Looking for good Low Light HD Camcorder advice

[Wink]

I have been shopping and reading reviews for a couple of weeks now and just came across your fantastic site!

I need to shoot pool games, you know, 8-ball, 9-ball type of games and the environment is usually not well lit, other than the table. The action can also be fast in the example of a break shot. SO... the things that I want are good low light, good battery life, HD quality (1080) and flash based (SD or similar)

I was hoping to get a Sony HDR-CX150, but then I read some low light reviews and moved up the food chain. Now I am looking at either a Panasonic HDC-TM700K or a Canon HFS20/200/21 or some flavor.

I will be using my MacBook Pro for editing. What advice would you have for me so that I capture usable content in HD quality. Primary application will be editing and posting to Vimeo, as well as personal use for other things.

[mshilly]

I have the canon HF100 (about two years now) and shoot primarily Cheer competitions which are notoriously dark except for the lit stage. The canon does very good with that particular type of lighting and the HF100 only does 17Mbps but is crystal clear with all of the fast motion sequences. The canons seem to be about the best consumer grade HD camcorder for low light situations.

Make sure your editing software handles AVCHD cause Canon does not really supply any software with it to speak of.

[edDV]

The main issues for low light capability are sensor size, sensor pixel density and optics. Most consumer camcorders are poor on all features. They have small sensors with HD Bayer sampled tiny pixels and small plastic lenses.

The other extreme (at the prosumer level) would be DSLR's with 35mm size sensors and large lenses. DSLRs vary widely in sensor size and lens f rating but most will be better for low light vs. a consumer camcorder.

Broadcast and digital cinema camcorders use huge lenses and multiple sensors. If ESPN comes to town they will be using these cameras and lots of lights. They don't shoot available light. Also, they will be shooting 1280x720p 59.94 fps to better capture the action.

[budwzr]

There are two kinds of challenging video, extremely high or extremely low contrast. Low contrast would be like an overcast day. High would be like what you describe. Exposure is the way a camera lens tries to compensate, but it's all or nothing. So more detail in dark areas means blown out in the normal areas.

This is where these "Program AE" selections are useful because you're helping direct the photo processing "chip" how to smooth everything out theoretically. Canon does seem to have a lead in this department, but don't expect miracles.

LOL: There's a lot more than two challenging videos, now that I think about it a little.

[2Bdecided]

Vimeo streams 24p, so shooting any higher frame rate is pointless. Uploading higher frame rates (25p, 30p, 50p, 60p) can lead to stuttery footage due to uneven frame-dropping by vimeo to get it down to 24p.

(This was the case about a year ago. I haven't checked recently. They did start accepting 30p for a while, and then withdrew that facility.)

I bet there's more than enough light on the subject to get good enough results at 24p. All other things being equal (except shutter speed! ), 24p needs less than half the light of 60p/60i. Your challenge is managing the exposure and contrast. Something like cinemode on the Canons might help here, or might make everything look too grey.

Cheers,
David.

[Wink]

You guys are very knowledgeable!

Do you think that I need to go to a Panasonic TM700k or a Canon HF20 or HFS21? or can I get HD crisp images of pool games with something simpler like a Sony CX150 or something else less expensive than the 700 or the 20?

I am not a professional producer or anything, I just want clean crisp video of the games that you can read the ball numbers for example. I am using standard 4:3 Panasonic SDR-S10 Digital Camcorder This one that I have now is NOT good quality at all and I am looking to significantly upgrade from this one.

Your advice on which camera would be ideal would be appreciated. I hope not to have to jump to the $1000 range, hopefully something middle of what i have and that price point.

[budwzr]

The only advice I can give is save some money for a good NLE because you're gonna be doing a lot of post production color correcting.

[Wink]

What is NLE - Non-linear editor?

[budwzr]

Yes, like Sony Vegas Movie Studio, and there are others.

Are you going to mount the camera in a fixed location? Or run around between shots? Or use multi cameras? Or a crane? What about audio?

There's a lot to it.

What is NLE - Non-linear editor?

[edDV]

Camcorderinfo.com rates cameras by low light sensitivity, low light noise and low light color accuracy.

On those factors, the following small format models scored higher than average.
http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Panasonic-HDC-TM300-Camcorder-Review-37105/Low-Li...erformance.htm
http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Panasonic-HDC-TM700-Camcorder-Review-37681/Low-Li...erformance.htm

The larger format prosumer cammcorders did better
http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Canon-XL-H1A-Camcorder-Review-36185/Low-Light-Performance.htm
http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Canon-XH-A1S-Camcorder-Review-37140/Low-Light-Performance.htm
http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Canon-EOS-7D-DSLR-Camera-Review-37365.htm

[Atak_Snajpera]

@Wink
You should check Sony HDR-CX550

[Wink]

Yes, like Sony Vegas Movie Studio, and there are others.

Are you going to mount the camera in a fixed location? Or run around between shots? Or use multi cameras? Or a crane? What about audio?

There's a lot to it.

What is NLE - Non-linear editor?

Tripod mount or mounted on the wall for home, on a shelf or tripod when at a Pool Hall.

One camera, mounted at the rack end about 7-8 ft off the ground, downward angel focused on the table area almost exclusively.

[Wink]

@Wink
You should check Sony HDR-CX550

I was looking at the 550 and it seemed to have good low light capability as well. Almost bought that exact camera as a matter of fact at BestBuy last weekend. They didn't price match at the register like they said they would, so I walked... oh well.

[Wink]

Camcorderinfo.com rates cameras by low light sensitivity, low light noise and low light color accuracy.

On those factors, the following small format models scored higher than average.
http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Panasonic-HDC-TM300-Camcorder-Review-37105/Low-Li...erformance.htm
http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Panasonic-HDC-TM700-Camcorder-Review-37681/Low-Li...erformance.htm

The larger format prosumer cammcorders did better
http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Canon-XL-H1A-Camcorder-Review-36185/Low-Light-Performance.htm
http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Canon-XH-A1S-Camcorder-Review-37140/Low-Light-Performance.htm
http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Canon-EOS-7D-DSLR-Camera-Review-37365.htm

Thanks edDV, I have been spedning quite a bit of time on the comparison and review sites. They have helped me narrow down so far.

[budwzr]

If the lighting and camera are fixed, then almost any camcorder should be fine, just don't leave it on "auto".

FWIW, this is not really a "low light" situation, the subject is very well lit.

[edDV]

@Wink
You should check Sony HDR-CX550

Is the HDR-CX550V that much better than the 15 Lux HDR-CX500V?

[Wink]

I get confused on LUX, would a 15 lux have better low light than a 3 lux?

I thought I want a low lux number for sensitivity...

[edDV]

I get confused on LUX, would a 15 lux have better low light than a 3 lux?

I thought I want a low lux number for sensitivity...

Camcorderinfo measures Lux (light intensity) required to make the test chart white reference reach 50 IRE (half reference white but usable). The lower the Lux the better but you need to take into consideration noise and color accuracy. Many cameras cheat low light by going near monochrome.

[Wink]

Thanks

[budwzr]

That's an excellent point that edDV made, you don't want to go grayscale or look like some half-arsed army night scope, and Sony is notorious for that kind of stuff, I remember they had a 300X camcorder once, but the pixelation was so bad it was a joke. Out past 50X it looked like a bad special effect.

[intracube]

On those factors, the following small format models scored higher than average.
http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Panasonic-HDC-TM300-Camcorder-Review-37105/Low-Li...erformance.htm
http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Panasonic-HDC-TM700-Camcorder-Review-37681/Low-Li...erformance.htm

Thanks edDV, I have been spedning quite a bit of time on the comparison and review sites. They have helped me narrow down so far.

Although camcorderinfo.com does pretty comprehensive tests, I'd be cautious about some of the conclusions they make - particularly their low light tests. The way they measure low light performance will be strongly influenced by a cameras noise reduction system rather than the capability of the lens/sensor.

The downside of using strong noise reduction is fine, low contrast details and textures appear smoothed over or even disappear - particularly when panning the camera. Filming a static scene with no low contrast detail masks this.
http://www.camcorderinfo.co.uk/content/How-We-Test-Camcorders-36180.htm#lowlightnoise

Take a look at the raw videos posted here:
http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/canon-xf-series-hd-camcorders/478223-xf300-compared-panaso...ml#post1524096
Particularly the Canon HF S21 and the Panasonic TM700
I disagree with 'Ivan Pin' that the test serves no purpose. Although the cameras are in 'automatic mode', the test still shows how different cameras cope with the same dimly lit scene. Although if some of the cameras drop the shutter speed under low-light, they would have an unfair advantage. My Canon HF S21 does this; not sure about the Panasonic.

To my eyes, the TM700 has stronger noise reduction - blurring the grass and other textures, especially when the camera pans. The HFS21 might have marginally more noise, but it manages to record a more detailed image.

The Sony PMW-EX1R and Canon XF305 do particularly well, but are probably outside your budget.

[Wink]

[QUOTE=intracube;2034078][QUOTE=Wink;2033998]

Take a look at the raw videos posted here:
http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/canon-xf-series-hd-camcorders/478223-xf300-compared-panaso...ml#post1524096
Particularly the Canon HF S21 and the Panasonic TM700
I disagree with 'Ivan Pin' that the test serves no purpose. Although the cameras are in 'automatic mode', the test still shows how different cameras cope with the same dimly lit scene. Although if some of the cameras drop the shutter speed under low-light, they would have an unfair advantage. My Canon HF S21 does this; not sure about the Panasonic.

To my eyes, the TM700 has stronger noise reduction - blurring the grass and other textures, especially when the camera pans. The HFS21 might have marginally more noise, but it manages to record a more detailed image.

The Sony PMW-EX1R and Canon XF305 do particularly well, but are probably outside your budget.

In the side by sides, I think that I prefer the HFS21 (over TM700K), although I was trying to stay in the price range of the HF20.

WRT the EX1 and the XF305, umm YEAH.... those are WAY outside of my price range! LOL!

[edDV]

WRT the EX1 and the XF305, umm YEAH.... those are WAY outside of my price range! LOL!

And those would be substandard in a pro environment. It comes down to budget.

[intracube]

In the side by sides, I think that I prefer the HFS21 (over TM700K), although I was trying to stay in the price range of the HF20.

The HFS200 ($749) and HFS20 ($849) are also available. I believe they're mostly the same as the HFS21 but without the electronic viewfinder, and different internal memory.

I haven't found the viewfinder on the HFS21 to be that useful, mostly because of it's low resolution compared to the flip out screen. I've only used it occasionally in strong sunlight.

This site has some a large selection of camcorder reviews:
http://camcorder-test.slashcam.com/compare.html
Check out the comparison of the HFS21 vs TM700 which shows an interesting difference in the colour resolution:

The HFS21 is less defined on the toadstool compared to the TM700.

Although there are some anomalies in their tests:
- The HFS21 is in 'interlaced' mode, the TM700 has been set to 'progressive' which may affect the resolution
- They've used the same test image for the Canon HFS20/HFS200/HFS21 and just renamed it
HFS21: http://produktdbimages5.slashcam.de/camcorder-testergebnisse_testbilder_testbild_1200_lux_153.jpg
HFS20: http://produktdbimages2.slashcam.de/camcorder-testergebnisse_testbilder_testbild_1200_lux_152.jpg
HFS200: http://produktdbimages4.slashcam.de/camcorder-testergebnisse_Dtestbilder_testbild_1200_lux_154.jpg
The robot and wheel is in exactly the same position in all three. Their sound measurements are also identical. Looks likely they haven't actually tested all three cameras...

Even if Canon state the lens/sensor/electronics of all three cameras are the same, it seems bad practice.