Sony intros HDR-SR5C camcorder with 100GB hard drive

Sony's got a new camcorder for those that prefer to keep things hard drive-based, with its new HDR-SR5C model upping the on-board storage capacity to a mighty 100GB. Apart from that notable spec, the cam will give you a 10x optical zoom, a 2.1 megapixel "ClearVid" CMOS sensor, a Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T lens, a 2.7-inch widescreen LCD and, of course, the requisite Memory Stick Duo slot (for capturing still images). You'll also get Sony's trademark SteadyShot picture stabilization system, 5.1channel Dolby Digital audio recording, and a couple of nifty features like smooth slow video recording for those looking to analyze their golf swing or re-enact their favorite experiment from MythBusters. While Sony will gladly take your order now, to the tune of $1,300, you'll have to wait until July 9th or so for the camera to actually ship.

[Shaocaholica @ Jun 8th 2007 2:36PM]

Whats 100GB when the format is AVCHD. Not to mention this is just another interlaced only HD cam. With 100GB and beyond of onboard storage, at least beef up the bitrate of the format and give us progressive recording.

[Grant @ Jun 8th 2007 2:44PM]

It's a big hard drive, no question... but the problem it creates is, what do you do with all that video once you're done shooting it? If you want to put it on a disc, you need that much available space on your desktop HD, and who's got an extra 100 GB to play with these days? And what are you going to do once it comes time to put it onto disc?

[Jagannath A @ Jun 8th 2007 2:51PM]

simple u need two bluray discs :P

[Dan @ Jun 11th 2007 4:29AM]

100GB+ hard drives are hardly uncommon these days and once transferred the majority of your video will find itself in the trash can after editing. AVCHD can be transferred to standard DVDs for HD playback on compatible players such as the PS3.

[Jagannath A @ Jun 8th 2007 2:52PM]

lol kidding... but if you dont have enuf space to store stuff just dont make stuff.

[Shaocaholica @ Jun 8th 2007 3:03PM]

Well why buy a 60GB ipod if you only have a 20GB desktop? 100GB at AVCHD bitrate is more than enough video for anyone other than a film maker and I would expect an amateur filmmaker to have the space. You don't need to put it on a 'disc'. The whole comsumer/prosumer video industry is moving away from discs and tapes.

[John Koetsier @ Jun 8th 2007 3:22PM]

The question is: do they still "muxe" the video and audio so that you can't edit properly. And do they still use MPEG2 instead of the higher quality MPEG4, which you would think they now have room for.

[FinDog @ Jun 8th 2007 4:24PM]

FYI. I ordered the 60GB HDR-SR7 on 5/7 which I think was the same week Sony put the camera on the site. I got an e-mail yesterday saying it was delayed until 7/5. Their site still says it ships 6/13. Upside: the longer I wait the more likely AVCHD support will be available when it comes time to edit my first movie.

[Yannis @ Jun 8th 2007 11:57PM]

Native AVCHD support is now available in a bunch of different video editing software.

[Karim @ Jun 8th 2007 6:04PM]

Genius, and about time.

Clearly at least one division of Sony has their head screwed on straight.

Once you start recording to hard disk, changes in the recording format can be accomplished via a FIRMWARE upgrade. No more new flavor of tape every couple of years.

What Sony really needs to do now is standardize a format for REMOVABLE HARD DISKS. So you can pop the 100 GB out of this camcorder, and replace it with a 250 GB disk. Or take it out of the camcorder, and pop it into your PC. Or DVR. Or iPod. This is exactly the kind of thing where you need an industry leader like Sony to spur adoption.

Conventional hard disks are only going to get cheaper with higher capacities. Solid state disks (SSDs) are only going to get cheaper. A single "removable hard disk" format would obviate the need for a lot of the transfer mechanisms we use today (e.g. 1394) and ones we'll use in the future (wireless USB).

One format to rule them all. This is the kind of thing Sony ought to LOVE. LOL

[tekdroid @ Jun 8th 2007 10:45PM]

Hard drives may be nice to some people, but how do you share your vids with friends, family, etc? That's right, DVDs and maybe some of us even share with miniDV tapes.

They are cheap, removable archives. Hard drives cannot be given to friends and relatives. Nor are they robust throwaway archive formats. They are fragile relatively expensive creatures that need decent care.

Blu-Ray and HD-DVD might go some way to solving the "how do I archive my original vidoes in the original quality" question, but they are not cost-effective yet.

Which means that perhaps young Billy's first steps will be overwritten on the cam's limited-space HD once the parents burn things to DVD. With no option for cheap removable media in the cam, I think that's a certainty.

Also, AVCHD requires some monster horsepower to edit, if that's your thing.

[Shaocaholica @ Jun 8th 2007 11:17PM]

Sharing is what the internet is for. Not limited to youtube these days but you get my point. Even hosting HD isn't that hard these days.

I want to see more progressive cameras that can compress nicely without interlacing artifacts for web and digital distribution.

[Asterra @ Jun 9th 2007 12:06AM]

The first poster said everything I wanted to. There are already enough HD camcorders out there for certain facts to be perfectly clear. 1: MPEG2 at any (current or feasible) bitrate is rubbish. AVCHD at all currently touted bitrates is rubbish. HDV as a codec doesn't appear to be any better than AVCHD, but at least it defaults to 25mbps, which gives it all the edge it needs over AVCHD camcorders and boosts Canon's cheaper HV20 way past every expensive Sony HD consumer camcorder that has ever seen the light of day. (Check CamcorderInfo.)

25mbps is still inadequate, even for a contemporary codec. 30 should be the minimum excusable bitrate (to maintain some hypothetical compatibility with HD-DVD) with the option to scoot all the way to 40 (Bluray max) and beyond (ignoring standardized media players for archival purposes). A camcorder that uses a harddrive and costs over a thousand dollars has no excuse.

[ccox @ Jun 9th 2007 1:34AM]

It's expensive... but not that much more than a non HD unit. And camcorders keep their value. Selling sometimes for EVEN MORE than what they sold for new (because camcorder features change).

With that said, unless you just have to have HD today.. I'd be patient and wait. DVD quality and resolution is good enough for most people. Remember that old VHS camcorder? Now that would be hideous by today's standards.

If you must have a camcorder today, save some money and get a non-HD hard drive camcorder. I do own a Sony DCR-SR300... I recommend it. Sure, it's pricey, but it's still within the same price range as its competitors and unlike most of them, it's actually a pretty nice camera.

[nikster @ Jun 9th 2007 2:55AM]

I would not get anything that's not HD in this day and age. I already have a HDTV and I think looking at standard def footage 10 years from now will look like super 8 does now - severely outdated. Antique, even.

[tekdroid @ Jun 9th 2007 10:17AM]

Shocaholica,
Until these cams come with web sharing applications for the unwashed masses, cheap physical media will still be very important (and is still highly important for the majority of the market who just want to press PLAY and have things run; they are the ones buying these cams en masse and driving the convenience push, after all).

The industry still hasn't got an answer to the question of archiving hidef originals cost-effectively (and reliably). Perhaps in a few years high-capacity opticals like Blu-Ray will be cheap.

In the meantime, these steps are avoided with the direct-to-dvd and direct-to-tape cams; just put another dvd/ tape in. The fact pretty much remains that hidef content needs a big budget, not only to handle slowwww editing, but to handle archives.

[Shaocaholica @ Jun 9th 2007 12:40PM]

Well maybe they should make some cheap(er) FW/USB DVD decks. When I take a camera out for travel or a project, I don't want to lug around anything more than I need including the mechanics for tape or disc. HDD is ok, solid state is better. The worst thing about tape is queueing up stuff. Everything will be better when the whole process is non linear, fast write, fast erase, fast seek.

[KC @ Jun 9th 2007 3:30PM]

100GB is a ton of space. I have the SR1 with 30GB, and I've never come close to filling it up (4 hours of HD quality or something). If you need to share 20 hours of non-stop home video with your friends and family, I really pity them for having to sit through all of what you filmed.

[cinatrade @ Jun 13th 2007 5:18AM]

I think the price of Brand DC and DV is too expensive. You can find more unbranded DC and DV from Chinese Manufacturers, please see here:
http://www.cinatrade.com/productlist.jsp?cate2=44

a lot of cool DC abd DV.

[dynamicD @ Jun 13th 2007 2:08PM]

So whish is better? this or the HDR-SR8?

[bigyield2010 @ Jun 19th 2007 9:19PM]

Why is the SR1 more expensive than the higher-drive-capacity SR5, SR5C, SR7, and SR8?

Other than a larger LCD, I don't see any advantage to the SR1.