Canon Vixia HV40 camcorder

[Chris C Sanner]

Interesting...as while "shopping" I've been using Bit-Rates as a gauge of video quality...

I had my mind set on a low end "prosumer" unit, but after a little research, I'm not so sure you don't get more bang for your buck with a higher end Consumer model...

This new model is somewhat intriguing.... http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/671536-REG/Sony_HDR_CX550V_HDR_CX550V_64GB_HD_Handycam.html

Damn near twice as much as last years model (CX500V), but it has some improved features that might make it worth the extra money, including Wider Angle lens, takes SD instead of just Memory DUO (about time Sony did that), and it also records at 24mbs as opposed to only 16 on last years model...$500 seems like a lot for the same series just the new model, but those three features are pretty valuable...

Bit-Rates are only a number in a larger set of considerations. People don't buy computers based on processor clock speed anymore -- at least I hope not -- and you shouldn't buy video cameras based off of bit rate. How the video is compressed and stored on tapeless media is very important and you see 17mbps cams outperforming 24mbps cams. Common thinking would see the bigger number on the latter and assume it's storing more video info, but it's really just storing less efficiently if the 17mbps is outperforming it. And when you hit tapeless, that can add up to about half an hour of extra recording time on a 16gb card, definitely a big deal for the price conscious person wanting to save some money on memory cards.

The best option for shopping for cams isn't to look at specs but to look at video samples yourself and see what it looks like. Sometimes, you can even see storm type of settings shot with some of these cams to get a good idea for what they can do. YouTube and Vimeo does compress video, but it does so on an equal opportunity basis so to speak

 

[Scott Weberpal]

Bit-Rates are only a number in a larger set of considerations. People don't buy computers based on processor clock speed anymore -- at least I hope not -- and you shouldn't buy video cameras based off of bit rate. How the video is compressed and stored on tapeless media is very important and you see 17mbps cams outperforming 24mbps cams. Common thinking would see the bigger number on the latter and assume it's storing more video info, but it's really just storing less efficiently if the 17mbps is outperforming it. And when you hit tapeless, that can add up to about half an hour of extra recording time on a 16gb card, definitely a big deal for the price conscious person wanting to save some money on memory cards.

Please explain how storing 17 Mbps more "efficiently" than say 24 Mbps would produce better video. The bit rate is simply the amount of data the camcorder can store in a second. One stores 17,000,000 bits of data, the other stores 24,000,000 bits of data.

I could understand there would be a difference if they are using different codecs to encode the data (say H.264 vs. MPEG2) where the H.264 at 17 Mbps could outperform the MPEG2 at 24 Mbps. But, if the codec was the same for both the 17 and 24, theoretically the 24 Mbps would record higher quality video regardless.

 

[Chris C Sanner]

Please explain how storing 17 Mbps more "efficiently" than say 24 Mbps would produce better video. The bit rate is simply the amount of data the camcorder can store in a second. One stores 17,000,000 bits of data, the other stores 24,000,000 bits of data.

I could understand there would be a difference if they are using different codecs to encode the data (say H.264 vs. MPEG2) where the H.264 at 17 Mbps could outperform the MPEG2 at 24 Mbps. But, if the codec was the same for both the 17 and 24, theoretically the 24 Mbps would record higher quality video regardless.

Edit here - That's partially true, but in general, it's not best to use that line of thinking. For instance: If you pick up a Pentium IV running at 3 ghz and a Quad Core 2.66 GHZ, which processor is going to perform better?

When it comes to tapeless cameras, how they process images in a given second can be just as important as how much they process. Just check out Panasonic's line of cams which record at 17mbps but perform at least as good if not better than any other consumer cam on the market (most of which record at just under 25). Ditto for why the Hm-100u recording at 35mbps can't match similarly priced cams recording at 24mbps. There are so many other factors that determine image quality from the lens, to the sensor, to the image processor that to narrow it down to bit rate is over simplifying a very complex process and will lead to inexact results if that's what you are using to determine which cameras are better than the others.

EDIT: Of course it goes without saying that choosing a camcorder is an inexact science in and of itself. A lot of times, picking a camera involves selecting it based off of a few distinct factors which favor the shooting environment you will be encountering. So choosing the right camcorder for you is a question of budget and suitability and is inherently subjective. I'm just making the point, which I hope is well taken, that picking a camera based off of the image quality which you are deriving from a bit-rate number is a bad idea when cameras shooting at 17mbps can often outperform those shooting at higher rates.

 

[Nathan Withrow]

I have an Canon HV30 HD Camera, and I love it so much. Just need to get footage of a tornado with it, and see how it performs, and how good the footage comes out. I have use it a lot already since early in the 09 season.

 

[Chris C Sanner]

I forgot this actually, you can check out my YouTube account and all of the stuff from 2008 on there was shot with an HV-20, which is not too far off from the rest of the HV line of camcorders. So for anyone considering the HV line of cameras and who want to know what they look like in a real storm environment, here's a link:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oybP9vdoFjM

 

[Scott Weberpal]

I shot everything last year on an HV20 as well...here are a few clips:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOS-zCQ08D8 - if you fast forward this video to about 3:45, you'll get a good idea of how good the HV20 is in low-light. It was pretty dark on the east side of the Aurora tornado, yet my HV20 did a good job of keeping the grain down yet still being bright enough for the video to turn out great.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pp-0e8eDyuc

 

[Chad Cowan]

What video settings do you Canon guys use when chasing? I have an HV30 and kept everything on full auto last year (except for focus, of course) because I was deathly afraid of getting a great shot but having it messed up by my experimental setting. I've been playing around with the Cine setting and am liking the results so far, curious how it'll work in a near-storm/ low-light environment.

 

[Scott Weberpal]

What video settings do you Canon guys use when chasing? I have an HV30 and kept everything on full auto last year (except for focus, of course) because I was deathly afraid of getting a great shot but having it messed up by my experimental setting. I've been playing around with the Cine setting and am liking the results so far, curious how it'll work in a near-storm/ low-light environment.

Thanks for bringing this up Chad. I use Cine Mode when shooting in low-light conditions, I really helps keep the grain down, but at the cost of losing some of the color saturation.

At around 3:35 in this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOS-zCQ08D8 I'm filming in front of a field that had some small crops, but you can see that the "greens" don't show up very well. To me, this is a fair trade-off getting video with less grain even with less saturation.

 

[Dustin Wilcox]

At around 3:35 in this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOS-zCQ08D8 I'm filming in front of a field that had some small crops, but you can see that the "greens" don't show up very well. To me, this is a fair trade-off getting video with less grain even with less saturation.

I'd say the HV beat the Sony HC (my cam at the time) easily in noise as well as pretty handily in saturation...basically a direct comparison to the HV at about :35... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=is1gP2BhFXo

 

[Chad Cowan]

Thanks for bringing this up Chad. I use Cine Mode when shooting in low-light conditions, I really helps keep the grain down, but at the cost of losing some of the color saturation.

At around 3:35 in this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOS-zCQ08D8 I'm filming in front of a field that had some small crops, but you can see that the "greens" don't show up very well. To me, this is a fair trade-off getting video with less grain even with less saturation.

Wow, that's a lot less grain in low-light than I had shooting in auto. Thanks for the example!

 

[Paul Knightley]

What video settings do you Canon guys use when chasing? I have an HV30 and kept everything on full auto last year (except for focus, of course) because I was deathly afraid of getting a great shot but having it messed up by my experimental setting. I've been playing around with the Cine setting and am liking the results so far, curious how it'll work in a near-storm/ low-light environment.

Last year I used Cine mode, and the HDV25P standard (on PAL - HDV24 or 30 on NTSC, I think). Put a lightning shot onto YouTube - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2b1dQ99sEk

Also, a nice shot of the DFW supercell on 26th May 2009 in the same mode (I think I might have posted this already) - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nkJeR4tjAeE&feature=channel

One thing to be aware of is that the 'P' standard (progressive) can 'chop' lightning bolts up when you try to do a screen grab.

On a side note, the max res the HV30 can give out via Firewire is 1440x1080, but via HDMI it gives the full 1920x1080.

 

[Dean Baron]

BUMP

hv40's are marked down again at B&H. Instant savings of $300, only lasts through August 31st. Just ordered one myself, looking forward to my first HD cam. Great deal for anyone in the market for HD.

 

[Jason Boggs]

BUMP

hv40's are marked down again at B&H. Instant savings of $300, only lasts through August 31st. Just ordered one myself, looking forward to my first HD cam. Great deal for anyone in the market for HD.

You won't be disappointed. It's a great vid camera.

 

[Lanny Dean]

For those that have purchased the HV40...what a great little cam this is! I have had the 40 basically since it came out as an upgrade to the HV30 and I have been nothing but pleased with this unit. After owning and using many different cams including the XL2, GL2, XD Cam, FX7, I was certainly surprised at just how well the cam worked. One of it's boons is how well it works in low light not to mention the 24p frame rate.....this really helps with that "film look".

Congrats to those that have picked this little gem up way cheaper than I did!

 

[Mark Blue]

Yes, awesome camcorder and not too bad of a price either. My wife bought me one for Christmas last year and I have been very satisfied with how it works and the quality of the video. I have been adding some extra goodies to it from the B&H site and it actually changes the look of the unit and makes the video even better.

Thus far I added a Raynox wide angle lens, step up ring adapter, a lens hood, a shotgun microphone and dead cat wind muff to deaden those crazy inflow winds around tornadic storms. I've also purchased a couple of extra batteries and a battery charger that plugs into the wall. I need to offload my footage from this year before too much time gets away.