Jump to content

Does Camcorder design need a rethink?


geoff_edwards

Recommended Posts

<p>After having been very pleased with my Canon SX10 I decided to buy a camcorder for HD video. The reasons being that although I particularly like the SX10's LCD monitor which can be moved to any convenient angle there aren't many DSLR cameras that have that facility. The drawback is that in strong lighting conditions it is best to use the viewfinder. I did think of buying a Canon 5D Mark II but didn't like the absence of the multi-angle monitor that the CAnon SX cameras have. I also think that it is expensive, especially as one could buy a pro camcorder for about the same price as the 5D. And I still have a Mamiya 67 for my landscape still photography :)<br>

I opted for two Panasonic camcorders the SD90 and the SD900, the latter has additional features one being a viewfinder in addition to the larger LCD screen and three sensors. The problem with these video camcorders is that there doesn't seem to have been enough attention given to the design; the features that make using them attractive or even possible have not been given enough thought! In bright light the LCD screens are virtually unusable. I dont know about other manufacturers but in the case of Panasonic's consumer camcorders the monitor screens are highly reflective due to a high gloss finish. <br>

Even using a screen hood or shade hardly helps as the problem is not ambient light but reflection of the camcorder user's check shirt and whatever else is directly behind the lens. I would have thought that it would be possible to alter the surface of the monitor screen to a dull finish similar to computer displays and TVs.<br>

Apart from the LCD screen, which under good viewing conditions can work very well the addition of an Electronic viewfinder (EV) is ommitted on the lower priced camcorders. In my opinion, at present, these camcorders are not suitable for outdoor use. One can hardly see what one is recording let alone use manual focus or exposure. Coming back to the EV in the case of the Panasonic SD900 the EV is good except for the lack of a rubber eyepiece! In use, in bright sunlight, one sees bright red as the sunlight penetrates the skin surrounding the user's eye! It's use is thus uncomfortable and hardly conducive to good photography. I have checked the SD900's manual and find no mention of a rubber eyecup, I suppose I'll just have to make one! I have already reread use of a horseblanket :)<br>

Finally, just because these modern camcorders can be made small in size doesn't mean that they should be, when to do so, means that the camcorder's controls can be almost too small to use. The SD90's On/Off button is tiny and close to the hinge of the LCD display, the SD900's On/Off button is higher, more central and larger. <br>

Incidentally, both these camcorders give excellent results! It is just the attention to detail that could make using them easier.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Videocamcorders are mostly sold to moms and dads who want home movies of their kids in the playground and (later) in theater productions. For several years now, still cameras (such as the Panasonic ZS series) have been capable of at least equal quality video.

 

Unless you have a high-end computer capable of true 1080p display and editing, I don't think you can appreciate the quality of the more-expensive videocamcorders. A 720p movie will look smoother because older computers don't drop frames as much as with 1080p.

 

That said, why the heck did you get the SD90 and SD900? Canon videocamcorders are generally higher rated. For that kind of money, you can get a still camera that takes great video, such as the Panasonic G3 or Sony A55.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I am sorry Bill but I tend to disagree with you. The SD 900 has a three chip sensor and a Leica lens it is far superior to the Canon 5D which hasn't even got OIS. If I want high resolution still pictures I'll use my Mamiya 67 or my 5x4 Arca Swiss film cameras. The market for videocamcorders, or more correctly camcorders includes pros they are not toys for mums and dads. I have got a prime 20mm Canon lens and would like to add that to a camcorder, a proper camcorder not the Canon 5D. <br>

My choice would be a Panasonic AG-AF 100 its about £4,000 but it is a high definition 35 equivalent movie camera. My reason for posting the question is to give people an opportunity to think about camcorder design and in particular to publise the fact that some careful reconsideration of the functional aspects can be and should be made. Incidentally, I have a powerful Dell workstation with 13 GB of memory and Sony Vegas Pro so there is no problem editing full HD. And in case you missed it both the Panasonic SD 90 and the SD900 has 1902 x 1080 50P recording. Perhaps you need to have a good read of the specification of these camcorders before dismissing them. </p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>It's swell to voice your opinion regarding this issue, but I would suggest doing it in an article format if you want to put forth only your perspective. Asking it in the form of a question will always result in differing opinions, many of which are just as legitimate as anyone else's.<br>

Why ask for opinions then 'correct' most of what someone else says?<br>

Statements like 'far superior' and 'proper' are just inflammatory to a lot of people.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Geoff, I checked Panasonic SD90 results on YouTube, and they are bad, especially smearing of greenery due to compression artifacts. The Sony HX100v superzoom definitely produces better looking 1080 video. I could not find a videocamcorder named SD900, but the Panasonic TM900 is much better than the SD90, as it should be, at nearly twice the cost. (Had to do this at work, because our home PC drops frames at 1080.)

 

As you can tell, I really don't know how much one has to spend to produce good 1080p video. DSLR cameras have a large sensor and DOF control, but really misbehave when zooming. Their advantage is that many people already have one. For posting 720p on YouTube, the old Panasonic ZS3 was good enough, several years ago.

 

My suspicion is that unless you spend thousands, you are not going to find a videocamcorder that outperforms still cameras of similar price. Being mostly replaced by SD cards now, tape no longer confers a storage advantage to camcorders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I am sorry Jack and Bill but my question was "Does camcorder design need a rethink?" It appears that this was misunderstood. In fact you are both, not deliberately, spoiling this thread. I was expecting people to discus multi angle LCD displays and their visibility and their ease of use. I am not a midget being 6 foot tall. So I should be able to use a camcorder or digital camera without undue problems. But are these manufacturers designing for adults or children?<br>

There will be some photographers who maybe thinking of getting into video and wonder whether they would be better off sticking with either a point and shoot camera like for example, the Canon SX10 20 30 etc or whether it is better to buy a camcorder. I own the SX10 and would be happy to buy an SX30 - which has HD 720. Or, even getting over 20MB still pictures and HD video by buying a Canon 5D Mark II except that my SX10 provides good still pictures. If most of your production<br>

I have stated that in my opinion, and bearing in mind the cameras that I have and with my knowledge of video cameras that for me a camcorder is a better option. If you don't have a medium or large format film camera then you are stuck with a digital camera, point and shoot or SLR camera. So my query Does Camcorder design need a rethink is relevant.<br>

There are two issues that I pointed out that should be particularly important to photographers, one is seeing what they are about to record the other is ease of use. SLR photographers will be bitterly disappointed by some camcorders as their multi-angle viewfinders are poor in bright sunllight -this may not be a problem with UK residents who are very lucky if they see the sun (not really relevantas it may be cold but the sun is shining:). Camcorders with proper viewfinders must cost more, so expect to pay more, do not complain.<br>

Never mind what I said about my cameras, but take my word for it that looking at what you are about to record on a Mamiya 67 is a real pleasure and also I recall my bright clear viewfinder on my Pentax Spotmatic 35mm film camera. Digital viewfinders are notably not as good IMHO. The reason being that the viewfinder itself is a pixel display - they are not glass.<br>

Let's resolve one issue SLR vs camcorder by refering the reader to: <a href="http://www.dvuser.co.uk/content.php?CID=246">http://www.dvuser.co.uk/content.php?CID=246</a> <br>

In fact I would query why call the video camera a camcorder except for the fact that the camcorder includes the recording mechanism. And what apart from a studio camera does not include a recorder in 2011? (Incidentally Bill search for SD 900 that's the SD card recorder. And why accept some youtube review as being an accurate review? I would prefer to review Amazon purchasers reviews. The only axe to grind is defending a poor purchase? Also beware, he who wants what would cost normally £20,000 for a camcorder for £400! <br>

The facts are that whatever manufacturer one chooses, a camcorder, an HD 1080 camcorder is cheaper, or not much more, than buying the benchmark Canon 5D Mark II and other high end still cameras with video capability. And I mean a semi-pro camcorder - which is capable of broadcast quality.</p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>@Jack Quote:</p>

 

<p>"It's swell to voice your opinion regarding this issue, but I would suggest doing it in an article format if you want to put forth only your perspective. Asking it in the form of a question will always result in differing opinions, many of which are just as legitimate as anyone else's.<br />Why ask for opinions then 'correct' most of what someone else says?<br />Statements like 'far superior' and 'proper' are just inflammatory to a lot of people."<br>

It is not "swell to voice my opinion regarding this issue" It is MY issue that has been raised if you have nothing to say on the issue then refrain from responding. All that I have raised is two queries on camcorder design: to repeat: is the multiangle LCD monitor usable? And are the camcorder controls accessible?</p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>In relation to the usability of vari angle LCD screens further to my disappointment with the Panasonic camcorders that I bought I have found that Canon with its new 600D SLR has realised that there is an issue. Here is a quote from their sales literature:<br />"The EOS 600D’s 3” Vari-Angle LCD screen not only flips 175° and rotates 270° - it also has an incredible 1,040,000 dot resolution and 3:2 aspect ratio, offering incredible flexibility of shooting without compromising on quality. So whether you’re shooting across a crowd or from ground-level, you’ll capture the scene perfectly every time. Plus, the EOS 600D’s anti-reflective, water-repellent coating makes for easy viewing in bright light and from a variety of angles."<br>

<br />I haven't had a chance to handle one yet. I am wondering whether the highly glossy vari angle LCD screens on the Panasonic camcorders can be treated with something slightly abbrasive so as to reduce reflections?</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...