Best camcorder for enthusiastic amateur

bogtotty

I know there have been a few of these threads but most of them refer to very tight budgets. I'm looking for a camcorder for recording holidays, the kids, occasional interviews and presentations etc. It should be good inside and out, have decent sound quality, record to hard disc as well as sd cards, connect easily to my laptop (Dell studio running Windows 7) and be editable with Adobe Premier. Full HD would be preferable. Budget is ideally around 350, but would pay more for something decent, probably up to 500ish. I'm currently considering the Canon Legria range, or the Panasonic HS25. The Panasonic I've seen is the last one in stock - I'm wondering why this is - does anyone know if they're launching a newer model anytime soon?
Any advice would be much appreciated.

Freddie59

bogtotty wrote: »

I know there have been a few of these threads but most of them refer to very tight budgets. I'm looking for a camcorder for recording holidays, the kids, occasional interviews and presentations etc. It should be good inside and out, have decent sound quality, record to hard disc as well as sd cards, connect easily to my laptop (Dell studio running Windows 7) and be editable with Adobe Premier. Full HD would be preferable. Budget is ideally around 350, but would pay more for something decent, probably up to 500ish. I'm currently considering the Canon Legria range, or the Panasonic HS25. The Panasonic I've seen is the last one in stock - I'm wondering why this is - does anyone know if they're launching a newer model anytime soon?
Any advice would be much appreciated.

If you choose a flash memory (SD card) or Hard Drive camcorder, the format will be most likely AVCHD. Google AVCHD editing and you'll see the problems.

I bought a Canon HV40 HDV tape-based camcorder, and it's a dream. OK, it's dearer, but you can edit it on your existing PC. Even recording at SD it's impressive. Choose carefully!:)

TommyGun

AVCHD editing and you'll see the problems?

I use Edius with booster, no problems, no transposing.

And that's at the highest PH 20 bit rate, editing with only a dual core.

TommyGun

If you can stretch the budget, have a look at the Panny HMC-40.

It is getting very good reviews and awards.

Freddie59

TommyGun wrote: »

AVCHD editing and you'll see the problems?

I use Edius with booster, no problems, no transposing.

And that's at the highest PH 20 bit rate, editing with only a dual core.

I beg to differ

This article, although from 2008, demonstrates the difficulties involved.

@ the OP: as I said already: choose CAREFULLY!

roguey

i'll recomend the Canon HV series also, i have a Canon HV20 and it is excellent, picked it up on Adverts.ie for €400

SouperComputer

Freddie59 wrote: »

I beg to differ

This article, although from 2008, demonstrates the difficulties involved.

@ the OP: as I said already: choose CAREFULLY!

Freddie, I'm curious. Have you used software lately that is not almost two years old with AVCHD and had a bad experience or are you just going on outdated info?

Personally I've gone the HDV route, but only because having tapes gives me a warm fuzzy feeling. Theres been times where I would have liked AVCHD much more, especially in footage shot with a lot a fast horizontal movement.
For HDV, I'll second the Canon HV-20. The Sony DC3 isnt bad, thats what I have, but the Canon I think overall is a better camera, especially where light is marginal, indoors for example.

Freddie59

SouperComputer wrote: »

Freddie, I'm curious. Have you used software lately that is not almost two years old with AVCHD and had a bad experience or are you just going on outdated info?

Personally I've gone the HDV route, but only because having tapes gives me a warm fuzzy feeling. Theres been times where I would have liked AVCHD much more, especially in footage shot with a lot a fast horizontal movement.
For HDV, I'll second the Canon HV-20. The Sony DC3 isnt bad, thats what I have, but the Canon I think overall is a better camera, especially where light is marginal, indoors for example.

I see where you're coming from. But I also discussed this with one of the tech heads in a locel educational institute (big into this stuff) and he says there's no problem editing AVCHD, as long as it's not more than 5 minutes long.:eek:

On a Mac, yep, probably a different kettle of fish, but PCs, to put it mildly, struggle with the format. HDV on the other hand.......:)

TommyGun

Freddie59 wrote: »

I see where you're coming from. But I also discussed this with one of the tech heads in a locel educational institute (big into this stuff) and he says there's no problem editing AVCHD, as long as it's not more than 5 minutes long.:eek:

On a Mac, yep, probably a different kettle of fish, but PCs, to put it mildly, struggle with the format. HDV on the other hand.......:)

I have to say i make money from producing videos. Between 1-2 hours long with the hightest bitrate AVCHD.

And the proof of the pudding is in the eating, and i eat well.

The editing is like a knife through butter. (with the right software & PC.

Your info is old. I have hands on experence with this CODEC.

Freddie59

TommyGun wrote: »

with the right software & PC.

The critical statement Tommy. But I will bow to your experience. Remember though that most of us Joe Soaps may not have that "right software and PC". And may not be able to afford it either.;)

TommyGun

ok Freddie,
I agree that editing AVCHD was a very bad in the passed. But so was DV for a long time.
I went with it as it was better than HDV at the highest bitrate.
It only resently I stoped having to transposing the files, due to an improvement in my software. My pc is not state of the art, a xp os, 2*2.6 amd, good video card a 4gb of ram.

As time moves on it can only get easier.
All the best.
Gerry

Freddie59

TommyGun wrote: »

ok Freddie,
I agree that editing AVCHD was a very bad in the passed. But so was DV for a long time.
I went with it as it was better than HDV at the highest bitrate.
It only resently I stoped having to transposing the files, due to an improvement in my software. My pc is not state of the art, a xp os, 2*2.6 amd, good video card a 4gb of ram.

As time moves on it can only get easier.
All the best.
Gerry

True Gerry. Like all formats. The video card is a must, and, sadly, many PCs fall down in this area. I use a three year old Dual Core Dell Optiplex 745 with nVidia Card, standalone 7200 HDD, and 3GB RAM. Even at that Pinnacle Studio can struggle with a long project.

Regards,

Freddie.

SouperComputer

Freddie59 wrote: »

True Gerry. Like all formats. The video card is a must, and, sadly, many PCs fall down in this area. I use a three year old Dual Core Dell Optiplex 745 with nVidia Card, standalone 7200 HDD, and 3GB RAM. Even at that Pinnacle Studio can struggle with a long project.

Regards,

Freddie.

Just to clarify for the sake of others, in the vast majority of cases a beefy graphics\video card will make NO difference to your editing experience or rendering speed. The video card only needs to be good enough to playback the video smoothly. Most onboard chips shipped with core2 or better these days will play 1080p.

Win7 and Snow Leopard supposedly have "built-in" support to use the graphics card's processor to render video. Weather this has been implemented yet and on what editing software I'm not sure. Maybe someone else can chime in.

TommyGun

SouperComputer,
One of effects plugins from prodad for Edius exclusively uses the video card to take the pressure of the processor and is a lot quicker at rendering a clip.

davgtrek

lads. i am in a similar boat but using a mac and ideally ( for now ) sticking with iMovie.

I have a lot of use for a new dslr and the fact that i have growing uses for video i was wondering whats the downside of buying say a Canon eos 5D ( or if budget is blown a 7D.) from a video editing point of view. is it a nightmare to handle the HD video from these cameras on a decent macbook pro with imovie.

or would picking up a €500 camcorder be handier for the video and keep the slr for the photography.

I think having the ability to use wide angle/fast lens etc on slr for video is surely a massive bonus. But not if the huge footage files are a nightmare to handle editing...

any advice on this one

r0k

I'd be interested to hear what people think about the question above, or maybe more specifically- Would I be better off with a canon 7d over say a panasonic ag hmc40 or something of that standard? Any thoughts would be massively appreciated

keefg

davgtrek wrote: »

whats the downside of buying say a Canon eos 5D ( or if budget is blown a 7D.) from a video editing point of view. is it a nightmare to handle the HD video from these cameras on a decent macbook pro with imovie.

or would picking up a €500 camcorder be handier for the video and keep the slr for the photography.

I

r0k wrote: »

I'd be interested to hear what people think about the question above, or maybe more specifically- Would I be better off with a canon 7d over say a panasonic ag hmc40 or something of that standard? Any thoughts would be massively appreciated

Check out Philip Bloom's blog for more info on DSLR's.

Not sure if imovie will handle the raw files from a DSLR, could be wrong but you'd probably need to upgrade to FCP.

Personally I say choosing a DSLR over a "normal" video camera depends on what you intend to use it for.

If you are just looking for the highest quality footage, the 5D mk2 has a full frame sensor, and are not worried about sound then a DSLR will certainly do the job.

If however you need to record sound (interviews, film dialogue, news reporter etc) then you have to remember that you will need a separate set up to record all of your audio and you will need to sync it in post. So you'll need to be half decent on an editing suite.