Well Marcus, we'll have to agree to differ on the Z1's HD quality.
I think that it falls way behind the Canon HFS10, shooting like-for-like at 1440 x 1080.
The Z1 started to look tired when compared with the newer Sonys such as the Z5 or Z7...

My EX1 blows away the Z1, but you can get very acceptable results from the Z1. Having been working in XDCAM the HDV codec looks tired and the Z1 image looks softer and lacks that punch the EX1 has.

However with the HFS10/11 you are looking at a very artificially enhanced picture. While it may look pleasing, there's no extra detail there. It's just like my PDX10 example where that old war horse produces great SD pictures that look sharper than the Z1. But it's just an illusion. And exactly like the PDX10 did the HFS10/11 actually has a high level of picture noise that simply isn't there on the Z1.

The PDX10 had it's place just like the Canon does. I wish I could still find an excuse to use my PDX10 in fact. I'm also itching to get the Canon into my Fig Rig as when I used to use the PDX10 in the rig I used to get fantastic results.

Not to mention the quality of the glass and the lens system in general. Don't get me wrong, I love my HFS11 but I'm not going to try and pretend it is something it isn't. It's a great camera that I am finding lots of uses for but when I needed a B camera for a low light situation a few weeks back it was the Z1 I turned to.

I have the HF-S200, which is based on the original HF-S10/S100 series. I like it, but agree with Marcus that the manual controls are a bit fiddly. I find that some pre-shoot planning is required in order to determine what manual settings will be required. Then I create the settings needed and forget about them.

Image quality is decent, but like a lot of small-sensor camcorders, it performs best in bright daylight or really well-lit indoor areas. Noise can be a problem with this camera when shooting in low light.

I'm by no means a professional, so can't render a professional opinion, but my feeling is that you could use an HF-S series camera for some professional work as long as you are prepared to work within its limitations.

That said, you could definitely use it for corporate or institutional work on a small-scale basis.

Regarding the interlaced issue: I just got a HF21.

I recorded to an SDHC card and used FCP's Log & Transfer function to import the footage into a project. FCP converted the footage to Prores 422 HQ.

I did some pans on hard-edged objects, took a close look at the footage, and confirmed that it's progressive. No interlaced artifacts. No horizontal lines.

Dean, you're right. When the Canon records in p30 mode, it buffers a full progressive frame at a time; but then it records it as two interlaced fields. (I wonder if Canon did this in order to increase compatibility with NLEs.)

I have an HF-S100, and this is one of the things I most like about it: progressive frame capture == no interlace motion artifacts.

Mitch... My footage came across as true 30 progressive. No interlaced fields at all, and FCP also reports it as 30p.

I'm reading it directly off a file on my hard drive after transferring the contents of the card to a folder.

Perhaps interlacing becomes apparent when footage is read off the camera?

Hi Dean,

I also log & transfer from the hard drive, using Final Cut Pro, after copying from the card. The end result is 1920x1080, 29.97fps, ProRes 422.

But that's the result after log and transfer. Movist reports that the original MTS files are AVCHD/MPEG-4, 59.94 FPS. As page 181 of the HF-S10/S100 owner's manual puts it, "recordings made with the [PF24], [PF30] frame rate are converted and recorded on the memory as 60i".

In other words the HF-S10 and HF-S100 (not sure about your HF-S21) capture images at 30 (or 24) frames/second, then split it up into separate fields for recording as 60 fields/second. For PF24 mode, my understanding is that the camcorder also has to do 2:3 pulldown and duplicate some frames to convert to 60i format.

Whatever the recording format details, I think we both are saying the same thing about PF30: the camcorder is capturing 30 full frames per second, so there are no interlacing artifacts.

It is indeed progressive frame capture. However the camera is then encoding the image as an interlaced frame. This introduces scan lines into the final image. This is the example I used in my blog entry. Look at it very closely. It's an image of a train going past the camera:

http://www.media2u.co.uk/blog/wp-con.../05/canon2.jpg

That's a section of an image (not resized) that was shot as progressive and then captured into Final Cut into a 1080p project. If you look closely you can see the scan lines. This is not the same as an interlacing artefact, but what it does mean is you don't get the same kind of clean results you do from a Sony EX1 which outputs its progressive image into a progressive frame.

If it was interlaced capture the train (going at about 70mph) would have far more scan lines visible. Instead what you have is these very minor lines that are evident on the edges.

Why Canon decided to process the image like that is beyond me, but it is really annoying.

Here's what I get off the HF21. This is a complete 1080 p30 frame grab exported from FCP. I'm panning with the dog so take a look at the leaves of the tomato plant nearby. If I blow it up beyond what might be considered reasonable then it's possible (under close inspection) to see something that might look like interlaced lines, but then at that point I'm seeing other artifacts as well.

For normal viewing in HD, it seems very good. Especially considering the cost and size of the camera. If there's anything objectionable it's so miniscule as to be a non-issue. Might be the camera that makes a difference?

Frankly, I'm impressed by this itty bitty camera. It's destined for an Ikelite housing for underwater work. I'll post something as soon as I can find time to actually get into the water. Which better be soon since there are some cool stories coming up.

My company shoots a lot of school concerts lately. We use the HF11, and HFS-10 occasionally on stage as unmanned cams off to the side. It captures some good close-ups of the musicians performing. The little Canons seem to work quite well in that capacity, where you would not dare use a more full-sized cam. And the resulting footage is usually quite acceptable.

I use the HFS200 as a 2nd camera on weddings. Works great coupled with DSLR's. The standard battery you get with the camera is almost useless since it gets you about 30-40 minutes of time so I bought the largest one that canon makes and I get about 2.5 hours out of it.

Yup! All the time
 

We use the Vixia all the time next to our Sony EX1. This show was shot with the EX1 and The HFS100 tough to tell one from the other...Florida Keys Key West Time
All cut away shots was the Vixia.
It will air on Direct TV in November
Best, Craig

Check this out using my HFS11:

SET TO HD via the YOU TUBE setting in the lower right.


YouTube - Smoketown Air show 2010

HF100 on professional gigs.
 

Yes, I certainly have used Canon Vixia HF100s on numerous occassions for paid work. The key is knowing just what it can do and what it can't. Here are a few notes from my experiences with the HF100 filming concerts:

- You must manually control the exposure. Do not expect it (or most cameras, period) to know how to handle stage lights.
- The LCD screen is not totally accurate. The colors and contrast appear washed out compared to what is actually being recorded. This means if you try to manually set the exposure by eye, you may end up under-exposed. Also, the HF100 actually records a little beyond what is displayed on the screen [frame]. I like this, as there have been a few instances where I thought I had just cut something off judging by the LCD, but luckily it was within the recorded frame.
- Don't use it to record audio. But that just goes without saying for all cameras, right?
- The camera is wonderful for "set and forget". Need an unmanned static-shot? The HF100 is perfect because of it's reliability and solid state media. If I'm manning a camera in the balcony, I don't need to worry about the conductor cam running out of tape.
- There may be a corrupted frame at the seam between .MTS files. On my cameras, it's a black and green frame at the end of the initial MTS. If this frame isn't naturally edited out, I replace it with the first frame of the second MTS.
- One in ten clients may be surprised by the small camera. Their skepticism doesn't last long.

If you are serious about making video your livelihood, you will probably want to get the best tools available -- ones that succeed in the most situations. However, having a fancy camera won't give you good video or make you a good videographer. Case in point: I ran sound recently at an a cappella concert while also filming the show with two HF100s. A professional videographer on staff at the college was also present with a Panasonic HMC-150 ($3.5k 3CCD camera). You can see the results side by side below:

HMC-150: YouTube - Papa Was a Rolling Stone - DoubleTake
2 x HF100: YouTube - DoubleTake - Papa Was a Rolling Stone (The Temptations) - 2010 A Cappella Showcase

Enjoy.

HF S20 anyone?