Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
91 of 91 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Strong upgrade from HDR-CX7, September 3, 2008
This review is from: Sony HDR-CX12 High Definition Memory Stick PRO Duo Handycam Camcorder With 12x Optical Zoom (Electronics)
Five months ago, I took the leap and bought a Sony HDR-CX7. I had been using the Sony HDR-HC1 HDV camcorder, but as my boxes of DV tapes grew, I thought going tapeless would solve two problems: 1) tapes degrade and take space, while a flash memory card could be backed up easy to DVD-Rs. 2) it would take much less time to copy data from a flash card to the computer, instead of importing real-time. The downsides will be mentioned in a moment.
As it turns out, #1 was correct, but #2 was not. After getting an 8GB memory stick, I realized I could not back that up to a 4.7GB DVD-R (single layer) so I now use a series of 4GB parts, so each backs up to a cheap DVD-R when I am done (I just use the Apple Mac OS X disk utility and tell it to make a Disk Image from Folder, and point it to the memory stick. When I mount that image later, it will be recognized in iMovie or Fnial Cut as a camera/memory stick and let me import.) So now I have a stack of DVD-Rs of backup images -- much nicer than DV tapes (and I can make clones/copies much easier).
#2, though, surprised me. The computer has to import the AVCHD and then transcode it to some editable format, and this takes longer than real-time. On my Core Duo 2 iMac, it was fast enough to import and transcode HDV video from tape (one hour of footage took one hour) most of the time, but importing AVCHD from memory stick or CD or disk image takes about double time. So note that this format is slower -- until we all get computers fast enough. Maybe one day I will be able to import an hour of video from a memory card as fast as the USB reader will handle it, and instantly be able to use it.
The downside would be that AVCHD compression would not be as good as HDV. (13GB of data on a DV tape versus 8GB of flash memory for about an hour of video). And, after watching some footage, I could see much more artifacting and blockiness in dark/shadow areas. There are four quality settings in the CX12, and I have not tested the highest (I record on the second setting), so it may be better.
Still, for general video, it's completely acceptable. Motion did not seem to be an issue (taping out the side of a moving car, recording the joust or sword fighters at a renaissance festival, etc.)
The size and convienience won me over, totally. The CX12 also takes very nice still pictures -- good enough that I generally don't bring my Fuji F10 camera with me. But, if you side-by-side compare the lower-resolution Fuji 6.3 megapixel images to the CX12 "10 megapixels" (not true resolution), the Fuji clearly wins -- brighter colors, better in low light, and sharper image. The CX12 is "good enough" for casual photos, but still doesn't replace even a cheap $170 digital camera.
Sound is good. Features are good -- having a manual knob to focus, for instance (upgrade from the CX7). Smile detection is addictive -- I set it to automatic, and it captures images while I video tape. I get home to find pictures I didn't take. Posing people can be diffuclt in this mode -- you have to say "wait, don't smile until I tell you" else it starts snapping away if it gets a face (even if you have yet to frame the photo in the viewfinder). Still nice.
It can record more than three photos while video taping -- three was the limit of the CX7. It is also faster between still shots (about a second, or 3-4 with flash, and slower if it has to refocus). Acceptable, and much faster than CX7.
The camera loses the flash button (you now do it through a menu system on screen) but gains a sleep mode, so you can suspend the camera, then power it up and start recording in about a second (instead of 5 or so from a cold start). It uses about half battery to sleep, but still may be useful.
Overall, I'm very pleased, though I still wish the stills could be good enough to not need a still camera, too.
Low-light sucks compared to my old 1999 vintage Digital8 Sony, and focusing is slow in low light (just like with the $2000 Sony HDR-HC1). I guess that's just an issue of the HD imaging sensors being so small (?).
But I do like it, and I like it better than the CX7 (which I also liked).
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you?
 
|
|
|
|
|
|
49 of 50 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Addictive but be aware of the work you will create using the clips!, September 18, 2008
This review is from: Sony HDR-CX12 High Definition Memory Stick PRO Duo Handycam Camcorder With 12x Optical Zoom (Electronics)
This isn't a review of the features and performance of the camera. I am not an expert at comparing it to others. This is a review of what you can do with the files that you create.
I got this camera and the 16gb memory duo card. So far so good. It stores between 2 and 5 times the life of a single battery in video.. hours and hours unless you pick the highest bit rate.
The challenges come after you get your files home.
1. Sony Vegas
Probably this is the best solution for workflow from this camera, but it is windows only. Moving right along ..
2. PS3
Happily you can either insert the card into your PS3 (or into a multi-card reader via USB - a recent one, not an old one, as high capacity memory sticks can't be read by older multi-card readers). The PS3 sees the clips, shows moving previews, and they look fantastic. You can also put them on a media server (such as MediaTomb mac/linux) and connect to it from the PS3. Not quite as nice, as the thumbnails lack preview, but workable.
3. Connecting the camera to your Mac via the included dock
This works fine and I'll sub-divide what you can do at this point:
3a. Using Final Cut Express (or Final Cut Pro).
Neither of these programs will deal directly with the MTS files (which are AVCHD and 5.1 ac3) without the full directory structure of the card present! so don't copy the MTS files off, and delete them if you want to use FCE! At any rate, use FCE to import the clips, they are decompressed and blown up to an apple format that uses heaps more space! you can't edit natively in AVCHD using FCE. It isn't clear to me that you can even edit natively in FC Pro. Note, FCE down-mixes to 2 channel stereo during import!
3b. Not using Final Cut Express - using other tools (linux users read this too)
You can't play these MTS files reliably using Quicktime or Quicktime Pro despite the claim that quicktime pro can play h264 video. You can't even use the Perian codecs (which are available free and based on the open source libraries used by ffmpeg). They claim h264 compatibility but unfortunately they do not read the sony h264 stream properly. You may see various problems: missed frames, half speed, crashing or lots of errors. It may be that a SD camera setting on this camera is more reliably usable, I got bored trying so many different things. This also means you can't use ffmpeg or mencoder under linux, despite their flexibility. The latest version as of time of this review just does not deal with all your clips. It might deal with some, reading and re-encoding if necessary to mpeg4 or whatever, but you WILL get frustrated. The same problems apply to mplayer, vlc, MPEG Streamclip, and so on, as they also depend on the same libraries.
Note: xportdev will demux MTS files and TMPGenc will decode the video correctly, you CAN use these two tools to create mpeg4 or whatever.
see http://www.sonyhdvinfo.com/forumdisplay.php?f=40 this forum for more info.
3c. Not using Final Cut Express - using VoltaicHD
VoltaicHD will convert the clips properly but there are no options to speak of. It creates much larger mov files that can be used in typical mac utilities, quicktime, etc.
3d. Using Toast Titanium
I believe this produce accepts AVCHD files. I haven't tested it, obviously you have to buy the product. It appears to be capable of writing DVDs or even bluray discs after the edit is done.
4. Uploading to vimeo (the HD version of youtube)
Vimeo does not accept MTS files, it tries to accept h264 video if packaged in an avi or whatever, but will not process them correctly. It accepts mpeg4, or re-encoded h264 as output by mencoder. It probably also accepts mov files from VoltaicHD and obviously you can get FCE to output a file that vimeo will take.
The problem I have with this is the chain of encoding and decoding:
image --> camera --> encoded to avchd --> decoded in voltaicHD or FCE --> re-encoded to mpeg4 or whatever --> uploaded to vimeo --> decoded --> re-encoded to their On2 codec --> played by flash.
As you can see this chain is ridiculous and the result will not look as good as the ideal, which is:
image --> camera --> encoded to avchd --> played
My conclusion is that your frustration level will vary according to what you want out of your clips. The camera offers very limited editing: you can chop a clip into two and delete any clip, so you can basically throw away bits you won't want to waste time on.
If you want to show them off on your HDTV via the PS3, without mixing them into a "movie" then everything is great. They look really good.. the interlacing is really not visible when the PS3 plays them, resolution is outstanding at least depending on how high a bit rate you pick.
If you want to burn DVDs then I expect Toast Titanium or FCE will be reasonable but there is some quality loss from the inevitable decode - reencode cycle.
If you want them on the web at vimeo, although the result is heaps better than youtube, it certainly isn't high definition. I believe the vimeo bit rate is limited to 2000 kbit, for example.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
45 of 46 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Excellent all-around video, audio, feature and build quality, August 20, 2008
This review is from: Sony HDR-CX12 High Definition Memory Stick PRO Duo Handycam Camcorder With 12x Optical Zoom (Electronics)
I have a Sony standard definition miniDV camcorder, and also bought the HF100 and the Sony CX12, both flash camcorders.
I found the Canon to be the better value: good to great video and audio quality in good lighting conditions, better user interface, and standard SD cards will save you money and hassle vs. the Sony CX12.
However, the Sony is the superior product IMHO based on the following features: much better low-light performance (by low-light I mean indoor night-time videos of kids with under ordinary incandescent lighting (without lots of halogens)). Sony DVD HD DVD burner is more flexible than Canon's, for example, you can shoot video in HD, and burn a standard DVD for people w/o HDTVs and Blu-ray. I understand to do this on the Canon burner, you need to record in standard definition to begin with. Build quality is a little higher (LCD joints stiffer, battery/inputs door covers more firmly attached). Slightly better audio (I noticed you could sometimes hear "clicks" from the Canon's zoom button).
The first 2 items (low-light & recorder characteristics) seal the deal for me. Generally, the camera is comfortable to hold, image stabilization is excellent (better than the Canon). Flash performance for still pictures is poor.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|
Saving...
of the latest digital cameras and accessories, the most active discussion forums 
