The top 4 video camcorders

Discussion in 'Amateur Video Production' started by Brian, Mar 8, 2013.

  1. Brian

    Brian Guest

    In New Zealand there is a magazine called Consumer and they test products
    sold in New Zealand and report the results in their magazine. This month
    they tested 25 camcorders for video quality, sound quality, ease of use,
    versatility and photo quality.
    They recommended 4 camcorders out of the 25.
    This is the results in order of first place, second place etc...

    Sony HDR-TD20V (3D camcorder)
    Panasonic HC-X900
    Sony HDR-CX700V
    Canon Legria HF G10

    Other camcorders they marked as worth considering are...

    Sony HDR-PJ260V
    Canon Legria HF M52
    Sony HDR-XR260V
    Panasonic HC-V700

    The Sony HDR-TD20V had the highest score for video quality.
    All eight camcorders above were reported as having excellent video quality
    and photo quality.
     
    Brian, Mar 8, 2013
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Thanks - but in the US there is a magazine called "Consumer
    Reports" (same company, or same concept as yours???), but
    I invariably disagreed with their ratings in the two areas
    where I had experience: audio gear and photo gear. The
    problem was that the "listening panel" for audio gear and
    the "viewing panel" for photo quality consisted (at least
    mostly) of basically "people off the street" who had little
    experience with either. Such people (in quick, casual
    listening or viewing sessions) tend to prefer brighter, more
    "forward" sound, and more "hyped" visual material, neither
    of which more experienced or professional listeners/viewers
    may have judged as "better". They also tended to fail to spot
    what were to me various obvious and annoying faults such as
    irritating sharp peaks in audio response and soft corners in
    photos. I found "Consumer Reports" useless for telling me
    anything of value in those two areas except (maybe!) for
    some useful information on long-term reliability, gathered
    from other sources... "CS" may provided OK evaluation
    information for beginners in those fields, perhaps, but not
    for me. I preferred (and still prefer) to do my own testing
    and evaluations, using the advice of experienced users to
    help with the beginnings of my quests for finding "the best"
    for my use..;-) BTW, I also learned that the specs. for gear
    often "lie" in terms of the actual quality of their output.
    I also learned that in areas where quality is somewhat
    subjective, perceptions extraneous to actual output quality
    can play a surprisingly large role in evaluations. Examples:
    JBL speakers were "better" 'cause JBL was a supplier of pro
    audio gear (even though their home speakers sounded generally
    terrible); Mac computers are better 'cause they look fancier
    and are more expensive than PCs (even though the "guts" may
    be the same as those in a PC); a recent pocket camera that
    costs $800 is better than another that sells for $350 'cause
    it has a round red circle on it with the name "Leica" in it
    instead of the name "Panasonic" on it (even though internally
    they are identical cameras); while demonstrating high-end
    speakers in a shop I worked in for a while, a single word
    (such as "hooded", "spacious", "bright") uttered by one of
    the people listening at the time could immediately affect the
    perception of the sound by the others (with different results
    occurring at other times with other words being uttered...;-);
    some companies produce lenses that are very sharp in the
    center, but soft near the corners of their images (at least
    in their "consumer" lines), figuring (correctly) that many
    people see any area of good sharpness in an image as
    indicative of the lens being sharp (but to me, any lens that
    is consistently soft in any part of the image at a given stop
    is not sharp at that stop). As advertisers know well, "sell
    the sizzle, not the steak!" 8^)
    --DR
     
    David Ruether, Mar 8, 2013
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. That's interesting Brian - I have praised the sharpness and video quality of
    the HDR-TD10V Sony for a while now. This is a superb 2D camera and it also
    does 3D. Great in low light and has a to die for image stabilization that
    makes it almost a Glidecam. I have projected the footage 13 ft wide and it
    holds up fantastically.

    Gary Eickmeier
     
    Gary Eickmeier, Mar 8, 2013
    #3
  4. Brian

    Brian Guest

    Hi David.

    Inside the Consumer magazine it says:
    Feel confident in your purchase decisions knowing they're backed up by
    expert option, independent reports and in-depth testing. Over 60,000
    members trust us to help them make the right choices and contribute to us
    getting a fairer deal for all
    New Zealanders.

    They have a website at www.consumer.org.nz

    The magazine has been around since the 1980's and maybe even before then.
    It is also good at showing weaknesses in products.
    Most of the products tested will cost within the consumers range so won't
    include a very expensive HiFi system which might be better than a lower
    priced system. In saying that I don't mean they test cheap products that
    are poorly made.
     
    Brian, Mar 10, 2013
    #4
  5. One of those cameras in the top four was much less expensive than the
    others, about 1/2 the more expensive ones, about $700. I forgot which one,
    lost my notes.... lol

    Funny how sony, canon, panasonic consistently dominate the ratings, tho.
    For some time now.
     
    Existential Angst, Mar 10, 2013
    #5
  6. Brian

    Frank Guest

    Given that they produce what - 98 percent of what's out there - isn't
    that sort of to be expected?
     
    Frank, Mar 11, 2013
    #6
  7. Funny that sony canon panasonic produce 98% of what's out there..... LOL
    --
    EA

     
    Existential Angst, Mar 11, 2013
    #7
  8. Brian

    Frank Guest

    Actually, I had forgotten about JVC. :)
     
    Frank, Mar 11, 2013
    #8
  9. Brian

    Brian Guest

    These brands offer high quality video and advanced features which some of
    the other brands don't offer. Video quality is more important these days
    with people wanting to show their video on large sized TV's. Companies like
    Sony seem to pack their cameras with lots of features yet manage to keep
    the price down.
    If you had the choice of getting a camera that was $10 cheaper from a
    company called XYZ or paying $10 more for a camera from a company called
    Sony (or some well known brand) then most people would buy from a trusted
    company.
     
    Brian, Mar 12, 2013
    #9
  10. Brian

    ushere Guest

    "Frank" wrote in message
    Actually, I had forgotten about JVC. :)

    not hard to do ;-)
    as for the rest of the field - who'd buy an 'unknown' brand in the first
    place? i've seen a few and by golly, they're CRAP!
     
    ushere, Mar 12, 2013
    #10
  11. Brian

    Paul Guest

    That's going to depend on who makes sensors, and who they will
    sell the sensors to.

    If your competitor has this, has it patent protected, and you don't,
    your product will look pretty silly (low ISO number).

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hole_Accumulation_Diode

    Paul
     
    Paul, Mar 12, 2013
    #11
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.