What is the best miniDV cam?

[midiguy]

okay, let's just say that money isn't an issue (it is, but let's just say it isn't), what is the best possible miniDV camera available that the consumder can buy?

[OvERaCiD23]

check out cnet.com for some reviews. "What is the best...?" questions aren't accepted here ~~~> read forum rules. (can't say that w/o sounding like an a**hole, not how it's meant though). you'll want to get something that shoots progressive video though ~~~> no interlacing, nice!

[mikecito]

Do you know how I can find out if a camcorder uses progressive video? Sorry for a stupid question, but the Circuit City guys looked at me like I was speaking taiwanese when I asked...

Thanks!

[bb]

On my camcorder it's written on the camcorder: "progressive scan CCD". If you don't see this statement, the camcorder most likely won't have it.

If the Circuit City guys don't know what progressive scan is, I wouldn't trust their advice - they obviously don't know what they sell...


bb

[bira]

When you start looking for the cams, note that "progressive shutter" is not the same as "progressive scan".

[ByronE]

Progessive scan is a big selling point, and they know that...it will say in the features for sure if it is.

Here's a really good comparison chart
http://www.consumerdvreviews.com/camcorders/

[shindsh]

I did a lot of research on this and finally chose the Canon GL2 for myself. Bought it yesterday. With additional warranty and purchasing it from an authorized dealer it will cost you you US$3K.

Canon GL2 is CNET best choice.
http://electronics.cnet.com/electronics/0-6733264-8-20542428-1.html?tag=st.ce.6342639.tp.6733264-8-20542428-1

Here is a detailed review at CamcorderInfo: http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/canon_gl2_camcorder_review.htm

And this is the homepage for the GL2.
http://www.canondv.com/gl2/index.html

If you want to spend US$5K go for the Canon-XL1S.
http://www.canondv.com/xl1s/index.html
It has interchangeable lenses.

Regards,
Shree

[mikecito]

Well - after reading pages and pages of opinions - I'm at an impass. I want the ease of editing progressive video, but I want the look and feel of interlaced on my television... or at least, that's what I read. So, either way I'm giving something up.

So - I think I've decided to go interlaced, figure out a method that works for my editing, and stick with it. It doesn't look like interlaced video is leaving anytime soon, so I might as well learn to deal with it more professionally.

However - even after this decision - I wouldn't mind hearing someone defending a good reason to get a progressive camcorder. Anyone? Anyone? Can I use DV interlaced video in Premiere and output dvd's that look good? (I really don't want to deal with frames in my editing, but I don't want choppy playback on my tv, either)

By the way - I looked into buying an HDTV Camera... $60,000 - I guess that's still a ways off for me. :)

[Zeppeliner]

I have used my dad's dv cam, an older Sony TRV-890 quite a lot, and edited much of it and put it on dv. The camera says "3-ccd progressive scan" but it's not entirely true - the camera can shoot progressive video, but only at 12fps (pal camera), or in photo mode. So it's rather useless, since 12 fps is choppy video and dv photos suck in any case imo.

However I usually deinterlace in Avisynth when encoding the edited avi to mpeg-2 and I experience no flaws in the playback, no jerkiness. My dvd player is a Pioneer dv-444 and the TV is a Sony 28" that is some 4-5 years old. The tv does not support progressive scan, whereas the player does but I've heard that it sucks in that department (rules in all others) - I haven't had the opportunity to try it with a progressive scan set.

[theReal]

Can I use DV interlaced video in Premiere and output dvd's that look good?If you want to watch your videos on the tv screen, I think interlaced is still better. Every DV editing program can perfectly handle interlaced DV video and you can also encode interlaced DVD mpeg. You'll need a slightly higher bitrate, but you'll get the most fluid motion on all tv screens.

Progressive scan recording is only necessary if you want to watch most of your videos on a computer screen - as Divx video, or DVD watched on the computer screen - or if you want to encode SVCDs (the bitrate on SVCDs isn't high enough for good quality interlaced mpeg2).

When I want to make Divx video from interlaced DV, I can live with the results I get with decomb.

[andyg]

May want to check this out.



Sony has announced ten new digital camcorders, three of which are DVD-RW based (3").

http://news.sel.sony.com/pressrelease/3114

http://news.sel.sony.com/pressrelease/3146

[Richard Iredale]

From a conceptual point of view, the benefit to me of shooting in progressive format is that the image would be sharper on a progressive big-screen, in the same way that a 35mm film transcribed over to DVD is. As I understand it, the DVD-video format needs to pretend that the source is interlaced (because that what NTSC and PAL are), but in reality the even and odd fields are being pulled from a common frame; a progressive-display monitor can reassemble the fields into a replica of the source. So if one wants to shoot video that is as "pure" as possible, I suppose it would imply that one shoots in 30p.

[Crucio]

most important things in a camera:

low noise to color ratio

atleast 10x optical zoom

3ccds atleast 1/4 of an inch, with higher end cams going as far as 1in

optical image stabilization

and sturdy construction.

the best non-hdtv format by far is Digital-s, which will run about 10-30,000.

then theres prosumer formats like dvcpro and dvcam. These are sturdier tapes and things, you can get a very good camera here, the jvc dv-5000u. This is about 7.0000

then for cheaper cameras, theres the sony pd-150 and the jvc gydv-300 and the trv950 and the canon gl2 and the panasonic agdvx-100.

my personal favorite is the gl2 for cameras under $3000

[BassPig]

If money's no object, I'd say go for a HD cam from Sony for about 80 grand.

In a more realistic arena, if you're striving to make Hollywood movie-quality DVDs from your own video, there are a number of decent 3-CCD DV cams out there. I personally like the hi-fi picture from the PD150/VX2000 models from Sony. They are at the 'sweet spot' on the price/performance curve (ie., you can spend $10,000 more for barely discernable improvement in picture) and, when combined with proper lighting techniques, a quality MPEG encoder like CinemaCraft and proper GOP structure and choice of bitrates, can make DVD videos that are indistinguishable (at least on a 36" direct view CRT) from the better Hollywood releases and considerably crisper and more detailed than quite of few older Hollywood releases.

An amazing amount of quality control is in your hands and depending on how you encode for DVD can make all the difference in the world.