1. Stourbridge Lion

    Stourbridge Lion TrainBoard Supporter

    16,680
    130
    184
    Anyone one made the jump yet?

    Starting my research at looking to replace my Sony DCR TRV103 NTSC Digital Handycam. My current system has a 360x Digital Zoom with Image Stabilizer and Night Shot (InferRed) and uses Digital-8 tapes. It's still a great video camera but knowing the world is heading towards HD, I'm looking at moving up too.

    :tb-nerd: :tb-nerd: :tb-nerd: :tb-nerd:​
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 18, 2008
  2. Stourbridge Lion

    Stourbridge Lion TrainBoard Supporter

    16,680
    130
    184
  3. Doug A.

    Doug A. TrainBoard Supporter

    3,509
    161
    59
    That looks like a nice one. I wouldn't mind having one but honestly I don't shoot much video anymore. Some of my son, that's about it. For railfanning I just take a crapload of stills. I probably would take more video if I had one of those bad boys but I don't have $1200 to spend on one right now. When that functionality with greater capacity (I would think 60-120GB would be a little light) hits the $400 range I'll probably bite.
     
  4. Stourbridge Lion

    Stourbridge Lion TrainBoard Supporter

    16,680
    130
    184
    Hard Drive Concern

    Yes, Hard Drive space is a concern since with my old camera I can carry tons of tapes but with these new HD's when your hard drive fills your done until you can download. This is why I'm looking at this version and it's smaller sister version.
    "At the top AVCHD quality level, you can fit up to 7 hours and 10 minutes of video on the SR11's 60GB hard drive."

    "Double those numbers for the SR12's 120GB drive"
    I think the most video I have ever taken on a trip has been just short of 8 hours so if the SR11 can handle just over 7 hours at 60GB then we are talking over 14 hours at 120GB with the bigger SR12 version.

    I too find the current $$$ steep but I'm hoping that when I'm ready to jump these will be lower in price becuase the next generation is out. My current system set me back a bit but the DVD Videos I can produce from the tapes has been great for the 4:3 format but 16:9 1080 format is where things are going and the old system can't do it and nor can my video editing software. :(
     
  5. LADiver

    LADiver TrainBoard Member

    456
    0
    14
    I have the Sony sr7HD witha 60 GB drive. The biggest problem with the drive is how much you can fill on it. Had it down to Texas when I hooked up with Russel Straw. It worked great.
     
  6. fitz

    fitz TrainBoard Member

    9,709
    2,730
    145
    I'm taking my crappy old VHS-C to the Martin Hansen special at the McCloud in October. I can't justify the cost of new digital stuff. Grandkids are all grown up, and ain't much steam operating any more. I only do it for my own amazement anyway. I have always been of the philosophy "if it moves, video it" so I will do so on this trip. I haven't figured out how to get a quality transfer on the net, so will just keep making DVDs for anyone who wants copies. :tb-sad:
     
  7. Stourbridge Lion

    Stourbridge Lion TrainBoard Supporter

    16,680
    130
    184
    So, other than wanting a larger drive would you buy it again?

    :tb-biggrin: :tb-biggrin: :tb-biggrin: :tb-biggrin:
     
  8. Leo Bicknell

    Leo Bicknell TrainBoard Member

    569
    30
    27
    I use a Canon HV20 to shoot Reality Reduced. A few thoughts....

    1) HD Video is much larger. More hard drive space, slower editing, need a faster computer, etc. It's something to really consider when planning the leap.

    2) AVCHD is probably finally where it is good enough, but only on the high end boxes. I went with the MPEG-2 tape based unit 2 years ago as it wasn't there. The HF10/HF11 reviews lead me to believe it is finally on-par with the older tape based. The new Panasonics get very good ratings as well.

    3) Don't buy a camera without an external mike input, ever. Plan on buying an external mike. The built ins are junk on every camcorder I have ever seen. A basic shotgun (under $75) or a lavalier wireless (around $200) if you're shooting people is required.

    4) If you're going to shoot in a normal house, or otherwise "close" (people < 15 feet away) you will need the "wide angle" lense adapters, which depending on model can be pricy.

    Last but not least....I think the video quality on Reality Reduced is really good, but the amount of compression required for the web is still quite substantial. Even making a DVD shows a lot of compression. Plugging the camera directly into the TV with HDMI for playback shows how vastly superior true HD is, it's really breathtaking. In fact, it's better than anything you'll even get over the air, as it's uncompressed HD right from the source. This may actually cause you to hate all of your other HD, now that you know how good it can be. Until making home Blu-Rays is cheaper and easier, there's no way to distribute anything approching the quality level the camera can produce. If you're planning on putting clips on YouTube or the family web site there may be no point to an HD Camcorder....
     
  9. Stourbridge Lion

    Stourbridge Lion TrainBoard Supporter

    16,680
    130
    184
    Keep the feedback coming!

    Thanks Leo, that's exactly the real-world feedback I'm looking for before I make the switch. Today I do perform allot of editing to create DVD vacation albums and the jump is with the idea of moving to Blu-Ray and 16:9 / 1080 format. Our main PC today is farily high end; but, I know that it too will likely need replaced soon so the replacement will take into account HD needs. My other PC has no hope of running today's HD video editing software but great for the YouTube clips. One of the main reasons I havn't jumped earlier is becuase of the AVI vs. AVCHD quality difference and my concern over hard drive space while on the road for weeks at a time.

    What editing software are you using for your HD stuff?

    Today I'm running Pinnacle v9.4 and thinking Pinnacle 12 Plus or Ultimate for HD...

    :thumbs_up: :thumbs_up: :thumbs_up: :thumbs_up:​
     
  10. Leo Bicknell

    Leo Bicknell TrainBoard Member

    569
    30
    27
    I tried Pinnacle on the PC about 3 years ago, and while I found it ok I have switched to Final Cut Express on a Mac and it is 1000 times better. That said, my MacBook Pro 2.3 can't capture HD from the camera to the internal drive, it's too slow. I have to use an exteral FireWire 7200 RPM drive, and it's quite clear that is right on the edge.

    A little known trick, BTW, is that almost all Blu-Ray players will play Blu-Ray off a DVD. That is, if you get the authoring software for Blu-Ray and limit yourself to 4.2G (or 9.1, if you want to use double sided media) you can burn to that and pop it in a PlayStation and it will just work. Obviously due to the space limitations you will have a MUCH shorter duration available, but if you want to distribute a 15 minute home video to some relatives it's far cheaper than buying a Blu burner and Blu blanks.

    One last note about AVCHD, while the quality is there on the newest, high end units, and it saves disk space, it takes more processor to encode/decode. To put that in perspective a full pass of exporting a Reality Reduced episode (call it 20 minutes), encoding to "AppleTV (720P, heavily compressed) and "iPod" (320x200, extra-heavy compression) from a 1080i source track is about 3.5-4 hours. AVCHD should be worse. Keep that in mind.
     
  11. traingeekboy

    traingeekboy TrainBoard Member

    5,677
    580
    82
    Flipped over flip

    Ahhh video... Something I know something about.

    What Leo is saying is, oh so true.

    1. HD you get over TV is compressed. Hence not really true HD.

    2. Anything you plan to put over the web will be compressed. Not even standard definition.

    3. The biggest concerns with going HD is the amount of storage space required for the data on your computer hard drives.

    I too am a mac user. I started out with an Amiga computer because back in the 80's that was the exciting new video and graphics platform. I had a Pc. Now i'm mac. It's all about what tools you plan to use.

    Final cut pro is the video editing tool everyone is competing against. I use Final cut, nothing can touch it on the PC side hence the mac. If Final cut was on a different platform I'd be on that system.

    Having said that, even imovie is a really powerful tool.

    The most interesting video product to my way of thinking is the Flip. They plan to produce a HD version this year.:
    Flip Video

    This video is a comparison between full function camcorder and the flip:
    http://e3.video.blip.tv/1600003948597/Kirkclimber-FlipVideoVlogATaleOfTwoFormats968p.mov

    The website discussion where I got the link. Very interesting blog:
    The Master of Emulsion: Flip Video Vlog: A Tale of Two Formats

    I had a chance to use a flip and produced this piece. Not exactly train related, but it shows some interesting abilities of this camera. It is about 95% flip footage mixed with some DV and some hi 8. I played around with putting different lenses taped to the front of the flip. I really liked that.
    http://www.viddler.com/explore/VideoGriff/videos/12/

    So if you want to do some web videos consider the flip. It's less than 200 dollars.
     
  12. Doug A.

    Doug A. TrainBoard Supporter

    3,509
    161
    59
    Anybody have updates...bought the new toys? I was thinking about getting a new video camera and am weighing options. I had decided to buy a Sony HDR-CX12 today but the Best Buy I went to was out of them. So I kinda have the opportunity for buyer's remorse without having bit the bullet.

    Here are some things I was looking at:
    -Standard Def Hard Drive cams- these are running around $300 for a 30GB model. BB has a nifty little JVC but I know nothing about it and JVC has historically been very hit or miss. Sony has one too and I would probably lean toward it given the choice. I spent most of my research time looking at the HD's.
    -HD Flash Cams- There are basically 4 major "3rd Gen" cams that are acceptable values from what I've read: Sony, Canon, Panasonic, and a very highly rated Samsung. Like I said, I was ready to pull the trigger on the Sony today.
    -One of the reasons I'm looking at the HD unit is I wanted a "all-in-one" unit that could do double service as a "snapshot" still digitial camera. (think family/internet stuff, not publish worthy pics) Research is pointing to this being a pipedream up until these latest round of HD flash cams. Of course the HD capability is pretty compelling, too. I have been considering a small P&S digital but I like having minimal devices...I'd hoped the iPhone could have taken that function but it just doesn't cut it. Consolidating the video and digital p&s would be worth a lot to me IF the quality of the stills is decent. (say, comparable to the 3.1MP Sony DSC-S70 I used to have) I have a DSLR but it sucks for just grab and go, social functions, etc....and travelling with it is a pain. The little Sony HD unit is very small and meets almost all my requirements, albeit about twice the budget I initially envisioned, and I'm nervous about the capacity of the Memory Sticks being enough to get the job done.
    -I saw the little "Flip" cams touting high def, but my "you get what you pay for" alarm went off immediately, I dismissed, and I haven't revisited them. But now I'm curious about them...they are dirt cheap.

    So anyway, thoughts? I'm still leaning toward the Sony but if I don't get it tomorrow (basically my last chance before Christmas) I'll either wait indefinitely or when their price drops appreciably. If there's a good standard def camera that takes remotely decent still pics that would be good info as well...for a stop-gap solution.
     
  13. YoHo

    YoHo TrainBoard Supporter

    5,508
    2,011
    98

    In the interest of stirring the pot and going off topic.

    This statement depends on your point of view.

    What is your definition of HD?

    The technical definition is anything exceeding NTSC/PAL/SECAM standard definition. Ergo, in the US, anything above 525 (including sync and unviewable) interleaved lines of resolution.

    There's nothing in the definition that says anything about compression.

    Further, OTA HDTV using 8VSB modulation is the ATSC standard. Doesn't that alone make it HD compressed or not? That standard is where the term, as it's used in US television comes from.
    Furthermore, Cable and Satellite compress the signal further, so if you are viewing your HD signal over cable/Sat, you are actually getting a worse image than you would over the Air, Some might suggest that that is a distinction. Certainly, the people that made up the HDTV/DTV spec make that distinction.

    So, what is your daffynition?


    One of the best parts of an HD camera is that it's the great equalizer. $1200 seems like a lot, but combine that with some basic lighting and mikes, and you have a setup that can make video as good as many in hollywood. It, along with Youtube is the great equalizer.

    I expect an explosion in Railroad videos to come out of it.
     
  14. Leo Bicknell

    Leo Bicknell TrainBoard Member

    569
    30
    27
    Don't plan on using your camcorder for stills, it's just average at best. Focus times are bad, no flash, not enough ISO or F-Stop range. Bad idea.

    I've got a Canon SD1000 pocket camera. Small, cheap (under $125), 7MP, nice flash, quick focus. You'll be much happier.
     
  15. Doug A.

    Doug A. TrainBoard Supporter

    3,509
    161
    59
    I got the Sony. The still pics seem to look pretty good. No train subjects yet so I can't post evidence but should have something soon to report.

    I love how freakin' small the thing is. Can't wait to shoot some trains in HD.
     

Share This Page