Consumer level HD camcorders

[MikePizzoff]

I've been thinking about picking up an HD camera within the next year. Does anybody have any experience with the consumer-level ones? I'm thinking the models that are around $500-600. Can anybody recommend whether I should or shouldn't make a commitment to one of these? Also, any sort of pros and cons would be greatly appreciated. Thanks guys!

[PJoseph]

Do you have any specific models in mind? I've shot with one of those Panasonic HD handy cams that captures on little SD cards - it looked pretty good. It was for a film at last years's Comic Con. I actually matched it with HVX footage - now, it wasn't nearly as nice as the HVX, but it looked decent. It's really small and light. Also, FCP was able to transcode the files easily into DVC Pro HD files - and I edited them right on the timeline no issue. It was 1080/60i, so there was some fluttering when working with the 23.98 footage from the HVX, but overall, I was pretty amazed at how well it looked. Now, those cameras ran about $900 - but you could probably find something in your price range that offers the same functionality. Overall, they really are little, light cameras with limited functionality with a compressed HD format. But still, I was impressed with how clean they looked. pJ

[krakenslayer]

These are great, although a tiny bit over your budget: http://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-HDC-.../dp/B001BFRQA0 They have a 3MOS sensor (very similar to the 3-CCD system used in high end professional video cameras) and can shoot at 25 fps, both of which mean it can shoot VERY film-like footage. I own a JVC GZ-HD10, which is more within your price range, it's pretty impressive too. It doesn't have a 3MOS sensor, nor does it shoot in 25 fps (it shoots at 50/60 fps) BUT it's very affordable, comes with a 40 GB HDD, can also shoot on SD cards if that's more your thing, has great picture quality (almost on par with the SD-100), takes good still images, has loads of options and settings to play with for a camera of its price, comes with Blu-Ray burning software (and a half-decent video editor too, if you don't already have one), it has a decent on-camera mic and (handily for budding filmmakers) an audio-in port for pugging in an external microphone, which is rare on cheaper camcorders. You can pick these babies up very cheaply now: http://www.amazon.com/JVC-GZ-HD10-De.../dp/B001CBUTCA Only two drawbacks. One: the way it produces HD video is shooting at 720p and upscaling to 1080p. However, I've compared the footage with my mate's 1080p camcorder on a 42 inch screen, and my HD10 footage actually looked better, so it's not a big deal, but you should know this, as some people are anal about these things. Secondly, the low light performance ain't great. It's perfectly acceptable, but I've seen a lot better.

[MikePizzoff]

Thanks for the responses, guys. Kraken - that JVC looks pretty promising! I think you've just made up my mind for me. It sucks that it doesn't film at 25 fps, however it's more in my price range... I really don't think I'd be able to afford the first one you showed me. Plus, it's got a built-in hard drive with the option of using an SD card, which is what I'm ultimately looking for. I've found a higher model of that camera for the same price at Best Buy ... plus they'll give ya a free tripod. http://www.bestbuy.com/site/JVC+-+Ev...=1218049843959 Thanks, man! ---------- Post added at 11:41 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:05 AM ---------- EDIT: I've just read a bunch of reviews on the camera and 90% of people say it has terrible quality when low-light/indoor filming. The majority of my filming happens indoors with natural lighting (for the most part), so this really worries me. However, I'd like to get your word on it. Are these just people that have never had another camcorder before so they don't know that low-light/indoor filming produces lesser quality material? Or is it that this camera will produce horrendous low-light film compared to my 7-year-old Sony DCR-TRV 530? I know that with all cameras there is a tremendous difference between filming outdoors on a sunny day and filming indoors at night... but these people make it seem like this camera is bottom of the barrel when it comes to that. One person even compared it to that of cell phone camera quality!

[krakenslayer]

[/COLOR] Thanks for the responses, guys. Kraken - that JVC looks pretty promising! I think you've just made up my mind for me. It sucks that it doesn't film at 25 fps, however it's more in my price range... I really don't think I'd be able to afford the first one you showed me. Plus, it's got a built-in hard drive with the option of using an SD card, which is what I'm ultimately looking for. I've found a higher model of that camera for the same price at Best Buy ... plus they'll give ya a free tripod. http://www.bestbuy.com/site/JVC+-+Ev...=1218049843959 Thanks, man! ---------- Post added at 11:41 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:05 AM ---------- EDIT: I've just read a bunch of reviews on the camera and 90% of people say it has terrible quality when low-light/indoor filming. The majority of my filming happens indoors with natural lighting (for the most part), so this really worries me. However, I'd like to get your word on it. Are these just people that have never had another camcorder before so they don't know that low-light/indoor filming produces lesser quality material? Or is it that this camera will produce horrendous low-light film compared to my 7-year-old Sony DCR-TRV 530? I know that with all cameras there is a tremendous difference between filming outdoors on a sunny day and filming indoors at night... but these people make it seem like this camera is bottom of the barrel when it comes to that. One person even compared it to that of cell phone camera quality! I wouldn't call it horrendous, but like I said, I've seen a lot better. I was pretty much in the same boat as you - shooting mostly indoors, wanted HD, and needed a HDD and SD slot - the problem I found was that, in that price range, there seems to be no HD camera which has both great low-light quality and an HDD drive. After a lot of investigation, the JVC one came up as the best compromise. Some people do have unrealistic expectations. But you can still get some decent footage out of it in dark places if you play with the settings. Here's a video I shot in a pitch black tunnel. All I had was a weak powered torch. It gives you a good idea of the camera's limitations, just bear in mind that it's far darker in that tunnel than your living room at night, even with the lights off, and the quality on the Youtube video is, obviously, many times lower than the actual output footage: Watch from 3:46 onwards.