I personally don't understand why everyone here is so HDV happy. HDV is kind of a clusterf*** of a format. No HDV seems to be same as another. There is no solid ground in the format.
I have not had any problem with the format, I really don't understand what you mean. The tapes I record with my Sony HC1 aren't incompatible with the tapes I record with my Canon HV10.
I have not had any problem with the format, I really don't understand what you mean. The tapes I record with my Sony HC1 aren't incompatible with the tapes I record with my Canon HV10.
He's right when dealing with 60i the only imcompatible company is JVC.
When it comes to 24p or 30p it's another story because different companies have different way of doing it. That's to be expected though, this type of situation never occured in mini dv so it's not comparable. Only the xl2 and dvx ever offered something like that and on a technical level even they were slightly different.
When shooting 60i all these cameras can use each other's tapes:
fx1
z1u
a1u
xha1
xhg1
fx7
v1u
hc3
hv10
xlh1
hc1
That's almost every hdv camera in existence, the only manufacturer left off is jvc's like what 3-4 720p models? And that number drops even lower if you conder the fact that their early hd1 and hd10 where garabage and didn't even fall into the standard hd colour space.
hdv on the whole is not incompatible with itself, the various methods of variable frame rates are and for the vast, vast majority of consumers, this is a non-issue they'll never even know about.
If money isn't really a huge deciding factor, I'd skip HDV and AVCHD altogether. Both will eventually be replaced with some other compression codec.
If I had the moolah (a little over $5000), I'd get the Panasonic HVX200. Shoots 24p and has the option of shooting standard def on miniDV tapes & HD on P2 cards (for quick downloading) or on a firewire connected harddrive (Firestore).
Blu-ray is a physical format, AVCHD is a codec. You could put AVCHD footage on a blu-ray disc. Not sure if you could play it back but that's another story.
AVCHD records to a red laser disk. I read an article where a Panasonic rep said the only reason for AVCHD in its current state is because blu-ray is too expensive right now to fit in a consumer format.
Quote:
Yes, same codec, but a completely different format otherwise. Different limitations, different market. So no, not marketing semantics. Different stuff.
They both use the AVC codec, they both are HD.
They both could be called AVCHD.
I disagree they are entirely different. One is designed to record as small a files as possible while still being considered HD. The other records much larger files. If they were differentiatig by technical differences one would be called AVCHD- Long GOP, the other AVCHD- I.
They both use the AVC codec, they both are HD. {/quote]
AVCHD records to a red laser disk. I read an article where a Panasonic rep said the only reason for AVCHD in its current state is because blu-ray is too expensive right now to fit in a consumer format.
I don't see why it has anything to do with the storage medium. Sony has one that saves directly to a hard disk, the other records to a DVD.
Quote:
They both could be called AVCHD.
I disagree they are entirely different. One is designed to record as small a files as possible while still being considered HD. The other records much larger files. The names are different only because of marketing.
They may both use the same basic codec, and are both HD, but they are both coded differently. The difference is more than just file size. It's like saying that DVCPRO HD and HDV are the same thing.
I don't see why it has anything to do with the storage medium. Sony has one that saves directly to a hard disk, the other records to a DVD.
Technically it doesn't. But that does not mean AVCHD is not a stop gap to a future technology. Because blu-ray can store more information. Panasonic will likely change the format to create less compressed higher quality pictures.
Quote:
They may both use the same basic codec, and are both HD, but they are both coded differently. The difference is more than just file size. It's like saying that DVCPRO HD and HDV are the same thing.
DVC-PRO HD and HDV are not the same in any way.
AVCHD and AVC-I basically come from the same technology purposed for different markets. Panasonic could take the AVC codec, encode it and store it in any number of ways. They could come up with a third format for the prosumer market. With a larger file size than AVCHD and smaller than AVC-I, call it AVCHD-S.
Panasonic could come up with a super professional format that records slightly compressed 4:4:4 800Mbps AVC - I HD. It all uses the same technology.
I have to agree yes. Because AVCHD uses Long GOP and AVC-I uses i frames. In the end that does make them very different.
I would imagine once blu-ray becomes more pratical as a consumer camera storage medium. AVCHD as it is known now will be left behind. Panasonic will adopt a range of AVC-I formats that go from 4:2:0 8 bit 25Mbs to 4:4:4 10 bit HD 800Mbps formats.
As long as their different editing formats i consider them different formats, I doubt NLEs won't need different settings for AVCHD vs AVC-i. To me, this makes it different enough.
In all honesty I don't belong here, mainly because I know nothing about cameras.
However I've read enough to make a couple of conclusions:
You and your Wife are expecting in a couple of months. You obviously can't wait for AVCHD (Did I get that right) to mature in 6 months.
If you really want HD recordings, you will need HDV then.
If you don't want to invest in an external Blu-Ray or HD DVD Burner for your Mac, and a Player if you don't have one already, you won't easily be able to play an HD format on you 1080i anyways. Though your Mac will easily play it in Frontrow or Quicktime/iTunes just fine (I assume it's an Intel based Mac and not a refurbished G5 or something that doesn't have Frontrow) or even Quicktime.
Going by that, you'll either need HDV or a Non HD format. Since I don't know much about Non HD formats, I'll just leave it at that.
You know what really sucks? I went to CES on Monday with every intention of looking at the new HDV HD camcorders. Per the recommendations of this thread, I have decided on the Sony HDR-HC3. But, what should my eye see? two more updated HDV HD camcorders from Sony; HDR-HC5, HDR-HD7. The worst part is that these two "newer" models are about the same cost as last years HC3. But, they're not available till the end of February. My baby is due the first of February.
Let's see, put up with the wife complaining about not having a camcorder for the first month of life of our first child, or put up with the self loathing of knowing I bought an outdated model for the same cost as the newer product.
A point I think should be made in this thread with the recent keynote in mind...
If you get yourself the new Apple TV you'll be able to play your HD movies on your plasma TV at 720p. While that won't be giving you the full 1080-line res from your future HD camcorder, you'll get more out of the originally-recorded resolution than you would by burning a DVD and playing that to your plasma display instead.
AppleTV! An excellent point. I pre-ordered mine about 30 seconds after the Apple Store came back on line after Steve's keynote. I've called Samy's and B&H and both have a 30 day return policy. I've decided to pick up the Canon HV10 and see how I like it. If it proves to be less than what I want, I'll return it and put the full amount toward an HC7. As stated above, I may miss a few weeks, but I'll have the video of the first few weeks and it'll be in HD 1080i.
The AppleTV solves my problem of not having an HDMI to stream directly from the camera to my plasma. Now, I just have to download the video to the computer first, then it's "on demand."
Comments
I personally don't understand why everyone here is so HDV happy. HDV is kind of a clusterf*** of a format. No HDV seems to be same as another. There is no solid ground in the format.
I have not had any problem with the format, I really don't understand what you mean. The tapes I record with my Sony HC1 aren't incompatible with the tapes I record with my Canon HV10.
The names are marketing semantics. They both come from the exact same codec, H.264/MPEG-4 Advanced Video Coding.
Yes, same codec, but a completely different format otherwise. Different limitations, different market.
So no, not marketing semantics. Different stuff.
I have not had any problem with the format, I really don't understand what you mean. The tapes I record with my Sony HC1 aren't incompatible with the tapes I record with my Canon HV10.
He's right when dealing with 60i the only imcompatible company is JVC.
When it comes to 24p or 30p it's another story because different companies have different way of doing it. That's to be expected though, this type of situation never occured in mini dv so it's not comparable. Only the xl2 and dvx ever offered something like that and on a technical level even they were slightly different.
When shooting 60i all these cameras can use each other's tapes:
fx1
z1u
a1u
xha1
xhg1
fx7
v1u
hc3
hv10
xlh1
hc1
That's almost every hdv camera in existence, the only manufacturer left off is jvc's like what 3-4 720p models? And that number drops even lower if you conder the fact that their early hd1 and hd10 where garabage and didn't even fall into the standard hd colour space.
hdv on the whole is not incompatible with itself, the various methods of variable frame rates are and for the vast, vast majority of consumers, this is a non-issue they'll never even know about.
If I had the moolah (a little over $5000), I'd get the Panasonic HVX200. Shoots 24p and has the option of shooting standard def on miniDV tapes & HD on P2 cards (for quick downloading) or on a firewire connected harddrive (Firestore).
Blu-ray is a physical format, AVCHD is a codec. You could put AVCHD footage on a blu-ray disc. Not sure if you could play it back but that's another story.
AVCHD records to a red laser disk. I read an article where a Panasonic rep said the only reason for AVCHD in its current state is because blu-ray is too expensive right now to fit in a consumer format.
Yes, same codec, but a completely different format otherwise. Different limitations, different market. So no, not marketing semantics. Different stuff.
They both use the AVC codec, they both are HD.
They both could be called AVCHD.
I disagree they are entirely different. One is designed to record as small a files as possible while still being considered HD. The other records much larger files. If they were differentiatig by technical differences one would be called AVCHD- Long GOP, the other AVCHD- I.
They both use the AVC codec, they both are HD. {/quote]
AVCHD records to a red laser disk. I read an article where a Panasonic rep said the only reason for AVCHD in its current state is because blu-ray is too expensive right now to fit in a consumer format.
I don't see why it has anything to do with the storage medium. Sony has one that saves directly to a hard disk, the other records to a DVD.
They both could be called AVCHD.
I disagree they are entirely different. One is designed to record as small a files as possible while still being considered HD. The other records much larger files. The names are different only because of marketing.
They may both use the same basic codec, and are both HD, but they are both coded differently. The difference is more than just file size. It's like saying that DVCPRO HD and HDV are the same thing.
I don't see why it has anything to do with the storage medium. Sony has one that saves directly to a hard disk, the other records to a DVD.
Technically it doesn't. But that does not mean AVCHD is not a stop gap to a future technology. Because blu-ray can store more information. Panasonic will likely change the format to create less compressed higher quality pictures.
They may both use the same basic codec, and are both HD, but they are both coded differently. The difference is more than just file size. It's like saying that DVCPRO HD and HDV are the same thing.
DVC-PRO HD and HDV are not the same in any way.
AVCHD and AVC-I basically come from the same technology purposed for different markets. Panasonic could take the AVC codec, encode it and store it in any number of ways. They could come up with a third format for the prosumer market. With a larger file size than AVCHD and smaller than AVC-I, call it AVCHD-S.
Panasonic could come up with a super professional format that records slightly compressed 4:4:4 800Mbps AVC - I HD. It all uses the same technology.
I have to agree yes. Because AVCHD uses Long GOP and AVC-I uses i frames. In the end that does make them very different.
I would imagine once blu-ray becomes more pratical as a consumer camera storage medium. AVCHD as it is known now will be left behind. Panasonic will adopt a range of AVC-I formats that go from 4:2:0 8 bit 25Mbs to 4:4:4 10 bit HD 800Mbps formats.
However I've read enough to make a couple of conclusions:
- You and your Wife are expecting in a couple of months. You obviously can't wait for AVCHD (Did I get that right) to mature in 6 months.
- If you really want HD recordings, you will need HDV then.
- If you don't want to invest in an external Blu-Ray or HD DVD Burner for your Mac, and a Player if you don't have one already, you won't easily be able to play an HD format on you 1080i anyways. Though your Mac will easily play it in Frontrow or Quicktime/iTunes just fine (I assume it's an Intel based Mac and not a refurbished G5 or something that doesn't have Frontrow) or even Quicktime.
Going by that, you'll either need HDV or a Non HD format. Since I don't know much about Non HD formats, I'll just leave it at that.Sebastian
Let's see, put up with the wife complaining about not having a camcorder for the first month of life of our first child, or put up with the self loathing of knowing I bought an outdated model for the same cost as the newer product.
"Oh Lord, why must you be so cruel?"
You may miss part of your baby's first month but at least you'd get its birth and probably first week.
If you get yourself the new Apple TV you'll be able to play your HD movies on your plasma TV at 720p. While that won't be giving you the full 1080-line res from your future HD camcorder, you'll get more out of the originally-recorded resolution than you would by burning a DVD and playing that to your plasma display instead.
The AppleTV solves my problem of not having an HDMI to stream directly from the camera to my plasma. Now, I just have to download the video to the computer first, then it's "on demand."