Good Camcorder for electronics videos? - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: DrRich
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: April 19, 2016, 01:04:50 pm
content: Hi all,I have produced some videos on electronic engineering for my students but I am not satisfied with the video quality from my ~5 year old cheapo Panasonic camcorder. I am also considering breaking out onto YouTube to make my material more accessible and available to all.I am looking to upgrade to a decent camcorder similar to the Canon Legria HF G30/G40. The differences between the G30 and G40 seem marginal, yet there is a large price discrepancy due to the G30s inevitable discontinuation. Is the G40 worth the extra cash?Secondly, do you have any recommendations for other camcorders?Thanks in advance!

author: orbiter
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 19, 2016, 01:17:21 pm
content: Take a look at the Panasonic HC-X920.. I've got one and it's great, they've been out for few years now but are still widely available. They regarded as one ofthe best camcorders available. They're not 4k but the image quality is still great. When first released they cost over £1100 but are available now for around £700https://www.amazon.co.uk/Panasonic-X920-Full-Camcorder-Intelligent/dp/B00B170BKU/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1461071445&sr=8-1&keywords=Panasonic+HC-X920

author: mariush
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 19, 2016, 01:40:29 pm
content: Something to consider: I've often found that the LIGHTNING matters a lot when recording videos. There's no point in using a high end 4k camera with bad lightning, the video will look barely better than one shot with a regular HD camera.Choose a camera that has separate microphone input, so that you would be able to use a lapel microphone. Would make editing easier, compared to recording yourself on a separate recorder and mixing sound at a later time.I have and used aSony CX410VEto record some videos and I was happy with the quality.For less than $1000, seems like 4kSony FDR-AX53would be a good investment, here's a review :A couple of good videos about lightning :

author: DrRich
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: April 19, 2016, 09:50:24 pm
content: Thanks for the replies everyone!I have some photography lights - they improve the image quality significantly but I still think I am limited by the camera I got as a gift prior to going on holiday years ago (Panasonic SD-10). Perhaps I am being overly picky!I just recorded this silly (half baked and very quickly done) footage to demonstrate the quality (LED strip light under the shelf above my lab desk, 150W photography lamp over the scene and a desk lamp as light sources!):https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i_1ejlCcbok&feature=youtu.beMain points I dislike are:* The video quality (I have seen better).* No external microphone input (synchronising audio from my alesis IO2 / behringer micophone is mildly irritating)* 1080i rather than 1080pAlso fancy something a bit better to record family events etc as well anyway. Any further comments appreciated!

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 20, 2016, 03:57:50 am
content: Quote from: DrRich on April 19, 2016, 01:04:50 pmMost of my videos are shot with a HFG30. I used to use a HFG10. I guarantee you wouldn't notice any video quality difference between the two, let alone G30 vs G40It doesn't really matter which one you get in terms video quality, anything over say US$500 is going to be more than good enough. It's the small things that matter.Audio quality can differ though. The canons have good built in mics for close up work.It'sallabout the light you have available though.And before people rave on about DSLR's and other huge sensor big lens cameras, there can actually be a potential problem with the camera and lens beingtoogood for many types of videos out of the box. If you don't know why, then you don't understand videography. I even have this problem with the HFG30 and have to set stuff manually for different types of shots.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 20, 2016, 04:00:58 am
content: Quote from: mariush on April 19, 2016, 01:40:29 pmMy main gripe with the Sony cameras is the embarrassing built in audio level meter, it's borderline useless for decent work (which usually means manual audio gain settings)The Canon's have a real VU meter in dB.

author: ez24
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 20, 2016, 04:12:50 am
content: You did not say what price range.But I suggest you do as others have said with your current setup and post another test video for us to seethanks

author: orbiter
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 20, 2016, 09:26:59 am
content: As mentiond one of the biggest issues with digital cameras is the audio.. My Panasonic HD-X920 is no different. The 5.1 mic is 'ok' but still not quite up to the job when one needs to move around a little perhaps away from the camera. Only dedicated audio gear can overcome this, often costing way more than the camera itself.In my case I use 2 Rode Lavalier mics into a Sound Devices Mix Pre-D, then into a Tascam D100 Mk2 recorder as I wanted control over 2 separate adjustable audio channels.

author: DrRich
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: April 21, 2016, 10:55:09 pm
content: Thanks for the replies everyone.I will record some more footage tomorrow and post it.

author: ez24
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 22, 2016, 12:41:15 am
content: I once used a tape recorder like this in my shirt pockethttp://www.amazon.com/TASCAM-DR-05-Portable-Digital-Recorder/dp/B004OU2IQG/ref=sr_1_14?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1461285133&sr=1-14&keywords=sony+recorderand at the same time the video recorder recorded sound.I use a dog clicker like thishttp://www.amazon.com/Petco-Dog-Training-Clicker/dp/B0006344B2/ref=sr_1_15?s=pet-supplies&ie=UTF8&qid=1461285369&sr=1-15&keywords=dog+clickerto cue the tracks. When I wanted to start or stop, I would hold the clicker off camera and click it twice. In the video editor I could see the spikes and line up the audio track from the recorder with the camera audio and then delete the audio track from the camera. Not so hardA nice high quality lapel mic probably is better.

author: Richard Crowley
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 22, 2016, 01:56:09 am
content: I have $30K of digital, HD video cameras. Mostly for on-location, multi-camera, live-switched video production. And I am thinking about setting up 2 or 3 cameras to do some more audio-electronics related YouTube videos.But using a $5K (or more) camera to make YouTube videos is just silly. For that matter, using a $1K camera is silly. It reminds me of a quote from GearSlutz a couple months ago: "A $200 cable will sound better than a $2 cable. But not better than a $5 cable."I will REPEAT what others have said many times here in this discussion. BECAUSE IT IS SO CRITICALLY IMPORTANT!!!! No apologies for shouting. For sufficiently-decent quality YouTube videos that viewers will find attractive and useful, it is quite possible thatdecent LIGHTING and SOUND are MORE IMPORTANT than the camera!I intend to use $300 Panasonic cameras from Costco. I have already used them for some live online "podcasts", and with DECENT LIGHTING they produce pictures that are indistinguishable from my $5K cameras. The big difference is ability to handle changing field conditions, lens control, etc. etc. But for fixed "podcasting" video shooting like YouTube, you don't need any of those fancy features.And don't get me started about "4K" Even local theaters with screens as wide as my house aren't running 4K. And 4K on YouTube is just a sick joke. Buy a camera that will put out a decent 720i video image and spend what you save on good lighting and sound.Don't even consider buying a camera without a microphone input jack. And a proper headphone monitoring jack is a VERY close second requirement in my book.But you don't need ENG/broadcast cameras with XLR and P48 to get decent audio, either. I have made quite decent corporate videos for a large multi-national high-tech company C-level executive with nothing more than a $5 "computer microphone" clipped onto his shirt pocket.But unless you are quite close to the camera, using the typical "pinhole" microphone in a DSLR or the fake "shotgun" mic on a low-end camcorder, you will get a lot more "room tone" than is generally acceptable for semi-professional video. IMHO, Dave's videos are on the edge of what is acceptable for audio quality, but he affirms that it is GOOD ENOUGH for his audience (i.e. US) and perhaps I am more picky because I came from the world of audio before I got into video.A $20 microphone IN THE RIGHT PLACE will outperform a $2000 microphone that is too far away. There are "headset" style microphones at prices around US$50 that are IDEAL for YouTube "podcasting" IMHO. You can generally plug them directly into the camcorder 3.5mm mic input jack, and use the camera's built-in automatic recording level feature. In most low-cost cameras you don't even have the option of manual control of audio record level. And for simple narrative dialog with a decent microphone placement, camera auto-level is OK.A $300 camera WITH GOOD LIGHTING (sufficient lighting of the right kind and from the right directions) will produce video as good as anything you see on YouTube, and probably as good as much of what you see on the local even news on local broadcast television. And LED lighting solutions of a wide variety of sizes and shapes are so easily available these days at remarkably low prices, there is no good excuse for poor lighting.

author: ez24
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 22, 2016, 04:20:55 am
content: QuoteNow I remember this is why I used a portable voice recorder, my video recorder was very cheap (and decent). Made for acceptable videos. I could not afford a video recorder with audio jacks.

author: nidlaX
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 22, 2016, 04:37:59 am
content: Quote from: Richard Crowley on April 22, 2016, 01:56:09 amIf that's the case Richard, I sure hope your theater isn't charging you more than $1 for viewing and $0.25 for concessions.It's true that bad lighting can ruin the image of even the most expensive cinema cameras, but saying that 4K nets you no advantages, especially for a subject matter like electronics where fine image detail can be very important, sounds a bit disingenuous. Even if you don't upload 4K content to YouTube, you will still likely have an advantage in post-processing by capturing in 4K and down-converting to 1080. This is especially true for cheaper cameras, where native 1080 recordings can suffer due to bad codecs, sensor sub-sampling, etc.DrRich: I recommend taking a look at the large sensor compact cameras (not camcorders) that are on the market or coming soon. Cameras such as the Panasonic FZ1000 or the upcoming Nikon DL24-85, paired with a good external mic or mic recorder and good lighting, will give you great results. If you have a PC that can handle it, you can record in 4K mode and down convert in post-processing to get a sharp image. The cameras I mentioned should also have good autofocus performance while recording video.

author: mariush
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 22, 2016, 05:44:38 am
content: 4k has its advantages , more pixels, sharper image most of the time, makes it easier to crop 1920x1080 pixels out of the 4k image when needed (and this makes it easier to edit videos) or to simulate a zoom in / zoom out , makes it easy to do slow pans (have a closeup image of an item or whatever move slowly sideways or from top to bottom to make videos look more pro and keep viewer entertained, still shots are boring... LinusTechTips editors use this trick often)In cheaper 4k cameras, the disadvantages are that a bit better lightning is required compared to 1080p recording and automatic focus is a bit slower (in a way natural, because there's a lot more surface area, more pixels to analyze to see where to focus)Another smaller disadvantage would be the files sizes, which are 50-100 mbps for 4k@50-60fps .. 2 hours of video that results in a 20-30 minute video can use tens of GB of disk space.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 22, 2016, 06:13:46 am
content: Quote from: nidlaX on April 22, 2016, 04:37:59 amHow many cinemas, apart from IMAX, do you think are currently equipped for 4k or higher resolution?

author: SteveyG
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 22, 2016, 07:56:26 am
content: Quote from: DrRich on April 19, 2016, 01:04:50 pmI also use the HF G30 for my videos - there appears to be very little difference between the G30 and G40 so I'd go with whatever budget allows. I've noticed with some Panasonic footage, you can see some odd artefacts in the background which appears to be the related to the autofocus which is what initially swayed me away from the Panasonic cameras when I was first looking.The Canon also accepts 58mm lenses and filters etc. which I already had for my DSLR.

author: Someone
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 22, 2016, 08:17:32 am
content: Quote from: coppice on April 22, 2016, 06:13:46 amThere are many to pick from in Melbourne Australia, so many they don't get enough 4k content to fill the schedule.

author: idpromnut
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 22, 2016, 11:44:24 am
content: I use an older version of the Canon Vixia HF R700 (http://www.canon.ca/inetCA/en/products/method/gp/pid/45893) which I bought at Best Buy a few years ago. I use only the internal microphone (for the moment) and a good quality Manfrotto tripod (a must). For lighting I use various LED lights, but I need to buy more for either side of my bench to reduce the overhead shadows (from my head or the camera or both).So my biggest advice is pretty much ignore all of that, and focus on the content of your videos; i.e. topic(s), presentation of said topics, clarity of explanations, clear speaking (DO NOT MUMBLE!This is something I do and people /complain/ about it, and rightly so) and logical flow of the video (don't loose your audience).I think gear and recording techniques are only part of producing good content, Youtube or otherwise. It's easy to go buy some bit of gear to fix bad lighting or crappy camera. It issignificantlymore difficult to correct bad habits in yourself

author: sony mavica
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2016, 02:55:36 am
content: Quote from: mariush on April 19, 2016, 01:40:29 pmthat camera is damn good for the price

author: nidlaX
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2016, 03:04:35 am
content: Quote from: coppice on April 22, 2016, 06:13:46 amWhere I live, almost every cinema I can find has featured 4K digital projection in the last 5 years. I have to go to a very old, small, or discount theater to find lower than 4K resolution or non-digital projection. AMC, Edwards, and Regal have all been equipping Sony Digital 4K projection since the very late 2000s / early 2010s.

author: NiHaoMike
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2016, 04:52:51 am
content: Go for a 4K SLR if you can afford one. 30 FPS is plenty for "normal" electronics content.If you're into making videos of stuff blowing up (or other content involving a lot of action), you'll want a high frame rate mode. (Don't bother with 4K and high frame rate at the same time - way too expensive and not much added value. But quite a few 4K SLRs can also do 120/240 FPS at reduced resolution.)I don't think it's worth making any investment in 1080p equipment that does less than 100 FPS unless you can get it cheap.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2016, 11:45:57 am
content: Quote from: nidlaX on April 23, 2016, 03:04:35 amI did a little checking after posting what I wrote. Globally, Sony is the smallest of the 4 makers of cinema projectors. Their older systems can select between 2k 3D and 4k 2D. The other makers all use DLP, and TI waited until they had 4k 3D ready before shipping any 4k cinema DLPs at all. That means the 3 suppliers who have >80% of the market only started shipping 4k systems in 2012, but they were 4k 3D from that time. Sony now seems to have 4k 3D available. It looks like deployments of 4k have really expanded in the last year or two, and are now widely used in some markets.

author: encryptededdy
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2016, 01:35:14 am
content: Quote from: NiHaoMike on April 23, 2016, 04:52:51 amThere aren't many 4K DSLRs on the market at all, perhaps consider cheaper mirrorless cameras like the Sony a6300 or the Panasonic GH4.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2016, 11:50:32 am
content: Any recommendations for something old or new with decent inbuilt macro range?

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 24, 2016, 01:59:01 pm
content: Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on April 24, 2016, 11:50:32 amNot good that you presumably want for PCB close-ups. I use the Opteka x10 macro lens, works on most cameras.

author: nidlaX
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 27, 2016, 02:26:38 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on April 24, 2016, 01:59:01 pmOne of the features of the Nikon DL24-85 that is coming out next month is 1:1 macro capability. That is unheard of for compact cameras so far. The working distance will be shit, but I'm hopeful that you could rig up a ring light and turn it into a close-up video rig. It can record 4K 30p and has a clean HDMI output.