Sony HDR-TG5V

Low Light Sensitivity (3.77)

The Sony HDR-TG5V did a pretty good job in our low light sensitivity test. The camcorder required 15 lux of light to reach 50 IRE on our waveform monitor—a performance that was nearly identical to that of the Sony HDR-XR520V and last year’s Sony HDR-TG1.

We tested the HDR-TG5V in auto mode with its auto slow shutter feature disengaged for this test (we do this for all camcorders that include this feature). Auto slow shutter allows the camcorder to drop to a 1/30 of a second shutter speed in low light situations. This enables the camcorder to produce a brighter image, but it can result in choppy footage and motion trails as a side effect. According to Sony, the HDR-TG5V has a low light sensitivity of 5 lux when using auto slow shutter. More on how we test low light sensitivity.

The big thing to notice here is the horrendous sensitivity from the JVC GZ-X900, which had one of the worst overall low light performances of the camcorders we’ve tested in 2009. Also notable is the very good performance from the Sanyo VPC-HD2000; a performance that is better than the Sony HDR-TG5V. Still, there’s really nothing to complain about the Sony HDR-TG5V here. For the camcorder to have just as good sensitivity as the larger Sony HDR_XR520V is very impressive.

Low Light Noise (7.98)

Noise was definitely noticeable on the Sony HDR-TG5V’s low light footage. In our testing, we measured noise levels at 1.56%, which is not terribly high, but is enough noise to notice with the naked eye. This noise percentage is a bit higher than what we got with the Sanyo VPC-HD200 and almost double what the Sony HDR-XR520V registered. The HDR-TG5V’s noise performance isn’t bad, however, and many camcorders—like the JVC GZ-X900—do much worse in this test. Overall, we’d say the TG5V had average noise levels in low light. More on how we test low light noise.

Sony HDR-TG5V Low Light Noise Comparisons
Sony HDR-TG5V 100% Crop	Sanyo VPC-HD2000 100% Crop JVC Everio GZ-X900 100% Crop Sony HDR-XR520V 100% Crop More...

Above, you can see how each camcorder handled shooting in low light. The HDR-TG5V has some noticeable noise and its image is quite fuzzy. The Sanyo VPC-HD2000 recorded less noise, but its image is discolored and splotchy (it is also much brighter than other camcorders). The JVC GZ-X900 is clearly the goat in this bunch. Its image is very noisy (close to 3% noise) and is completely discolored with a cool, green tint. Being a high-end camcorder and much more expansive than any of the other models shown, it shouldn’t be too surprising that the Sony HDR-XR520V was the best of the bunch. Its low light image is sharp, has minimal noise, and consistent colors. The Sanyo does have its benefits as well, however, particularly in its ability to capture such a bright low light image.

Low Light Color (6.55)

In our low light testing, the Sony HDR-TG5V came close to matching the results from Sony’s high-end HDR-XR520V. Admittedly, the TG5V’s color accuracy was a bit worse and captured less saturated colors, but the results from the two camcorders weren’t all that different. The TG5V measured a color error of 5.59 and a saturation level of 63.66 in this test. More on how we test low light color.

Low Light Color Accuracy Performance
	Color Error Map
	The map on the left is a diagram of the color error. The length and direction of each line indicates how the camera processed each particular color while capturing video. The Sony HDR-TG5V produced a color error of and a saturation level of in our bright light color testing.

The big story here is how much better the Sanyo VPC-HD2000 performed with this test. The Sanyo captured a significantly brighter image than the TG5V, and its colors were exceptionally vibrant (possibly too vibrant for some tastes). Below you can see how the TG5V looks compared to the competition. It managed a better picture than the JVC GZ-X900, which had weak colors and a green hue that coated its entire low light image. The TG5V rendered an image that looks similar to the Sony XR520V, but its colors were a bit duller and darker than its larger, more expensive cousin.