Thanks to several people for pointing out that I was totally wrong and the Sony XD Cam DOES have a built-in ND filter. I have absolutely no idea how I missed this over the course of two months, but I did. The switch can clearly be seen at 15:36 next to the battery on the back of the camera. The good news is that this makes the camcorder even better! As I said in the video, this isn't a review of this specific camcorder, but rather a look at modern camcorders in general. I wish I would've done a better job in being aware of the ND option, but I also don't want to get too bogged down in the specifics of any one camcorder model for this video.
Hi Tom, well, most people would expect the ND selector to be just behind the lens controls. With motorised ND it can be placed anywhere and I guess Sony thought that at the back made it more visible. It's down to expectation, if things are not where expected they can easily get overlooked.
The camcorder form factor is the most versatile setup for many workflows. Especially multicam and live situations and sports. The integrated lense and XLR inputs make it very useful in those situations. And for b-roll it can be extremely useful. There is definitely a benefit to having everything integrated and running from a single battery. So much to like about it. It is definitely not “cool” - but who really cares about that.
I definitely think it might be time to reconsider what “cool” is because these things have so much to offer! Like you said, they make multicam situations a dream.
@@tombuck Agree completely. I have a Panasonic UX180 and DVX200 and when shooters use them they tend to really like them. The full integrated system solves so many problems. And the zoom length on them is insane.
For shooting sports I’d rather use a larger format camcorder. For most sports actions the zoom on smaller camcorders is too slow and the camera does not have enough mass for smooth pans and tilts.
It’s funny to see this video. I live in Japan and the Japanese tend to use camcorders a lot, especially at school events. I questioned why they still are using them until I looked the specs and decided to order one. It’s been one of my best purchases.
Interesting observation! Maybe i'm trippin balls but being half japanese i see maybe a cultural thing to it, Japanese culture seems more oriented to what this camcorder does best, capturing the environment without a lot of separation of the subject from the background, less of a "vloggy" style, and more general B-roll type shot. Not saying there are no Japanese vloggers or anything like that, more than the archetypes of "tourist that buys a videocamera to record his/her trip" / "ojiisan that buys a camera to film his grandkids doin stuff" / "hobbyist that wants to record their hobby" fit more to the camcorder type than the DSLR type.
What model did you end up getting? I replaced a Sony FDR-AX33 with the Panasonic HC-VXF1 recently, but I might be trying out the Sony FDR-AX53 as well 🙈
I’m still rocking my Sony DCR-TRV9, which uses mini-DV tapes. I have modern equipment as well, but the unit has a nice lens and is fantastic when paired with a Rode video mic. Wonderful ergonomics and a bit of a nostalgic vibe; you can even attach a PS2 and use the monitor for gaming.
Tom, I used to repair camcorders in the 80's and 90's. You mentioned "parfocal" lenses on camcorders. There are actually 2 different meaning to that term. A traditional camcorder lens was parfocal in that the lens elements for focus and zoom were separate, so that when you moved the zoom lenses it stayed in focus. In the early 90's, a lot of manufacturers switched to a new system that used fewer and lighter lens elements so that the zoom lenses affected the focus, and had to move the focus lens during zoom to keep it in focus which was determined electronically on a predetermined curve. So technically, they no longer used parfocal lenses. They could only stay in focus due to being motor driven. If your lens has a focal distance scale on it, it's a traditional parfocal lens. If it's buried, and only motor driven, it's probably the later version.
@@tombuck hii sir. I have a question solve it. How did camera people write titles in films whn there was not or no computer in old times. How did people write titles whn computer was not invented for example. Abcdx studio presents. Ship in the river.::"" How will they write titles.
@@KunnuKumar-be9ju they would put a transparency with the title over a frame of the video, duplicate it, and then move to the next frame. That's why you can see the title vibrate a bit in like old westerns.
Hey Mark! I am hoping that you or someone on this thread can help me? I have a massive box of very valuable family MiniDV tapes my sister has dropped on me to to transfer to digital media. No camera. I have looked at buying a MiniDV tape deck, however, they are very expensive! Is it possible to use a higher resolution camera 1080 (HD) MiniDV camera to transfer 480 dpi MiniDV tapes to my Mac? Would that work?
I went through this a couple years ago trying to figure out why every RU-vidr was recommending photography cameras. I had always used camcorders growing up. And I came to the same conclusion that you did; image quality is so much better at an affordable price point.
Yeah but they could just put it in the camcorder form factor. It’s why cinema cameras often follow the box form factor. I thinks it more to do with wanting the hybrid aspect of photos and video.
@@mrwashur1991 I just wish BlackMagic built a camera with the insides of the current 4k/6k but in a box form factor. It would be so much better for rigging and versatility.
Evan a base Pro video camera like a Canon C100 is $CDN3100 and then a lens is another $CDN3100 add tax and you are in for about $CDN7000 to a get a pro level starter video setup with interchangeable lens's and that's with one lens! I can probably do a R6 and a lens for that and maybe get another lens if I can find a refurb.
I think it's a price/performance situation. Video cameras in the 'semi pro' range, with an f2.8 lens, XLR audio inputs etc is still going to run you more than mid range dSLR/mirrorless and a rode shotgun mic mounted in the hotshoe and the stills camera/lens used market is pretty vibrant so you can get something used really cheaply, or, if your youtube career doesnt take off then you can resell the dslr/mirrorless and lens for more than you could a used video camera. That said - for established creators who have careers in video, I'm surprised more of them don't have camcorders, but I can see why they don't recommend them as a first camera to get started with.
@@PostingCringeOnMain I'm thinking about a camcorder for casual street video and a few occasional RU-vid videos. It might be a better investment than mirrorless cameras and the associated lenses from Canon. Getting mirrorless here in Canada with an 85 less is between 5 and ten thousand $CDN and I think I can do a camcorder for far less than that. But I need better performance than my iPhone 13 Pro can give me.
I have a Sony camcorder very very similar to the one you show, and it DOES have infrared night vision and it has a built-in ND (3 levels), so I'd be very surprised to find that yours does not. The way I can ease in and out of zooms is much appreciated. It is also much easier to hold when shooting video than a stills camera.
I’m really quite sad camcorders haven’t continued to evolve. I built my channel in the early years on a Sony camcorder and miss it dearly. The freedom and flexibility of insane zoom, crazy good stabilization, etc. The lack of shallow DOF and a few other issues, I ventured to a7s3. If Casey Neistat switched to a camcorder, I bet these companies would start developing them again.
Wow, darn, really, go look up camcorders then. They have evolved so much... there are even smaller-size camcorders that have interchangeable lenses (JVC LS-300 from my bare head). Though I'm not a fan of the MFT mount on the thing because lenses with quick motorzoom just don't exist (and motorzoom lenses in the MFT-world are already very rare) ánd you are still stuck with the lack of the allround-capabilities of fixed lenses on camcorders, it has a far bigger sensor than most lower grade camcorders. Canon leads the way for huge sensors on camcorders as far as I know. And for motion stabilisation: Sony has ABSOLUTELY understood how to do that. The PXW-Z70 (if I remember it right) my sister once had to try out, could produce extremely steady image, even so steady that when she showed me the footage, I thought she had used a steadicam-solution of some kind. Same goes for focus-peaking: if there's one manufacturer that knows how to provide CLEAR focus-peaking on an LCD-screen, it's Sony. Blackmagic does a good job as well, but the Sony is absolutely the best. Ever since I switched from a tube-viewfinder camera (yep, black and white only) on a broadcast camera (thus manual focus) to LCD-viewfinders and LCD-screens on the same kind of equipment, focus has never been so hard: JVC just does not understand how to provide clear focus peaking and I usually have to resort to using focus-assist (which creates coloured hues around the points in focus, but turns the total image to black and white) And mind you, those are 1/3 inch sensor cameras, where depth of field is less of a thing and being out of focus doesn't produce such horrible blur as it does on larger sensor camera's. Even though I usually have trouble finding focus, even when zoomed in at 18 times.
@@weeardguy that’s a lot to read, so I won’t. But I feel people expect camcorders to be cheaper because the good ones are a bit pricy. You can get a very nice dslr or mirrorless camera for the same price, and they’re capable of doing more. Most people only want camcorders for the convenient zoom and everyday life.
@@justabreeze460 Well, I still don't agree on the fact that DSLR or mirrorless can do much more for the same price, because.... well, they just can't. They lack a substantial-capacity battery, which isn't weird, because it is pushed inside the camera, restricting the physical size of the battery, where these are always protruding somewhere on camcorders, usually enabling different capacity batteries for longer runtimes than the standard battery that usually comes with 'em. And than the lens: you just won't find the super-allrounders as on camcorders in photography-land ánd in photography-land they are hardly ever parfocal (ofcourse, there are lenses aimed at videography that are parfocal, but these are also substantially more expensive) The ergonomics, batterylife, lack of connections, lack of motorzoom are something I regularly see mentioned in a group of video-dudes as a problem amongst the people who don't dare to look at camcorders anymore: the first thing they nag about is battery-life, than they start nagging about ergonomics 'Darn... with the monitor on top of it this thing becomes a pain to hold after 5 to 10 minutes', than they want a top-handle because the camera doesn't have one (while every camcorder in the same price-range comes with one, period) and then they buy some professional mic, but hey, their photocamera only has a mini-jack input, which also does not support phantom-power (where every camcorder has XLR-inputs that do provide phantom power). Than the motorzoom and focus: rings and external motors are then bought to control these as powerzoom and such... you'll find all this already on the slightly bigger camcorders and especially motorzoom is a standard feature on every camcorder. For all this, they buy shitloads of accesoires to turn that photocamera-used-as-videocamera basically into a camcorder, spending thousands of dollars/euros extra on the thing than they would if they would just have bought a camcorder. And then I haven't even talked about the bigger models out there, that feature at least 1 D-tap connection on the batteryplate, for connection of accessories. Just a simple cable is enough to take care of that and if you're a bit handy, you just convert your battery-plate to 2 D-taps for hardly any money and you can power two accessories. Really. Camcorders have evolved and most of those in the price-range of the average DSLR/mirrorless camera-body provide you with the same options to buy S-Log V-log and whatnots-unlocks and give you in-depth gamma and knee-control, and all those other things you find on DSLR/mirrorless cameras. I will stick to camcorders, because photocameras just lack too much flexibility.
Found myself an XM2 (the European market version) off eBay for around 200 bucks in pristine condition last year and it's a really fun camera to use for lo-fi stuff, especially with a fisheye lens. I'm not a huge fan of how the footage looks in bright natural light (like a sunny day with no clouds in sight), but if you toss a light panel on it and shoot something in the dark, the footage looks super cool. I've shot a few music videos like that and I'm super happy with how they've turned out. Great for that rough, gritty, underground feel.
I still use 2 camcorders to this day for my wedding capture. They are the last backup resort when filming ceremonies and entire reception events. They are absolute workhorses and have been extremely reliable when capturing moments in a wedding. They are placed high-up on very high light stands and act like "security cameras" in my opinion. I only cut to my camcorders when there are shaky shots/transition shots/failed shots from my A, B, or C cameras, but I at least know they are recording reliably every time. It gives me peace of mind that my camcorders are recording the wide angle of a space or venue and I make sure to hit record on those cameras first before I turn on my A, B, or C cameras. Thanks for the nostalgia on all those old school cameras. That is what I grew up on - VHS, Super 8mm, Mini-DV - and now I have the FX3 and FX30. I appreciate your vids and now I just subscribed!
Ever since DSLRs started recording videos, more focus was put on making them achieve the function of camcorders. First it was about achieving 30, 24, and 60 fps. Then they had to include autofocus on their lenses that worked with video modes and create new motors of smoother fluid autofocus control. They needed to add on additional ports for connecting to monitors, audio jacks, and power. They needed to start including image stabilization which worked actively in video mode. And later they had to add on different monitoring features like waveform monitors, RGB parades, and other interfaces. Also, they needed to add in video color profiles such as LOG and REC 709, REC 2020 for better color and contrast control. More lenes had to be created specifically designed to work with video features such as power zooming and quiet smooth aperture adjustments. The handle grip is still a rangefinder style handle rather than an underhand rest and ND filters are usually placed in front of most lenses. And now, after all these years the 2 types are very similar. Cameras have their advantage for having customizability of lenses, attachments, and hybrid capability of taking great photos as well. Their low light performance due to larger sensor sizes as well and shallower depth of field attracts more attention. And versatility can be achieved through purchasing of more versatile lenses for those specific situations. But probably the largest factor in my opinion that drives people towards these is the community of users and designers. There are more tutorials, recommendations, articles, and guides about using a camera (typically of these styles rather than a camcorder.) And when more new creators get their first camera, they pick the one that they feel they will get more support and recommendation from. However, camcorders (not cinema cameras) do still have their place still. They are a one size integrated solution. That's because of their unique body design. It's all about the body. Mirrorless cameras can outperform these camcorders now for picture quality, low light performance, and weight. But camcorders have everything built to work together with minimal need to setup or put a rig together. The microphone setup, handles, shoulder straps, XLR inputs, cooling functions, and power managements are designed to work seamlessly together for long recording sessions. Access to your controls is usually present with buttons located right on the camera for instant access and can be changed during recording. You can achieve a similar workflow with a camera, but you may need to buy all the necessary parts to make it work similarly as well as rig it all together. Though you still may be missing a few features like waveform monitors, ND filters, broadcast delivery functions, timecode generators, depending on the camera. When you buy a camcorder, you are buying a bundle of devices that work together for a well-rounded video focused system. Rather than a single piece. Cinema cameras are like mirrorless cameras, but more expensive and focused on customizable video capabilities. Camcorders are best for their simplicity and reliability for capturing videos. You have decent functionality for more use cases and some changes can still be made with easy integration. The form factor is also designed for long constant recordings, making quick changes while recording. Which means they are better built for continuous recoding while swapping batteries, media, microphones, preventing overheating, and on the fly changes (usually without digging deep into the menu settings. That's their biggest strength over mirrorless cameras. You may not have as much creative control, but for run and gun situations, where time and speed is crucial, they are a great tool to have, since the setup is kept to a minimal.
As an MMJ, I'm absolutely with you. Camcorders have their prime uses much like mirrorless cams do. I think people's abilities to create content has generated such a gray area, that you routinely have people like me who window shop online or find themselves with the budget to buy a new or used camera and suddenly become that meme of the sweaty guy trying to figure out which button to press.
about the the Z90: - It has ND filters internal... the control switch is behind near the battery. - it has nightvision. - it has many profressional broadcast functions - SDI out, - can share its color settings to multiple cameras during braodcast. perfect to match cameras in location. Its perfect for broadcast News, Sport Events, multicamera events, stream concerts.... Many mainstream broadcast channels use the Z90 to create hi-quality reports in location. I love it, and its amazing to work with multiple of those cameras. I own other Sony Caemeras (FX3, 6400, ZV-E10)... but that Z90 wins in multicamera enviroments with more "broadcast tv style look".
Ive never understood the obsession with blurry backgrounds on youtube. I want to see all the cool posters and knivk knacks and shit in your room! It adds character and ambience to a youtubers usual recording space.
@@colvinscorner i guess it's the stylistic trend of the time. Blurry backgrounds can add a feeling of geniune depth to the image and people seem to like that. It can also help make the viewer focus on the subject. But yeah, there are situationa where clear backgrounds actually work much better.
Hi Tom, the thing about camcorders at a base level is that they were designed for family use. So you go from Australia with the kids when they were little to Disneyland, Universal Studios, San Diago Zoo etc... you want the background in full focus, not blurred. Adjusting settings was secondary. So if you understand the design for purpose limitations and work within them then you should expect the results you get and be happy with that. I think camcorders no matter how sophisticated still maintain this premise. Having said that. Mirrorless cameras...wow. I guess I am saying use each to their best advantage that is fit for purpose and you can't go wrong. A thoroughly enjoyable vid, mate.
Год назад
Thanks for the video. I use a Canon XF400 for live TV connections and for situations with a lot of action, demonstrations, conflicts... Each camera has its specific use.
20:53 This is one of the reasons that I was very interested for a time in the Panasonic Camcorder AG-DVX200 was that it had a 4/3rds sensor. I would have loved that they continued with this as an option.
Great video topic. When I first started on RU-vid, I went down the same path as most people with a DSLR. After a while, though, I got tired of the recording issues, like time limit and overheating. Decided to sell all of my lenses and camera bodies for a Canon G60. It's been great as an indoor camera. Never have to worry about recording limits again. I miss the blurry background look, but it's a compromise I can live with. It also gives me the option to film my kids in the future. The ultimate dad camera for school events and sports. I also found that because they update camcorders less frequently, I don't feel tempted to buy new gear as much. So I'd say the camcorder was the best purchase I made for my channel in years. 🤙
Just seeing this video today and was going to mention the overheating factor, and at one time, the time limit, though I think that aspect has been licked so you don't have to deal with the time limit, used to though and that's an issue with my Nikon D90, bought in 2010. It had other issue, like a codec that is not widely supported and can't adjust focus etc. So never used the camera for video after the few tries to see how it worked. Too hamstrung to be useful in other words. Then in 2019, bought a Canon Vixia used at a pawn shop that dates to 2014 and it's wide screen, does 1080P/30 or 1080I/60 and while the low light performance is middling (noisy), it had many things that can be set to manual, so exposure and audio are 2 I keep in manual so the camera does not always hunt for exposure. The GoPro is equally as bad in low light, but is decent as long as it's near a bright light. The GoPro is more prone to overheating due to its small size, especially if in a hot environment with little airflow but it is my go to at this time. So in that situation, the Canon will trounce the GoPro every time due to the fact that it can dissipate the heat better than even Mirrorless/DSLR's can. That may be why Red and other cinema camera makers use the camcorder form factor over others, and that old film cameras had a similar type of form factor, although with film.
@@johnhpalmer6098 To be fair to the D90... it was the first DSLR ever to support video, period. And you can manually focus in video, if you didn't know. Flip the switch on the bottom left to "M" (and the one on your lens too, if it has one) and turn the manual focus ring. Now you can control focus!
@@RSWebery Had to look and it's what I thought, first off, I know the D90 was the first SLR to do video, but even there, it's crippled too much, for starters, you can focus, but must do so manually before you go to shoot in video mode due to the mirror being up. Later models got around that issue so focus has greatly improved, even can shoot video in auto if I recall and thus able to focus as needed while shooting. The format is proprietary, and tops out at 720, which to be fair, was likely the norm for many digital cameras doing HD at the time anyway. Also, it was limited to 5 minute intervals and tops out at 2G sized files. While Nikon could not say why, likely due to the issue of overheating. Again, this is still common with DSLR/mirrorless cameras as a whole.
First of all, hello from a fellow Buck! I shot loads of my videos on a camcorder. Until early 2020, my main camera was a Panasonic SD90 that I started using in 2012. And before that, made loads of my early work on miniDV, so the leap to SD cards and HD was huge. It still works and I still use it as one of my B-cameras, I still love it and haven't retired it. I wanted to upgrade it for many years, but there wasn't enough evolution in camcorders. When I did, it became a long hard search to find a mirrorless that fit my needs: I didn't want a mirrorless, I wanted a camcorder, but was forced really. And don't get me wrong, the leap was another huge one that made my videos look more cinematic and professional, but it isn't as convenient. You can't fit a mirrorless in a large pocket, and ergonomically, these cameras are designed for photography, not video, even ones more purportedly for the latter. The two big ones for me was no overheating and being able to record over 30 minutes, which up until recently were still hurdles on mirrorless. I got a Sony A6400 for a good price (I'd have been ideal for the ZV-E10, but it didn't exist then), but it is always something I treat very cautiously because of the cost. It isn't as convenient despite the improvements, and I'm kinda annoyed that innovation was at the expense of camcorders. But, yes, camcorders are extremely underrated. Imagine if there was one that had some the big things in mirrorless, like Sony's AF? What a beast it would be.
It seems like mirrorless cameras have really only caught up in terms of reliability in the past year or two, like you said. I LOVE the image quality, but it's tough to beat the ergonomics of the camcorder. The fact that this specific one is several years old and now seems to be at a cheaper price makes me thing that there might be an update coming? I would love to see it with Sony's current AF!
Nostalgia kicking in. Growing up in '80s I (apparently) always had our camcorder in my hands. I see these types of camcorders at the professional boxing events I cover. They stream to RU-vid & even some pay per view events. They're great for specific use cases!
They are super awesome! I used a lot of the Canon ones when I was a teacher, but never did anything expect events with them, so I didn't know how they performed for more RU-vid-style stuff.
I grew up using so many Video8, Hi8, Digital8, & Mini DV camcorders. My first dip into HD video was still on Mini DV tape, but with the HDV format! Had the Sony HC5 & HC9. Then finally started to get into flash based camcorders with the CX550V and then finally the Sony AX100 which I still use often along with my AX53!
I followed a similar path, except that I am still using my AX33. Like your 53 they both have that internal gimbal. It makes run and gun video so much steadier. No that there are more used AX700s available, that is where I am looking next.
Also- hope you're feeling better. And the vibe I got from this & recent videos is- side table for objective/ product in hand shots, main table for subjective & overview shots. LOVE the retro, EposVox-esque cut scenes!
Hi Tom A few months back I sort of downsized and started doing stuff on my own. As I was scouring the net prior to ordering some stuff, I came across your channel, and some of your videos did help me immensely - thank you for doing this! As for camcorders, here’s another point of view: The biggest strength of the camcorder platform for us, has always been its ability to output a finished product at the end of recording, or even during; as you yourself said, this is what makes them ideal for live productions. What makes this possible is the audio inputs, isn’t it? We too used mirrorless and DSLRs for our productions, but after a while we got sick of the workflow and tried out camcorders, and we never went back! And here’s something else we noticed; every time the audio was sent via the Rodecaster (Version 01) there was a little lag which disappeared when the mics were directly connected or when mixing was done via an analogue mixer. It was not perceptible to the ‘uninitiated’ and wasn’t something that couldn’t be fixed in post with a few clicks. Your studio is well lit, (and, very pleasing to look at as well) and the environment seems to be well controlled. So, don’t you think a modern camcorder might cut down your production time at least by 10 -20%? Either way please keep on making these videos - and thanks again for producing useful content is a very palatable way - your stuff really cut through the clutter!
This is a great point! I think for me, especially when it comes to audio, the FX3 has been a total game changer (but that could be because it has the same audio inputs as a camcorder 😁).
This. I use the FX3 privately but at work, which is ENG work, the Sony camcorder walks all over the FX3. Also worth mentioning is that the camcorder has connector for transmitting live via broadcast backpack to the studio. But practical professional features get very little airtime on RU-vid usually. Incredible focal length range with power zoom is huge too.
I'm not even much of a camera buff, I was just interested in the information. However, as someone with a lot of time spent watching product reviews/ gear talk videos for audio stuff, I must say I really appreciate your presentation style. Substantive information communicated clearly and concisely, with a good sprinkle of humor, with balanced comparisons that measure the utility of features with respect to use case rather than making judgements based solely on personal preference or circumstances. The amount of effort and thought you put into the quality of this video is apparent. Great work!
Thank you Cameron! It really means a lot to hear this. It can be tough to balance everything you mentioned in a single video, so I'm really happy to know that it came through this time!
I miss the days where social media was about connecting with others and the companies didn’t take extreme advantage of us and incite hate, war, genocide, coups, and whatever else 😔
The Sony z90v does have night shot, but you have to shoot in auto by flipping up the physical switch on the back. And also did you say that your z90v doesn’t have built-in ND’s? Because it definitely does, that is also another physical switch on the back.
Tom you've absolutely nailed it! I really like the new style, bringing your own personality even more into the video. From someone who shoots with a NX80, ZV-E10 and a DJI Mini Pro 3 editing all together it's good for people to understand the pros and cons of each and when each might have a role. Having the view from the side of the usual table makes it feel more like an educational chat with an old friend, and as always excellent b roll and demo shots. Love to see you're still exploring new styles, keeps it fresh!
I have a Canon xf605 and it is my A-cam on some shoots. I have a Ronin 4d 8k, Canon R5c, Sony fx6 and Komodo…all of them are also A-cams. It comes down for me the project I’m involved with and what is needed. All are just tools. None of them perfect. All of them great. When in a run and gun documentary and weight is an issue, I’ll grab the xf605 camcorder almost every time. Built in everything, great telephoto lens.
I went with DSLR because I couldn’t get a camcorder with a wide enough field of view, and couldn’t get the depth of field that I wanted. But my first thought when starting to make videos on youtube again was to research camcorders. They just didn’t offer what I was looking for in that regard. Great video Tom!
Thanks Mr. Bandrew! I think the small sensor means that the camcorder field of view just has to be narrower. I guess the benefit is that you could add on sweet fisheye lenses for 90's skate videos.
@@tombuck Most manufacturers offer, beside the fish-eye accessories, wide-angle screw/click on lenses for camcorders, to get a 0,75-0,9 times 'magnification' added to the existing lens, just to circumvent this. There are great differences though, some camcorders really do lack wide-angle (I consider 28 mm (35mm equiv) to be a minimum, but some even start at 30. I'm glad my wide-angle lens on my older camcorder (FHD max) gives me 25 mm.
Great video. I still use Canon g30 camcorder. Reason is broadcast 23.97 and 29.98. produces clean HDMI, no time limit, fstop 2.8 thru entire focal length. Beautiful lens, Great preamps, low power, dual SD card slots, color broadcast patterns, ND filters . Touch screen focus, all manual functions. Processor same Canon c100 mkii. Made a video on smallrig rail system for it if anyone is interested. My next purchase will be Canon c100 mkii. I started with Canon t3i lol. Forgot to mention it has full cell phone control via WiFi and psf frames for atomos record. Can't find anyone selling these because this g30 is a gem.
I used Camcorders all through college myself. I don't mind them, but I think it really is the lens interchangeability that does it these days for the mirrorless dominance. However that seems to be more because of the trendy lenses that youtubers recommend and such. I know for me I like to have a particular look and especially lately I have been expanding creatively into other lensing options, and I have a justified reason to get other lenses for the use of creative direction. If you didn't want that, or need that. I.E. you were going to buy a 24-105 or a 24-70 and roll with basically just that with one fast prime as well, I find it very hard to justify that setup when you are spending an extra couple thousand on those lens options (depending on your price point) for something you could get for far cheaper that would do nearly the same job.
Tom, when you compare to full-frame equivalent, you need to adjust the f-number as well. It's not equivalent to an f/2.8 lens on a full frame. This is a common misunderstanding, even amongst professionals when it comes to smaller sensor systems.
I was thinking exactly the same! A common misunderstanding and a marketing trick in the industry to sell more cameras. So the crop factor should also be applied to the f-stop as well when doing the math. Good review though! 👍
My main interest is filming wildlife and making short nature docs. Having tried DSLRs for a while, because I was to easily influenced by the Internet, I got really frustrated with all the swapping lenses and delving around in bags, usually in the mud! Way too often I would miss shots altogether while i was busy getting set up for them because the animal refused to wait for me. So i changed tack a few years ago and bought a pro-sumer level camcorder. I haven't looked back since. Best decision i ever made. And now I've just upgraded again to Panasonic HC-X20. 24-480mm (35mm equiv) zoom f2.8 lens and 1 inch sensor. I can just walk along with the camcorder and tripod slung over my shoulder and when i see a bird i want to film 50 metres away i just plonk the camera down, zoom in, press record, and enjoy. It takes 2 seconds and I'm recording. If immediately after that i decide to record a close up of the wind moving through the grasses of a hay meadow 3 feet away i just zoom out press record and enjoy. Another 2 seconds. Everything i see around me during a whole day, all i have to do is adjust a few settings and the camera will capture it. Its also worth mentioning that for a lot of wildlife work a smaller sensor is actually sometimes better. Bokeh really isn't helpful when trying to keep two boxing hares in focus during the frenzy of courtship while they chase each other all over the field. And of course larger sensors mean less magnification (crop factor). . I'll never go back. They'll never take me back alive, do you hear? Never!
I still use camcorders & love them! I'm bummed that manufacturers stopped investing & updating them! I still have a Sony AX100 & Sony AX53. Both so fantastic!
I use my PXW-Z90V a lot. I also add a Nija V+ with SDI to get more out of it. It does have ND filters built in and Low Light along with IR night vision. It is my video workhorse. GoPros have a major place in tight situations and when I would rather not risk killing the Sony camcorder.
I got it too and mine also has night vision and build in nd filters I really wonder why he claims it hasn't as the nd are pretty visible from the back side
Most of what I record for 4K "newsreel" is on a Sony FDR-AX53. It has a 20:1 zoom which extends to 30:1 digitally. It works well enough both on the imaging side and the audio side. Ironically, sometimes I actually prefer the older Sony audio side.
Great video. I'd watch a tech round up of every camera category every once in a while. Or, for that matter, a tech check up of any variety. For example, lapel mics vs booms, lighting (LEDs, COB etc.).
One of my favourite features of my Panasonic HC-X1000 4K camcorder is the 20x zoom. You can press the buttons to zoom in/out electronically (looks really smooth), or by adjusting it manually on the lens (good for accuracy). You can even control it using a remote control - I bought one the other day so need to test that out!
I just bought the Canon XF 605, it’s great. We use it for documentary stuff. The files are beautiful, and it’s easy to use, but has a lot of customization. In my opinion cams have been overlooked, they are great value and do broadcast like many DSLR’s can’t. Yes Tom got your release notification quick, I listened to you often and your “corney” word play!
Ah the good old days. How terrible they were! New camcorders are a hard sell for the majority - the good ones are too expensive, but limited (live events being the exception where they shine), and the cheap ones most would be better off using their phone. Great great video Tom - Nostalgia and info
@@jomsies Sorry, but mirrorless cameras still suck for batterylife: they are photocameras and not meant for ongoing live-events that can take hours. USB-C is also not a professional connection for such things: you'd want HD-SDI via BNC hooked to either a switcher controlled by someone, or sent by ether via a 4G-modem: many professional camcorders have a dedicated USB-output for such modems. If you want better quality (as the bandwidth is usually rather limited on those modems) you can either connect the HD-SDI to a dedicated videotransmitter you either carry on a backpack or - on bigger cameras - usually clicks on as a piggyback-solution on the V-mount batteryplate, which then accepts a V-mount battery on the back of the transmitter. For more 'steady' live events (a football match in a stadium that regularly televises) there usually is a special 'landline' (really high-end pro-stuff) from the directors' cabinet to the camera that takes care of everything: power, remote-control of every setting inside the camera and control on the lens, return videosignals and so on... Especially return-signals are a thing for mirrorless-cameras: they just can't do that. And then about controlling your camera from a tripod: most mirrorless cameras and DSLR's do not feature LANC-connections or similar to have at least one remote on your tripod pan-bar to conveniently control zoom or focus (you usually can't do both at the same time with LANC-remotes). Though I consider LANC-connections to be a non-professional connection (as the 2,5 mm jack is vulnerable and absolutely lacks all protectoin against accidental disconnection), it does give you remote-control over a few basic functions you absolutely want in live situations when on a tripod. The more professional camcorders have dedicated remote-connections so you can control both zoom and focus, while exposure (iris) is usually controlled by the person at the switching console. Even bigger camcorders get the remotes connected to the lens itself, enabling zoom at your right hand and focus on your left hand. The tripod than also needs two pan-bars. I haven't even talked about genlock and such... Good luck finding that on a mirrorless camera.
As people move to mirrorless cameras, camcorders sales have dropped causing manufacturers to stop making them. Well, not completely, for some but, for those in the consumer market, a lot of units are no longer sold. When is got serious about doing YT, I bought a Panasonic HC-X1, it a great unit and I didn’t use half of the features during the time I had it but, the image quality was great, the zoom was awesome and I loved using the XLR connections on it. The downsides was the screen, I had to use an external monitor as the screen quality was bad. The IBIS could also use some work for hand holding., on a tripod, it’s great. I wanted the newly released, at the time, Panasonic X2000. It was similar to that SONY, with the XLR connectors, but smaller. Since they weren’t available, went with the XC-H1. There should be more camcorders options on the market but, I doubt that will happen. That SONY is several years old and as mentioned lacks internal ND. The XC-2000 is marketed as a professional camcorder and comes with built in ND. It was $2k when released, with a removable XLR handle. Don’t want the handle? Get the XC-1500 and you could buy the handle later. Down, side is that it had a small sensor, not the 1 inch like the HC-X1. I saw they upgraded the XC-X1 recently and the price also went up. I doubt you will find the XC-2000 for the $2k release price anymore. Unless more people buy them and post on YT, only those in the know will continue to use them.
I love camcorders. I use them for weddings. As a solo shooter, I need a camera that’s very versatile and allows me to get what I want without me having to think about the camera. I can just capture whatever I see with no sweat. Camcorders provide that.
I’m loving this video! I was also born in the mid-80s and used camcorders like this for several years in the early 2000’s. Then I took a break from cinematography and when I recently jumped back in, it was shocking how much cameras had changed. EspecialIy the zoom capabilities. I love the new cams but feel like I’m learning all over again!
Night shot caused a lot of controversy back in the day. When used during the day you could see through clothing. I remember it making the nightly ABC news leading story.
OMG. Ghost hunting - every high schoolers staple of camcorder projects back in the day. We hunted down a ghost in the woods and caught it on camera. At least we thought it looked like a ghost.
I have such a love for the camcorder form factor. I learned to make movies as a kid on vhs camcorders and learned to edit using two vhs tape decks. I loved moving to mini dv later. Once I moved in to a T3i, I loved the interchangeable lenses and digital workflow but missed how well my body worked with the camcorder form factor. Using the BMPCC6K now but the Ursa 12K form factor has me curious. Maybe the URSA 4.6/12K will give me that old school camcorder feel in a modern device with interchangeable lenses? Lens me give that some thought!
I used to use camcorders in my high school AV class and I didn't realize how spoiled I was to have such a clean and simple setup for when I was still learning everything. Before I even knew what parfocal was I was using it to manual focus my talking head shots. Another interesting use case is how Rooster Teeth (rip) used them, they always spontaneously ran into content situations and many people were recording on their phones to capture the opportunity, but with many different phones all with different color sciences, resolutions, and framerates, the editing workflow was a nightmare. They ended up getting a bunch of camcorders and left them out in reachable places, so in situations where you want to capture something, but not planned to, there was a fleet of easy-to-use and versatile cameras to make things consistent. Would be a lot harder on an interchangeable photo focused system, and compared to phones, the 1 inch sensor is plenty.
I’ve been using video cameras for decades, S-VHS was my first video camera and then graduated up the ranks through Hi-8-mini DV and 1080p digital to 4K digital. For video the camcorder is the best option even for today. DSLR has many great features but a smooth zoom and optical image stabilization is way better on a video camera. I’m now using a Panasonic HXc2000 and it has built in ND filters, an LED light on the handle and xlr inputs and the lens on it is amazing 32x zoom optically. It’s really hard to beat.
I can remember when Sony made a camcorder with interchangeable lenses that had a full frame sensor in it. More or less a DSLR in a Camcorder form factor. I remember being really excited about that since I loved my Sony Handycams and also wanted to get cinematic shots, but it must not have been very popular because I haven’t really heard much about it lately… 😂
I started filming and editing in 1996, editing with two VHS recorder, then later on PC. The reason I don’t use a camcorder now is the iPhone. It films, it edits, it publishes online, from anywhere. I can edit in my car, on a sofa, at friends house. And the best part, it fits in my pocket.
You can actually get parfocal or close to parfocal lenses on mirrorless camera systems. The Sigma 18-35mm F/1.8 is near parfocal and exists for various mounts, like the Canon EF mount. The Panasonic Leica 10-25 and 25-50mm lenses for MFT are near parfocal and with near to no focus breathing. These lenses were all designed with video in mind. To find more parfocal lenses, you usually have to look at Cine Zooms. The Canon 18-80mm T/4.4 Compact Cine Zoom is such an example. It is parfocal. So no, you don't have to revert to camcorders to get parfocal lenses.
I study AV and we have multiple of these exact camcorders and we use them for a lot of different stuff. I myself have used them for recording live concerts, podcasts and street interviews. Itsa great camera for stuff like that but i myself wouldnt use it to shoot a movie or anything like that.
Cool video. I constantly have arguments with my father who has a Sony AX700 compared against my mirrorless APS-C camera. Whilst the image quality on my camera is better, most of the time it is pretty marginal, and if we go out together he has taken his footage at a variety of focal lengths way before I have, as I have been swapping lenses off and on. He pretty much rolls his eyes at me and says that is a total faff! Actually not helped as one time I got dust on my sensor when I swapped lenses :D :D There is one camera I am considering which is the Sony RX100 VII. That has the same sensor as the camcorder, has a really good zoom range, and is ridicuously portable (small!).
I have the RX100 V, and it really is awesome! The newer ones are only better, but the first 50 or so videos on my channel were made mostly with the RX100.
I love using camcorders for my overhead cameras for the simple fact you can control everything with a remote. It’s really annoying to need to physically handle a camera that takes a long time to frame perfectly. Having the zoom on a remote is amazing, and Sony cam corsets never overheat. I’ve had my AX100 on for 3 years straight. The color science also pairs well with my ZV-1. I just wish there was a full frame version.
Great job, Tom. Very interesting. I started with 8mm film. Later we had the digital tapes, memory cards and Sony Handycams. Now loving the A7Siii. Have a great day! PS. Yes, Sony really needs to work on their model numbers. I just bought the new Sony E10-78BEV&^%$# microphone.
Fun fact, the good folks at “What’s inside” have used a camcorder for the majority of their videos. He was still using one up to Sony Camera Camp. I don’t know if he still is.
The Sony PXW-Z90 does have Nightshot, which is uncommon for a professional Sony camcorder. The PXW-Z90 is basically the same camcorder as the consumer-oriented FDR-AX700 Handycam with the handle, mic inputs, and additional connection options added. Being a Handycam, the FDR-AX700 has Nightshot (in 4K!), which is retained on PXW-Z90.
Amazing video as always Tom! I currently use a Sony - Handycam AX53 but I'm looking to buy a Sony a6400, Cam corders are fun and super easy to use but when I was using it for filming in public it felt just so unprofessional but, I felt like a little kid just running around with a camera which is why I could see why it isn't as popular. Shame because they're really good!
I would recommend against the a6400 if you're specifically getting it for video. It has no IBIS, horrendous rolling shutter in 4k, and very poor quality 1080p.
@@TechnoBabble The a6400 when used on a tripod is a great 4k video camera especially for interviews (also relatively inexpensive). it's not too bad on a gimbal but yeah the rolling shutter is not great when there is lots of motion. we quite often shoot 1080 50p on a gimbal for b-roll and add a bit of sharpness in post and it looks fine (make sure camera sharpness turned off ie -7 setting).
I think it’s just cost. Especially for RU-vid, a lot of entry level DSLRs and point-and-shoot cameras gave better quality video for a lower cost. As I get more into video making, however, I am considering investing in a camcorder because the filming limit on the DSLRs is negatively impacting my processes. Thanks for this video!
Keep in mind that crop factor applies to your aperture as well (this is one of the big reasons people say full frame is better in low light). A lot of times Sony gives the full frame equivalent stats on the 1” sensor cameras but if they’re not and you have to apply the crop to the camcorder then you also have to apply the crop to the f stop. That’s why you’re not gonna get the same low light or background blur your fx3 is getting when your settings are the same.
For any handheld application, especially so when you need to zoom in, the camcorder is the clear winner. The long zoom range, power zoom and the excellent image stabilization make the camcorder king.
From what I can understand, they’re good for TV and live productions, while a DSLR is better for dynamic and on demand workflow, since you can swap most things on the body.
Gotta say, despite the video quality you guys did a good job on that analog high school footage. You were clearly thinking about the stuff that matters the most.
I remember DSLRs were recommended for film students over camcorders when they first started featuring HD video. Because the interchangeable lenses and rolling shutters of the CMOS made them look more like film.
I have the FDR-AX700 which is the little sister of this cam. Yes, it has no infra red night vision. Because no one needs it today. It was a gimmick in the old days but now everyone as a small battery driven LED panel that let you get a usable picture. My two cents about camcorders: They are purpose build. If you know what you want, you can get it for WAY less money than a cinema cam. This was the case for me. Having the lens attached means less versatility yes! But it means also less clutter. Of course I have my cam backpack which holds also my sound equipment. Bu if I take out the stuff I don't need for a day trip I can even get my bigger light and a stand in the backpack. I don't wanna change.
Moat event/streaming/multicam companies around my are have a "no slr/mirroless" policy. Even the little canon and sony camcorders have some super handy features. 20x Zoom, great autofocus, built in ND, easily accessible controls, proper xlr mic preamps, SDI connections, the list goes on. Easy to setup up and tear down.
I do video at a university, and as lockdown was winding down in Summer 2020, we set up a studio to run classes online, and used those exact Sony cameras. We looked at some DSLR options, but the camcorders seemed like a better option because they were built for video and the price was right. But you're right; we'd leave them on all day, every day, and they'd be fine. I even accidentally left them on (we had two) for a weekend and they were still fine.
Yep! Definitely no worries about leaving them on for an extended period. It's always nice to used something that's designed specifically for the purpose you need.
The right tool for the right job. I try to use camcorders for any job that requires reliability, zoom, consistent auto focus, audio etc. When doing anything other than talking head or fixed shots it is just so much easier and consistent to use a camcorder than a mirrorless plus rig/accessories that breaks easily and takes time to setup
omg i have been wondering this for so long. I grew up with camcorders and switched over to DSLRS once they started getting popular. I have always wondered what the camcorder scene is like these days.
It's pretty wild, honestly! And there are some super cool options out there. Definitely tough to beat the overall image quality of a mirrorless camera though.
Cool shot of the Metro. I lived in Winchester, VA in the 80s and road it from Vienna, VA to get to DC. I remember being there in 1986 at the Independence Day celebration and the dedication of the Viet Nam Memorial.
I shoot booth. The biggest decider of which on to shoot with is. If there’s only one chance to get the footage, I go with the camcorder. Because it requires you to always be shooting ( sports, live events, certain products). They’ve come a long way since Handycams. Oh and all those dedicated buttons are so much better than menu hunting
I have a Canon XA50 and I really appreciate how suited it it for video. It shoots 4K video and has two XLR inputs for microphones and built in ND filters. I have two DSLRs and I still go for the camcorder for all my video needs. My Canon XA50 also has infrared capability.
I do a lot of multicam livestreaming and recording. I do more events with just myself than with a crew. Because of that, I use 3 Sony AX-700 4K camcorders. They are quite easy to setup, can run unattended for the length of the event, don't overheat like some DSLRs do... Yes, the smaller sensor prevents shallow depth of field, but that's something I don't really need when shoting an event, school play, muticam podcast, what have you... There is no "perfect" camera. For almost all of them you have to pick two of these three items: Quality, Price, Capabilities. So I believe you should not "poo poo" what someone else uses. If it meets their us case, then it's the perfect camera... for them! Thanks for all you do! Love your stuff.
Camcorders like this are absolutely incredible for unattended use. Definitely a good "set it and forget it" solution. I also agree about never "poo-ing" what anybody uses. I'm always interested in and fascinated by what people use and the reasons they chose it, no matter what it is!
Like you mentioned in your pinned comment, the discussion isn’t about a specific camcorder model, but it’s worth mentioning that the Canon XF400/405 and family of HD to 4K cameras still have that infrared night mode. Not useful for most pro video work, but it’s a nice feature for documentary video (professional or life-documenting).
News camera operator checking in here - this is why our cameras are so big. Everything is manual and along with all of the dials for the lens, we need to be able to adjust the sensor readout at a moments notice ie; is it too dark? Add gain. Too bright? Add 1-4 ND. White balance off? Preset and manual buttons. Brightness clipping reduction, viewfinder adjustment knobs, audio level, audio monitor level dial, audio monitor channels, audio gain (seperate from levels), Audio source, audio RX, ANOTHER audio adjustment.... the list can go on! DSLRs will never have the space for so many buttons to have crisp footage taken at a moments notice - or be as comfortable as being able to leave it on your shoulder for as long as your body can support it. DSLRs get a full frame sensor and I belive that is about the only benifit - though a drawback too as 2/3" sensors get to read in 4:2:2 and typically keep file sizes smaller for storage. Although the models up from this FX3 like the FX6 and FX9 are biridging that gap and where we news camera ops use the camcorder 2/3" sensor - reality TV typically use the FX6/9 due to that depth and also from a lighter weight - along with being mounted on a shoulder! Side note; camcorders can see in the dark. Check if there is any added shutter, check ND filter and add some turbo gain!
The local news crews in my area still use them. Many Cinema cameras are Camcorders. Technically the Sony ZV-1 is a camcorder in a point and shoot form factor. I have a couple lower end Vixia cams I keep for backup or extra angles. A few years back a house in the neighborhood caught fire, I threw it on a tripod and went out to film. Someone I didn't know asked me what news station I was with. Mind you the fire department was already on scene and there was nothing else I could do. The ZV-1 is the camera I take everwhere now days, I just wish it had a longer zoom.
I like my handycam because somes times I'm recording proyects but the time is so long, now having that I can record for 5hrs continously. Get the 100GB out is another history :,D I need a card reader because that move at 12MB/s. I think camcorders are good for long shot (in distance and time) but cameras are good for narrow shot because the possibility to fit the correct lens for that, you can't not do adjustment on the fly, but on static scenes you don't need it. I don't like the excessive bokeh. When you did the zoom at 16:49 is fine because is the same as you holding something at 10cm infront you, that feel natural, but a narrow DOF make me feel dizzy when the size of the object and the blurry background missmatch what you can measure by experience. My eyes want to focus the background when that happen.
