AVCHD vs HDV

[Al Bergstein]

As far as low light goes with AVCHD, Panasonic has a new camera the AG-AF100 that is more like a real video camera and like a Canon 5. It might be a good choice to look at.

But I shoot with both T2i and HMC150, and can say that *depending* on the light conditions the 150 can be just fine. Take a look at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wXa7et-VoL0 and the rest of my concert footage at 8stringthing on Youtube. All of it is shot with the 150. Plenty of lower light there.

But if you encounter locations with gain boost needed, the Canon seems to do better. Some have debated this, but it’s my opinion based on real world shooting. I’ll be posting some examples soon. They are dramatic. You also might try the Panasonic still cameras, which would give you the run length of AVCHD and sensors of the still cameras. But if you are used to camera controls, you’ll hate the DSLR’s. They really suck, especially their audio controls. You’ll likely rely on a field mixer.

AVCHD has it’s own aggravations, especially in naming conventions for clips. I hate using the Panasonic software tools to rename clips, but you can run into problems with Vegas if you don’t. For example, I dump my PRIVATE folders into folders with the project name. BUT it appears Vegas gets “confused” if you have multiple files named 00001.mts deep within differently named folders. (If I’m wrong here please give me a way out of this), so I routinely have to rename my individual clips, a time consuming bit of agravation.

But other than that, AVCHD on Panasonic seems to work fine. And I’ve compared clips a friend does on her Sony HDV to mine and mine are noticeably better. Her’s tends to be less contrasty out of the tape. My is rich and vivid. So you may need to do some tuning for your color grading I guess is the point. I have a hard time mixing her B cam stuff in to mine…

Alf

Some contents or functionalities here are not available due to your cookie preferences!

This happens because the functionality/content marked as “Google Youtube” uses cookies that you choosed to keep disabled. In order to view this content or use this functionality, please enable cookies: click here to open your cookie preferences.

[Dave Haynie]

AVCHD vs. HDV is absolutely not a low-light issue. Both encode whatever your camera’s sensor is capturing.

In practical terms, low light technology is one of the primary areas that every camcorder company has been attacking. These days, I can buy a consumer model like the Panny TM700 that does low light better than some of the early HDV pro models. But it’s not the CODEC, it’s the evolution of sensor technology.

The real issue with HDV vs. AVCHD is quality and flexibility. Given a matching lighting condition, it wasn’t really until 2009 that any AVC camera could match the overall quality of an HDV camera. But these days, I think it’s pretty clearly flipped. I bet money on it..

I bought a Panasonic HMC40 and a TM700 in the last year, to replace more expensive HDV gear. The 1920 vs. 1440 resolution was a minor issue; the real rational was better low-light (I’ve been working a bit lower end than you) and better overall quality. In theory, AVC should deliver twice the quality of MPEG-2 at the same bitrate. Thus, a 1920×1080 encoding at 24Mb/s should be better than a 1440×1080 encoding at 25Mb/s. Today, it is, no questions.

And then there’s the flexibility. My Sony HDV camcorder did 1080/60i. The HMC40 does 1080/60i|30p|24p and 720/60p|24p. The TM700 adds 1080/60p capability. And no, it’s not as nice to use as the HMC40, but on a tripod, it delivers the same result.

If you have SDI or HDMI out or some-such, straight from the camera, and some PCs, you could get a better result with a realtime capture card. If you’re happy with the low-light capabilities of the current gear, no problems.. but again, most of the issue isn’t the encoder. It’s true that a noisy image will screw with modern interframe lossy compression, but the compression doesn’t create the sensor noise. And of course, needing a PC per camera or two isn’t a terribly mobile rig.

-Dave

[Al Bergstein]

Of course you are right. As usual the inexact nature of using typing into these posts altered what I was trying to say.

I had extrapolated what Scott was looking for as he seemed to me to be pointing towards choosing a DLSR or a AVCHD video cam (since he was discussing replacing HDV cameras, and needed ‘low light’ capability I made some assumptions).

Obviously, as I pointed out, if he buys the newer Panny that has a larger sensor the AVCHD situation is pretty much moot, and actually works in Panny’s favor. Also, as you mention, many of these AVCHD based cameras have little problems with low light. But ‘low light’ can mean a lot of different things to different people. I have shot ‘low light’ and then I shot ‘low light’. On my Youtube page I have a comparison of my 150 and my T2i shooting a campfire at dusk. They are pretty comparable, but the shadows fall out quicker on the 150, even with Gain boosted.

Then again, your requirements may vary. I’m not needing to blow it up to a theatrical screen size. Large HDTV monitors is all I need.

Alf

[Scott Francis]

Thanks guys…I have had good results with my FX1’s in the low light settings I shoot in. I have read in other forums that the AVCHD format has issues in low light. I understand the size and number of imagers are more important than recording format. When I do a large production I watch all 5 of 6 of the cams and call out shots as well as use 3-4 robo cams that we remotely control from the monitoring area. The footage I see in real time on the monitors (coming from the sensors) ALWAYS looks a ton better than the HDV footage. Hence my desire to get a better end product. I currently capture both to laptop (one at each cam via firewire) as well as to tape as a backup. This saves a lot of wear on the cams. I would not have too much trouble taking a PC for each cam as I am also looking into a building a video truck as well. I think cost will be lower in I go with the Intensity cards, and would get a better end product coming in via the imager….but this is my question about avchd formats….better to compress with that then uncompressed via imager? Not sure! Thanks again guys, also I love my Sony’s and will probably stick with that brand due to also being able to control the cam (zoom, focus and rec/stop) via remotes at the monitoring station. I know panny’s and some others (including SLRS) don’t have as easy of a remote control as the Sony’s, plus I already have 6 remotes and I am wired for them…again thanks to all!!

Scott Francis
Mind’s Eye Audio/Video Productions

[Danny Hays]

AVCHD is clearly better now days in my opinion. I have a Sony HVR-A1 and the Intensity Shuttle, which I had to build a special i7 with a certain chipset motherboard to use, but I just bought the Panasonic HDC-TM700 and Now I will only use the Sony and the Shuttle as a second camera if needed. The TM-700 is amazing! It’s very new as far as the 1080p60 that hardly any NLE’s will support it yet, but low and behold, Sony Vegas pro does as well as CS5 After Effects. I can render a 1920 x 1080 60p 25 mbps .WMV that looks better than any video I’ve seen other than maybe some HD cameras used in pro football. I payed less than half for the panasonic than the Sony too. Ouch!!! But whatta ya gonna do? That’s the way technology goes. If you get a chance check out this TM-700. You will be very suprised on the quality for the price and especially the size. It’s very small, but smokes most every prosumer camera on the market in my opinion.
Danny Hays, Universal Orlando Resort A/V dept.

[Bill Mash]

It took a few years for the benefits of a tape-less workflow in AVCHD to be realized in the prosumer space in performance and quality output. As soon as it did I dumped my aging GL2 for an HF10 and will be upgrading to Panasonic AVCCAM shortly.

Just because you can doesn’t mean you should.

[Dave Haynie]

Low light has been an HD issue all along, and of course, a camcorder issue before that. Over time, sensors have improved… the same kind of sensor today is probably better at low light, all things being equal, than one from a few years ago.

Tragically, of course, things are never quite equal. Early pro/prosumer 3-chip cameras boosted low-light capability by using 1/2 resolution sensors… this, huge pixels, usually with the green sensor offset. You’d pay a little in sharpness, but win back some low-light capabilities. The first HDV camcorders did this too… your FX1 used three 1 Mpixel sensors, rather than the three 2Mpixel+ sensors used in most of today’s pro/prosumer camcorders. And even with older sensors, your 1/3″ chips are gathering more light than the 1/4″ chips in my Panny, though probably less than the 24mm x 36mm sensor in a Canon 5D Mk II.

I take it you’re monitoring via analog component outputs? That is presumably a tap directly from the sensor output somewhere, maybe even at full resolution, but be careful… are you using the same monitors you’re using for HDV editing? Probably not. Small field monitors are often less than full resolution, but small enough to make that not so important, and so they basically run a low-pass filter over your video. So you don’t see the imperfections you’ll see when you start editing on that 24″+ monitor back at the ranch. Maybe not, but something to consider — do a real test

-Dave

[Nigel O’neill]

Scott

I use an FX1 and Z1P for live video work including concerts and weddings, with an HC3 as backup. I have avoided AVCHD as the data rate on the earlier cams was around 17 mbps, compared to 24 mbps for HDV. The quality difference was noticeable, especially when you mixed AVCHD and HDV. That is no longer true as some new cameras show.

The second factor to consider is manual controls. The smaller barrel type cams often have fiddly zoom, iris, gain and focus controls. Live shoots with rapidly changing lights and action tend to demand manual control. I would have thought this would have been your leaning.

The third factor to consider is the lens/sensor combination. Smaller cams tend to compromise on this for the sake of compactness. The ability of a camera to work in low light is not generally governed by the fact that it is an AVCHD camera. A good high quality fast lens backed up by big sensors is a must in low light conditions.

The type and size of sensor, CMOS or CCD needs to be considered. CMOS tend to work better under low light, but suffer from rolling shutter. Personally, I prefer CCD over CMOS, but they can sometimes be considered to lean towards offering a ‘cooler’ image. It comes down to personal preference. Manufacturers prefer CMOS as they are cheaper to produce and often have some smarts built in to the sensor, such as super high quality slo-mo.

Next is impression. Some clients like to see big gear! I know it may sound trivial, but psychology and perception to prospective clients does need to be considered when buying your next cam.

Next thing to consider is form. True shoulder mounted cameras work well for live video work. If properly balanced on your shoulder, you could use one for long periods of time. The smaller camcorders or palmcorders tend to suffer from the motion of your arms, your breathing and trembling of your hands during handheld work, and hence need supports and other paraphernalia to literally help you hold the camera.

Yet another to consider is inputs/outputs. I use the XLR inputs on the Z1P and a break out box on the FX1 to get a feed off the sound desk. Cheaper cams tend to use proprietary hot shoes or 3.5mm inputs which are not as robust as XLR connections. Headphones are a must for monitoring sound, yet some cams don’t offer them.

Hope this helps.

Intel i920, 12GB RAM, ASUS P6T, Vegas Pro 9 (X64), Vista x64 Ultimate, Vegas Production Assistant 1.0, VASST Ultimate S 4.1

[Scott Francis]

Thanks for all the replies…I still am unclear with my main question though.
1) I have 5 cams 3 FX1’s and 2 HC1’s have to do some color correcting when using them all, but have had good sucess.
2) Manual controls are a must as I always shoot shutter speed 60, no gain and let the iris run on auto with manual focus on my robo cams (I can do up to 4 of my 5 on robo vs having a live camera operator at the cam.)
3) I track up 48 tracks of audio from the board and mix entirely separately from my cam audio…better end product and I only use the cams for lining up the video and crowd reactions that don’t make it to my audience mics.
4) I monitor with 5-6 720p 19″ monitors all LCD. What I see on them is straight from the cams using the component out at 1080i.

This always seems to look better than when I watch my footage captured in HDV while editing, even on the same monitors. Hence my desire to look into capturing via Blackmagic or another HD box vs buying up to 5 new cams with AVCHD compression?

Looking at costs, it would be a bit cheaper going the Blackmagic rout vs 5 new cams. I tried the FX7 and HATE the colorset vs my FX1’s and HC1’s and it is a nightmare to color correct to even get close. I tend to like CCDs as well over CMOS except for the HC1’s which is 1 cmos sensor, however I can work with the exposure and get reasonable footage in lower light. The color correction is pretty good, as only the reds tend to look a little more magenta on the HC1’s.
My main question is, is it better to invest into Blackmagic cards, RAID arrays and such for each cam (about $1000 for a decent computer with needed HDs, as I build my own), or to look into new cams, which are WAY more than that, up to triple or more.
I understand this is a loaded question, however cost is an issue as is doing it is steps, then I have to deal with color correction and getting cams to play nice with each other in color correction. I am wired up for 6 cams via robos using component, cat5e and sony lanc remotes, so I need to stay in the sony brand (or at least LANC capable which I believe panny is).

So there it is…Blackmagic Intensity with PC’s or newer Sony cams with AVCHD compression….anyone?

Thanks again for all the input guys!

Scott Francis
Mind’s Eye Audio/Video Productions

[Danny Hays]

I have a Sony HVR-A1 as well as the Intensity Shuttle. I can capture MJPEG straight from the imager and bypass the HDV compression and get 4.2.2 color space instead of 4.2.0. The quality is better than capturing via firewire. Blackmagic is very specific on the Express slot the Intensity pro will wirk with as well as the speed of the computer. The Shuttle needs a X58 or X55 chipset as well as USB 3 on the motherboard for it to work. But even with MJPEG, it’s still 1440 x 1080 interlaced as thats what the imager puts out of it’s component out. I just bought a Panasonc HDC-TM700 for $765 and it shoots 1920 x 1080 60p and WAY better in low light than the Sony. If I had seen the TM700 quality before I bought the Shuttle, I wouldn’t have bought it. The TM700 quality is so far superior than the Sony, that I may never use it or the Shuttle again unless I need a second camera. Granted $765 is more tha the $199 for the Intensity but I could probably sell the Sony for $1500 as it’s in perfect condition and buy two TM700s. Do yourself a favor. buy a HDMI mini to HDMI standard cable if you don’t have one, (the TM700 doesn’t come with it) and go to best buy as they sell the TM700 and convince them to let you connect it to a 1920 x 1080P HDTV, set to HDMI out on the TM700 to 1080p and see the quality this thing puts out. I promise you you’ll thank me and go with getting new cameras, not from Best buy as they are $899 when they’re on sale. B&H Photo sells them for $769. Oh yea, With the intensity card or shuttle, you have to have a quad core i7 for each camera where the TM700 comes with 32gig internal storage, enough to capture 2 hours and 40 minuts of 1920 x 1080 60p. Research the TM700 on youtube and see for yourself, this thing will amaze you. Hope this helps, Danny Hays, Universal Studios A/V dept FL.