Camcorders
 

Whilst I still want to record any future trips on Slide/jpeg, I have often considered a video diary, that I can watch over and over when HD TVs are old hat!!

First thought about it when we went to Argentina but scrapped the idea due to space and cost, but there are some nice looking HD camcorders out there.

If you are in the know, care to share with me the sorts of specs I should look for and what the 'corder specific jargon is?

Any particularly good brands too for quality, sturdiness, image and battery life?

Cheers

There is a new one just out ... its HD, lightweight (the weight of only 3 mobile phones), and records to SD card (no moving parts, low battery consumption and jolt resistant)

Canon HF100. I havent had the chance to check it out yet, but its full HD... 1920 x 1080 , and the reviews are very promising. Its on my shopping list !

Google it for more info

My Panasonic SDR S10 records to SD cards. At it's best quality 10 Mbps 704x567 it only gives 25 minutes on a 2 GB card! I wonder how much HD you would get even on an 8GB card?

I have the option to record at 5 Mbps and 2.5 Mbps with the reduction in quality and increase in record time. 5 Mbps is acceptable for youtube.

I have used a SDR S10 a few times, and have not been impressed with the quality - especially in low light

Canon are saying that in LP mode (5Mbps) you get 6hrs 5mins recording on a 16 GB card. Full HD is 17Mbps ... implying you will get 1 hr 47 mins out of best picture mode. (there are also 7Mbps and 12 Mbps modes) There is a different compression algorithm in the new canons as well which is purportedly giving better quality video at higher levels of compression. 16GB cards are coming down in price all the time and are currently 55 quid. (High Capacity Secure Digital/SD Card 16GB Card (Class 6) from Offtek.co.uk) Before long there will be 32 GB cards out in SDHC format.

You tend to get what you pay for with cameras. The canon is over 3 times the price of the little SDR. I haven't held one, but I bet it's 3 times the weight too. Horses for courses.

Hi,

I don't want to take over the topic but I want to add something, because I've got the same question as Colebatch, but want to add one thing:

Which brand is capable of taking with you on a humping-bumping trip.

I've taken videocamera's with me on the last couple of travels and they all died, from dust, bumps and so on.

I also want to buy a HD camera with solid state, because I've got enough of tape, last time I wasn't able to film anymore, while being in Africa.

Is solid state (because of the lack of mechanic moving parts) indeed much better to take for overland trips?

Jurgen

In theory it should be but I believe many of the solid states save only in compressed formats. Maybe the higher end one's save uncompressed but for HD that amount of data would be considerable. Hope you bring about 200-300gigs of flash memory.

CC

Thanks for your answer, but still I'd like to know about this Canon compressions, is it still good enough to watch on a tv (showing the family and so on) or is this then only suitable for small Youtube like formats?
I can forget about the HD thing, this is not necessary.

Of course I can't take 200gigs with me, at least that would cost a lot of bucks.

Hi

This link shows news on an upcoming system from Baehr in June.

News

I saw the actual product at the Townsville AGM and they looked quite small and compact and built for the type of things we want to use them for, rugged outdoor sports.

I looked at the specs, one of them was broadcast quality, 800x600 screen size and 730lines of PAL resolution, the other one had 480. The lipstick cameras they had plugged into them had a nice lens with about a 60 degree view, perfect for helmet cam

I guess he is back home in NZ by now. He did not have any for sale at the AGM.

Cheers
TravellingStrom

I think you'll find tape has a large capacity ... when compared to solid state (memory flash cards). So you'll need more cards than tape ...


As for the format ... I think you'll find it is all compressed! Makes storage much better (more minutes per byte). So I'd not worry about the compression (or encoding) .. but the resolution of the image. And an anti shake mode ... one that works with the lipstick lens.

-----------------
Running out ... of tape/cards/rolls of film .. buy more .. or copy it to CD and send the CDs home ..

I don't mind spending more money on memory, compared to buying a new camera it's a bargain :)

I think uncompressed is no option, then I indeed need 200gigs as a previous poster said. Is 10MBps okay with format 704x567 you think?

What do you mean resolution is something I need to worry about more then compression?


Thanks!
Jurgen

Hd
 

I too have seen the HF10/100 and thought that it may be the answer to my prayers (having just transcoded 74 hours of miniDV from my africa trip onto my computer for editing). I don't think it's ready for me yet...

I'm glad I took my Canon MVX with me this time because although its old-fashioned miniDV, the tapes are reasonably robust, easy to find, the player was cheap, it also could be used with my helmet cam (av-in), batteries cheap and I didn't mind so much it being stolen (so I took it out with me more - crucial to getting the best clips!)

Refrain from becoming fixated with resolutions - cost and availability of accessories, what television you have and how you intend to distribute the media afterwards should be foremost in your mind (for newbies, I mean - don't roast me, camera-pros). Depending on who you ask, 720p often looks better than 1080i, for example. Who here has a Blueray burner? DVD it is then. On the other hand, sticking a memory stick in your computer after you've finished clearly seems to me like the way-forward!

Mainstream HD has arrived - but is it ready for life in the field with us overlanders?

I have to disagree. Resolution is all! Your standard TV is where most people would rather watch videos/movies. For that you need to have the resolution to fill a TV screen, this means image resolution of at the minimum 576 TV lines PAL, and whatever NTSC equivelent(480 I think). Don't forget, the less TV resolution, the blurrier the picture, so if you want nice clear large movies that other people will enjoy watching, you need to concentrate on resolution. Forget compression and trying to make it for computer screens, TV is and will still be the preferred place to watch movies of any sort.

Unless they like Utube quality.

If you have got the above, you can then worry about moving it around, but a basic DVD burner would do it.

Cheers
TravellingStrom

just quickly...
 

I know this thread is called camcorders but the substance had moved towards HD and by 'resolution' my comments were aimed at people thinking about HD over 'standard def'. I know that those little mpeg cams that record to sd cards are acceptable (rarely good) for action footage only. Resolution is not ALL - I'm no expert but go on any of the DV websites and you see people talking about other factors such as interlacing- 60i, 30p and colour handling (blacks etc.). For me the Canon HF10 is the beginning of HD cameras that are really relevant for us late adopters and I'd hate to see people learning about camcorders being told that Resolution is ALL!

Thanks for your answers.

It's not so much that I want HD, but at least a format one can show on a regular telly.

I've got a regular tv and I just want to be able to record something and show it to my family, so the Canon HF10 looks very promising for what I need.

Is it best to record uncompressed?
That means 17MBps * 60 = 1Gig per minute.
60Gigs for one hour! Oops.

Would I be able to record with compression which results in, say, 10MBps and still able to watch it on a regular non HD telly screen?

Jurgen

OK, I see your point. I guess it all comes down to what your are used to. Down here in Oz, we use PAL as the TV format, this is using interlaced scanning as normal. The American NTSC system iuses sequential scanning. The quality of the interlaced system is so superior and a more truer colour system that I agree, there are other things than just resolution.

So, in your case, if you see an interlaced system and your used to an American NTSC broadcast television signal, it will be miles better quality than what you see at home. I had totally forgot about the different scanning formats of other countries when I posted above. Canada uses a different system again called SECAM, this is similar to PAL, but the colour signal is encoded differently.

Cheers
TS

I'm from the Netherlands, we've got PAL too. But if that interlacing method will interfere, I just watch the video's on a big TFT monitor, that's also a possibility.

I've made my decision now, I'll buy the HF10 from Canon, I understand from camcorderinfo.com that this cam is using the H.264 AVC compression and is therefore able to give a very nice image with this compression.

Hd
 

Please post again to let us know how it works out. I would love an HF10 and I think we'd all be interested to hear what it's like to live with on a trip. That, and when you get home with all the footage, is when your camcorder 'earns' its keep!

All right, I've picked up the camcorder last friday. I will take it on my trip and let you know, how this Canon worked out, see if it's overland proof ;)

Jurgen

Sony HDD 30Gb
 

We are using a Sony HDD 30gb Handycam.

This records to the internal hard drive, as well as a memory stick. We have yet to record anything and run out of memory... so 30gb seems to be surprisingly big.

Standard battery lasts around 90 minutes. I bought an extended battery which lasts 2 hours.

It was cheap, it seems to be pretty robust (translate: not broken by us, despite travelling across the desert, and filming us throwing spanners about etc.)

The only FRUSTRATING thing, is that you HAVE to put it in the cradle, to charge the battery, and to download to PC... this just sucks for me - cos I am very, very lazy. And forget things. Like the cradle.

Its got an ALMIGHTY zoom (40x) but we don't really use that... and the sound is pretty good. And its got night vision.

As for quality -- stills are pretty crappy. Dont bother. Your mobile does better.

Video -- 9M - whatever that means.

If I had more money, I would spend it on buying better picture quality.

Compression
 

Its ALL compressed - doesnt matter what you use. DV format (as recorded onto DV tapes) is about 5 times compressed!. (thats right, raw DV data on a DV tape is already 5 times compressed) Burn it onto a DVD and you compress it a further 12+ times !! So recorded on a DV camcorder then burnt on to a DVD its compressed around 60 times. 720 x 576 pixels x 3 RGB values per pixel, x 25 fps, x (60 x 60 x 2) seconds per DVD = 225GB. But a DVD hold only 4.5 GB all up, including all the soundtracks, menus etc, so DVD quality is what video looks like when compressed about 60 times.

Those cheap 100 quid solid state cameras that record at 640 x 480 and hundreds of times compression are NOT comparable to a proper solid state video camera like the HF10/100 recording in 1920 x 1080 and about 6 times compression.

I would also add that its not difficult anymore to get 1000 GB external USB hard drives (for about 100 quid) that are compact and will store about 100 hours of full HD recording. Its a great way to back up solid state recordings so that you need no more than 2 x 16GB cards.... and 16GB SDHC cards are now around £35

Blu ray burners and players may not be that common today, but I would be very sure that in 5 years time you wont be able to buy a DV camcorder, or fix your existing one.


Edited PS ... there a good review of the HF100 here: SimplyDV Review: Canon HF100 AVCHD Camcorder

The main problem with the HDD based camcorders, or with backing up flash memory on HDD is that if your hard drive breaks you've just lost everything. So you'd have to have a minimum of 2 hard drives to keep a backup of everything... that's a lot of gear to haul around. 1 60-minute tape = 12 GB. So 20 tapes = 240 GB. Instead of 20 mini-DV tapes you'd have to carry at least 2 300-GB drives for backup. Plus a laptop for the transfer..

Of course it depends if you're doing a trans-america on highway or if you're mostly off-road and crashing here and there.

And I only taped 20 hours, that's not a lot. A friend of mine had already 50 hours after 6 months only!

For my 1 1/2 year tour I took an HDV camcorder - that is, recording on tape. The advantages are:

- tapes are cheap (just regular mini DV tapes). You can buy them virtually anywhere in the world.
- tapes take space but they're light.
- tapes can deteriorate without losing everything. This is known as "drop outs", it happens to me not very often (unless you're recording to HDV specific tapes which cost $$$). In most cases the drop-out can be hidden during editing by a cut. If a HDD loses one sector, chances are you lose everything. Only in one case did I lose half a tape because of bad quality.
- tapes can be sent home as you go, by courier at least that's a good way to secure them.
- HDV is easier to edit than AVC/H264. DV is even easier.

Advantages of solid state / HDD:

- tape transport mechanism is a moving part and can break. Sand can get inside during tape load-unloading. I had to fix my camcorder mid-way in the middle of India. But at the end of the day I could do it and my previous footage wa snot affected. Solid state cameras are inherently much more reliable.
- HDD/solid state is easier to transfer to your PC/Mac for editing.
- solid state (flash) is extremely reliable, it can sustain extreme abuse.

With tapes you can be sure you come back with something usable. With hard drives you never know..

Please comment on your experience when you come back.

Laurent
A ride to Asia