You are viewing an archive of the old fxhome.com forums. The community has since moved to hitfilm.com.

i want a 3ccd camera...but which one?

Posted: Fri, 22nd Sep 2006, 5:08pm

Post 1 of 30

skywalker dan

Force: 684 | Joined: 7th May 2005 | Posts: 190

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

hi all,

i'm sick and tired of the crappy images my sony handycam puts out so i'm in the market for a new one.
i'm raising the money by selling some stuff on ebay. (people buy anything)!

i'm really tempted by the canon xl1, however they all seem to be going for around a grand which is slighty out of my budget.
i'm looking at a figure of around £500. anyone got any ideas?
Posted: Fri, 22nd Sep 2006, 5:44pm

Post 2 of 30

B3N

Force: 3081 | Joined: 26th Feb 2006 | Posts: 1534

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

well if you really want the canon xl1 and your current busget is £500
i would suggest saving up for it, that way you will be happy when you buy it and glad that you didn't buy another one. biggrin

B3N
Posted: Fri, 22nd Sep 2006, 5:54pm

Post 3 of 30

Magic_man12

Force: 853 | Joined: 20th Mar 2002 | Posts: 1350

Windows User MacOS User

Member

Rating: +1

Panasonic GS series
GS 400
GS 500

check them out - awesome cameras -> cheapest 3CCDs you'll find

www.camcorderinfo.com

here is the gs500 review
http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Panasonic-PV-GS500-Camcorder-Review.htm

will be useful to look at the other cameras on the site too

-MAGIC
Posted: Fri, 22nd Sep 2006, 8:53pm

Post 4 of 30

Nutbar

Force: 530 | Joined: 13th Aug 2006 | Posts: 373

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Pro User Windows User

Gold Member

B3N wrote:

well if you really want the canon xl1 and your current busget is £500
i would suggest saving up for it, that way you will be happy when you buy it and glad that you didn't buy another one. biggrin

B3N
What he said. If that is the camera you want its worth saving the extra for it.

The panasonic GS series are probably favourite, although you probably wont find them for £500 unless you go down to the 280 or get a 2nd hand one.
Posted: Fri, 22nd Sep 2006, 11:30pm

Post 5 of 30

ben3308

Force: 5210 | Joined: 24th May 2004 | Posts: 6433

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Get a Canon GL2. Need I say more?
Posted: Sat, 23rd Sep 2006, 5:23am

Post 6 of 30

Gnome326

Force: 10 | Joined: 21st Mar 2005 | Posts: 436

Windows User

Member

^ lol, but look at the price on that thing. OUCH!
Posted: Sat, 23rd Sep 2006, 5:32am

Post 7 of 30

ben3308

Force: 5210 | Joined: 24th May 2004 | Posts: 6433

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

1500 bucks isn't THAT much for a prosumer 3CCD camera. In fact, I'd be as bold as to say the GL2 is quite possibly the best bang for your buck if you're on a tight budget.
Posted: Sat, 23rd Sep 2006, 10:16am

Post 8 of 30

skywalker dan

Force: 684 | Joined: 7th May 2005 | Posts: 190

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

thanks for the feed back guys, gl2 seems slightly expensive, but if someone gave me one i wouldnt say no smile

i'll keep all your ideas in mind. if anyone else has any ideas feel free to post.

dan.
Posted: Sun, 24th Sep 2006, 4:40pm

Post 9 of 30

Super Cameraman

Force: 430 | Joined: 25th May 2003 | Posts: 242

Windows User

Gold Member

Magic_man12 wrote:

Panasonic GS series
GS 400
GS 500

check them out - awesome cameras -> cheapest 3CCDs you'll find

www.camcorderinfo.com

here is the gs500 review
http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Panasonic-PV-GS500-Camcorder-Review.htm

will be useful to look at the other cameras on the site too

-MAGIC
I've been thinking about the 500 myself. Only because the 400 is way expensive...er.

-Super
Posted: Wed, 27th Sep 2006, 5:09am

Post 10 of 30

Dancamfx

Force: 2558 | Joined: 7th Sep 2006 | Posts: 873

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

I would go with a Canon Gl2. Thats what I use and if you want to see what you can do with one, check out the movie "Between the Lines". They said they used Gl2's to film it. Great quality! It is worth the price. And I only paid $1700 for mine Brand New! I have a little trick for buying new cameras for cheap!
Posted: Fri, 29th Sep 2006, 5:25am

Post 11 of 30

the Fiddler

Force: 1900 | Joined: 21st Dec 2004 | Posts: 286

VisionLab User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

There seems to be a heavy leaning toward the GL2 around here, so I'll be the odd-man-out and give the other option. Panasonic also makes a great camera. It's called the AG-DVC30. It actually received a higher ratings by both CNET and camcorderinfo.com.

I'll be the first one to admit, the GL2 does have a couple features that the DVC30 doesn't. However, the DVC30 also has several features & abilities that the GL2 doesn't have. One thing that meant a lot to me was that it has a sturdier construction with metal casing on the camera itself. It's rugged, yet still lightweight and easy to carry and use. Personaly I love my camera, and wouldn't trade it for a GL2 for anything. Though I do really like Canon as well, and wouldn't mind having a GL2 for a secondary camera.

Now before all you GL2 people start bashing me and all that. Just remeber the DVC30 got better ratings for good reasons, on many places (CNET & camcorderinfo were just the 2 I could think of off hand). If you don't beleive me, or want to see why, just go look up the reviews yourself. Oh, and I almost forgot, one other reason to seriously look at the DVC30... it's cheaper than the GL2.
Posted: Sun, 1st Oct 2006, 4:45am

Post 12 of 30

Dancamfx

Force: 2558 | Joined: 7th Sep 2006 | Posts: 873

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Yeah the AG-DVC30 is an ok camera but it doesnt compare to the GL2. The reason it is cheaper is because you would need to buy some accessories to match the features of the GL2. And even a couple of websites rated the DVC30 higher than the GL2, there are plenty of other websites that rate the gl2 higher. And Id hate to tell thefiddler this but the DVC30 is not classified as a professional camera. Thats not my opinion, but A fact.
Posted: Sun, 1st Oct 2006, 6:19pm

Post 13 of 30

ben3308

Force: 5210 | Joined: 24th May 2004 | Posts: 6433

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Rating: +1

Hahaha, after reading my post, I realize this is going to sound a bit like a smear campaign against the DVC-30, but whatever, I think I make some valid points.

Anyways, here is.........


Ben's Bottom Line Reasoning for why you NEED the GL2.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

skywalker dan, you initially stated you wanted something like a less expensive Canon XL1s, true? Well then the answer is clear that the GL2 is the definite way to go. The DVC-30 is a nice camera, and it was manufactured two years after the GL2, but it's just not as professional.

The GL2 has many options and toggles to get you what you need. You can set the camera's exposure to full automatic, semi-automatic, or full manual; all three of which can be better and vastly more easily adjusted on the GL2 as opposed to the DVC-30. In fact, the DVC-30 has no semi-automatic exposure settings. (Manual shutterspeed with auto iris, or vice-versa)

The reason the DVC-30 has high rankings on places like CNET and other websites is because it is, at best, a consumer camera, and consumers make the bulk of the population. It's a great camera for filming things like a dance recital or other home videos, but when it comes to making 'film' looking films, the GL2 just completely blows it out of the water. Bottom line, the GL2 is a professional camera, and the DVC-30 just isn't. Look at prosumer cameras on B&H Photo's website (biggest online camera seller) and the GL2 is their top-selling item. Now, what does that tell you?

A complaint about the GL2 is that it has a semi-plastic body, whereas the DVC-30 has a magnesium body. Let me ask you this: do you care more about what material the outer parts of your camera are made out of, or do you care about ease-of-use, better controls, better picture settings, and better audio? Because the GL2 is the exemplification of what I just listed.

Then there's audio. Now any camera enthusiast knows that on-camera audio is always going to be a little sub-par, but which has better audio? Well, from what I've heard (literally), you might as well break the microphone off of the DVC-30, it's so bad. The GL2's isn't the best, either, but it's got a digital audio level meter both on the LCD screen (you can turn this on or off) and on a two-tone LCD on the side of the camera. Next to that, there are audio toggles to change the levels in both the left and right sides of the camera's microphone. If you don't want to do this much manual audio work, you can always just switch the audio to full automatic mode.

All-in-all, I'd hate to see you miss out on getting a GL2, especially if the DVC-30 is what you get instead. You'll regret it, I'm sure. Yeah, you'll save a little bit of money, but it's not worth it.

Oh, and here's a still and some video from my GL2, just to give you an idea of what kind of 'film look' I'm getting from it. Because, in my opinion, now that I've upgraded to a GL2, my movies are starting to look more and more like actual movies and less like home videos.




Example video.

And I've got plenty more videos where that came from, all you gotta do is ask.

As you can obviously see, I freakin' LOVE the GL2.

Oh, and here's the IMDb listings of real movies shot on both cameras.

Here's the DVC-30.
Here's the GL2.

Note how there aren't any movies made on the DVC-30. biggrin Now I'm actually a little scared of thefiddler's response to this.
Posted: Sun, 1st Oct 2006, 8:50pm

Post 14 of 30

the Fiddler

Force: 1900 | Joined: 21st Dec 2004 | Posts: 286

VisionLab User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Dancamfx, basically everything you said was either not true or a ridiculous assertion. Therefore I'm not going to justify your name-calling type tactics with a response. Its sad that after all the FXhome guys and mods do to try and keep things respectful and positive, cheap-backstabbing still seems to take place.

As for ben, I appreciate your trying to hold the debate to an at least slightly higher level of maturity. Even if most of that attempt seems to be done after writing the majority of your post.

Now before I address any of your post, I just want to clarify one thing: I never intended to create or invite a debate over which was better the DVC30 or the GL2. I hold both camera's in high regard (a much more neutral position than others around here seem to hold), & merely intended to point out that there is a very comparable alternative to the GL2 which is actually cheaper. In this spirit, I will address some of the points you made, but will not bring up a whole set of counter-points because I simply don't want an argument, & feel that the camera's in question are very comparable, therefore nothing good would come from such an argument.

You are right in saying that in some areas the DVC30 does not have the same controls as the GL2. For example, those who want multiple rings for each of the adjustments like zoom, focus, etc, the DVC30 only has one ring that can be set to control whichever feature at any given time. But to compensate it has programable buttons to allow you to quickly switch to specific settnings you choose. This actually can be used to get more precise in-shot (while filming) adjustments then doing it manually.

To say the DVC30 has no semi-automatic exposure settings is completely relative. Yes, in the purest sense that is true. However the manual/auto switch very readily accessible, & the camera keeps whatever adjustments it automatically makes, when switching back to manual.

As for the label of consumer camera. camcorderinfo is not a consumer camera website. They review all types of cameras and rate each on a very specific set of criteria, most of which apply & are only important to professionals. Both the GL2 & the DVC30 fit firmly in the pro-sumer classification. And as I have said before, are very comparable cameras. They both are configurable enough and produce quality enough results that many professionals have, & continue to use them. They both however, also feature enough automatic controls that they can be relatively easily used by consumer type customers. However, lets face it, no mere "comsumer" is going to pay that much to shoot home videos. These are both very much targeted at semi-pro's on up. I mean seriously, does this realy look like a consumer camera to you?:


Along with this you said that "the GL2 completely blows it out of the water." Are we sure we're talking about the same camera? http://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-AG-DVC30-MiniDV-Camcorder-Optical/dp/B00028SR0A --if so, I'm not even sure how to respond to that, simply because they are extremely similar cameras built by different companies.

To me the build of the camera is important, simply because if it breaks, then I've no camera at all. If I'm paying over a thousand dollars, I want it to last & be able to go places with me.

You suggest, without really supporting, the idea that the GL2 has better ease-of-use, controls, picture settings, etc. Controls & ease of use are relative & depend on a user's own prefrences. As for picture settings, this is one area that I was surprised you didn't mention further, as it is one area where the GL2 has a real advantage. The GL2 features a much truer implementation of 16:9 video capture, as well as has super-low framerates for time-delay type shots. While the DVC30 does not implement 16:9 as well, it still does very good. It also does not have any kind of low framerates at all. However, it consitently scored better in its ability to capture color with it's CCD's. Both mathematically, & to the eye of many professional reviewers, it actually captures better color than the GL2.

Not sure where you got your info on the DVC30's onboard audio, but I was fairly impressed with the results on mine. However, I don't use the onboard mic (I use a Rode Videomic), and wouldn't use the onboard mic on a GL2 either, so it's kinda ridiculous to debate. Though I will point out that the DVC30 has very good monitoring and control (as well as very good automatic adjustment) for both the onboard mic, as well as external ones like my Rode.

You also said that he'd regret getting a DVC30 if he got one. This is a matter of personal prefrence & opinion. My opinion is that he wouldn't regret it, but probably rather enjoy his DVC30. Though I'm also quite sure he'd love a GL2 as well.

Your screen shots are very impressive, but as mentioned both camera's have some advantage over the other in the specifics of this area. If anyone cares to check it out, my trailer was filmed mostly with the DVC30: http://fxhome.com/cinema/info_cache/movieinfo2437.html (all of the screen shots you see there were taken from video were filmed with the DVC30, except the two of the actual terra-cotta soldier).

As for your last assertion. There have been (and currently are) TV shows, independent films, etc. which were (and are being) filmed with the DVC30. Panasonic featured several on their website a few months back (should still be there).

I want to be clear that I have high regard for the GL2. I have no intention of bashing it. But it worries me when people are so one sided that they act as if there is no viable alternative. When the truth is that there are very good alternatives. I am glad you like your GL2. However, in the end I think it is a matter of prefrence, because the two camera's are so similar. Do you want a truer implementation of 16:9? Or do you want purer image color? And there's a whole list of things like this. In the end, I decided on the DVC30 because it had the advantage in certain areas that were more important to me. For others like yourself, the GL2 seems the better fit. I guess I'm just hoping that skywalker dan and others will look at the other options, even if they go ahead with the GL2 in the end (a descision I'm sure they'll be happy with).

EDIT: ben, I hope I have been appropriately respectful and clear. I meant no disrespect to you by any of the above, and hope that this doesn't call for a fight or even heated argument.
Posted: Sun, 1st Oct 2006, 9:34pm

Post 15 of 30

ben3308

Force: 5210 | Joined: 24th May 2004 | Posts: 6433

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

fiddler, I'm glad we're (to some extent) seeing eye-to-eye here.

The points I stressed as eas-of-use and image control flaws on the DVC-30 relate directly to the single control for exposure AND audio leveling (or a single toggle for more than one thing, if you will), a function that the GL2 has 3 toggles for. The GL2 has the same custom preset buttons as you mentioned the DVC as having, but it also has semi-auto exposure (which can be invaluable for shooting on the fly), which is a quality the DVC cannot boast.

As for calling the DVC-30 a consumer camera and not a prosumer one: it does indeed look prosumer, but in 2004 I believe (I could be wrong here) it was advertised as basically the "super" consumer camera, meaning while it's not exactly on level with the prosumer range (particularly that of Canon and Sony, plus the DVX-100 line), it comes damn near close, and they've made the body of it fit the picture. Essentially, a 'pro' camera for the consumer. If that makes any sense.

Basically, all the points I am trying to make relate directly back to skywalker dan's idea to get an XL1. If he wants the qualities an XL1 has, the GL2 is the closer match.

Also, on the "blows it out of the water" statement, tht's solely referring to the quick ability to achieve a convincing "film look", which I think you can sort of agree the GL2 beats the DVC in that respect. I mean, look at my clip and look at your trailer. Mine doesn't have much post grading work done to it, and by the looks of it, neither does yours. Now, granted, mine's a slightly more serious subject matter, and yours is meant to be somewhat comical, I don't think you can argue that mine looks a little more cinematic. biggrin

You know what's funny, though? Coincedentally enough, both the trailer you posted and the scene I posted have the exact same music tracks, just used in different orders and times. Heh.

Oh, and that picture you posted of the camera is one of it pretty suped up, I don't think that's fair. Don't make me bust out my pics of the GL2 with a shotgun mic, mattebox, rails, follow focus, shoulder mount, hotshoe videolight, and the like. biggrin

Last edited Sun, 1st Oct 2006, 9:42pm; edited 1 times in total.

Posted: Sun, 1st Oct 2006, 9:42pm

Post 16 of 30

Bryce007

Force: 1910 | Joined: 5th Apr 2003 | Posts: 2609

VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

It might be better to not post still's that are Color Graded. Instead, Post some Completely Raw captures.
Posted: Sun, 1st Oct 2006, 9:47pm

Post 17 of 30

ben3308

Force: 5210 | Joined: 24th May 2004 | Posts: 6433

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

See, the thing is, when you're making a movie, you should always grade your footage, so posting the raw stills would do nothing (plus, mine are suffering heavily from interlacing, and I don't really want to render some deinterlaced raw footage just to get some stills) I don't doubt the DVC can put out as good or as film-like an image as the GL2, I just think it'd be more time-intensive and more difficult to accomplish.

That, and the arguments here are over audio, as well as how the camera is used, not just what it outputs.
Posted: Sun, 1st Oct 2006, 9:55pm

Post 18 of 30

hatsoff2halford

Force: 1360 | Joined: 6th Feb 2005 | Posts: 360

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Pro User Windows User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

The DVC-30 has been discontinued, anyway.
Posted: Sun, 1st Oct 2006, 9:59pm

Post 19 of 30

ben3308

Force: 5210 | Joined: 24th May 2004 | Posts: 6433

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

As has the Canon XL1, but people still buy them, anyway.
Posted: Sun, 1st Oct 2006, 10:10pm

Post 20 of 30

hatsoff2halford

Force: 1360 | Joined: 6th Feb 2005 | Posts: 360

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Pro User Windows User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

I'm guessing Panasonic will be releasing some kind of card based recording camera relatively soon, probably an Hd DVX. Which is already the HVX, but a more affordable solution. If you are willing to spend more for quality, I would wait...

But, GL2 between the other two.
Posted: Sun, 1st Oct 2006, 10:49pm

Post 21 of 30

Dancamfx

Force: 2558 | Joined: 7th Sep 2006 | Posts: 873

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Thefiddler, why would you give me a negative rating on my comment simply because a stated facts about a camera? I didnt say anything different from what Ben3308 said, and in my opinion Bens comment was more pro GL2 than mine. You shouldnt go around giving negative ratings to comments that you just dont agree with! Thats wrong! What pissed you off so much about my Post? Everything I listed were facts and Ben3308 said most of the same things. I dont know If you have ever used a Gl2 but I for the record used both cameras and decided on the Gl2. It doesnt matter if a post is Facts or opinion, you should be more mature than to give me a negative rating just because you disagree.
Posted: Sun, 1st Oct 2006, 10:52pm

Post 22 of 30

Bryce007

Force: 1910 | Joined: 5th Apr 2003 | Posts: 2609

VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

Rating: +1

Dancamfx wrote:

you should be more mature than to give me a negative rating just because you disagree.
And consequently, You should be mature enough to know that Negative ratings aren't THAT big of a deal...
Posted: Sun, 1st Oct 2006, 11:35pm

Post 23 of 30

Dancamfx

Force: 2558 | Joined: 7th Sep 2006 | Posts: 873

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Bryce007 wrote:

Dancamfx wrote:

you should be more mature than to give me a negative rating just because you disagree.
And consequently, You should be mature enough to know that Negative ratings aren't THAT big of a deal...
To some people they are, and to others they aren't. I dont think being mature has anything to do with it.
Posted: Mon, 2nd Oct 2006, 12:08am

Post 24 of 30

Bryce007

Force: 1910 | Joined: 5th Apr 2003 | Posts: 2609

VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

Rating: +1

Ironic Dancam. Very clever.


But the fact still remains that you rating me down is directly contrasting what you JUST said.




Anyways, I highly reccomend The GL2, The GS400 or the DVC30. Just don't opt out for a Single Chip if you can help it.
Posted: Mon, 2nd Oct 2006, 12:22am

Post 25 of 30

er-no

Force: 9531 | Joined: 24th Sep 2002 | Posts: 3964

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

GL2/XM2.

That is all I have to say on this subject.
Posted: Mon, 2nd Oct 2006, 12:41am

Post 26 of 30

ben3308

Force: 5210 | Joined: 24th May 2004 | Posts: 6433

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Rating: +1

Dancamfx wrote:

Everything I listed were facts and Ben3308 said most of the same things.
This much is true, however, there's one thing you have to remember, and that is the tone in which you write. Lately I've realized more and more that to make your point abundantly clear you have to be specific and concise on what you're saying, otherwise someone may take it the wrong way.

This coming from the king of saying things that people take the wrong way, be more concise in your argument next time, and it won't be misunderstood.

The negative rating was a little uncalled for from your point of view, but if thefiddler takes your comments to be more negative than you intended, he may see a -1 as being fit. Intent is in the eye of the beholder, unless of course you elaborate enough to make your point clear.
Posted: Mon, 2nd Oct 2006, 1:15am

Post 27 of 30

Wizard

Force: 5941 | Joined: 18th Jul 2003 | Posts: 555

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXpreset Maker Windows User

SuperUser

Rating: +2

After reading through this topic, I feel some one should clarify how the rating system is intended to be used. I would like to make it known that I am not addressing anyone specific, but rather, the premise of the rating system, and how it has been used here in general.

Determining the appropriate time to give a negative rating can be difficult, especially if one feels opposed by another’s opinion, or insulted in some fashion, by a contrasting statement too their own. Topics can easily become heated, and when this happens, individuals become combative, which makes it difficult to be objective.

In circumstances like this, the rating faq is in place to help members remain objective, and provides an unbiased guideline to follow when considering rating another individual. I advise members to refer to the rating faq if you find yourself in this position, and doubting whether or not you are rating out of bias for the moment at hand.

Regardless of ratings being important to some, and not to others, the rating system is not in place as an implement to cause anguish for others, and should not be used in this fashion. Negative ratings are intended to be used as a sort of filter, to weed out content which happens to be particularly offensive, or not constructive in any way, and detracts from the topic.

Using the rating system to simply express you disagree with another's opinion is not appropriate, and likely to begin arguments such as this, or get topic's deleted, which other wise would have been valuable topic's to some. The moderators ask that members refrain from doing this, and to abide by the rating faq.

If you find the rating system has been misused, please contact a moderator, or FXhome team member, and your query will be addressed. Try not to create open debates in the forums. For the time being, all negative ratings in this topic have been removed.

Have a nice day.
Wizard.
Posted: Mon, 2nd Oct 2006, 3:24am

Post 28 of 30

Dancamfx

Force: 2558 | Joined: 7th Sep 2006 | Posts: 873

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Thank you wizard for the post. Hopefully some people will read it and realize the purpose of forum ratings!
Posted: Mon, 2nd Oct 2006, 10:28am

Post 29 of 30

Vault FX

Force: 2550 | Joined: 30th May 2003 | Posts: 602

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Hi,

I've been looking at the Panasonic GS-500, but I have recently come across the Sony DCR-SR90E and I was wondering if this was a good camcorder it is a HDD camcorder does that make a lot of difference?

Thanks

TC
Posted: Tue, 3rd Oct 2006, 12:59am

Post 30 of 30

Dancamfx

Force: 2558 | Joined: 7th Sep 2006 | Posts: 873

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Rating: +1

The HDD stands for Hard Disk Drive, which means instead of recording on a tape you record it onto a hard drive. This has become more and more common with new camcorders. Ive used the panasonic camcorder and its a nice camera. If I were you I would choose the Panasonic over the sony because the panasonic is a 3CCD camera compared to the sonys standard CCD. Which basically means the panasonic has a better quality picture. But even though the panasonic is a 3CCD it still isnt as good as quality as the Canon Gl2, sony vx2100 and other profesional 3CCD cameras. But I have used the panasonic before and it was a very good camera and the best part is the price! I hope this helps.