HV20/30 vs. HFS100

[jrod81]

Hey guys,
Obviously I realize the main difference is tape vs. tapeless editing, but for budget reasons I am wondering if an HV20 or HV30 wouldn't just do the trick for me. While I might kick myself in the editing bay for having to capture tapes, I am thinking for $400-$500 less money I might just go the HV20/30 route. Can you guys tell me what the other differences are in the cameras and why this might not be a good idea.
thanks
jared

[roblc12]

The biggest thing for me was the megapixels of the CMOS sensor. hv40/30 2.96mp vs. hf s10 8.59mp. Inaddition, the price of the tapes your going to use, one day that will add up to what you saved getting the hv20/30. Also the hf s10 has little to no moving parts wich means that this camcorder will be more reliable and durable in the field than any other camcorder. One more thing is that hf s10 has about an hour more record time then the hv 30/20 for witch may change soon because they're always coming out with better sd cards.

[sparkle_and_fade]

if you're looking to cut your teeth a little as a filmmaker you get the hv20/30

if you just want a camcorder for vacation you get the hf

the hf s10 implementation of 24p is not as good as the hv20 because of the avchd codec

i think youll learn a lot more using the hv20 and you can always sell it and upgrade
when need be

[NickG]

I think the money saving is worthwhile. I personally don't buy the argument that AVCHD is necessarily poorer quality than HDV, but the point is that, apart from workflow, the HF100 doesn't give you anything the HV20/30 doesn't. Its one significant advantage is that it's quite a bit smaller to carry around.

[Robert M Wright]

AVCHD, in and of itself, is not poorer quality than HDV. Quite the contrary. AVCHD will give you better image quality at a given bitrate (assuming a well implemented codec).

There are other differences between the HF100 and HV20/30, but on the whole, image quality is quite comparable between the cameras.

[Sean Michael]

One of my HV20s bit the dust today (actually it bit the sidewalk!) so I am considering a replacement. I'll either pick up an HV30 or an HF S100.

One upside of the HF S100 is the step up in resolution from HDV to 1080p. You wouldn't think it makes that much of a difference, but it does.

Also the lack of "tape deck whine" on the audio would be an upside.

With that said, I'm uncertain about AVCHD, having heard more negatives than positives about that codec. I've had good experiences with my HV20 cameras and would still be using one if it hadn't been fumbled today.

Any other thoughts about the HF S100?

[Robert M Wright]

The downside of AVCHD is the CPU power it takes for editing, and NLE support not being as well developed as for HDV. Both of those issues will eventually be resolved.

The thing I dislike with the Canon consumer AVCHD cams, is lack of a viewfinder.

[Sean Michael]

I also have a Sony EX1 and often shoot in the 35 Mbs XDCAM codec. My laptop is a T9300 2.5 GHz Core 2 Duo and it handles the XDCAM fine. Should I be worried about AVCHD?

Good point about the viewfinder. That is an upside of the HV20/30/40 series that the AVCHD cams lack.

[Sean Michael]

I also have a Sony EX1 and often shoot in the 35 Mbs XDCAM codec. My laptop is a T9300 2.5 GHz Core 2 Duo and it handles the XDCAM fine. I edit with Sony Vegas Pro 8. Should I be worried about AVCHD?

Good point about the viewfinder. That is an upside of the HV20/30/40 series that the AVCHD cams lack.

[astigmatic]

I had both, shot with the hv20 for 2 years, then got the hfs100 the moment it came out. The hfs hands down has a better quality codec. The footage is soooooooooooooooo myuch more cleaner and the colors have a whole lot more depth. With the hv20 you always thought about doing hdmi capture to bypass it's limitations. With the hfs100, you don't even think about it.
I've worked with and xha1 and sony fx1000 as well. the hfs footage is cleaner than both of those as well.. although the fx1000 and a1 do blow it away in low light, and the fx1000 destroys it in resolution.
Also avchd is so easy to work with. It's no longer a pain in the ass to transfer footage. I use to dread doing the whole capture from tape process. With sd cards, there's not a single drop of sweat.

[Sean Michael]

Do you transcode the AVCHD to another format for editing? Or do you work directly with the files straight off the SD card?

With my EX1, I use Sony ClipBrowser to export MXF for NLE files for editing. It's not a big deal. If this is part of the AVCHD workflow, I'd be comfortable with it.

At the moment my only hesitation with the HF S100 concerns the codec and editing.

[astigmatic]

since I use sony vegas I can work with the files straight from the camera.

However, I convert them using cineform neoscene since that supposedly gives me a 4.2.2 color space to work with in post.

[Robert M Wright]

I also have a Sony EX1 and often shoot in the 35 Mbs XDCAM codec. My laptop is a T9300 2.5 GHz Core 2 Duo and it handles the XDCAM fine. I edit with Sony Vegas Pro 8. Should I be worried about AVCHD?

Good point about the viewfinder. That is an upside of the HV20/30/40 series that the AVCHD cams lack.

You'll probably want to use an intermediate codec (like Cineform).

[Robert M Wright]

I wouldn't get way to concerned about editing with AVCHD. There are reasonable ways to make it work, and with computers getting ever more powerful, along with better and better software support, editing AVCHD will eventually be smooth as butter.

[ffelix]

Any idea when FCP will offer complete support for AVCHD? In the meantime, is Cineform significantly better than Voltaic [or other] for transcoding? :huh:

[Adam J McKay]

I too was thinking about the HFS100, is there any way to control shutter and aperture? or at least lock one while adjusting the other?

[NickG]

Any idea when FCP will offer complete support for AVCHD? In the meantime, is Cineform significantly better than Voltaic [or other] for transcoding? :huh:

There's a reasonable chance that the next version will do direct AVCHD editing (note: that's my interpretation of trends, not based on any solid information), and I've seen suggestions (rumours?) that it'll be out during the Autumn.

Direct AVCHD editing is very hard on the system, so I wouldn't be surprised if it was very slow on anything less than a Mac Pro.

As to alternatives to Voltaic: MPEG Streamclip (free) does an excellent job of converting AVCHD to the codec of your choice. And Clipwrap has a new version very soon which will allow direct AVCHD editing in FCP - it 'wraps' the .mts/.m2t files to make them look like Quicktime. Given that AVCHD is the same as all other MPEG-4 codecs under the hood, the rewrapping is enough to convince FCP to deal with it. Clipwrap will have the advantage that, because i doesn't transcode, there is no impact on quality. Don't have release date yet for Clipwrap 2, but should be pretty soon

[Robert M Wright]

I too was thinking about the HFS100, is there any way to control shutter and aperture? or at least lock one while adjusting the other?

I don't have a Canon AVCHD camera, but I believe manual control is essentially the same as with the HVs. You can lock down exposure. (With my HV20) I set the shutter, then adjust "exposure" - essentially adjusting a combo of aperture and gain (and locking it). It's not pro level manual control, by any stretch of the imagination, but is workable.

[mgalvan]

Yes, I've had both the HF S10 and currently have the HV40. They have similar levels of manual control.

I found the white balance settings to be more accurate on the HV cameras. The HF S10 pushed more towards blue in general, especially in auto white balance mode.

And though the footage from the HF S10 seemed cleaner, it wasn't really that much more in my opinion than from the HV cams.

I mainly got the HV40 have native 24F recording just like on my Canon XL H1S.

[Robert M Wright]

I'm curious to know if the native 24p out of the HV40 is a little better quality than the 24p (inside a 60i stream) from an HV20/30, due to more efficient compression.

[filmmaker's gang]

me too.. not only if the native 24p out of the HV40 is a little better quality than the 24p (inside a 60i stream) from an HV20/30 but also if it is a little better quality than the new AVCHD cameras

[mgalvan]

It should since recording in 24F mode allows for the full 25mb be allocated to the video, as opposed to throwing away bits with a pulldown removal.

[Chamber005]

Seems like the better comparison is the HF200 vs the HFS100, isn't it? Not sure if we've had a thread on that.