HD Camcorder

[MarioB]

I’m considering in buying the new Sony camcorder HDR-HC3. But first of all I would like to hear some opinions of the owners of this machine:

Are you satisfied with it? Does it really have a (very) good picture quality?

Just another question concerning this camcorder: let’s say we shoot some scenes in HD format and then downconvert the film to SD — just to be able to author a normal DVD (I have not yet Blu-ray or HD-DVD). In this situation, is the final result (the normal DVD) better than if we shot the same scenes directly in SD, or does the picture quality remains the same?

Thanks in advance for your reply.

Mário

[Xesdeeni]

There are a number of technical reasons, but in general, shooting at a higher resolution and then downscaling will provide better quality than shooting at that resolution.

Also, you don't have to get an HD-DVD or Blu-Ray player and associated burner to enjoy your HD videos outside of the camcorder. If you burn your data, as-is on a DVD*R, you can play it on any of the Sigma Designs-based HD DVD players, including:

IOData LinkPlayer
Buffalo LinkTheater
JVC SRDVD-100U
DVICO HD M-5000
Zensonic Z500.

Prices run from about $250 to $400.

About 20 minutes of this will fit on a single layer DVD*R in the HDV format used on the the DV tapes.

But that's not all! You can also convert your video to DiVX, WMV, or MPEG-4 HD and these devices will play them as well (MPEG-4 is not available on all). Also, all of these devices have a network connection (some include wireless) so you can preview your video production right from your editing PC before burning anything. And they double as DVD players (the DVICO won't play encrypted DVDs), with component out. Most have DVI or HDMI as well.

Xesdeeni

[sorinicu]

IOData LinkPlayer has really capabilty to play HD-DVD's as is stated on CompUSA?

[Xesdeeni]

No, the IOData (or any of the above devices) cannot play HD-DVD (or Blu-Ray for that matter). (Someone probably made a typo, meaning to type "HD DVD" instead of "HD-DVD.") There are a number of reasons for this:

* HD-DVDs use a different physical disc format than DVDs and CDs. The drive in the players above were not designed for this format, so they cannot be played by these players.

* These new DVD technologies utilize a more sophisticated menuing (programming) system that requires additional firmware, processing power, and licenses that are not part of these players.

* HD-DVD (and Blu-Ray) require HDCP copy protection. Only the Zensonic (with HDMI) and JVC (with DVI-HDCP) listed above could support this.

* One of the required formats for HD-DVD (and Blu-Ray) is h.264, a.k.a. MPEG-4 Part 10. Only the Zensonic above can play MPEG-4, but only Part 2.

Xesdeeni

[sorinicu]

Thanks... I knew about the different drive necessary for the HD-DVD but it was unclear on CompUSA website:

LinkPlayer is not only a HD-DVD player, but also supports...

Anyway that looks nice:

This product has playback capability of Windows Media Video® 9 (WMV9), DivX® HD, and MPEG2-TS (HD 720p/1080i). HD mode allows you to enjoy pictures and movies in High-Definition (Video Up to 1080i / Photo Up to 2048x1532).
LinkPlayer2 supports HD mode for movie fans. The main chip decodes a real high resolution video (no scaling), and can also play Microsoft WMV9, MPEG1/2/4/ DivX®, WMV HD, DivX® HD, MPEG2-TS (HD 720p).

I'll look more into Zensonic.
LE: jeez... $400. I don't know if it worth the difference.

[pdemondo]

I bought the Sony HD camcorder.
PROS: Great Picture!

CONS: HEAD WHINE!!!! You can hear whine of the video head spinning even in moderately
noisy environments.

I recorded a couple of DV tapes worth and played it pack through
my HDTV. The picture is fairly close to PBS HDTV!
But at times, you can hear the whine of the video heads as they are spinning.

I exchanged it once, the second one was exactly like the first. I wound up
taking it back and getting the Sony HDD camcorder instead. That one is great!
Not HDTV quality but much easier to edit and zero noise when recording. Goes
straight to DVD.

Also beware of return policies. I bought from Circuit City, they have a 15% restocking
fee! I took my second HD camcorder to a different Circuit City that agreed to waive
the restocking fee since I was buying another camcorder from them.

So if you don't mind a little noise, get the HD camcorder. I, personally, prefer quiet
video over the better picture quality. Too bad there isn't an HD HDD camcorder.

[pdemondo]

Oh one more thing,
I did config the camcorder to downconvert from HD to regular DV and used WinDV to
transfer from the camcorder to my hard drive. At that point, it was just an encode
to mpeg2, author a DVD, and then burn a DVD.

[wwaag]

MarioB,

For more info on the HC3, suggest you go the Sony's HDV forum at http://www.sonyhdvinfo.com/.
They've got a sub-forum specifically for the HC3.

I bought the HC1 and must say that the picture quality is awesome compared with SD. One caveat, I've got a 65" HDTV. As your screen size gets smaller, the advantage of HDV is not as apparent. Bottom line--if your main interest is picture quality, go HDV.

The main drawback, at the moment, is editing HDV material. It's "painful" compared to DV since the native HDV format is a very high bit-rate MPEG2. However, it can be done with a modest machine (I use an old P4 with a 3Ghz processor). Although difficult, I would recommend doing all of the original editing in HDV. At that point, you can always render a regular 720x480 MPEG suitable for putting on a standard DVD.

For HDV playback, you can initially use your camcorder--not as convenient as a DVD, but the PQ will be much, much higher. I just got the Zensonic Z500, a networked high-def player and must say that the video is really great. The PQ of the the video is the same or perhaps better than using my HC1 for playback--the original source. Since its networked, I can playback directly from my computer. This is extremely useful for editing.

Bottom line, IMHO. If video quality is your major concern, then go HDV, do your editing in HDV, save your assets, and plan to create high-def DVD's in the future once the technology matures and prices come down. In the interim, you can always get a Linkplayer or Zensonic for watching your videos in HDV or even use your camcorder. Good luck.

wwaag

[Xesdeeni]

Thanks... I knew about the different drive necessary for the HD-DVD but it was unclear on CompUSA website:

LinkPlayer is not only a HD-DVD player, but also supports...

Yeah, it also lists HD-DVD in the table at the bottom listing the formats supported. I sent an e-mail to their webmaster. You could do the same...the squeeky wheel...etc.

I'll look more into Zensonic.
LE: jeez... $400. I don't know if it worth the difference.

Yeah, I have made it known that this is too expensive. They are late to the U.S. market, so I hope they aren't too disappointed by poor sales. For $400, you can pretty much put together an HTPC that will do more. Microcenter has a $250 PC with Windows XP installed. Add a $150 MyHD card for MPEG-2 HD TS playback, a wireless keyboard (mine was $30), download the K-Lite Mega Codec Pack plus DVD43, and you're set. And your HTPC can record HD, and it's playback codecs can be upgraded easily. Not to mention all the other uses of an actual PC.

The main drawback, at the moment, is editing HDV material. It's "painful" compared to DV since the native HDV format is a very high bit-rate MPEG2. However, it can be done with a modest machine (I use an old P4 with a 3Ghz processor). Although difficult, I would recommend doing all of the original editing in HDV. At that point, you can always render a regular 720x480 MPEG suitable for putting on a standard DVD.

For an inexpensive (albeit rudimentary) frame-based MPEG-2 editor, I recommend VideoRedo. The newest version of Premiere will do this, but for a whole lot more.

For HDV playback...I just got the Zensonic Z500, a networked high-def player and must say that the video is really great. The PQ of the the video is the same or perhaps better than using my HC1 for playback--the original source. Since its networked, I can playback directly from my computer. This is extremely useful for editing.

Bottom line, IMHO. If video quality is your major concern, then go HDV, do your editing in HDV, save your assets, and plan to create high-def DVD's in the future once the technology matures and prices come down. In the interim, you can always get a Linkplayer or Zensonic for watching your videos in HDV or even use your camcorder.

Yes, you can store <20 minute projects in the HDV format on a DVD*R (or <40 minutes on a DVD*R DL). But you don't have to wait for HD-DVD or Blu-Ray for longer projects. You can always encode into DiVX or WMV (or MPEG-4 for the Zensonic), and still have HD from these players!

Xesdeeni

[pdemondo]

Anbody here purchased the HC3? And if so, anyone notice the noise?

[daamon]

...first of all I would like to hear some opinions of the owners of this machine...

www.camcorderinfo.com - Is a respected site with good reviews. See if the camcorder is on there.

Good luck.

[edDV]

It is there. The HC3 is the novice targeted and cost reduced feature reduced version of the HC1. The HC1 is for the semi-prosumer that wants a good picture in a small form factor and half the cost of the HDR-FX1 to HVR-ZU1.

The issues with all HDV camcorders for consumers is the inadequacy of current home computers to handle HDV with any productivity. FCP and Vegas work OK if you can stand the processing wait. Pro solution is hardware conversion to uncompressed HD SDI with very expensive computers and RAID.

Simple cuts only HDV editing is realistic for a high end home PC but wait 2-5yrs to add special effects.

These suckers are slow slow slow and nowhere as easy as normal DV it you want to get fancy.

[pdemondo]

So nobody has mentioned actually owning one just discussed potential issues or
limitations of the camera? The other links are fine, but anyone here have used the
HC3?

[pijetro]

EdDV wrote:

Pro solution is hardware conversion to uncompressed HD SDI with very expensive computers and RAID.

@EdDV
Would the conversion be done at the card or at the camera? Seems that Canon's latest HD camcorders offers SD/HD-SDI, Genlock, and TC-in/out ports (whatever TC means )..

So in essence, i can see a potential for harddrive space, raid servers, and some sort of capture card that supports SDI interface, but what i don't understand is, why is there a need for such huge process power with uncompressed material? I thought that working with uncompressed material was suitable to modern day CPU's??

Or am i missing something...
Please fill me in with regards to hardware requirements..

[edDV]

So nobody has mentioned actually owning one just discussed potential issues of limitations of the camera? The other links are fine, but anyone here have used the HC3?

Never used the HC3 but there are plenty of reviews and user comments on the net. I Demo'd the HC1 outside but don't recall excessive noise. It may be different at home.

I've used the FX1 and ZU1 for projects but both are larger than I'd like for a personal travel cam. I rent them when I need them for a project.

The HDV issues are the same for all the cams. HDV is processor intensive.

EdDV wrote:

Pro solution is hardware conversion to uncompressed HD SDI with very expensive computers and RAID.

@EdDV
Would the conversion be done at the card or at the camera? Seems that Canon's latest HD camcorders offers SD/HD-SDI, Genlock, and TC-in/out ports (whatever TC means )..

So in essence, i can see a potential for harddrive space, raid servers, and some sort of capture card that supports SDI interface, but what i don't understand is, why is there a need for such huge process power with uncompressed material? I thought that working with uncompressed material was suitable to modern day CPU's??

Or am i missing something...
Please fill me in with regards to hardware requirements..

First, software decompression/recompression is very time consuming. Long GOPS for HDV make scrubbing jerky and cuts editing a rendering task. Realtime hardware SDI conversion is currently expensive. Uncompressed HD SDI requires ~125MB/s (1Tb/s) sustained at 1440x1080 and that calls for some serious RAID video serving. Remember realtime needs 2-4 active streams where any live processing is being done. Otherwise, you must render. A fast computer allows use of all I frame compressed storage like DVCProHD or AVID's DNxHD but we are talking $$$ there.

With uncompressed workflow, scrubbling and cuts editing is as fast as DV bit any rendering sends you into slow slow processing.

Check out this little $2500 box to see how it should be done and will be when reduced to a hardware converting PC card. Effects processing and filtering will be solved by future 8 to 32 core processors. Until then HDV/HD is too expensive and too slow on a typical home PC IMO. The PDF presentation below explains the issues.

The Convergent Design HD-Connect LE bridges HDV to HD SDI. I'm not saying this is the only way to do it but it shows the issues.
http://www.convergent-design.com/CD_Products_HDConnectLE.htm
This PDF presentation is a good overview for HDV to uncompressed issues.
http://www.convergent-design.com/HDLE%20files/HDV%20Editing%20Made%20Simple.pdf

To implement this in a single PC or MAC workstation, we would need Blackmagic or AJA SDI interface ($800-1600) and a substantial RAID ($1000up) plus the $2500 HD-Connect LE or a camcorder with SDI out.

There are intemediate software based methods available for FCP, Premiere Pro and Vegas but the computer needs to be fast and performance will be slower.

[sorinicu]

I am hoping that the soon-to-come Intel Conroe (Core 2 Duo) will be better suited for HD work... And of course, I already have 2x200GB @ 7200rpm in RAID0 only for storage.