> HD Camcorder a $2,000 mistake (USA Today)

FYI... (new TECH news + update)



-published in USA Today (5/27/2008)
Life section, pg 4b, by Jefferson Graham



> HD Camcorder a $2,000 mistake (includes reader comments following ^above story)

Art Krueger just bought a new Sony hi-def camcorder, but can't burn the footage to DVD and watch it on his new $1,000 Denon Blu-Ray DVD player - or so Denon told him. He wrote to us seeking help, and our answer isn't any better than what Denon initially told him. He's $2,000 in the hole with incompatible equipment.

Krueger bought the $1,000 Sony HDR-SR11, which records video in the new AVCHD format. We recommend steering clear of AVCHD because of the multiple issues that - amazingly - have yet to be solved, some two years after the format's introduction. A few video editing software programs, like Pinnacle Studio 11 and Apple's iMovie, work with AVCHD. But many don't, including the popular Adobe Premiere Elements and Windows Movie Maker.

Plus, not all DVD players will play discs recorded in AVCHD, says Jeff Talmadge, director of product development for Denon. "Consumers should check the specs before they buy the machine," he says.



Blu-Ray players from Sony and Panasonic, the developers of the AVCHD format, do support AVCHD. Our recommendation to Krueger was to record video in standard definition and burn it to DVD, or try saving his hi-def footage as MPEG-2, QuickTime or AVI video files, and burning them to DVD. Then the disc should play on his Denon 2500BTCI machine.

"That defeats the purpose," he said. "I bought a hi-def camcorder, and want to see my video in hi-def on my hi-def TV." To get around these issues, consider a hi-def camcorder that records on that good old-standby, mini-DV tape, like the Canon Vixia HG30 (around $800) or Sony's HDR-HC3 (around $900). They work with virtually every video editing program, DVD player and TV. -[END of original article]-



~ Recent Update (from USA Today's site) - Last week we wrote about Art Krueger, who discovered that his pricey high-definition camcorder couldn't burn DVDs that would play on his pricey, high-definition DVD player. Today, we heard from the folks at Sony Vegas software with a suggested workaround for Krueger.

They recommended that Krueger buy a copy of Vegas 8 Pro software (ahem, only $549), edit his movie, and then choose the "Burn to Blu-Ray," disc option for the output. However, there was two big obstacles: Krueger doesn't have a Blu-Ray burner (add $199 minimum). And Denon, the company that made his Blu-ray player, says it doesn't support homemade discs. Not surprisingly, Krueger gave up and returned his Sony camcorder, saying it wasn't worth the hassle.

_____________
-JIMI McLovin (the Voodoo Child)

For this very same reason I stayed away from Sony when I purchased my hidef camcorder last week. Sony always has some proprietary crap somewhere whether it's software or hardware. Plus I have read the burning AVCHD files as DVD-R's for playback on normal DVD players (in case you may wanna share send some to your family) is a nightmare. Not only that but AVCHD compresses more than miniDV.

I ended up buying the Canon HV20 on sale after reading nothing but great reviews. It does produce a great hidef image and it's easy enough to edit and put on DVD. PLUS!! It cost half the price of the Sony AVCHD camcorders and still has a better image because of less compression.

Sometimes price and name brand mean nothing. Do your research.

just another example of sony treating consumers like dirt.

Stay clear of HD camcorderes for now...and some more months (or years??)...

Well I'm VERY pleased with my Canon HV20 so I have no complaints. Plus I want to have video of my kids growing up so it's important for me to have.

Like I said, great picture and it will be nice to watch when they are older.

For bang for the buck, the Canon HV20 can't be beat. That being said HDV (and MiniDV) seems to be going out of syle for consumer class digicams, and AVCHD seems to be its replacement. Although a lot of generic editing software hasn't kept up (along with older Blu-ray players that *should* otherwise be able to play native AVCHD from regular DVDs), AVCHD isn't inherently bad. Unlike HDV or DV-AVI, at least there are SOME devices that can play AVCHD back natively (something the author forgets to mention about HD cams that emply MiniDV). I wouldn't be surprised if there are opensource solutions already out there that convert AVCHD to a number of formats supported by any and all editing programs.

And there's advantages other than a more compact size to having digicams without moving parts to wear out, or tape heads to foul up, etc. The the PQ of AVCHD cams like the Canon HF 10/100 get excellent reviews - and offer TRUE HD resolutions of 1920 x 1080, and even support progressive 24fps. With a bitrate of 17Mbps, it shouldn't be full of compression artifacts either as with earlier AVCHD cams.

The biggest problem right now for consumer HD digicams regardless of their recording format is how to play them back without being an expert in Blu-ray or HD DVD disk mastering and VC-1/AVS encoding. Most consumers DON'T even want to deal with the workflow necessary (tape to hd transfer using firewire, editing, HD authoring, encoding, and burning tasks). They just want a way to watch their home videos. AVCHD is (or will be) a more practical format for consumers in this regard.

---

[Post edited by Skyhawk on May 29, 2008 - CDT 3:50 PM]

Skyhawk my Canon HV20 does 1920X1080 and 24fps without the headache of trying to find an editing program for AVCHD. Every store I went to, including Henry's in Toronto told AVCHD is a nightmare.

Plus they all pretty much told me AVCHD compresses the video more than HDV so I would actually get better video out of tapes. That totally surprised me.

I like quality and simplicity and at the end of the day I want to be able to share with family. I don't want to tell them they need a bluray player to watch my videos.

Falcon, first you should read some of the AVSForum threads on the subject.

Yes, for the cheap price of $600 to $700, your digicam can't be beat for the bang for the buck.

But you have a lot of things wrong. For example, it doesn't matter if your camera has a 1080x1920 sensor, the HDV format it records has a maximum resolution of 1080x1440 pixels, with the horizonal pixels being interpolated while read (upconversion) to 1920. AVCHD is capable of higher horizontal resolution (true HD), and is capable of 2K capture.

Another thing you have wrong is compression levels. Yes, early AVCHD cameras (when 2 gig of flash ram cost $200!) were very low bitrate. But the new Canon does 17Mbps! Next years models will no doubt top 25Mbps, perhaps even 30Mbps. HDV's MAXIMUM bitrate is 25Mbps, which is a physical limitation of the tape format. Would you rather have AVC at 17Mbps, or MPEG-2 at 25Mbps?

Considering many manufacturers (like Toshiba) are building hardware H.264 decoders into their TVs, playing back AVCHD will be as simple as plugging in your flash card into the TV. No disk burning necessary. You can do this natively already with devices such as PC computers, and the PS3 for example.

So if you're not using a computer or PS3 to playback these HDV files, you obviously aren't using a regular DVD player either. This puzzels me. If you aren't burning high definition format DVDs (for Blu-ray playback) or Blu-rays, or HD DVDs... how the hell are you watching your (edited) and (authored) HDV content, since regular DVD players cannot play HD!?

I'll also say the reason AVCHD is taking over is because of its simplicity for consumers, because at the end they just want to watch their home movies and not be subjected to a workflow that a lot of semi-professionals find daunting. Like it or not, HDV is going "bye-bye" for HD recording. And stock up on miniDV tapes too... cause they'll be harder to find in a few years when no consumer device uses them.

---

[Post edited by Skyhawk on May 29, 2008 - CDT 9:50 PM]