I had/have a Canon HF10. Unfortunately after 18 months it developed a problem with the zoom control whereby it would zoom in spontaneously from time to time. I did a Google search for: hf10 zoom problem , and found that dozens of people (at least) have had the same problem. However Canon would not recognise that this was a manufacturing fault and wanted $180 to replace the zoom switch.
I decided I wouldn't pay this and would put the $180 towards a new camera instead.

Since I had just found out about Sony Vegas I checked out the Sony vidcam range and eventually, after reading so many very positive reviews, bought the HDR-CX700

So far I'm very very pleased with it. It isn't as good with low light as I'd hoped however, but it's not bad and set on Auto it will switch to low light if required.

I must mention that one of the best things about going the Sony way is that it works with the fantastic Sony tripods, enabling control of zooms etc from the handle on the tripod. Added to which the tripod I purchased (80AV) is better in all ways than any tripod I had ever found at under $500.

So, after 4 months with Sony Tripod, camera and software, I'm happier than I'd imagined possible last year with my unreliable Canon and a jerky tripod and "another brand" of NLE software.

Good luck!

I have Panasonic TM700 (current model is the TM900). While I have had great luck with Canons, I like the TM700 at the price your price point because it will shoot in 1080 60p, and has 3 sensors. The sound connection is a mini-jack, but if you need XLR, you can buy an adapter cable.

Here's a copy of a summary, I posted a while back:

Panasonic TM700 Likes:
..o Great Picture quality, particularly at 1920x1080 60p.
..o Light and easy to "run-and-gun"
..o Great optical stabilizer. Used in conjunction with Mercalli V2 it can be mistaken for tripod mounted.
..o It has a focus ring.
..o One of the few 3 sensor consumer cameras
..o I like the Zebras & Manual focus assist
..o It has a viewfinder.
..o Records to SDHC cards

Panasonic TM700 Dislikes:
..o Image Quality of viewfinder and LCD is not great
..o Manual menu settings are not intuitive to my thought process.
..o I'd like more hardware knobs & switches rather than software based controls.
..o Mic picks up slight fan noise.
..o Can't switch mic to stereo from 5.1 in the "auto" mode.
..o And probably my biggest "issue" is that the auto WB & exposure is slow to respond

Here as short test video (downrezed from 1920x1080 60p to 960x540 30p: Peacock the Sequel. fwiw, all footage in this vid was handheld - stabilized with the TM700's excellent optical stabilzer and further processed with Mercalli V2 - comparable to tripod (at least to my eyes).

Here's some source footage 1920x1080 60p: parrots.zip

...Jerry

Panasonic HPX 170.
https://panasonic.ca/english/broadcast/p2/pdf/AG-HPX170.pdf

Nick - no need for the XLR hookups. The G10 looks like a possibility. Thanks for the input!

MrBrook - I'm assuming the HF10 is not the same as the GF10 that Nick referred to, correct?

I know what you are saying about the Sony tripod - I had one on my old camera. Really made tilt / pan / zoom very nice and smooth.

Thanks for the input!

Jerry - thanks for sharing the videos. I really liked the coloring of the parrots! So with the goods and the bads you shared, would you buy thr TM900 today?

Dan - do you own one? I'm curious - it almost looks like the 'hood' on the front of the camera covers up the lens...like it's an artificial way to make the recordings to be be in a 16:9 format. Am I misinterpreting that?

Panasonic GH3

+1 for the Sony HDR-CX700.
Beautiful HD picture up to 60p, and great low light performance around $1200

Sony HXR MC50

http://www.hdwarrior.co.uk/2010/07/10/the-sony-hxr-mc50-causing-a-stir/

around 1200

"would you buy thr TM900 today?"Yes, I would. Certainly at the $800-$1500 price point. The other recommendations are good ones, and I'm sure you understand you won't get the the "perfect camera" unless you spend a lot more.

I guess that's why the make chocolate & vanilla!

...Jerry

Don't forget, with the TM900 or similar Panasonic cameras they shoot at 60p so in order to edit with Vegas, you have to convert the footage. I use the included Panasonic software, others may do it differently.

John

John,

I'd forgotten you had the TM900. Can you comment on my Likes/Dislikes as they relate to the TM900?

...Jerry

Jerry,

It is a TM90 that I bought for my daughter for acting and screenwriting.

But it is similar to the TM900 in many ways so I agree with your assessment for the most part.

The zoom rocker on the TM90 is noisy and the sound is picked up by the microphone so you can't just let the zoom rocker go with your finger after a zoom or it will make a metallic noise that is recorded in a quiet setting. You have to keep your finger on it when you return it to it's normal position to prevent that. Really annoying.

Also, the thread size on the front of all those Panasonic cameras is 41.5mm and is only designed for their 3D attachment. There are no filters manufactured by anyone in that thread size so a skylight or UV filter is out of the question. Panasonic makes a step-up ring that fits it, but it is only designed to accommodate the 3D attachment and is sold as a replacement in case you lose the one that comes with the 3D attachment. If you screw a filter onto the step-up ring it shows vignetting unless you reduce the zoom range and it also blocks the built-in mic.

Panasonic also stupidly left out a headphone jack, but they did include an external mic jack.

John

Stripes.

HPX 170, which I own, is basically an improved version of the HVX 200 without a tape drive.
It records to P2 Cards. Two slots.
Shoots in native 16:9.
No tricks with the hood, just a hood.
Hope this answers your question.
There is a link to check it our in detail.
May even be able to find a used out as they've been out for a few years.


Dan

I believe the HPX 170 is discontinued Dan.

It also was not in the OP's price range.

John

This is definitely overwhelming! What are the bottom line characteristics I should be considering? Such as, I had a friend tell me to only look at cameras with 3 processors. How do I even know which ones have 3 processors? Also, I know I'll be using it in lower light quality situations...

Are there 3 or 4 key things to focus on? Or does that vary by individual?

Hi.

You've certainly managed to start quite a thread!
I think it is great that you have received so much feedback and suggestions. When I look back at your original posting, I think that you have already identified much of what is important for you. Your price range indicates that you're looking for a good quality consumer level camcorder. Most of these are now HD using the AVCHD codec, which makes for a very good picture quality - even in cameras using a single CMOS chip. The AVCHD codec is a great way for the camera to capture a terrific quality image, but it is very processor intensive for the computer & editing software to subsequently edit that footage. Using this codec (which is commonly used by HD camcorders) will test your computer. Unless you have a pretty modern and well specc'ed system, you may need to transcode into a different format prior to editing in Vegas. Not difficult, all possible with Vegas, but does take some time to get ready into a new format for editing. I have experience with the Canon Legria cameras in this range and they can produce stunningly good HD videos - it mainly depends on conditions, and operator care/skill with regards to lighting, sound etc. Consumer camcorders can accept external microphones (usually essential for acquiring decent sound) although mostly they use a min-jack plg (as opposed to prof. level camcorders that have XLR plugs for professional level mics). It's worth thinking about what mic you might be using - as while you can get adapters to plug the (more expensive) pro mics with XLR plugs into a consumer camcorder, at the budget you have I'd suggest you're probably looking at something like the Videomic (or it's stereo cousin) from Rode. The camcorder world has moved to tapeless, in this price range it's mainly SD cards, which are great and reasonably cheap , even for large capacity (say 32GB) and you'll need to budget for a couple of these cards & a USB reader if your PC doesn't have an SD card reader built in. Many video cameras perform fine in low light - once you're in a church, you're going to be testing the low light capabilities quite a bit, particularly if you're filming evening sessions. Lighting makes an enormous difference to the quality of resultant footage and you might even like to think about adding a cheap LED light or two to your kit. You can search this forum for info. Single chip camcorders are fine unless you really are delivering high definition projects to discerning audiences and you truly believe that a single chip camera is limiting teh quality of your footage - for the time being, I think it unlikely that this will be your limitation, as compared with lighting, audio etc, so perhaps allocate some of your limited budget into these areas. Trust this helps. BTW - I'd be pretty confident that any of the major camera manufacturers - Sony, Canon, Panasonic etc make a camera suitable for you in that price range - time to check out the specs on their websites.

Trust this helps.

You need to study the in-depth reviews on this site:

http://www.camcorderinfo.com

The HPX 170 is certainly NOT discontinued!
Also he should be able to buy a used model in the specified price range, or an HVX200.

Thanks Duncan - it's good to have a worthwhile thread! I also appreciate you getting into some of the basics for me.

Question on this quote: " Unless you have a pretty modern and well specc'ed system" What do you consider well spec'd? Here's my current system:

Windows Version:7 64-bit
RAM:24 GB
Processor:Intel i7 950 @ 3.07 GHz
Video Card:2 - nVidia GeForce GTX 460 SE Driver 275.33
Sound Card:Gigabyte X58A-UD3R motherboard
CD Burner:LG WH10LS30
DVD Burner:LG WH10LS30

Thanks for the link, John. I've created a spreadsheet with all of the info from everyone here and am using that linked site to supplement information.