ukresearcher
I have been using an HC96E (the PAL version available in the UK ) for a year now. I have found the image quality pretty good – sometimes impressive - and the camcorder is reasonably versatile once you know how to get the best out of it. I would have liked a microphone jack but considering the purchase of a Sony mic that slots into the hot shoe. I visited North America last year and with the footage I shot made a reasonable personal documentary using Windows Movie Maker. OK, So far so good.
Like many video enthusiasts, I have been busy researching an upgrade to an HD model. My head is full of HD model specifications and reviews and I reckon I have a good idea now of what to purchase when the money is available (the HF11 looks like a sound buy right now). Essentially, I want to be able to produce a good quality documentary, possibly for public viewing, using progressive (25p) and a bit of careful editing adding filter and cinegamma effects. I might record some audio separately using a good digital voice recorder. However, I am telling myself to hold on a moment. Can I afford a good upgrade, and after all, just how much inferior is the HC96 SD footage in comparison to HD?
The HC96 impressed Camcorderinfo reviewers with the resolution produced by the comparatively large CCD (for a miniDV consumer camcorder). There is no doubt HD resolution is, technically, a whole dimension better and, blown up on a large screen will presumably be significantly superior to SD. Nevertheless, my HC96, being PAL, has a 25p function (I am not sure if the NTSC version has 24p) and having tried 25p it’s not at all bad. I don’t have a particularly large TV or high spec PC monitor and I was wondering if any HC96 owners on this board have viewed their footage on a really large screen to see how it stands up to close scrutiny. If any of you have made a movie with the HC96 that you have shown to the public in some way (local community, home movie, church or sport activity etc) what sort of reaction did you get? I am more interested in the ‘technical’ quality evaluation than the creative and guess you would need to have heard the viewpoint of somebody with an interest in videography and a good eye. Any experiences and comments you want to offer much appreciated. Thanks.
Like many video enthusiasts, I have been busy researching an upgrade to an HD model. My head is full of HD model specifications and reviews and I reckon I have a good idea now of what to purchase when the money is available (the HF11 looks like a sound buy right now). Essentially, I want to be able to produce a good quality documentary, possibly for public viewing, using progressive (25p) and a bit of careful editing adding filter and cinegamma effects. I might record some audio separately using a good digital voice recorder. However, I am telling myself to hold on a moment. Can I afford a good upgrade, and after all, just how much inferior is the HC96 SD footage in comparison to HD?
The HC96 impressed Camcorderinfo reviewers with the resolution produced by the comparatively large CCD (for a miniDV consumer camcorder). There is no doubt HD resolution is, technically, a whole dimension better and, blown up on a large screen will presumably be significantly superior to SD. Nevertheless, my HC96, being PAL, has a 25p function (I am not sure if the NTSC version has 24p) and having tried 25p it’s not at all bad. I don’t have a particularly large TV or high spec PC monitor and I was wondering if any HC96 owners on this board have viewed their footage on a really large screen to see how it stands up to close scrutiny. If any of you have made a movie with the HC96 that you have shown to the public in some way (local community, home movie, church or sport activity etc) what sort of reaction did you get? I am more interested in the ‘technical’ quality evaluation than the creative and guess you would need to have heard the viewpoint of somebody with an interest in videography and a good eye. Any experiences and comments you want to offer much appreciated. Thanks.