Ask Engadget: Best video camera for $1000?
By Paul Miller 
posted May 2nd 2007 6:46PM
posted May 2nd 2007 6:46PM
After burning the midnight question-answering oil with y'all last night, we're here for another session of Ask Engadget. To get your questions featured, hit up ask at engadget dawt com, and we'll pick the best for answering by your fellow readers. After dwelling on the topic of Anna's e-book conundrum last night, we're going after a much broader category today, with a question from Clancy:"I'm looking to buy a new video camera. I don't want a "home handycam," but similarly I don't have loads of money, therefore I want a camera good in low light good for shooting movies and short films (good/quick focus etc) but I only want to spend about $1000 US. I realize that for that sort of money I'm not going to get much but what would you suggest? I've been looking at the Panasonic PV-GS500, what do you think?"
Lots of options out there. Clancy isn't going to get the pinnacle of cinematography for one grand, that's for sure, but we're betting he can find something passable at that price. Any suggestions?
why do you say something stupid like this. they have already said in the original post that they realize they won't be able to get top quality gear but they only have $1000 to spend so what would be the best they could get for that amount.
Get a nice SLR and learn to click the button really really fast.
huh? my post got cut off...
well... too bad you can only afford $1000, because I really want to suggest the sony hdr-sr5, which is $1099 (however, that's list price, so if you're lucky, it'll be around a grand on the web). sony just announced it, and engadget posted about it too. it will be out
no it didn't
huh? my post got cut off... sorry about the last two... i think i typed an escape sequence or something.
well... too bad you can only afford $1000, because I really want to suggest the sony hdr-sr5, which is $1099 (however, that's list price, so if you're lucky, it'll be around a grand on the web). sony just announced it, and engadget posted about it too. it will be out around july 13, so if you can't wait, then oh well.
I like it because it offers HD video of 1080i. it also records to a hard disk drive, so you'll find it very convenient. one of the things i hate about minidv tapes is that you can't browse by scene... rather, you have to fast forward or rewind the tape to a place, play the tape, and see if you are where you want. to play something over, you always have to rewind the tape. i'm sure you can already see how hard that would be to do. rewinding also uses a lot of tape, and you're limited to around 60 minutes of high quality video. and it's easy to lose cassetes, once you have a bunch.
the one good thing about cassettes is that they can record in standard definition video without compressing it... so you can edit it without losing any quality. but the files it produces are gigantic, and it's annoying to have to wait 60 minutes to upload a 60 minute video. with the hard drive camcorder, it's just a lot faster and easier to do things.
yes, you might lose some quality by editing the video from the hard drive camcorder. there is also limited software to edit the format (AVCHD) at the moment, but pinnacle studio 11 will support it soon.
i know some of you will not like the format that the sr5 records, but i really like it in terms of convenience.
Given the nature of the shoots (movies and short films) just make sure it has an external mic port and a headphone jack. Most newer sub-$1000 cameras don't have those two essential features. If you gave me $1000 today and I had to buy a camera I would find a good used Sony DSR-PD100. 3-chip, pro features, and good stock of accessories like XLR adaptor, lens adaptors, etc.
If I had to buy new I'd find a vendor selling their remaining stock of (the now discontinued) predecessor to the GS500, the Panasonic PV-GS400. They striped a lot of niceties of the older model when they released the 500.
Here's a second for the GS-400, much better than it's "successor".
check out the Canon HV20
I've had the Panasonic PV-GS500 for a few months now and have to say that it's probably the best money I've spent in a long time. The picture quality (at 16:9) and manual options are among the best around. Making widescreen home movies (with iMovie in this case) has been a real treat!
Try the Canon HV20 (under $1000 at Best Buy this week), which has a mic input (mandatory), and optical image stabilization. It shoots 1920x1080(i) HD (as opposed to most other HD camcorders in this price range), and has an HDMI output. Couple this with a Blackmagic Design Intensity PCI card ($250), and you can edit HD video on any PC/Mac, using Adobe Premiere Pro or Final Cut. It's a bargain, and the end result is very good for such a relatively small investment.
The camera uses Mini DV tape stock, and although flash memory is the future for video cameras, I would avoid hard drive camcorders. Sure, they are convenient, but there are disadvantages:
1. Hard drives fail. All of them.
2. As a filmmaker, you'll need to archive the raw footage. With a tape-based camera, you're already covered - the tapes are the archive. If a computer/drive crashes, you can batch-recapture your project without much effort.
3. Mini DV tape is used for DV and HDV recording, two standards that have been around for a while (and aren't going anywhere). They aren't perfect, but are superior than other consumer alternatives.
Hope that helps.
Shows up at $1099 on the Bestbuy website.
i am kinda curious about your comment about getting the HDMI capture card for a HV20. being a noob, and interested in getting a HV20, how would i be better off using a HDMI capture card as apposed to using the camera's firewire port to export video to a mac?
I agree with Chris Knight, the Canon HV20 is the way to go.
It would be a moral imperative.
As of right now, it provides the best bang for the buck in the $1,000 range.
Some tests on the DVi and DVXuser forums have provided interesting results that show the HV20 and it's predecessor the HV10 to provide image quality that compares quite favorably to its higher end siblings like the Canon XHA1, which at $3,500 already competes with cameras costing twice as much for professional applications.
The HV20 is very attractive to a wide range of users, and given the 24p mode it becomes an instant hit among indie filmmakers looking to give their videos a more genuine cinematic feel.
Ditto on the HV20. I have one, and bought it b/c it uses tape (low compression) and has an open mic input (which it needs ... get a Rode VideoMic or some other pick-up to get rid of the built-in mic which will pick up camera noise). It's been great so far.
I think you can pick one up for $949.99 at Amazon and OneCall this week.
Canon HV20, Circuit City $999.99
With the HV20's HDMI port, you aren't limited to HDV's codec limitations (both quality and workflow).
The HDMI connection allows you to capture at 1920x1080 (HDV is limited to 1440x1080), and far better (and variable) quality. On the mac, you can capture either uncompressed or with the DV100 codec. On the PC, you can capture either uncompressed or with Blackmagic's JPEG codec.
The uncompressed option is great if you have a massive hard drive array, but the DV100/JPEG codecs are more realistic for people with only one SATA capture drive - yet produce quality far superior to the HDV (mpeg-2) codec. There's also no slow rendering issues, and you can monitor editing in real-time on any HDMI-equipped monitor (the Intensity card has 2 HDMI ports, in and out). The firewire port is still needed for machine control (for batch-capturing), but otherwise having HDMI on the camera makes HDV are far more flexible format.
thanks for the info on the hdmi capture card. couple more questions:
does the HV20 record to tape in HDV format, and if so, wouldn't the quality already be lost when playing it back from tape even through to an HDMI card?
also i have an imac, so no pci-e slots :( can video be captured on a pc, then sent to the mac for editing in iMovie or Final Cut Express HD? i assume it wouldn't be a problem if the video was captured uncompressed, but does Blackmagic offer a mac version of their JPEG codec?
Right now the sweet spot for me was the Sony HDR-UX1. I was in a similar position, not wanting the most basic of camcorders, yet not wanting to even spend $1k. It can be had for $709 on Amazon now, $50 cheaper than I got it for a few months ago. The picture quality is AMAZING. Watching 1080i of you new born baby is where it is at. It has a mic in and a headphone out. It has a manual focus ring. Its two biggest weaknesses are it's lack of optical image stabilization (it uses an electronic version instead), a huge plus that the GS400 mentioned above does have, and its use of mini DVDs, which limits the amount of time you can shoot for. Depending on what you want to use it for, these may not be issues. You can compensate for low light situations well with a variety of Sony lights that work with this camera. You should read the reviews at Amazon, as well as at camcorderinfo.com (which gave it an OK review, but mentions a lot of noise--this is a problem I haven't noticed--maybe they made some changes to the model since it was released, but I don't notice any noise problem). You could also check out sonyhdinfo.com message boards for more info on this and other sony hd cameras.
In the end, this may or may not be the right camera for you, but at $709, this camera is a steal if you can live with the mini DVD format.
Hard drives may fail, but realistically, the quality that all current ~$1k HD camcorders offer is so unremarkable that one is very likely to end up acquiring a replacement in a year, perhaps in the form of an affordable XDCAM HD. 15mbps AVC or 30mbps MPEG2 are both hideous for one-pass encodings of live footage. And low light? Forget it.
That said, it does appear that the HV20 is the current winner, and _none_ of Sony's current or imminent offerings seem poised to change that, as they are basically mild variations on the same theme, and CMOS is simply an inferior technology.
I have a Canon HV10, and have been reading a lot about the HV20. They're both HDV camcorders, and both cost less than a grand.
Tape is best because of the reasons allready stated above, instant archive, less compression, compatible with current editing applications, tried and true MPEG2 codec, can be used for both DV and HDV in the same camera, DV being edited lossless, and HDV with very low loss on reencoding.
As I said, I have the HV10 and come from a Sony DCR-PC3, wich uses the same upright form factor. I like this, but if you are partial to the horisontal orientation then the HV20 is for you.
i agree with scbowman - get an older used prosumer camera. you need an xlr input and that camera would have decent optics as well as a focus ring and can be used better as a tool to learn how to shoot. be wary of hdv. it slows your editing down A LOT and its compressed making color correction a bastard. a pd100 will also have similar layout of buttons and features more similar to a pro camera, if you hope to shoot as a pro one day. the comsumer hd cameras have terrible optics and garbage features... id stay away. if you cant find a prosumer cam used for under 1k id just buy the cheapest mini dv camera i can for 300 bucks or so and then play with it and save up for a used dvx or pd150, or if you line up some gigs get an hvx :)
good luck!
Check out this link: http://www.cinevate.com/images/brevisonice.wmv from Cinevate who make a 35mm lens adapter to get the shallow depth of field (i.e. most like film) look.
--
Stephen Mowry
AdaptCommerce
www.adaptcommerce.com
Get Control of Your Technology
Sorry, I should've added that the Cinevate video was filmed using the HV20. :)
Stephen
--
Stephen Mowry
AdaptCommerce
www.adaptcommerce.com
Get Control of Your Technology
I just bought a Canon HV20 from Amazon.com It was a total of $1,079. That's including a 4 year service plan just to be safe. Better than any other HD offering and still cheaper.
That ice video linked earlier is a good example of what I like to call "hyper-idealized". The biggest weakness of the codecs used in HD camcorders is the aggressive interframe compression. Anything more demanding than refocused stillshots or gentle pans results in a dip in the effective resolution (right down to SD) or, worst case, heavy artifacting. But if you take footage that's doing practically nothing at all, then no sweat. Plus, if that footage happens to be in broad daylight, you can even bypass the striking limitations of the optics in these HD camcorders.
From what I read, the HDV cams on a Mac encode in iMovie or FCE to AIC (Apple Intermediate Codec). You edit like DV and then it re-compresses to HDV if/when you export to tape.
I still don't "get" the idea of HDMI instead of Firewire as an input type. I'd rather use the FW connection than the HDMI, especially with the use of AIC.
Not sure about PC options - gave up Windows 5 years ago.
i did some research on Blackmagic's website and in their pdf manual for that import card. looks like if you want the full advantage of the HDMI workflow, you basically need to just use the HDMI port on the camera in a "pass through" fashion, completely bypassing tape. sounds to me if you hit tape at all (which is what most people on a consumer camera will be doing), you've gone down to HDV and you might as well use the firewire port.
i could be wrong, but thats the way i read it. makes ya think twice about AVCHD (though good luck getting that working on a mac :( )
The HDMI jack allows recording in 4:2:2 color space versus HDV's 4:2:0 or DV's 4:1:1 color space. 4:2:2 is better color accuracy which helps when grading your footage or keying your footage (such as green screen). But to use the HDMI you have to have the camera tied to the computer via a cable. Not an option for a home user just looking to shoot birthday parties. But for someone interested in low budget filmmaking, this is a huge perk.
Also no one so far has mentioned that the HV20 is the only camera in this price range that can record at 24fps, which is ideal for the film-like motion.
It's really the sleeper camera of the pack. So yeah my vote is for the HV20
How about the Canon Powershot TX1 7? At $599 it's a 10x zoom digital camera plus HD camcorder... you'll have to wait until end of May but certainly looks to be pretty sweet!
If you all have thoughts on this let me know because I'm considering purchasing when it is released...
I do hope you realize that the HV20 is based on *GASP* CMOS technology.
Gawd. People let's do some basic fact checking before you spout off hypocritical statements.
One big vote for the Canon HV20...
Canon HV20. Although the Sony HDR-HC7 may have a few more features, it also has some stuff that will lock in to Sony's products at Sony prices, and some stuff that isn't supported by average software and hardware.
I'd say if you were a more advanced user and didn't mind the ~$200 bump in price, go with the Sony, but to be safer, simpler and cheaper, go with the Canon.
Canon HV20.
HV20 all the way, 1080i, hdmi, 24p(godsend for some, gimmick for others). It's definitely what i would get for a g. my only negative is the focus ring, which isnt really a ring, more of a nubbin really.
As for the hdmi, it spits out 4:2:2 while its actually shooting, otherwise, itll be spitting out the hdv flavor of compression. Get the hdmi card from blackmagic to get the same colorsampling you'd find in cameras costing more than 7x as much.
Now, cmos, old technology? I don't think so. There's a reason canon sticks with cmos, even with their dslr line. cmos provides better power efficiency as well as greater dynamic range, also gets rid of nasty vertical smear seen on ccds from bright points of light.
Ignore everyone else, Red (of Oakley Sunglasses fame) announced they are working on a 'mini-red' camera, if it anything it will be as ground-breaking as their amazing looking $18k camera that brings film quality digital images of FOUR TIMES the resolution of current 'HD' at a staggering 60/120fps.
It may be at least a year off but here's hoping that this 'mini-red' will be nearer the $1000 mark and bring with it the competition-trouncing features and image quality that their Red One already has provided.
Everything you need to know on http://red.com
Enjoy :)
Great for a year or two from now. Not so much for this year's vacation or what have you. ;p I'll certainly welcome more competition in the field. If RED manages to do what no other consumer HD camcorder manufacturer is doing - a good codec at a good bitrate - they'll win. The HV20 wins for now chiefly because its superior bandwidth enables it to win the quality gauges, which are all that really matter.
Not to skew the original post too much, but what if the limit were upped to $1500?
Is there anything that would provide a better 'bang for your buck' and be worth saving your pennies for an extra month or two, or is the HV20 the King of all Cameras until you start hitting the $2500 range?
the only answer to his conundrum is Canon HV-20
can u swap the hard drive?
can u upgrade the hard drive??
I've been working with DV cameras since the vx-1000. I've produced over 60 short digital films and mentored over 150 others. Been teaching Final Cut since the summer after it's release. HV-20. Yep. That's the camera. IMO the HV-20 is the best camera up to the higher end Canon HDV at over 3 grand. I personally own and love the Sony HVR-v1u.
try here
http://www.videoguys.com/blog/?p=907
When you're shooting stuff like movies, all the bells and whistles in the world means nothing if you miss the shot due to bad lighting, or bad composition.
I use a sony VX2100 (old by now, easily had for under $1000, but with plenty of features) but more importantly, I have a set of LIGHTS and a good wireless mic.
My suggestion? Spend no more than $700 on the camera, and spend the rest on a decent mic, and at least a few reflectors if not some real lights.
This weekend I went looking for a MiniDV camera. I'm work in web design so I wanted one that was high def. The Sony HDD Handicam had every feature I wanted, except the tape, and was in the $1,600 price range. I told the guy at the store (Micro Center) what I was looking for. He pointed me to one (the last in the warehouse - he had to go search for it), the Sony HCR-HC1 MiniDV released in 2005, but new in the box. Not only did it have all the features of the HDD one, but it was priced at $791.00. It had the original sticker under several newer ones, and it was originally marked $1,799.00 Best. Deal. Ever. The guy at the store said if I didn't buy it, he would, simply based on the price alone. Look around, the deals are out there.
I have the Panasonic PV-GS500. I'm very satisfied with it. Excellent picture I must say. Its ok with low light but then again this is a 3CCD camera so its not gonna be the best in low light. The sensors are supposed to be larger than other 3 sensor cameras so that explains why it actually doesn't suck in low light. Unless you're gonna be filming under the moonlight, you probably won't be bothered by the low ligh problem. The controls are very good but I think there is small room for improvement.
I would most definitely recommend this camera to anyone in the market.
I am looking for a camera to shoot documentaries for TV & the cinema. What will be the most professional camera I can buy at the best price?
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16830179126&Tpk=sr5
Sony HDR-SR5 on newegg.com only $899
It uses the best compression format. h.264 instead of the junk mpeg2. There isnt alot of editing software for it yet, but there will be by the end of the summer. And it is the future. Besides...do you really want Tapes? They can get damaged all the same as a hard drive can, just backup your videos more and there is no issue. Plus with tapes you have to playback and record to get on your computer, with hard drives you just transfer data. Oh and you have to rewind and fast forward, instead of just skipping ahead or back. Its like 8 tracks vs CDs...no contest. Quality from what I hear from canon is a smidge better, but hard drive is worth it.