Ask Engadget: Best consumer-level HDD camcorder?
By Darren Murph 
posted December 25th 2008 10:28PM
posted December 25th 2008 10:28PM
Seems like the holidays are always good for sparking up a discussion on camcorders -- after all, what better time to have one than when everyone in your extended family's family is gathered together at your house? Take a break from the turkey and gift bags and give Chaz's question some thought. "I've been looking for a decent HDD-based camcorder. I just want to use it for normal everyday use, and maybe to record some live performances, like dance shows and stuff like that. I'm not looking to spend a fortune, and I'm obviously looking for the biggest bang for my buck. Thanks for any advice!"
Chaz might just be onto something here, as these memories you're making this week will be lost forevers and evers unless someone pulls out the camcorder and lights up the red light. If you've recently purchased a hard drive-based camcorder, why not toss in your advice? As for us, we'll point to Samsung's SC-HMX20C and simultaneously ask you to send in a question of your own to ask at engadget dawt com.
get the SR12 sony, really nice build quality, nicer hatches/doors than the canons, and really good low light performance. if you're looking for an HDD camcorder, i would definitely recommend it. you do end up using the touch screen a lot though, but it is much easier than the shitty menu structure on the canons, those joysticks hurt my thumb! haha
If you're looking for a HDD camcorder, the Canon Vixia HG20 is just under $600 with a 60 gig harddrive. If you record at full HD (1920x1080) at the highest bitrate, you will get 5+ hours of recorded video.
From what I've read, competing Sony models have a sturdier build quality but the image quality is _slightly_ less than Canon. However, Sony's models use touchscreen controls almost exclusively whereas the Canon model has a physical d-pad for navigating menus.
Also,
Search your soul and decide if you want your videos to be 100% digital. Excellent tape-based HD camcorders are still being made and sold. Also, the compression used on tape-based camcorders is less aggressive than the digital counterparts so you will enjoy better image quality AND faster processing times when manipulating video on your computer.
Of course, there are downsides to tape-based camcorders. Your recording time is limited to roughly one hour, or the length of the tape. Also, tape-based camcorders are forever limited to a resolution of 1440x1080 which is then stretched up to 1920 x 1080 for playback. The digital counterparts record at a true resolution of 1920 x 1080.
This page will give you a wonderful overview of things you need to know when making a HD camcorder purchase:
http://www.camcorderinfo.com/d/Reviews&level_b=Camcorder&level_c=HD.htm
I just bought the Sony HDR-SR11 (HD, 60Gb) and I've had it for 3 days ($679 on Amazon). No complaints whatsoever -- works as advertised. It was an upgrade from a 7-year old JVC Mini-DV and I'm liking the HD. I recorded a 7-minute bit, downloaded to my PC (via USB 2.0), used the Sony software to convert to MPEG, and uploaded to You Tube. I plays on You Tube in high quality...no problems. If you've got a PC that's new enough to crunch the video file and if you have enough storage (obviously, these two things usually go hand-in-hand), then I think it's a good move.
Gotta toss in my +1 for the HF11/HF10/HF100, while there are some artifact issues moving fast, the storage/size/look is where it shines. Its a consumer based take your kids to disney land camcorder. You want the memory of the trip not making sure you have 100% perfectly clear picture when mickey mouse goes for the throat of some random child. I ended up getting the HF10 for
Canon Powershot TX1
perfect blend of camera, hd video and small size
There are compromises to everything.
Go for a smaller, flash based camcorder (like the Canon HF11/10/100), and you get a really tiny camcorder with no viewfinder and some handling issues (sadly, Canon omits the viewfinder on many other models, like the HG20). Go for a AVCHD based camcorder (like any flash or HDD based camcorder) and you get easy transfers to computer, at the cost of image quality issues and editing headaches. Go for something really small like the TX1, and you're really tossing away a lot of things (obviously IQ goes out first), but getting ultra portability in return. Depends on what you're willing to give up, and what you really want.
Don't be fooled by the "resolution" numbers of 1920x1080. Any fool camcorder can record at that format. None actually can "resolve" that well, so you'll see many times that a HDV tape-based output that's limited to "only" 1440x1080 will out-resolve the digital output of "real" 1920x1080 camcorders. Many cheaper/smaller 1920x1080 camcorders can only get a muddy mess, hardly any better than a consumer standard-def model.
Go canon Hv30. HDV is proven. Tapes are perfect for archiving and cheap to purchase. Never worry about having to erase previous footage, just pop in a new tape and throw the old tape into the archive.
I have a Sony DCR-SR300... it's standard def. But what I like is that it looks like a USB hard drive when you plug it into your computer and the file format is mpeg2. The picture quality is pretty good and fantastic outdoors. It's a good choice if your platform isn't Windows (i.e. Linux). There are cheaper versions of this model that might also be interesting. Depends on how much quality/disk space you want.
Yeah ,(sniff) , they are allright gizmos if you 've never tried a RED just like the one I've got right here...
Canon HF11. It is part of a strong family of cameras, has exeptional lens, great audio, and superior bandwith (recording bitrate). For a better price you can now get the previous model, the HF10, which has a lower (but still good) bitrate.
It's not exactly what you asked for, since it uses flash memory (32 GB internal memory is included, you can add more), but I took the liberty of being open minded about the question, not taking it too literally.