Hf10 / hf100
 

Maybe I'm missing something here, but can someone please explain the difference between these two cameras? Is the only difference the size of the internal recording device?

After looking at the low light performance of the Sony SR 11/12, I think that the Canon HF10 is the way to go (for this particular project). But I've read often here at the forum that people love the HF100. I'm just curious, as I can't seem to find what the difference is between the two (outside of 16GB / 8GB).

Brian - you're right: The HF10 has got built-in flash memory. Apart from that, they are the same (except for the colour; The HF10 is shiny black!)
I've got the HF10 and absolutely love it...

Ok, I just wanted to make sure. I've been [ elsewhere on the web ] and strangely, sometimes they don't score the same in the low light tests and other color tests. That's why I was confused. I was under the impression that they were roughly the same model, just had different recording mediums.

Hi,

I have the HF100. It is the same as the HF10 without the hard drive (the HF10 has a slot for the SDHC card, too), but the HF100 costs about $200 less - and it's silver. That $200 buys a lot storage.

For me, it was a preference.

Mike

Hi Brian, we need to break you out of that habit of looking around [ elsewhere on the web ]. There's a lot of misinformation out there. This site should always be your starting point for everything relating to camcorders.

Are you kidding? I spend around 10 hours a day here reading the forums (mostly when I should be working). I check it out here, but I like to get information from a spectrum of places. I've got a subscription to consumer report, but they don't seem to have any idea what's going on.

So I guess this means that you all would support the HF10 as one, if not the best pick for consumer level AVCHD in terms of resolution, sharpness and effectiveness in low light?

The HF10, HF11 and HF100 are all *identical* in performance, with the key difference between them being the 24mbps recording mode on the HF11. If you're happy with 17mbps (and most people are), then the HF100 is really all you need.

Are the cards for recording fairly decently priced? I'm willing to bet that I would need more than 2 hours recording time when I go out on shoots.

EDIT*

Nevermind, they look to be pretty cheap. Looks like the HF10 costs about 100 bucks more on Amazon and eBAY, for 16GB of storage. I can get the HF100, and get three cards at 16GB each, and still undershoot the cost of the HF10.

Chris, it may have just been a sub-standard unit I had when I tested an HF10, but it seems I'm getting much better color & sharpness with the HG21 (which is really an HF11).

Mike, I'm sure it was just a "slip of the typing" but the HF10 has no hard drive. It has internal memory plus the SDHC slot. And there is a provision for copying video from the internal memory to the SDHC card.

I have the HF100 also (actually two of them). Only gripe is no eye level viewfinder, but I'm adaptable (use hoods on the LCD).

Great working cam!

or people could have been mucking about with the settings if it was an instore demo unit.

i've found the color and sharpness on the hf100 to be very satisfactory.

probably best to refer to the internal storage of the HF10/11 as a SSD (solid-state drive), but for all intents and purposes, it serves the same function as a conventional HDD in a dual format camera.

but most consumers would likely get confused by the term SSD, because it is fairly new tech to the consumer market, so the internal storage is typically described in lay-terms as a HDD, because it is a concept that joe public is used to and can understand.