the National Park Service. But, before you call me an old-timer, I'd like you to know that I also designed the first professional desktop video application for the PC (JVC Video Titler) and the interface for Pinnacle (Now Avid) Systems' first video product. So, I am very much aware of the digital age. But, I'm aware enough to be leary of it, too. For my personal use, I have a 3-chip video camera (Sony DCR-VX2100) and a smaller Hi-Definition camera (Sony DCR-HC7) ... both storing video to mini-DV. I love the size and quality of the smaller 1 chip camera for traveling; but, I am very selective about what I shoot in HDV because of the terrible compression scheme used for HDV.
And, I'm not a fan of editing MPEG-2 video.
But, my primary concern is that when a hard drive fails, it generally does so without any warning at all. That is not a risk I want to take with precious family videos. I urge you to listen to Polar Bear's wise counsel.
The Sony DCR-HC7 has been replaced by the Sony DCR-HC9. It's a wonderful little camera that can shoot both normal DV or HDV. Its still image capture is the first I've ever seen from a video camera that is acceptable to me. One camera, two video formats (DV/HDV), and two functions (video/still) in a small package that does well under lower light situations. The low light capabilities come very close to the DCR-VX2100's performance, which I find remarkable... plus, the reliability and safety of MiniDV.
Neither Polar Bear nor I have to live with your choice; but, as someone with more than the average person's experience with video and computers, I can tell you that I would only have a hard drive video camera as a backup or 'quick & dirty' capture camera. But, again, I would NEVER under any circumstances use a DVD camera if it were given to me. I see DVD cameras as a MUCH worse choice than the hard drive. :)
< Message edited by TMeeks -- 5/10/2008 9:46:17 PM >
_____________________________
Galatians 6:7 Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows. 8 The one who sows to please his sinful nature, from that nature will reap destruction; the one who sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Need a new camcorder. - 5/10/2008 9:52:14 PM
|
|
|
TMeeks
Posts: 1356
Joined: 1/27/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: PolarBear
Another issue in tape vs hard drive might be quality. Video stored on DV tapes is about 14GB per hour, uncompressed. Hard drive cameras use an MPEG format to compress videos, and uses about 2GB an hour I think, the same as DVDs. That might sound good, but the compression is lossy, so at least theoretically you're not getting as much information in the picture. When you work with the video in an editor and MPEG-compress it again to make a DVD, you're losing more quality.
Admittedly I don't know how big a deal this is in practice, as I haven't done a lot with hard drive camcorder video.
I did get to play with a hard drive camera last month, and one annoyance was that every time you pushed start/stop on the camera, it saved the video into a different clip. With my MiniDV, I can import the whole string of shots as one file. Maybe it's easy to concatinate the MPEG files, I don't know, but I think DV is more intuitive here.
Then there's reliability. If you're out shooting for a day, and your camera hard drive crashes, you'll have a problem. A tape would survive almost any kind of beating.
Granted, all my reasons mean more for professionals or semi-pros than people shooting videos of their kids to send to grandma. For the later group, an HD camera may actually be better. (Perhaps a DVD camera would be better still, but again I wouldn't touch those with a 10 foot pole.)
Edited TOS 5
I'm right behind you on every single thing you've said. Hard drives are prone to crash completely without warning and I do NOT like the compression used. I'm one of the few people that had their children in the 1960s that has baby videos of their first years and I know just how precious they are. I'd hate to risk them.
My own workflow is to shoot mini-DV tape, copy directly to DVD using an external DVD writer, copy that DVD to multiple DVDs and distribute the DVD copies to multiple houses... just in case of first, flood or tornado. The mini-DVs are never viewed and they are always stored on edge, never flat. When I have time, I fast forward to the end before storing. But, I literally have hundreds and hundreds of tapes of various formats so I sometimes forget that last step. :)
Great advice! 
_____________________________
Galatians 6:7 Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows. 8 The one who sows to please his sinful nature, from that nature will reap destruction; the one who sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Need a new camcorder. - 5/10/2008 10:02:56 PM
|
|
|
TMeeks
Posts: 1356
Joined: 1/27/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Brandy
As to Hi-Def or not.. that's something we have been discussing.
For immediate playback of plugging into our HDTV that sounds great.. But after compressing everything to put online or send to family it seems like we would lose the HD quality in the long run so why buy it ? I'm just not sold on it, yet.
While I have a Hi-Def video camera, I purposely selected one that shoots in both 'normal' video and Hi-Def. With the DCR-HC7 (or DCR-HC9) it's possible to select the recording format on the same tape based on the situation.
For instance, when your baby is laying down and the background is not busy or changing a lot, then I would select HDV. But, when it gets old enough to run around or where there is a lot of movement in the background, I would select DV. Shooting styles are different between DV and HDV; but, you'd soon learn what works and what does not.
The really nice thing is that you can shoot a still while recording video (best) or take a still from pre-recorded footage (Not as good; but, useful) with the 7 or 9 series cameras. In all the years I've been buying and using video cameras, I think the DCR-HC7 was probably the best value for the money of any that I've ever purchased. I'd rather have a Canon; but, they do not record both formats.
By the way, the HDV that you shoot is easily downcoverted to DV on playback or capture with the DCR-HC7. So, it's easy to capture in HDV (where appropriate) for the future, while making copies in normal TV mode today.
Here are some still image samples from the DCR-HC7. The compression on Photobucket accentuates the noise considerably.
Indoor Image: Butterfly
Outdoor Image: Hummingbirds
Outdoor Image: Flower
< Message edited by TMeeks -- 5/10/2008 10:35:10 PM >
_____________________________
Galatians 6:7 Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows. 8 The one who sows to please his sinful nature, from that nature will reap destruction; the one who sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life.
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
