When I shoot HDV for SD, I get always very pleasant results. The noise print is smaller than shooting in SD, there is no visible artificial sharpness so the footage has a more filmic look. I suggest you to buy a HD camera, you will be able to make better SD films with it. When I downconvert to SD using Final Cut Studio, there is no artifact or aliasing.

Would you buy SD camcorder
 

I bought an XL1S for $600 3 months ago, and it's taken this long to learn to really use it well. I decided to videotape the "last" football game at the high school near us. I went up to the press box area, and it was packed with others wanting to video the game. Each school seemed to have 3 or 4 video cameras/videographers doing their thing. ...and then there were others there just to videotape for their friends or parents. I went right up, set up, and waited for the game to start. A school official soon came up and sent away 4 guys that were there (they were using the small camcorders, and I guess they "knew" from that which ones weren't "official," even though they said they were shooting for the school. When I looked at who/what was left, including me, There was only 1 person shooting with an HD camera. The rest of us was using an SD camcorder (VX1000, DVX100B, TRV-950, etc.) The guy with the HD camera wasn't even selling his footage.... The announcement was made that they can purchase a DVD of the game, and it was from the one videotaping with the DVX100b.

The recent weddings from relatives/friends that have had their event videotaped are still wanting it on regular DVD, probably because it's easy to copy, and can be given to anyone for viewing, which you can't do with HD DVD's yet. I haven't heard anyone complain yet that it isn't HD.

Videographers may notice the difference between HD and SD, especially when editing, but your customers don't, in the same way that they don't notice the difference between a photo taken with a Canon D30 (3 mp camera) and a Canon 5D Mark II (21 mp camera). The photographer who took the shot will, though.

In my opinion its not about HD vs SD, it's about widescreen vs 4:3. I don't know anyone with a 4:3 TV any longer, though I know they are still out there. Even an older friend of mine, (80 year old woman) has a widescreen lcd tv.

I have HD cameras because I couldn't stand to put out 4:3 videos any longer, not because I shoot HD. I shoot widescreen SD and can't even imagine shooting with a 4:3 camera any more. Just my 2 cents.

Jeff nails it, word for word. How do you respond to that Manny?

Would You buy an SD camera these days
 

Funny you should mention how your TV's are all widescreen. So are mine! All 3 of them. The living room TV is 56", the one in our kitchen/play area is 46", and the one in our bedroom is 42". When I play my SD videos on them, the screen is filled with the video. It doesn't matter which TV I use. When I play wide screen, then there's black borders at the top and bottom. I don't go in and change settings. It is the way it is. My mother has widescreen TV's. It plays the same way. My friends have wide screen TV's. When I bring any of my videos to their place, the results are the same!

So what's the issue? Play SD, it fills the screen. Play wide, it has black borders. So what? You're making a mountain out of a molehill.... and honestly, I doubt that your clients even care! That's not what they're looking for.

A Grandmother of ours died in April. We had a collection of videos on a DVD that we played at the viewing, and for the guests who came to visit from out of town to watch. So many tears over the memories.... and NOT A SINGLE VIDEO WAS TAKEN WITH HD CAMCORDERS. Some were taken with low resolution digital camera/camcorders (Cybershots type of cameras). They weren't crying because the footage was taken with an HD camera. No one asked what cameras were used. No one discussed the editing issues with lower resolution SD camcorders. Everyone wanted a copy of the DVD.

Setting on the DVD players or televisions are wrong...widescreen should fill the screen. Your 4:3 videos are stretched or zoomed, and yes they fill the screen but they are distorted if they are filling a widescreen TV.

Check your settings on the DVD players. Go to the menu on the DVD player and you can fix it.

Would you buy an SD Camera these days
 

Negative!!!! YOUR settings are all wrong! ...and that's why you needlessly spent money to buy an HD Camcorder just to record it in SD.

You can fix it, though, and set it to where I have it. Then you can play SD and not have to worry about constantly changing your settings. It would have saved you a lot of money, too.

When you pay for my TV, my friends TVs, and everyone elses that I know, you can dictate how they should have their settings, and whether it's "wrong" or not. Until then, don't presume to play God. There is no right or wrong. There is what works best for the person who owns it.

Okay, I'm going to go watch the last football game I taped for our local high school, and just chill. Breathe in, breathe out. Breathe in, breathe out.

I guess I need to find another way of making a living. Videography is clearly not working out, as I cannot grasp that post...went straight over my head.

I've bought 6 HD cameras when I just needed to keep my PD150s. Bummer.

In my area, more and more people who don't have a tiny bit clue about HD/SD/16:9/4:3 stuff we are talking about now have flat panel LCDs to watch what the majority of us in this forum would regard as junk on expensive screens. Though most of those people couldn't care less about the finer point of quality viewing and maybe simply wouldn't know how to set their displays correctly, they still appreciate good things like Blu-ray or HD player box playback on their screens. They ALL want to have that kind of viewing experience and sure will try to get it if only they can afford it. The reasons are economic as much as technical knowledge or even taste. The true barrier is delivery. As time goes by, more broadcast and cable channels turn HD (as they've so far), Blu-ray players get as cheap as regular DVD players were just one or two years ago, Blu-ray titles get cheaper and rental alternative is available, new display sets that can directly play various formats of HD videos recorded on cheap thumb drives come to the market etc., even clueless people will learn what is good and what is junk. They will start to adapt to the changes and when they can afford them, they will get them.

The majority of the pros in my area now own HD equipment. What most of them have done to make a living is still dumb down their materials to suit the market. The degrees of dumbing down vary but the days of clueless people watching 4:3 movies stretched out to fit their new 16:9 LCDs or watching 400,000 or so pixel contents blown up to 2-millon pixel screens and feeling good will soon be over.

Well said, W.

I suspect that if Manny doesn't see that 4:3 people are shown fat and wide then the 16:9 TVs are all in the 'zoom' mode. Of course there's no distortion, but losing 25% of what's already an iffy SD 4:3 image will make it look pretty ropey on a 56 incher I'd imagine.

And of course content is all, nobody here would ever deny that, so I can believe that the audience weren't asking about camcorder settings and aspect ratios. Who would? And they probably asked for a copy of the DVD so that they could see it correctly pillarboxed at home.

Don't fly off in a huff Manny. The considered replies posted here have just been trying to help you set up your TVs correctly, that's all.

tom.

Yes, Tom you are right. It was the older tvs that stretched, the newer ones now seem to zoom to fill up 4:3 images.

Yes, with SD 4:3 the choice is
1.Losing the LCD's display area with the pillar box
2.Further losing the paltry 400,000-pixel count with display zooming to eliminate the pillar box and maybe also losing vital parts of the image like people's heads, faces or feet etc.
3.Stretching the frame to fit the display and living with the always distorted picture, either equally distorted on the entire screen area or less in the middle but more on both sides (some newer displays' feature)

No getting around one of the above but if the viewer somehow likes what she sees, I guess maybe it's good enough.

Years ago I remember talent complaining that 'TVs add 10 lbs to you'. That was in the days of huffing, puffing CRTs, with scan lines all over the place and picture distortions a-plenty.

Jump forward 25 years and we have pixel-perfect, non-distorting, zero overscan digital displays. So what do we do? We stretch, pull, zoom, push and squeeze the image in an effort to 'use all the real-estate I've paid for'.

Sigh.

tom.