Pocket digital camcorders
James Morris, Matthew Sparkes
|
Oct 7, 2008 3:59 PM
Pocket-sized digital camcorders are becoming more capable all the time. We round up ten of the best
High definition is no longer the exclusive domain of blockbuster movies and the latest television series – you can now capture clips in full HD at home, with equipment small enough to drop into a jacket pocket.
But the small size of these cameras doesn’t mean you have to compromise on quality. Many of the devices in this Labs impressed us with the high quality of their optics, and with footage recorded at up to Full HD resolution (1920 x 1080 pixels), you’re also getting crystal-clear videos of you and your family that are guaranteed to look great even when played on a large HDTV.
These cameras also have a wealth of features designed to make shooting video as easy as possible, from image stabilisation – which helps reduce the shake you get without a tripod – to six-channel microphones.
There’s no need to put up with the inconvenience of capturing footage from tape any more. Flash memory and hard disk-based cameras can now store hours of footage, and make it much simpler to transfer them from camera to PC, which is why you’ll see no tape-based camcorders in this test.
And all this high quality and convenience doesn’t have to cost the earth. As well as a selection of high-end models, we’ve also tested some more affordable camcorders to see just how much performance can be had for a few hundred pounds.
Finally, we’ve attempted to clear up the complex mysteries of video codecs and video-editing package compatibility on page 76, while on page 78 we look at the image sensors which dictate the quality of the still shots and video recorded by camcorders.
So, whatever your budget or reason for buying, there’s something that’s sure to tempt you on the following pages. Read on to find out which is best.
The cameras on test here range from just $369 all the way up to $1419, so they vary a great deal in the features they offer and the quality of the footage they’re able to produce. Some of these features are essential for any modern camcorder, others are welcome bonuses and some are of little use to the average user.
The thing to remember is that the way the camera will be used dictates which features are most important. Here’s what to look for when choosing a camera.
Optics and image stabilisation
Getting close to your subject is essential to making your videos detailed and engaging, and using zoom can be tremendously helpful. However, it’s not as easy as simply choosing the camera with the biggest zoom.
A ten times optical zoom will make an object appear ten times closer with little loss in quality by physically moving the lenses. However, a ten times digital zoom will simply crop the image to a tenth of its size and expand it to fill the view, giving the appearance of a zoom but significantly reducing image quality.
Most camcorders come equipped with both types, but it’s best to focus on the optical zoom, as this is the one that matters.
But there’s no point having a powerful zoom without the assistance of image stabilisation. At maximum zoom levels, hand shake is greatly amplified, so it’s important to choose a camera with an effective stabilisation mode, either digital or optical. See below for details of how each camera’s image stabiliser performed.
Accessories
Some of the cameras on test have an accessory shoe, sometimes known as a hot shoe, which allow additional pieces of equipment to be connected. These simple brackets can be used to add handy accessories, such as a flash, and are also commonly found on SLR cameras.
If a camcorder doesn’t include a built-in flash or light, then it’s a good idea to choose a model with an accessory shoe to allow the fitting of an external one. However, bear in mind that this will add to the cost, weight and size of your camera, so although a built-in flash might not be quite as powerful as a dedicated one, it may be preferable for occasional use.
There is a common format for these adapters, although some manufacturers annoyingly provide a proprietary type that will only work with own-brand accessories. The Canon HF10 and HF100, for example, have proprietary connectors, limiting your choice to flashes from the same manufacturer.
It’s also worth looking out for external microphone inputs and headphone outputs on a camera, as these allow you to monitor and improve the quality of audio on your recordings and record ambient sounds while shooting.
How we test
Testing cameras is more subjective than for the likes of graphics cards or hard disks, which can be empirically tested, with precise results. Although certain specifications are important to bear in mind when choosing a camera – storage space, sensor size and so on – the most important factor is image quality.To this end, we’ve pushed each camera through a series of gruelling tests, each designed to push the limits of camcorder performance.
Our first test examines the quality of the image stabilisation system, which can be helpful when not using a tripod, and vital when using high zoom levels. A short film was taken in the PC Authority Labs, which have very consistent lighting, with the camera held at arm’s length at maximum zoom.
The process was repeated with each camera’s stabilisation turned on and off to provide a clear picture of each system’s ability to minimise shakes and wobbles.
Next, we gauged the low-light capabilities of each camcorder. A panning clip was recorded in a darkened room, including a transition to a better-lit adjoining room to test auto-exposure response.
The final test video was recorded outdoors on a busy city street on a sunny day. A short clip included fast-moving traffic, bright sunlight and shady areas. All tests were recorded over a short period of time to minimise differences in lighting.
In addition, each camera was used in various day-to-day settings to get the best possible sense of performance, ergonomics and the quality of features and menu systems. The results of our tests are shown in the table at the bottom of this page.
As well as looking at quality, we’ve painstakingly calculated a Features score too, and combined that with the Performance score to come up with a bang-per-buck Value for Money rating. Our overall rating is a straight average of the scores for Performance, Features and Value for Money.
Camcorder codecs
Camcorder recording formats are a lot more complicated than in the days of DV. Where DV relied on one unified compression system across all camcorder models, there are now numerous options. But they all revolve around various flavours of MPEG, which reduces the data rate required by video by compressing changes and variations within frames.The choice of MPEG sub-type varies greatly, and this can be confusing.
Generally, MPEG-2 is used for standard definition. The compression levels are adequate to fit a usable amount of video onto an 8cm DVD, and the use of MPEG-2 makes the discs compatible with consumer DVD players. Hard disk and Flash-based camcorders also employ MPEG-2 compression, which again means transferring footage to DVD only requires repackaging, not time-consuming recompression. With the top data rates about the same as commercial DVDs (approximately 8Mb/sec), a couple of hours of footage can be recorded onto a dual-layer DVD disc.
High definition video is much more data-hungry. At full 1920 x 1080 resolution, HD has five times as many pixels per frame as standard definition at 720 x 576. As a result, the most popular format for high definition camcorders is now AVCHD, which uses MPEG-4 H.264 AVC compression. This is more efficient than MPEG-2, and with it you can achieve the same visual quality at half the data rate.
However, not all HD camcorders use AVCHD compression. JVC has stuck with MPEG-2 for its HD models, using a much higher data rate than any AVCHD model yet launched. There are also a few camcorders that use different flavours of MPEG-4 and MPEG-4 AVC, such as Sanyo’s Xacti camcorders.
The plethora of formats is not only bewildering, but also poses a problem for editing software. All applications will capture and edit from DV tape, and most now support HDV, too, but AVCHD has taken a while to achieve widespread support. The latest versions of most apps can now import and edit AVCHD, including Ulead VideoStudio 11, Pinnacle Studio 11, and CyberLink PowerDirector 7. But Windows Movie Maker won’t let you edit with AVCHD, nor will Adobe Premiere Elements 4.
Also, the top-end Full HD and progressive scan modes of AVCHD on some camcorders may cause problems. The MPEG-4 formats used by digital still cameras and the Xacti camcorders are also less widely supported, making such footage harder to edit.
Sensors explained
Ten years ago, when DV tape was just beginning to become the dominant camcorder format, consumer models had one image sensor and professional ones had three – and they all used charge coupled devices (CCDs). Using three sensors together has traditionally been considered better for image quality, because a separate one is used for each colour channel. So colour resolution is the same as the overall video resolution. With a single sensor, a patterned mask separates the colours and divides them between the pixels, meaning the colour resolution is lower than the overall video resolution.
But whether it’s one sensor or three, the size and the pixel count of each is also very important. The larger the sensor, the more light will fall on it from the lens. This improves sensitivity and, therefore, performance in low light. This is a major reason why entry-level camcorders, typically with small 1/6in sensors, tend to perform badly in low light. |
| Adobe Premiere Elements 4 isnt able to edit footage captured in the AVCHD format used by the majority of the camcorders on test |
You might also think that more pixels will help, too. But this is only partly true, as video works at fixed resolutions. In Europe, regular TV operates at 720 x 576. High Definition is limited to two main options – 1280 x 720 and 1920 x 1080 – the latter being Full HD – used for HDTV transmissions, although 1440 x 1080 is also regularly used in camcorders. So if the sensor has more pixels than the video resolution used, the extra will primarily benefit still image capture.
This has led manufacturers to take different approaches for their higher-end models. Some, such as Panasonic and JVC, favour three smaller sensors for the colour benefits. But Sony and Canon now use a single larger unit over 1/3in in size, while all manufacturers are increasing the pixel count to make their camcorders’ integrated digital photography features more appealing.
If the sensor’s resolution is greater than the video resolution, the extra pixels can be used to make electronic image stabilisation more effective, as the actual video resolution doesn’t need to be reduced. Canon has also recently introduced an Advanced Zoom, which uses the sensor’s extra pixels to provide a digital zoom that doesn’t reduce resolution.
In the last couple of years, the CCD has also begun to be supplanted by active pixel sensors manufactured using a complementary metal oxide semiconductor (CMOS) procedure similar to microprocessors. These are usually known just as CMOS sensors, and there are a number of advantages over CCDs. They consume less power, are cheaper to produce, and can also integrate image processing features. For example, Sony’s CMOS technology integrates ClearVid and most recently Exmor image processing.
But the CMOS system has disadvantages too. The earliest examples had noticeably inferior light sensitivity compared with CCDs, which became obvious in the low-light performance of cheap digital stills cameras and camera phones. They are also progressively scanned, which can lead to video shearing in fast pans. These problems have mostly been overcome in the latest camcorders, fortunately. As a result, CMOS sensors have started to appear in professional models, and could take over the entire market in a few years.
This article appeared in the
October, 2008 issue of PC Authority.