Wow - just looked and I joined in 2003! Last post in 2008. It's good to be back. This was always a great place for advice, and I now need some...

Back in the good-old-days I used a VX2000. It was my dream camera. Amazing low light and I never had to touch a thing.

When upgrading years ago, I went against my gut and bought a Canon XH-A1. ADMISSION: I'm not a manual adjustment guy. I've download all the presets and learned how to adjust everything, but the damn camera is heavy and I've gotten a not so great picture as much as I've got a great one. AND IT'S NOT GOOD IN LOW LIGHT. I know it can be done and many love the camera. I hate it.

So here's where I need your help. What I want is an HD VX2000. :-) As I remember, when I bought the A1 I was comparing it to the Sony FX1, but the knock was that it wasn't nearly as good as the VX2000 at low light. I essentially want as close to a perfect point and shoot in any situation (impossible but you get it).

I'll be doing corporate interviews as well as event footage, so it has to look good. Budget is $1500 to $2k something range. Really depends on the bang for the buck.

I've seen good things here on the CX760, but wonder if the low light will really be good enough (sample footage on youtube looks good). Also the lack of manual focus ring worries me a little and I've heard the focus can hunt. The lack of 30p confuses me too. Only 60 and 24? LOVE the stabilization though.

The FX7 and FX1000 has been around so long, and I think I want to stay away from tape. The AX2000 looks interesting, but $3600 might be too much.

I'm somewhat stuck on Sony (after my Canon experience) but I'm willing to listen to all advice.

THANKS in advance for the advice. I really appreciate it.

LB

I owned a vx2100 and then went to the xh-a1 so I understand how you feel :D
The cx760 will be equally good in low light vs the vx2000, as long as you keep it wide. Eventhough you could shoot corporate interviews and event footage with it I"d get something with a bit more controll. The auto focus on the 760 is very good but like with any camera, if it gets too dark and if it looses focus you have to recover manually which can be a bit of a pain if you have exposure assigned to the small wheel in front and have to change it to focus instead, but once you do that focussing is easy.

Your budget is quite limited so you might consider a Canon XA10, als very good in low light and with xlr, it's still a small handicam but you get a lot for the money. You also might wait a bit and see what the street price of the new panasonic ag ac90 will be, it might fall pretty close to your budget and from what I read what Barry Green thought about it it seems like a camera with good low light performance, a very sharp image and it at least has a lot of controll. Looks like a perfect eng type of cam to me.

Hey Noa

Preorders from B&H are $1999 and the retail list is around $2200 ..so it's quite an affordable camera and a nice size too!! I will get one just to play with when they arrive and if I'm suitable impressed they might even replace my shoulder mount cameras.

Chris

Just hope they fixed the bad autofocus the ac130/160 series had, around 2k is actually a very good price if you see what you get in return.

Hi Noa

Barry has tested it as well as Bob Diaz and it uses the HMC40 focus and is lightning fast and no hunting either...Take a look at the post from Bob on the Panasonic AVCCAM forum here and watch the videos..he does an autofocus test too at the expo!!

Chris

I have all Sony cameras. NX5U, SR11, XR500, CX700 and of course my old FX1 ( all are better than the FX1 !!!). One thing to note with the new consumer cameras is face detection that was not on the older cameras and on my Sony's work very well. Most of the time though I am in semi auto on the consumer Sony's. Usually use touch spot focus( so they do not hunt focus and focus on what I want to be in focus) and AE shift to get exposure I want. If there is good light they will also track focus of the selected face too.

Ron Evans

Thanks to everyone for the responses!

Noa:
Dammit I blame you! Your threads on the cx760 is the big reason I'm considering it. :-) Something small and light with a great picture and lowlight AND steadi is a big draw. Your point about being able to adjust the front wheel to focus is a good one though. I'll have to test that and see how responsive it is.

How is the audio? Does it have an external mic input? (I'm assuming yes but never thought to ask)

I appreciate the XA10 suggestion. I will look into it, but after my A1 experience it would take a lot to get me to buy another Canon. The AC90 won't be available till next

And yes, wasn't the vx2000/2100 wonderful? Damn!

Ron:
Good to know all the recent stuff is better than the FX1. How much better is the picture and low light on the NX5U vs the CX700?


Any other opinions welcome. Thanks again.

Think about it before you buy and don't just take my word for it :) it does work for MY workflow but it might not for yours. The inbuild mics are not that good, it's ok for ambient sound but I prefer my external mics (zoom h1,h h4 etc) for better sound. I do have a beachtek adapter for my sony so I can use xlr mics or my wireless interview mike, so yes, there is a audio input. I have not done a side by side test with my xh-a1 but first impression is that the soundquality I could get through the xlr input of my xh-a1 was better. If I have more time I"l do that test to confirm that.

And yes, the vx2100 was my first love :) that and a cheap hama tripod, those where the days.

About choosing a camera based on previous experiences, you have to know the xh-a1 is a first generation hdv camera and when it came out it was a very good camera at it's price point, at that time no hdv camera did well in low light, the sony fx1 f.i. did suffer the same low light issues.

Every HD camera that has been released recently will do MUCH better then the xh-a1 in low light, no matter what brand it is. I don't care what brand I use, as long as it performs it's ok for me.

Ron:
Good to know all the recent stuff is better than the FX1. How much better is the picture and low light on the NX5U vs the CX700?


Any other opinions welcome. Thanks again.

The NX5U isn't better than the CX700. There is the option to select how the picture is shot on the NX5U but in a point and shoot test the CX700 would win hands down. The video noise on the CX700 at 24db is less than the NX5U at 12db when looking at large single colour areas. I never use the focus wheel on the CX700 as the touch spot focus is a lot better. I have the wheel set to control AE shift most of the time. The NX5U wins in that it does not have a backfocus issue so I can set focus for a point on stage once for a performance and know that the depth of field will allow me to zoom in and out. Also it has XLR audio and smooth iris and gain changing. Not possible with all the other small single chip Sony's I have as they will not hold a manual focus through zooming, and step change exposure. Hence on the CX700 and the others I use manual focus but use the touch spot focus frequently to reset the focus and AE shift to control exposure that gives the camera the ability to optimize the picture. That way the cameras do not keep going out of focus with lights going up and down. In good light with face detection on the small Sony's are great and the newer CX760 or PJ760 balance optical stabilizer is very good I am told by a friend who has the PJ760.

For family shoots or holiday its the CX700 every time. For shooting on a tripod where long zoom is needed or in difficult lighting then the NX5U is the choice. The CX700 is great in full auto the NX5U is happiest in manual.

Ron Evans

The NX5U wins in that it does not have a backfocus issue
So that was what I have been seeing last time I shot a dance performance! I shot one beginning this year with a sony xr500 and a xr520 and was standing not that far from the stage. I zoomed in, switched to manual focus, focussed and zoomed back out and all was good after that, very sharp images all throughout the video.

But later this year I had a performance where I was standing much further back from the stage and had to zoom in completely many times during the performance, there where several occasions at certain focal lengths I saw the video was soft and out of focus.

I have not tested this with the cx730 but will for sure now as I have another dance performance coming up beginning next year.

and smooth iris and gain changing
I can tell that the cx730 has very smooth exposure adjustments, I set the wheel to exposure and always manually controll it, if you look really close you can see some very minor jumps when turning the wheel but from a normal viewing distance exposure adjustments are almost as smooth as on my xh-a1.

as the touch spot focus is a lot better
Touch focus on my cx730 is not as good as on my xr520, after working a while with it now I noticed it can be quite unreliable (both my cx730's have the same issue so it's no camera defect) and I need to check focus each time with my hoodloupe to be sure. When I have zoomed in on a person and there is a bright background I have had moments where it refused to focus right, even when shooting outside.

Event video can be really demanding (and much more than interviews) and you really do need a camera that thinks for itself if it has to! I bought two Panny AC-130's and although they worked well, the auto-iris really sucked and was only semi-auto as it never changed shutter speed so I still had to "baby" it and turn on and off ND filters. Working solo at events you really need a camera that can adjust itself from bright outdoors to indoors and not have the operator have to change an ND filter when a cloud goes over the sun.

There sadly are times with a two cam shoot where you have to leave the second camera to work out good settings on it's own!!!

Chris

For event video I find the autofocus function the most important, you can fix a bit under- or over exposure but slightly out of focus sticks out like a sore thumb when viewed in HD. Every serious videographer will say you will have to use manual which I do whenever I can but there have been so many occasions I needed to rely on a good autofocus to get the shot. In that regard the cx730 has not let me down, unless you do a spotfocus on the screen, but if leave in auto I have to push it hard to get an out of focus image, even at dark receptions. Only if it goes out of focus it's completely lost.

I think it was quite similar to my vx2100 many years ago, that one also had a very good autofocus.

If you zoom in and focus and then come back all will be in focus but if you zoom in again you may find it has gone out of focus again. Not reliable if one is zooming in and out. That is why my wife ,who uses the SR11 most of the time will always spot focus again if she zooms in to a new area of the stage. Of the small cameras I have the XR500 is the best I think. Colour is a little better on the CX700 and the CX700 is better for a travel camera. A friend used his PJ760 in the show recently and it matched much the same as the CX700. Just needed about the same colour matching to mix with the NX5U and the EX3.

The iris moves in steps so if you are just adjusting that it will be stepped. If you use exposure control or AE shift the camera can use both iris and gain ( and shutter speed if you haven't locked that) so the changes are smoother.

We have noticed the same issue with touch focus on the CX700 compared to the SR11 and XR500 which is why my wife still uses the SR11 ( it has zebras the XR500 does not). Its why I am looking for a better camera for her as the SR11 is looking a little dated now.

Ron Evans

It is the exposure control I use and that is smooth enough for gradual exposure changes, works pretty well when in manual. Does the cx700 have zebra's? I find setting the right exposure on the xr500/520 not that easy, especially because it doesn't have zebra's plus you can clearly see the steps when you adjust.

All my stuff is theatre multicam usually 4 cameras or sometimes 5 camera. If I am by myself then it is three cameras. One or two are always fixed unattended ( the XR500 and CX700) spot focus on a mid point of the stage at the zoom position they will be set at for the whole show. Exposure set to AE shift full negative. This way they do not change focus when lights change and will change exposure for the lights. NX5U and EX3 ( when he comes) are in full manual, my wife using the SR11 uses manual exposure and spot focus. I have found this gives me the best combination. Lots of choices and at least one of the cameras is in sharp focus and well exposed !!! The EX3 or my wife with the SR11 are used for closeups so very often are moving to new position and out of focus so I use the NX5U as a medium shot to track stage action and then the two fixed cameras are also a choice in editing to show full stage activity or set the scene..

Ron Evans

Yes the CX700 has zebras and peaking.

Ron Evans

James, your aversion to Canon is not logical. Keep in mind your issue with your XH-A1 was due to your choice of camera, not the Canon brand . The XH-A1 was a poor choice for low-light work even back when the camera was new. Here in Cincinnati my friends and I never understood those few around us that chose that camera for wedding work,, it performed in low light conditions dismally compared to our FX1s and Z1s.

The Canon XA10 on the other hand is VERY good in lowlight. I run it along side my DSLR style cameras, and I prefer it's images over those of my DSLRs most the time. I love the size, the image quality, the lowlight ability. and yes I've even grown to like the exposure wheel, works great for me. Audio quality is absolutely stellar for a camera it's size.

I've taken my XA10 around to friends at three video companies and they are astonished at what they see. These guys are all veterans in the business who know a thing or two, and they were blown away with the IQ and lowlight ability of the XA10.

So it is your preogative to not choose the XA-10 or XF100 or XF300 of course. But do not ignore the current Canons because your old camera was poor in low light. Sony and Panasonic also have produced cameras that were poor in low light also.

I am a wedding shooter and I am a low light fanatic, I'm very picky, and I love my XA-10 for wedding work.

I have done weddings with my xh-a1 and a z1 and I can tell those first gen sony's where just as bad in low light, every one of those very first hdv camera's did not do well in low light.So I don't see why a xh-a1 would have been a bad choice, it was in fact an excellent camera when it came out, not up to today's standards but it was back then compared to it's competitors.

Noa, theZ1/ FX1s, etc, were not to my liking in low light coming from the VX2100 and PD170s as I did, but the XH-A1 was, to me, very poor, no comparison, but that is just my opinion.

The last couple of years I have edited numerous wedding videos shot by veterans using both cams, and the XH-A1s were just abysmal, to me. It is/was a very good camera, in decent light, but I have had this disagreement before with others. I have not owned the XH-A1, but editing footage from that model camera always just shocked me at the level of gain needed to cope, compared to the Z1/FX1. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this one. It doesn't matter, thank god for the newer cameras is all I can say.

Just for the record...I use a XHA1s for many weddings and events (like the video I shot at a Club-link below) and with a LED light on camera I got good results. The only footage I've seen that was better was a EX1 but I couldn't afford it. Are people saying that a cheaper Sony can do better? I'd like to see proof!
I never used the XHA1s in automatic settings. I have seen the footage I get when its set to automatic in low light. Total crap.mushy and grainy. I always used manual and i adjust contrast and colours in post-that's the way it should be.Of course I used gain at +9db and even shutter at 30fps but this footage (see link) is usable.
I have edited EX1 footage and it was better. What else is out there in a camcorder?
Babaluu's Club
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H9RO3_dkpTM

Nowadays, I use a Canon T3i with a F 1.8 lens for clubs (but always with a LED dimmable light) when I have to and even a new Canon XF300 (which is a little better than the XHA1s but sharper than an EX1)...
I still haven't found the perfect camera for under $10k ...
let me know when you do pls :-)
E

Are people saying that a cheaper Sony can do better? I'd like to see proof!

To which Sony are you referring to and compared to what camera?

To which Sony are you referring to and compared to what camera?

You also have to specify what characteristic you will be looking at. I still have my FX1 but when compared to the SR11( the oldest AVCHD camera I now have, which I still use) the SR11 has a sharper picture, better colour, lower video noise. If I compare my NX5U with the latest CX700. In full auto the CX700 will snap into sharp focus quickly, especially if people are around and face detection is on. In comparison the NX5U is slow at auto focus if it gets correct at all. Comparing video noise there is no comparison the CX700 is much less I think less noise in the CX700 at 24db than the NX5U at 12db and at these levels there is good colour in the CX700 too. In full manual the NX5U can be controlled in many ways and still has the advantage as the main camera for me if the stage lighting is such that gain can be less than 12db ( even better at 6db). The NX5U has better sound with XLR's and LPCM audio etc etc. If it gets really dark though I actually fall back to the CX700 or the XR500 because they have a clean signal and practically see in the dark something the NX5U cannot do without grain. The back illuminated sensors really do make a difference I think.

Ron Evans

Hi Ron

The backlit sensors is an interesting one. Panasonic's new AC-90 actually has smaller chips (1/4.7" against the older 1/4" of the HMC40) and reports so far have indicated not only as good or better IQ than it's big brother with 1/3" chips but video noise at 24db (unusable on the 1/4" chip cameras) is quite clean and comparable to 12db gain even on the big sensors.

It's obviously a tech improvement that will make a lot of low light users at weddings smile!!! I was a little dismayed when they announced a physically smaller chip but the test results from guys like Barry Green and Bob Diaz show that cams with backlit chips are the way to go!!!

I'm assuming that the CX 700 also has backlit sensors???

Chris

Yes the CX700 and the XR500 have backilluminated sensors the SR11 does not being much the same vintage as the NX5U . The AG-AC90 looks like an interesting camera that has lots of the functions I need for my wife to use. Wonder if they are Sony sensors!! Will look at it more when it comes out.

Ron Evans

This has been a very helpful thread. I appreciate all the responses. Ron: Your breakdown of the CX700 vs your other cameras was interesting.

The discussions of the A1/FX1/Z1 coming from the VX2100 and PD170 are interesting and something I remember very well. I owned a VX2000 for years and it was amazing for what I needed. The time came to move to HD, and I can remember sitting in the camera store with the FX1 and A1. BOTH didn't do nearly the job the VX2000 did, and everyone knew it. I remember zooming into all the far corners, recording footage and watching it later at home. I also remember combing through all the youtube videos (like I'm doing again now). The salesman convinced me the A1 was the better buy, and against my gut I went with it. The truth is I probably wouldn't have loved either, but the A1 has been incredibly disappointing for many years now.

That said, I really don't hold a bias in my comments, and am just looking for the right choice...

James, your aversion to Canon is not logical. Keep in mind your issue with your XH-A1 was due to your choice of camera, not the Canon brand . The XH-A1 was a poor choice for low-light work even back when the camera was new. Here in Cincinnati my friends and I never understood those few around us that chose that camera for wedding work,, it performed in low light conditions dismally compared to our FX1s and Z1s.

The Canon XA10 on the other hand is VERY good in lowlight. I run it along side my DSLR style cameras, and I prefer it's images over those of my DSLRs most the time. I love the size, the image quality, the lowlight ability. and yes I've even grown to like the exposure wheel, works great for me. Audio quality is absolutely stellar for a camera it's size.

I've taken my XA10...


...but even after my A1 story you've convinced me to look into the XA10. I like the size and what seems like the possibility of better DOF. I haven't been able to go to the store and hold both that and the 760, but I've been trying to read the reviews and the damn youtube footage.

I know all the variables that can make youtube footage a bad review source, but here's some thoughts. You can tell me if you've found the same or I'm off base.

The XA10 can look very sharp and crisp, but often the colors look bland and drab to me:

CANON XA10 FOOTAGE ~ VIDEO TEST - YouTube
Canon XA10 Test Footage - YouTube
Bits of my weekend - Canon XA10 Test Footage - YouTube (the images here are very sharp)
Canon XA10 test with manual focus (MF) with cinema mode & vivid color option - YouTube (to be fair, here's one I found "in cinema mode w vivid color option" and it does pop)

The XA10 looks pretty good in low light, although I've seen some footage that I'm not so sure about:

Canon XA10 Test footage day two - YouTube (a band in a club - not bad, not great?)
Low light with the canon XA10 - YouTube (some good stuff here, although I think I'm seeing grain in places)
Canon XA10 Nightout - YouTube (some nice low light stuff here. Some shots better than others. Looks very good then the field/bunny at 3:00 ain't great)
Canon XA10 Very Low Light - YouTube (not good imho)

As for the CX760...

Footage is sharp and I like it, although I'm not sure it's as sharp as the A10:
Sony HDR-CX760 Handycam Test Video - YouTube
Sony CX760v Active Steadi-Cam Tests - YouTube (look at band at 4:48)
SONY HDR PJ760v test - YouTube (good variety of footage here)

The low light video I previously reviewed looks good, but I do see issues too:

SONY HDR PJ760v Low light test - YouTube
Sony CX730 CX760 LOW LIGHT VENEZIA CANAL GRANDE RIALTO - YouTube

I think it's safe to say that for image stabilization, the Sony is the clear winner, so no research on that.

As you can probably tell I'm tearing my hair out over this! :-)

I don't know that the 760 is the "vx2000 with stabilization" as I hope. I don't know that my budget will get me what I need. I don't know if the XA10 is the perfect compromise. I don't know what I don't know!!!

Anyway, thanks for all the help.

If you are not in a hurry you may want to wait and see what the Panasonic AG-AC90 is like. It looks like an interesting camera at a good price point.

Ron Evans

Thanks Ron - that's the worst part about this. I need it next week for an event the following. And the situation doesn't allow me to rent now and buy later.

James, if you want I can upload some short footage straight from the camera (my cx730 - has the same performance as the 760) for you to view? So at least you"ll have some real world footage to look at, I have some footage on my camera from a wedding now where I can read the camera data at time of recording (like iso, shutter) so I can give you an idea about performance at certain iso's.

If someone else here could do the same for xa10 footage it will make your decission a bit easier. :)

If you need it next week I think the choice has to be a XA10 or the Panasonic AG-HMC40. Both have more control over the audio than the Sony and if you are on a tripod the advantage of better image stabilizer on the Sony is not an issue. For interviews audio is more important. All have face detection etc. I didn't bring up the HMC40 before as I think the AC90 will be much better but if its next week !!! I think the HMC40 may have a lot of deals around now too and closer to the price of the Sony's.

Ron Evans

Low light was a concern so that would rule out the hmc40, I"d take the xa10 if you are on a budget, from what I have seen it performs also really well in low light and like you say, has good audio features.

James, if you want I can upload some short footage straight from the camera (my cx730 - has the same performance as the 760) for you to view? So at least you"ll have some real world footage to look at, I have some footage on my camera from a wedding now where I can read the camera data at time of recording (like iso, shutter) so I can give you an idea about performance at certain iso's.

If someone else here could do the same for xa10 footage it will make your decission a bit easier. :)

Noa - that would be monumentally helpful. To have a wide variety of to judge the performance. Thank a million in advance. That would include the best and the worst, so helpful. Just let me know how to dl (I think you can message my profile for a link).

I"m uploading to my dropbox account now, have added a few very low light scenes which where filmed with 21 to 24db gain and a few high detail scenes outside, I"ll send you the link as soon as all is uploaded.

All files are in the 1920x1080 28mbs avchd 50p format.

Thanks a million Noa. I'm getting ready to take a look at the footage now.

If anyone has some raw XA10 footage they could share, it would be great to compare!

it's difficult to compare camera's if the shots where taken in totally different places or circumstances. Based on what I have seen so far I"d say the xa10 will be slightly sharper and a bit better in low light, a saw following comparison Sony CX760 vs Canon HF G10 on Vimeo with a hfg10 (guess this camera has the same performance as the xa10) but the test was done only up to 15db gain where you can see the canon has the advantage. But I also see in that test (I downloaded the original uploaded file) that the Sony is cleaner at 15db which probably was the reason why the tester did not go all the way up to 24db. He said it was because both camera's where producing unusable images at those levels but I have been happily using 21db gain shots without an issue, I also bet the Sony is cleaner at 24db compared to the canon. For me the xh-a1 produces a unusable image at 12db gain and even 24db gain on the small Sony looks a lot cleaner.


Also one thing I have seen in a test is that the Canon is better when zooming in in darker areas, the Sony is very good wide open in low light but quickly looses that advantage once you start zooming in.

Just to let you know is that I use Edius 6.5 to edit the 50p footage.

Whatever you buy, if you purchase from B&H or other similar place, use the camera gently and you can return it if you do not like it. I know B&H processes returns promptly, and would handle an exchange quickly. You do not have to be stuck with your purchase. You could return it Monday and have your new camera by the following Saturday for another shoot.

I want to thank everyone for their input so far, especially Noa for the footage. It was incredibly valuable.

I'm still torn and heartbroken. I REALLY want the stabilization of the Sony (I do some moving shots and that would be great for it, along with the size), but as best I can tell comparing many many videos is that the XA10 is both sharper and better in low light. The Sony looks great in sunlight. I'll be mainly indoors though and not yet convinced it will do the job. Damn! :-)

Thanks and damn you Jeff Harper for suggesting the XA10.

The entire situation stinks because I feel like I haven't had the time to look at the DSLR option like a Canon 5D Mark II. My understanding is that the benefits are the beautiful DOF, but that they're not all that easy to manage onsite. This stinks.

I'm headed to a camera shop today to try and play with both.

Thanks,

JLB

You have to consider that the low light footage I gave you at 21 and 24db gain is brighter then what you can see with your own eyes so I wouldn't doubt if it would do the job. At 24db of gain the cx730 rivals my dslr with a f1.4 lens at 1600 iso but with the biggest difference that you get a very deep and usable depth of field. Compared to the xh-a1 it's like night and day in low light. Also, don't expect big differences between the xa-10 and the cx730 in image quality, both will give you good results in good and bad light. Both camera's just have very minor pro's and contras compared to eachother. (not taken the xlr adpater into consideration)

I would think twice about the dslr route, they are a real handfull, especially if you are a solo shooter, very nice for creative shots, that's why I use both the dslr and the small handicam because they complement eachother. If you like I can show you some trailers I have done with the camera just to convince you it is possible to get good looking footage with the new generation handicams under demanding situations.

As Noa said, if you're considering an SLR, you're talking about a whole entirely different beast, not something you should pick up this week to shoot next, unless you've got some solid background with a still camera already!

That said, you could take a look at the Sony SLT cameras... IF you want to have a camera with that capability - I added them to my arsenal since we take stills and video, and I'm happy with the choice. But there are still a couple dedicated video cameras for what they do best... although I'm already finding I reach for the SLT camera first, must be the old film camera nostalgia kicking in <wink>!


The footage I've seen of the Canons is pretty good, and I'm familiar with the CX series (up to the 760, which I haven't bothered to upgrade to - 700's are fine for now). What I saw in your samples is typical of the differences - they handle color "differently" - Sony tends one way, Canon another. I usually catch what looks to me to be "murky" shadows in Canon low light as opposed to black with the Sony, but this could be inexperienced operators or post work. Sharpness improves with each generation just a little, and unless you're spending big $$ and putting the footage side by side, most people would not consider the current high end consumer cams overly "soft"... they will be a big jump over your "SD" camera.

Cameras have advanced A LOT in just a few short years, the newer backlit Sonys definitely see better in bad light than the average "eyeball", and it appears the Canons have caught up.


One other word of warning - whatever camera you get, be prepared for the workflow - you'll be processing AVCHD files that are 4x the amount of date per frame, and are highly compressed - you'll likely need a computer budget about equal to your camera budget if your computer is also "vintage". Not that the results aren't well worth it, but since you haven't upgraded "recently", you won't have a learning curve, but rather a "learning WALL" to scale, and it's not to be underestimated (at least you'll have lots of help from DVi'ers who have already done it...).

Thanks Noa and Dave. Noa: again, thanks for the footage. And I know what you mean about the gain. It was other clips along with your footage that gave me things to look for. I really appreciate all the first hand advice you've given too.

A few hours ago I finally had a chance to play with both at the store, and I recorded sample from the cs760, the G10 and the XA10. I'm still reviewing the footage, but I hate to say that I do see more noise on the Sony and a sharper and more impressive picture on the Canons.

Overall yes, both do an amazing job. I just need to convince myself that I can shoot high-profile interviews with the 760. I'm working on it, but the Canon felt more like my old VX2000 (although still can't touch it :-)).

The new wrinkle is the damn G10, It did a very good job, at $500 to $600 less. I now need to look into the differences further. I know the XLR inputs, top grip, and remember hearing that although it uses the same chip, the XA10 records more pixels so it should be better. That is a lot of money, so need to convince myself it's worth it if I decide to go with Canon over Sony. I also read the G10 doesn't have an external audio input, just a shoe, which I can't believe would be true!

DSLR: Thanks for the feedback. Staying away from that for now.

All make sense?

Like Dave said, you can't pick up a dslr now and do a paid shoot with it next week if have not got experience with it but you can with the small handicams. About sharpness, My sony xr520 also looks a bit sharper then my cx730 but there you can see it's an in camera sharpening as there is not more detail like with the image of a EX1 I recently was able to shoot side by side with. There I had to do some in post sharpening to get the cx730 to match better to the EX1. I have seen comparison footage where the xa10 (or could have been the cheaper version without xlr) also was sharper then the xf100.

I think the xa10 will be your better choice as it will deal better with your audio, has a focus ring and you can adjust exposure with the small wheel on the back, a odd place for such a control and nowhere near a practical iris ring on the lens but at least there is a way to control it. (xa10 users pls correct me if I"m wrong) And there are also, I think, 3 real buttons on the lcd screen to control some functions which is a + as well. The cx730 only has one control wheel but allows me to do real time exposure changes (which is always on manual in my case) and it's in a "normal" position. There are 3 assignable buttons but they are on the touchscreen, not a big deal but I"m not such a fan of touch screen control as you have to clean your lcd after every shoot. One thing I absolutely love is the 26,5mm wide angle on the Sony's which makes it so much easier to shoot in tight spaces.

Also remember that the way you have to shoot will drastically change compared to the vx2100, that and the xh-a1 you can press against your eye which gives you an extra stabilization point but you can't with the small handicams as those viewfinders are pretty useless and you"ll be working mostly with the lcd, that means you have to hold it in front of you in your hands or best on a tripod, the stabilization on the new sony's does do small wonders here as you can get near tripod like footage when hand holding it. You might consider a small shoulder mount for extra stabilization.

Thanks - good points.

I'm going to try and upload the footage I shot at the camera store so you all can tell me what you see. Would be interesting.

Never thought to mention it before but of course the Sony NX30 is the "Pro" version of the Sony PJ760 that does come with XLR's , shotgun mic,a larger battery with some extra firmware to give true timecode etc at about the same price as the XA10. Might also be worth a look. I have a small brace I had for years with an early JVC camera that I often use to hold against my shoulder as Noa suggests.

The Sony's always over expose so if your tests were all done in low light in auto they would be for sure over exposed. The image is brighter than reality. I find that fixing using AE shift it not only brings this closer to what is real but also seems to reduce the very fine grain that does appear if left in auto.

Ron Evans

Ron: Your point about the Sony pushing harder and increasing the gain in auto mode is a good one, and something I'm reviewing in the footage now. The only problem is that even if true and I can lower the noise and get a better result in manual mode vs auto, I often need/want to be in auto mode. Now if the picture can really be as good or better, then maybe...

I'm looking at the footage now, and going back to the camera store later today for one last hands-on test before I buy (that will be today too).

I'm trying to export the footage I shot from AE, but the files are understandably huge (900mb for just under 4 minutes with an h264 .mov). Any suggestions for rendering a fair representation I can show you on Vimeo?

You can only lower the noise if you lower the gain when in manual, if automode gives you too much noise but if the image is well exposed there's not much you can do about it, you could lower the gain in manual but then resulting in an underexposed image. I have not even tried to remove grain as for my use (and clients) it no issue.

I usually import and work with native files, then export as a mpeg2 HD 1080p file and import into handbrake and then render at 5000kbs, 2pass, 720p file and upload that to vimeo, gives me very good results and handbrake encodes very fast. This workflow for internet use is a fast one, even one my 2 year old pc.

When you use AE shift you are in auto but telling the camera to either make the picture darker or lighter from what it wanted to use. If you ask it to darken the picture it will most certainly reduce the gain and consequently the grain one would see in low light situations. Most of the time I have my Sony's in full negative AE shift in the theatre or with the CX700 even normal use at least -0.5ev. Produces a better image for me anyway.

Ron Evans

Yes, I can concur that my cx730 overexposes as well when in auto, me too has the ae shift set to a negative value incase I have to run one of my camera's in auto.

Thanks guys. Trying to upload some footage to Vimeo now. We'll see if it chokes...

I've upload a shorter clip of the 3 cameras shooting the same shot.

***I know it is not the exact same conditions, shot, settings, and is in now way fair. :-) What I did was shoot most of the same locations in the store in auto mode. I didn't have the time to play with the manual settings, and since I'll be in auto mode often, this was good enough for a first test.

Not going to tell you yet which footage is which camera. You''ll see the quick break in footage to tell when the next cam is shooting. One interesting note is that the compressing Vimeo did actually reduced the noise quite a bit, so it's not a perfect example.

I've uploaded am much longer version with better examples that is converting now.

Watch this on the vimeo site in HD, in full mode, and try with scaling on and off or you see little grain! (damn - the bad doesn't look near as bad here)

A reason why the Sony might seem noisier in these conditions is because you zoomed in, it closes it iris down pretty quickly meaning it will compensate with a higher gain. From tests I have seen the Canon does not close the iris as fast when zooming meaning less gain at comparable zooming lengths.
So, if you plan do do quite some zooming in darker areas the Canon will be the better choice I think. If you would have played back the clips in the camera at the store and if the settings where set to display the camera data you could have checked what the gain values where.

I think that's a very accurate point. I did notice it got worse with zoom, and almost any distance.

It looks like Vimeo only allows 1 HD video per free account, so I'm going to delete this one and upload the longer version. Here it is:

I apologize for the erratic movement. I know it will drive you crazy, but I was trying to grab quick footage of each camera of different subjects. I can't post it all, and the quick cuts make it work.

Make sure to watch it on the vimeo site at full size. The damn vimeo conversion is actually smoothing the noise, but best I can do...

Sony till 1:14
G10 till 2:53
XA10 till end at 3:49

Comp 3-1 on Vimeo