Are there differences in Digital Camorders?

[mongoo13]

Hi, I'm trying to figure out if my Digital8 Camcorder cuts it or not. Its a sony. ... TVR570 ???? I think. Something like that.

Anyways, I've always thought that that all digital camocorders where equal in quality, But I've heard little things here and there that make me start to think otherwise. For example I heard something about having multiple light detectors or something.

Is there a difference between Digital Camcorders or all they all the same?

Like What would a $2,000 DV Camcorder have or do that mine doesn't?



On a side note, I was looking around at Ultimate Electronics and saw they had a High Definition Camcorder, made by JVC I think for like 3 or 4 grand. Whats your take on these? I mean as of right now there are no HD DVD's out there or players so you wouldn't be able to get the benifit of higher resolution anyways.


Thanks for the help

[Jester700]

Yes, big differences in cams. All have the same capability in terms of the tape format, but the optics differ big time.

The better ones have 3 CCD sensor chips. This gives better color accuracy, better resolution, and better low light performance.

Also, CCDs vary in their resolution and size (which gathers more light - better low light ability & sometimes better colors).

Some lenses are better than others, and again, bigger ones let in more light (see a pattern here?).

That's why the best ones are big. The drive to make them fit in a pocket has also made the picture shitty.

HD cams can only work in MPEG for now, which means if you plan on editing the footage later, they're not a good idea.

[stsurbrook]

Jester700,

Just as a FYI, the JVC HD camcorder will output standard definition (SD, 720x480) DV as either 60p or 60i. Only when it is outputting HD (1280x720) does it output MPEG2-TS. The JVC camcorder also includes a NLE MPEG2 editor, basically eliminating the problems of editing MPEG2 in HD. With the SD DV output, you should be able to edit it with your SD NLE's.

Scott

[Jester700]

Jester700,
Just as a FYI, the JVC HD camcorder will output standard definition (SD, 720x480) DV as either 60p or 60i. Only when it is outputting HD (1280x720) does it output MPEG2-TS. The JVC camcorder also includes a NLE MPEG2 editor, basically eliminating the problems of editing MPEG2 in HD. With the SD DV output, you should be able to edit it with your SD NLE's.
Scott

That's cool, but the thing that gets videographers going is that HD. And they're not gonna be happy with MPEG editing.

And NO editor will eliminate the problems of MPEG editing. Maybe it cuts only on I-frames without sync loss, but then you still only have 2 edit points per second. Maybe it allows editing on any frame, but then surrounding frames will be re-rendered, at substantial quality loss. Maybe it gives you a choice of either, but that still isn't near as good as DV editing. Unless the MPEG is ALL I-frames, in which case it's probably as big a memory hog as DV!

[arcorob]

You have a very nice full featured unit but differences are in many area's

You have to know what you want, to get what you want. Example, if you are looking for high resolution and lighting is not a factor, then a 3 CCD or at least a megapixel camera is what you want. Optics Optics.

But say you shoot in low light like I do and extra lighting is NOT always an option. Now you have to look at LUX ratings. Well guess what ? The two best LUX rated cams on the market are at both ends of the price spectrum...

The TRV140 at about 300 bucks and the VX2100 at about 2500 bucks. Everything in between is 4 LUX or higher minimum whereas these babies are 1 lux.

You also want to think about features like digital passthru...Do you need it ?

If you are a general shooter, keep what you have. That camera is a workhorse. You may want to invest about 80 bucks for a shoe mounted light (10 watt) or about 120 for the 10/20 watt (then a battery)

That is for those late party scenes.

I have 4 TRV140's, 1 TRV340, 1 TRV740 and will all soon be replaced by 3 VX2100. I can actually get them for about 1600 so for 4800 bucks, my business is flying...But will never part with the TRV140's as backup. No features, just awesome shooters

[Jester700]

But say you shoot in low light like I do and extra lighting is NOT always an option. Now you have to look at LUX ratings. Well guess what ? The two best LUX rated cams on the market are at both ends of the price spectrum...

The TRV140 at about 300 bucks and the VX2100 at about 2500 bucks. Everything in between is 4 LUX or higher minimum whereas these babies are 1 lux.

You also want to think about features like digital passthru...Do you need it ?

If you are a general shooter, keep what you have. That camera is a workhorse. You may want to invest about 80 bucks for a shoe mounted light (10 watt) or about 120 for the 10/20 watt (then a battery)

I have 4 TRV140's, 1 TRV340, 1 TRV740 and will all soon be replaced by 3 VX2100. I can actually get them for about 1600 so for 4800 bucks, my business is flying...But will never part with the TRV140's as backup. No features, just awesome shooters

No way those x40s are really 1 lux - that rating is for that B&W nightshot mode. My 120 & 320 have larger CCDs than the 340 (1/4" vs. 1/6") and they SUCK in low light. Grainy, colorless. To be honest, most modern cams suck at this because of the drive to make them smaller.

Now the VX2100 - THAT is nice. I bet you'll be well pleased with the difference you get with your new gear.

Having said all that, you're right in that he should keep the cam, but I think he should rent or borrow some better stuff to see what it can do. Or buy some tape and shoot some test vid in the stores.

[arcorob]

Sorry, but I must correct you. They are one LUX , STANDARD. In nightshot they are zero (o).

Not trying to feud, but I worked with Sony on this. Best kept secret in town. I could probably tell you the minimum lux rating on every Digital 8 Sony made because I HAD to research this for my wedding biz.

Hey, and here is where they come in handy. I was shooting a wedding Saturday, 3 camera's as I always do. 15 minutes in, POWER FAILURE. The church was not much brighter than the candles at the altar. Did I lose the wedding ? Nope. The TRV140's got it and it is VERY viewable. I had to adjust the gain and the saturation slightly in Vegas 5.

the TRV340 ? It was having trouble with autofocus in the dark so I switch to manual exposure and manual focus and viola, was able to salvage during the wedding.

These damn digitals.

Sony will NOT explain why they could make analogs with a .4 lux rating but the average digital is 4 to 7 ...so the reason I want the VX2100 is they are 1 lux. By the way, the older VX2000 is a 2 lux minimum without light shot...wow ...big move...LOL

Best always

[tWoSour]

Jester700,

Just as a FYI, the JVC HD camcorder will output standard definition (SD, 720x480) DV as either 60p or 60i. Only when it is outputting HD (1280x720) does it output MPEG2-TS. The JVC camcorder also includes a NLE MPEG2 editor, basically eliminating the problems of editing MPEG2 in HD. With the SD DV output, you should be able to edit it with your SD NLE's.

Scott

what you forget to mention is the jvc one that is out right now is only a 1ccd camera. Why spend 3 grand on a 1ccd camera?

JVC announced that their new HD cam is 3ccd, but htat wont be out for a few monthes.

[Jester700]

Sorry, but I must correct you. They are one LUX , STANDARD. In nightshot they are zero (o).

Not trying to feud, but I worked with Sony on this. Best kept secret in town. I could probably tell you the minimum lux rating on every Digital 8 Sony made because I HAD to research this for my wedding biz.

Hey, and here is where they come in handy. I was shooting a wedding Saturday, 3 camera's as I always do. 15 minutes in, POWER FAILURE. The church was not much brighter than the candles at the altar. Did I lose the wedding ? Nope. The TRV140's got it and it is VERY viewable. I had to adjust the gain and the saturation slightly in Vegas 5.

the TRV340 ? It was having trouble with autofocus in the dark so I switch to manual exposure and manual focus and viola, was able to salvage during the wedding.

These damn digitals.

Sony will NOT explain why they could make analogs with a .4 lux rating but the average digital is 4 to 7 ...so the reason I want the VX2100 is they are 1 lux. By the way, the older VX2000 is a 2 lux minimum without light shot...wow ...big move...LOL

Best always

OK, but lux ratings are like power ratings in car audio - you could pull a number out of your hat and nobody could prove you wrong. These are OK, and better than many others at their price (that's why I have a 110, a 120, and a 320 after all). But they are NOT the equal of any of Sony's 3 chippers, even of lesser lux "ratings". The low light picture may be watchable, but it ain't pretty IMO. A 900 or 950 would be much better.

There's nothing about analogs that give them an advantage; the optics can be the same. But plenty of big old 3CCD analog machines with 1/3" chips would smoke the newer, smaller digitals in low light. Of course, the analog anomalies remain.

I like my D8s a lot, but they aren't all that. I'd love to see your candlelight wedding, because I can't get anything like those results with mine that I'd be willing to take money for. The pics I've seen of these cams in comparison tests bear me out.

[stsurbrook]

tWoSour,

Good point about the 1ccd. However, you should read JVC's write up on how they have overcome many of the limitations of 1ccd camera's.

Will the color be equal to a good 3ccd HD camera? Not very likely. However, I would be willing to bet that the quality of the DV color output (720x480) would rival many of the SD 3ccd cameras. Yeah, the price is a bit more, but those 3ccd cameras can't do (1) HD, (2) 30p, 60i, 60p output, and (3) MPEG2 output, ready for DVD (if you are so inclined).

For the same money, I would have to take a hard look at the JVC HD, Sony VX2100, and Canon GL2. It would probably take 24 hour demos of each for me to finally decide. I'm just glad I don't have to make that choice right now. I will probably wait for another 2-3 years before getting a new camcorder and I hope the 3ccd HD units will be <$3K by then (probably VERY wishful thinking ).

Scott

[arcorob]

Jester,

You have to see it to believe it. Yes, LUX ratings are like watts (is that RMS or not ...LOL)

But in the case of the TRV140, it IS the only redeeming value. Put it side by side with a 3 CCD camera or any other for that matter and turn the lights down to candlelight. The others (as you know) turn grey. The TRV keeps shooting IN COLOR with little loss. Lossless ? No. But for the situations I am in (receptions where they wont let me use spotlights) it works.

I usually get the place to leave the lights up over the dance floor so with that little bit of light, they are great . My 340 always has to be ADJUSTED during editting as it doesn't match.

Anyway, glad to see our friend here got lots of advice.

Best always....

[Jester700]

Hey, I'm not kidding - I would LOVE to see stills of this if you have them. The reason I'm incredulous is, the 140 optics are the same as the x20 series ones I have - same lens, same CCD. So they're doing some electronic trickery to get better low light performance (assuming it is really better) and I want to see how well it works. They don't advertise that model as any super HAD machine or anything. I've gone from skeptical to curious... If it is better, I want one; these are cheap on eBay.

[arcorob]

Hey buddy,

I will find some way to post a link to a short clip. Before and after the lights went out with both the 140 and 340. YES, they are cheap on ebay...Thats where I get my spares.

For a LOW grade look, look at the demo on my website. Not a great representation since its WMV, but you will see things I have shot with the 40's and 340

www.arctechvideo.com then click demo, it will autoload

[Jester700]

Well, it's hard to tell what the original light levels were, but those shots look pretty good! Don't bother uploading more; I got what I need and I think I'll look for one of these to play with! Thanks!

[choirislife923]

wait...does the TRV140 have digital passthru (desparately needed by me...my ATI TV Wonder drops too many frames...)?

also, do you know how it would stand against a TRV350?

[Jester700]

wait...does the TRV140 have digital passthru (desparately needed by me...my ATI TV Wonder drops too many frames...)?

also, do you know how it would stand against a TRV350?

No. No passthru, no Hi8/Video8 playback.

[Jester700]

Well, I got a 140 off eBay and it's not bad. It's not the improvement I'd hoped for, and doesn't compare to the more conservatively rated TRV900, but it is a little better than my other D8 cams, all of which also have the 1/4" chip. So Sony did something to goose the low light performance. It ain't 1 lux IMO, but it ain't bad. Plus, it has a little cam light built in - pretty cool.

So I would highly recommend this cam for anyone looking for a cheap, decent low light cam. The earlier models had some features the 140 misses, though, so if it'll be a person's only cam, he'll have to choose what's important.

If anyone's interested, I can put up a quick page with some comparison shots...