FORUMS: list search recent posts

HF S11 (or other suggestion) vs HV40

COW Forums : Canon Cameras

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Craig Alan
HF S11 (or other suggestion) vs HV40
on Oct 23, 2010 at 6:39:03 pm

How do HF S10 or HF S11 and other small Canon card based cams compare to HV20-30-40 cams?

Please compare:

Optical quality

Features: headphone out and mic in ports must haves.

Total workflow using Apple platform (FCS and ilife).

Cost/ease of archiving – copying and backing up to hard drives vs. storing original tapes.

Are USB drives ok for archiving if we then copy and edit using firewire or esata raids?

Image quality after ingesting as prores 422 or apple intermediate in Ilife?

OSX 10.5.7; MAC Book PRO (EARLY 2008); Camcorders: Sony Z7U, Canon HV30, Sony vx2000/PD170, Canon xl2; Pana, Sony, and Canon consumer cams; FCP certified; write professionally for a variety of media; teach video production in L.A.


Return to posts index

Bob Dix
Re: HF S11 (or other suggestion) vs HV40
on Oct 26, 2010 at 12:43:00 am

Have a look at this http://www.donferrario.com/ruether/Canon_HV20-HV30.htm

We have used a Canon HV20/30/40 for 3-4 years it's codec rate is professional at 25mbps as compared to 15 ? Mbps Hard Drive Camcorders and the diameter of the lens is sufficient to give Professional results, and can be used as a VTR for playing tapes from the Canon XL1. XH G1 or XHA1 according to Canon Specs.It will also give great result from a PP timeline using H.264 MOV files converted from a canon 5D mark II H.264 to Cineform HDV avi, the results Exported to Pro tape and blu-ray is very good indeed.In fact broadcast quality in PAL.

Would you believe my son uses Apple Mac and Final Cut and has run into rendering problems with that set up, we use Windows i7 64 bit Precision T5500 with 12GB Ram Quad Core with Adobe certified video card, I think it would be a NVIDIA Quad FX4800 for Mac.


good luck.

Freelance Imaging & Video
AUSTRALIA


Return to posts index

Craig Alan
Re: HF S11 (or other suggestion) vs HV40
on Oct 26, 2010 at 2:51:41 am

We use a bunch of canon hv30-40. In FCP, I capture the footage as apple prores 422. no rendering problems. I was wondering if any of the card based canon cams compare favorably, pros and cons. Would like to join the modern world and move away from tape but do not wish to loose quality or have workflow/archiving problems. Been experimenting on the higher end by capturing directly to apple prores using a kipro and that works great. But with one kipro and 20 production teams that doesn't replace this question.

OSX 10.5.7; MAC Book PRO (EARLY 2008); Camcorders: Sony Z7U, Canon HV30, Sony vx2000/PD170, Canon xl2; Pana, Sony, and Canon consumer cams; FCP certified; write professionally for a variety of media; teach video production in L.A.


Return to posts index


Bob Dix
Re: HF S11 (or other suggestion) vs HV40
on Oct 26, 2010 at 3:02:35 am

No, I agree you would you would not have rendering problems with the Canon HV/20/30/40 but, you could and may with H.264 mov files or other codec from Hard Drive AVCHD professional or lesser beasts.

Freelance Imaging & Video
AUSTRALIA


Return to posts index

Craig Alan
Re: HF S11 (or other suggestion) vs HV40
on Oct 26, 2010 at 4:41:57 am

So you are saying my current workflow/small camera choice is still the best? I figured if I captured using prores AVCHD would be the equivalent of HDV more or less. I really was just asking about optics/features and the workflow for large amount of projects that begin life as files and not tape.

OSX 10.5.7; MAC Book PRO (EARLY 2008); Camcorders: Sony Z7U, Canon HV30, Sony vx2000/PD170, Canon xl2; Pana, Sony, and Canon consumer cams; FCP certified; write professionally for a variety of media; teach video production in L.A.


Return to posts index

Bob Dix
Re: HF S11 (or other suggestion) vs HV40
on Oct 26, 2010 at 5:11:40 am

Craig, The only way for me is in the end tape(for the time being), to transfer edited material to blu-ray or tape and the optics on the Hv20 is exceptional, but, the Canon 5D Mark II is definitely top end. From what I read the newer pro-consumer Canon camcorders do transfer at professional rates of data at 25+ Mbps, the Mark II at 38.35Mbps and the up market new Pro units much more than that. It appears the tranfer rate is what captures the quality of the analogue image from the sensor. The 35mm sensor of the Mark II is ten times the size of the typical camcorder and the Pro lens or even the EF series lens are outstanding. .Check out the specs from Canon, the 3CMOS from Panasonic and JVC.
I go back a long way to VHS, S-VHS, Digital 8, Hi-8, SD and now High definition 1920 x 1080 both out of the HV20 , 5D Mark II, which is extra- ordinary,it depends on what you can budget for and what it is for, in the long run.

read some of the other reviews. Everthing will eventually go to HDD, but, editing some of the codec are a problem at the moment, and then you have to Export to something viewable, it is no good leaving it in the camcorder ?

Freelance Imaging & Video
AUSTRALIA


Return to posts index


Brian Louis
Re: HF S11 (or other suggestion) vs HV40
on Oct 26, 2010 at 5:34:18 pm

HF S2xx series has 1/2" image sensors compared to 1/3" in the HV series, both use full 1920x1080 image sensors but the HV series DSPs the video to a anamorphic 1040x1080(HDV) for transfer to tape using mpeg2 HD codec, the HF records full 1920x1080 to AVCHD(a flavor of mpeg4) which is a more highly compressed format so comparing bit rates can't really work because of the data differences, the glass used is different sizes due to the image sensor size difference, both series have close to the same minimum fstop so the glass will be larger and have more DOF adj than the smaller sensor, the difference between compression formats comes with editing, HDV is easier to edit in native format on less powerful twin core or quad machines, AVCHD takes a newer more powerful machine(i7 or i7xenon) with latest software, Ppro CS5, Edius 5.5, vegas9 etc. to edit in native form unless using a intermediate codec like Neoscene from cineform, myself I no longer use tape to get away from the possibility of long gop dropouts, which can occur anytime in a shoot due to a dust mote or some debris left over from tape manufacturing, HDV I now record to CF for HDV, SDHC cards B-roll and p2 for higher end cams, I archive to B-ray and harddrives after trimming, tapeless has faster download times(quarter of the time) even with slow card readers over tape with less chance of dropouts in the playback deck.


Return to posts index

Bob Dix
Re: HF S11 (or other suggestion) vs HV40
on Oct 26, 2010 at 9:37:09 pm

Brian,

I did get some drop outs using consumer mini tape for HDV but, since going to Sony Digital Master HDV/DVCAM PHDVM-63DM there have been no drop outs on the same timeline and none in recording in camera.

Freelance Imaging & Video
AUSTRALIA


Return to posts index

Brian Louis
Re: HF S11 (or other suggestion) vs HV40
on Oct 28, 2010 at 10:38:34 pm

Hi Bob:
Even though high quality tapes are very good there is always a chance of dropouts from things other than the tapes themselves, when shooting oner events any chance of a dropout is to be avoided if possible, second is the expense and storage, even the first year I when started tapeless, I came out ahead even with the purchase of CF and SDHC cards, and drives to archive with and cut down time to load video from one hour per tape to 15 minutes or so for an hours worth of video and with 32g cards had no changing tapes at inconvenient times


Return to posts index


Bob Dix
Re: HF S11 (or other suggestion) vs HV40
on Oct 28, 2010 at 11:51:40 pm

Brian,

I agree with you , we have been using a CF card Canon 5D mark II for over 18 months and it is exceptional, but, we did use a Canon HV20 for tape transfer to a Sony Bravia HDMI prior to blu-ray and it too was exceptional for quality.

Freelance Imaging & Video
AUSTRALIA


Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2017 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]