I haven't installed PMB 3 yet... undoubtedly this wil resolve the issue with Vegas, but I found it strange that I could only drag the first .MTS clip sucessfully, and the other short clips all cause Vegas to lock hard... this is reminiscent, but oddly OPPOSITE of some of the things I ran into with the CX7 at first. In short, these cams and their software are heavily linked, don't lose the software.

This is the first problem I've run into with short .mts clips not just dragging and dropping onto the VEGAS timeline... been holding off on installing the PMB "upgrade", will do it on a backup machine later today, but am still vetting the SR11, and don't know if it's going to work as I'd hoped (right now I'd say it's a great cam, but I prefer the older ones I've got)


I agree the SR11 holds up VERY well in low light conditions, I'd rate it alongside the HC7 (which was equal to the HV20, despite some bad reviews - in the real world they were pretty much neck and neck), it's just the CX7 beats them all by a hair or two... and in low light hairs count... it's not a deal breaker, as I have lighting available and know it's there when and if needed.

I'm still evaluating the cams, and know what the CX7 can do (far more than it's tiny size suggests), with the SR11, I'm just past the button poking stage, and I'm seeing things that I am not sure about just yet, but may be "deal breakers" for me on what is one of the best designed and laid out cameras in all other respects - handling and build wise, this cam is a 9.9 (I'd swap the tilt VF for pull out).

AS soon as I get some short clips in good light into vegas to evaluate, I'll have a better idea there - the CX7 has been my "lousy light" champ, and I don't see that changing. I'm going to be watching that "soft" issue carefully, as it may just be I prefer a slightly less sharp/smoother picture <wink>.

I've really got to consider the still function carefully as that was a primary reason for considering this cam - ability to shoot simultaneous stills and video, both in high quality for live event shooting... maybe too good to be true, but aside from the 3 shot limitation, the CX7 and HC7/9 shot some excellent stills in their rated resolution... they compare favorably with a decent quality 5M point and shoot, and with a little post sweetening... the SR11 stills are simply noisy by comparison. Noise and detail are two different animals.

Once I shoot side by side, I'll post some shots showing what I'm talking about - shoot a couple still photos and pull them into a program where you can zoom in, and it's painfully obvious. I'm going to surmise that perhaps the photo function was optimized for display on an HDTV rather than for traditional photo work, otherwise there's no way to explain it... I'm sure they look great on an HDTV, but that's 1920 x1080 or approx 2.1 Mpixel, NOT 7.1 or 10.1 Mpixel...

The higher resolution shots fall apart here - "oil painting" patterns and artifacts are noticeable on almost all parts of the shots I've taken so far where there should be smoother color/texture - it's an "effect" I've not seen before and I've shot my share of cameras.

In short, yes the SR11 is a VIDEO camera, but if all the earlier Sony cams worked pretty well as dual purpose cams and this one fails... I for one will be supremely bummed, as everything else about this camera is great from what I can tell so far. Build, design, features, ALL are top notch.

Dave, it is hard to believe that the SR series would have worse still shot functions than the earlier models given their improved pictures...but who knows. As I said, I don't use them for that, but at least on my Pioneer plasma it looks dynamite. To me that's the nicest way to show pictures. Of course it hampers sharing, but mabye I'll just put the Pioneer on wheels and send it to friends along with the pix! :)

But I definitely see none of the 'paint' effect in the few stills I've shot in good light. If you get that same effect in good light, I'll be surprised.

Dave, the other thing I've found with the SR12 vs any prior Sony model (including my tests on the CX7 as well as the many other Sony cams I've owned) is the amazing sharpness WITHOUT the noise! To me that may be the single biggest achievement of the SR series...the sharpest picture together with the least noise. My FX7 may have been a bit sharper, but it definitely had more video noise.

I guess this is what's got me puzzled - and yes I've now shot in "good light" with the same artifacts showing... I hope to do some more tests (today is swamped though), but I'm not expecting different results at this point - I'm only going to be seeing if the artifacts and patterns are truly a problem at comparable resolutions to the other cameras - my theory is that the .jpg algorithm may be flawed, but it may just be "too many pixels" from not enough data, resulting in "junk" interpolation. But it's not evident in the 7 series stills, so why here? I dunno, but it is. Once I post some shots, you'll see it, and I appreciate if you can cross check my results so we can confirm it's either a flaw or I've got a bad camera... is possible...

Video wise, well I've still got to stuff the PMB software on a backup machine so I can see what I've shot, but what I've seen on the LCD is stunning. I too will be comparing to the FX7 as well at some point - for now I'm just A/B'ing against the small cams.

After following these threads, I'm tempted to wait a bit and see what materializes. So far, I haven't even been able to find an HF10/100 in a local store yet, so I'm not in a big hurry at the moment. Any CX9 will probably be more compact - similar to the CX7, HF10, and SD9 - which is good, but I hope they keep the nice control dial.

I did finally see an SD9 at Best Buy and Fry's, but in both cases, their security system for the demo units didn't provide the proper voltage for the DC-in jack (Panasonic seems to have changed it from 7.2 to 9.6V with this generation). They gave me batteries to try, but they weren't sufficiently charged to do any real testing.

It might be a bit of a challenge to do low-light comparisons in these stores since they are illuminated by dozens of mercury vapor lamps! I'll have to look for or create a shadowed area somewhere.

HF10 now in stock at J&R Music World. HF100 in stock at B&H Photo.

Yeah, I noticed that, but I'm waiting for someone in the Sacramento, CA area to get it though so I can check it out. Fry's and Best Buy didn't have it yet, I'll check a few more this weekend. It probably won't be too long now.

In order to get a literal side by side comparison, I modified my bracket rig to accomodate both a CX7 and the SR11 side by side, triggering the cameras with the remote. This was helpful... only analyzed the stills so far, and shot them to the MS Duo while the HDD was running - I'm suspicious that perhaps could make a difference, but will have to test that theory.

SO, here's what I found - CX7 stills tend towards more contrast and saturation, which makes for a very pleasing first impression, but at similar zooms, there IS more detail in the SR11 stills - there is also some pattern noise, but in different areas between the two cameras - it's definitely more noticeable on the SR11 in light monochromatic areas, where I see it more in the dark areas on the CX7. Faces seem to get some special treatment with the SR, they look a bit smoother.

I took some more retouch passes, and it looks like I can make these really pop and smooth out the noise and artifacts, and that's what I was looking for - the CX stills look "better" at first impression, but the SR11 stills give you more potential to work with...

Maybe tomorrow I'll have a chance to A/B the outdoor stills... but after taking more time with the camera I'm starting to see the potential I was looking for!

I guess I'm in the same camp as Dave, get rid of the HDD, put in 16G flash to give some onboard record capability, drop the size and weight just a bit, keep the big LCD and control knob, toss in a couple of the pro features from the HC9, and I think you'd have perfection... will that be the CX9????

Hey Dave, just a thought, but based on your above comment I'm wondering if you have face detection turned on? If so, and you're not shooting people, try turning it off and then do your comparisons. You're really not doing an A/B if you have face detection turned on in the SR12 since your CX doesn't have it.

I agree with you that numbers don't tell it all, but we make the same mistake with words.

I'd rather trust my own observations and my own A/Bs conducted side by side on the same day, same time, same scenes...for me that's the definitive test and far more useful than words, numbers or anecdotes. :)

I will be doing these A/Bs with an HF10 and an SR12 over the next week or so. I can then make an intelligent, informed decision.

I have withdrawn from public view several posts in this thread which crossed the line regarding the code of conduct on this site -- as well as references to a review elsewhere on the web. I strongly urge anyone who is concerned about something they read elsewhere on the web to please go to that site and discuss it there, because I sure don't want it here.

Many thanks to Ken Ross for the quote of the day, above: "I'd rather trust my own observations and my own A/Bs conducted side by side on the same day, same time, same scenes...for me that's the definitive test and far more useful than words, numbers or anecdotes." That should be printed on a T-shirt and vended. Very well said, and a great way to close out this thread.

Much appreciation also to Dave Blackhurst for all of his valuable input and feedback here. I look forward to hearing more from both of you in other discussions on DV Info Net, but for now this particular one is closed.

Thanks all,