Camcorderinfo.com Reviews HMC40

I haven't ever been impressed with anything coming from that site. However, I must say it's funny because as I clicked on your link it popped up a camcorderinfo.com ad, which proclaims the Panasonic TM300 as "camcorderinfo.com's camera of the year 2009." The TM300 is the consumer version of the HMC40, so -- it's kind of funny to think that the same basic hardware can lead them to award it "camcorder of the year" and also hand out a review where they're "not impressed"...
 
I think that the HS300/TM300 being camcorder of a year and the HMC40 being unimpressive are not mutual exclusive statements. After all, the TM300 has about the same sensitivity as the Canon HV20 or HF-S, which are considered great consumer camcorders, but everyone knows that they cannot reach pro models in sensitivity and controls. Did not you sell your HV20? The same case with the TM300, is is as good as modern consumer HD camcorder can get, but not good enough for a pro model.

the HMC40 at 12dB is darker than the Canon A1 at 0dB, while at auto gain @ 60lux it get blurry. Recalling an earlier test of the FX7, which managed to hold at 60 lux but completely lost it at 15 lux, I expect the same from the HMC40. Great in good light, usable at low light until it gets to about 100 to 60 lux, and totally unusable in darker conditions.

Their reviews are somewhat funny, but at least you can compare models and see some charts. Not completely useless like VideoMaker's so-called "reviews".
 
Ah. Okay, having gone through that review now (which is, frankly, better than they used to be, even if they still miss several important things throughout) it appears that their gripe is that it's more expensive than the TM300, but doesn't perform like the other pro cameras they have tested (such as a $3,000 Sony, a $4,000 Canon, and a $6,000 Canon.)

That should not be a surprise.

Other than that, the improvements over the TM300 that they didn't get or understand include that it has the PH mode, which gives it 720p recording and slow motion capability with the 720/60, as well as 24p, including a native 1080/24pN mode, as well as the waveform monitor, as well as the 3-year warranty, the option of the XLR adapter, etc. And really, for lots of us, the TM300 is a complete non-starter because it doesn't have 24p. So it doesn't even get a ticket to the dance. The HMC40 has it, so it gets to be compared.

A fair comparison would be to put this $2295 ($1995 street) product up against all the other $2295/$1995 professional camcorders out there.

Or, the obvious comparison would have been against the JVC HM100.

I don't see the logic in putting a $1995 product up against an XLH1A and being surprised or disappointed when it doesn't perform as well in low light... :/
 
> slow motion capability with the 720/60

You can get slo-mo from regular 1080i60, just deinterlace to 60p and slow it down. I do it in Vegas, no problems, no 3rd party plugins needed. When rendered to 720p it looks quite good.

> And really, for lots of us, the TM300 is a complete non-starter because it doesn't have 24p.

It does have it, as 24p-in-60i. The prior model, the SD100 which I owned, had native 24p. Just like a model before it, the SD9. Panasonic simply watered down its flagship consumer model to justify purchasing the HMC40. This is what I hate, when customers are treated like a sheep herd.

> A fair comparison would be to put this $2295 ($1995 street) product up against
> all the other $2295/$1995 professional camcorders out there.

"All the other $2K pro camcorders" consist of the Sony FX7, which is in fact a consumer camera, and also used V1U or XH-A1. In this regard, their comparison to the XH-A1 seems valid: should one get a used XH-A1 or a new HMC40? One can find the HX-A1 for $2-2.3K in good condition or a V1U with less than 100 hours for about $2K. These are viable alternatives to a new HMC40, having XLR adapters and shotgun mics included in the package.

I wish someone tested it against the brand new FX7 though.
 
Last edited:
For me, the size and recording media of the HMC40 were major considerations. I wanted portability and the ease of flash media. Therefore, for my purposes, comparing the HMC40 to the XH-A1S, XL-H1S, and HDR-FX1000 was useless. I agree with Barry, the JVC-HM100 would have been the obvious comparison.
 
Saying that the chips should be bigger seams very odd to me. It's a much smaller and cheaper than camcorders with 1/3" chips. Am I missing something here?

I agree that comparing it to the HM100, FX7 and the V1u would have made far better sense and I find it odd that they missed it as if it was a fake review.

For anyone who doesn't realize it yet, the HMC40 has recently been reduced to $1895 and once you add the XLR adapter, it's $2160. Not bad if you ask me.
 
Lately it seems that you get better and more accurate information from the user comments on camcorderinfo than you do from the reviews.
 
I just think things have to be kept in context. When the GH1 first came out, I said that "if it cost $10,000, I'd throw it against the wall. But because it's $1500, I think it's great."

You can't put a $1900 HMC40 up against a $6,000 XLH1A and expect it to come out on tops. You shouldn't expect a $1900 product to do everything that a $3000 product does. You have to evaluate it for what it is -- $1900. And for $1900, it is pretty darn killer.
 
Camera Expert said:
They say that the FX1000 is much sharper than the HMC40 according to their testes. Barry Green, have you ever compared the FX1000 or the Z5 to the HMC40 and if you have, what's your conclusion? I'm talking broad daylight by the way.
http://www.camcorderinfo.com/conten...ew-37336/Motion-amp-Sharpness-Performance.htm
Click to expand...
They rated horizontal resolution of HMC40 at 800 lines and FX1000 at 900 lines. Barry, didn't you determine the HMC40 to be at least 900 lines? Thanks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top