| HF100 or HV20 + Questions
Question by Shiranai:
Januar 2009
I would like to see soon a new camcorder up, unfortunately I am still in the field of absolute newbie, have so far only small shorts with Billigcamcordern rotated. Now it is something to be professional.
After tagelangem browse the internet there are 2 on my list, camcorder, Canon HV20 or HF100.
The forum here was already a similar thread, but unfortunately I still have a few questions: yes, the HV20 is better for film makers, why? Only because of the easier format to be processed or has other advantages synonymous?
I have a Core2Duo with 2.4 gigahertz and ne Geforce 9600 - would make the costs of processing the material HF100 sufficient? (in Premiere)
Since the HV20 so produces a slight hum, then I probably need an external Micro synonymous. Can you perhaps recommend a cheap (really cheap). As I said, I'm still an absolute beginner and I feel rather cheap equipment.
Would a micro synonymous advisable for the HF100?
Thanks in advance.
Answer by dän:
As for the HV20 Micro is certainly the Rode-Videomic to recommend in the price range up to 100 ¬ I think the best ...
http://www.musikland-online.de/onlineshop_micpa170575717_Rode-VideoMic-Camcorders-Microphone.html
I think your C2D quite enough, the graphics card could be anything vllt remodel, but it is enough I would say:)
The HV20 (btw. Hv30-the newer, hardly changed edition) is "particularly appropriate for Filmmakers," because (Source: Amazon.de) is a
Movies look through 25-p-mode.
The special feature for a HDV1080i consumer camcorder, the HV20 offers an additional 25-p (progressive) recording mode. This picture is similar to the rate of 24 frames per second in the feature film. This mode is possible because the HD-CMOS both interlaced as synonymous progressive can be read. In conjunction with the 25-p-CINE are special recording modes are available.
Answer by Shiranai:
But as far as I know, the HF100 is the 25p mode synonymous and synonymous to the Cine mode.
So the HV20 is actually only the advantage of less resource-eating post?
Answer by wolfgang:
I have a Core2Duo with 2.4 gigahertz and ne Geforce 9600 - would make the costs of processing the material HF100 sufficient? (in Premiere)
Rather not, the processor is rather weak.
AVCHD and Premiere can only s.CS4 or Premiere Elements 7, which you know eh?
Answer by RickyMartini:
Forget the times very quickly 25p mode - Picture of the impression it is much worse than that of the 50i, as only two fields with each other "verwurschtelt" are. This leads to double-images and thus unusable images.
Natively edit AVCHD is nonsense, since the stuff on the timeline, such as hard rubber and feels the creation of the finished film can last many hours.
Therefore I turn now to the search term "Canopus Edius NEO" in the room. To learn everything else! ;)
It is recommended for AVCHD so slow to set up a sticky, on the NEO received, because every other program for AVCHD Intermediatecodec no use IMO as a "gross nonsense" to call is!
Answer by wolfgang:
... because every other program for AVCHD Intermediatecodec no use IMO as a "gross nonsense" to call is!
Even though I am even a fan of the Canopus HQ codecs am - but that is really just wrong. There are some programs that AVCHD natively can handle quite well. Sony Vegas Pro 8 for example. Power Director 7 for example. And synonymous Adobe Premier Elemnts 7 should not be so bad.
Answer by RickyMartini:
... because every other program for AVCHD Intermediatecodec no use IMO as a "gross nonsense" to call is!
Even though I am even a fan of the Canopus HQ codecs am - but that is really just wrong. There are some programs that AVCHD natively can handle quite well. Sony Vegas Pro 8 for example. Power Director 7 for example. And synonymous Adobe Premier Elemnts 7 should not be so bad.
Vegas Movie Platimum 9 study, I have at least tested the stability, however, is atrocious, as constantly crashes and AVCHD on the timeline is extremely tough!
Moreover, the very considerable loss of time for rendering and the framerate in the video window is with me despite Quad (4x 3GHz) is always significantly lower than 25fps.
Canopus is as clearly the right (professional) way! Everything else serves only to AVCHD customers' Schönzureden "!
The transcoder does not cost so much Entwicklunsgzeit and the result of other programs can be used.
Answer by wolfgang:
Strangely, when I run Vegas Pro 8 as well as Vegas Movie Studio 9 Platinum Edius as stable. No crashes from the timeline in the editing operation. And both deliver applications Vegas quite the 25 fps at synonymous with AVCHD 2.4 Ghz - albeit with some dips.
"Beautiful speeches"? Strong words.
And that the Canopus HQ codec not all applications can be used is always the subject of intense debate - as good as it synonymous Intermediate codec is.
Answer by RickyMartini:
In Movie Studio 9 I like especially the export opportunities after AVC, which I miss at NEO. When rendering, it is then for me, however, came to crashes.
AVCHD is simply not on the timeline, since the Decodieraufwand far too high. If you want to end the video output in various formats, it takes hold is clearly too long.
That is in Edius as if AVCHD on the timeline has.
The marketing division of Canopus Edius NEO synonymous praises as a program, which can edit AVCHD - the (clearly better) via the HQ codec is over. ;)
It could be synonymous alleged that Canopus, in contrast to the competition so far did not have, right AVCHD support.
Of course it would be highly desirable if the same buttery soft AVCHD could edit as DV with the case. Only this is the codec and nunmal not think the scientists should pay for it again.
Answer by wolfgang:
I wonder just why I am a native 1920 HF100 material from Vegas Pro 8 can be cut, why when I am well within the timeline goes. And the render is synonymous with me. Strange ...
And what Canopus has never hidden what AVCHD editing is concerned. Quite the contrary, the AVC-Converter was always quite openly discussed and is now in version 3, and is not a novelty anymore. The fact that neither a Canopus Edius Neo never yet for the average native has given the priority, not even for HDV then let for AVCHD, all know that just a little bit with the products have seized - but Canopus has always dazitiert on the conversion to Intermediate codec in the high-set house codecs. So far, that white papers on the HQ codec is ... nix hide.
Say, where are all these prejudices eigentlch when you come from?
Answer by strike300xxx:
Definitely the HV20 / HV30!
The image quality, in the static picture, with both camcorders is very good.
But in the motion blur in the whole HF100 Picture by bad data.
Also you can with the Canon HV30 / HV20 even better the Picture
determine and control. (for example, by the zebra function, manual fokusrad, etc. ..)
All this provides the HF100 is not!
Answer by RickyMartini:
I wonder just why I am a native 1920 HF100 material from Vegas Pro 8 can be cut, why when I am well within the timeline goes. And the render is synonymous with me. Strange ...
And what Canopus has never hidden what AVCHD editing is concerned. Quite the contrary, the AVC-Converter was always quite openly discussed and is now in version 3, and is not a novelty anymore. The fact that neither a Canopus Edius Neo never yet for the average native has given the priority, not even for HDV then let for AVCHD, all know that just a little bit with the products have seized - but Canopus has always dazitiert on the conversion to Intermediate codec in the high-set house codecs. So far, that white papers on the HQ codec is ... nix hide.
Say, where are all these prejudices eigentlch when you come from?
My prejudices - causes:
With Edius NEO has so far no problems with the post, where (when using the HQ codec).
"Movie Studio 9" because there is explizieter with AVCHD support clearly sedate. With native AVCHD is my opinion that in general not good at editing videos.
"Vegas Pro 8" I could not yet free.
I want HD material in the usual manner DV (start of single images, scrubbing) can edit. With NEO I nunmal this behavior.
Answer by wolfgang:
The image quality, in the static picture, with both camcorders is very good. But in the motion blur in the whole HF100 Picture by bad data.
Unfortunately, exactly the opposite is true - for HDV blurs the picture more than AVC, apparently due to better correction mechanisms AVC has to offer.
And of the data should not be deceived - AVC need a benchmark of holding only half the data rate of mpeg2 / HDV.
Also you can with the Canon HV30 / HV20 even better the Picture
determine and control. (for example, by the zebra function, manual fokusrad, etc. ..)
All this provides the HF100 is not!
Is that a zebra function, the HF100 does not, the manual focus goes beyond the joystick and only superficially, at least you have a manual audio control the sound. Both devices have not what you really "work" needs to put it in the class finds s.3000 euro - namely, the buttons to adjust things independently. Therefore, I appreciate unmodified devices, such as the FX1, if you really "work" will. Otherwise, the automatic in both the HV30 as synonymous with the HF100 is not bad and quite reasonably deliver good results.
And I here synonymous sags again: neither the start of single images or scrubbing with native AVCHD is a topic on an adequate PC and with the appropriate applications. The real reserves are much lower than HDV or DV, this is not an issue - and has just Edius Canopus HQ with the reserves just mistaken. Does it ever stop anm what you want and need.
| |
