@CubeAce

Hi Ray,

I can't believe I watched the whole thing...almost. I agree with the guy, a camcorder is unbeatable. Mine has been broken for a couple of years and I miss it. Repair, another thing to do.

Is it just me, or did the guy use a smoothing filter on his face for almost all shots? With a couple of exceptions, his skin is too smooth. See my tutorial on how to do this. I didn't need to do it for myself when I made the tutorial, but now, the mirror says otherwise.

John CB

@CubeAce

Hi Ray

I watched almost all of it too! I was fascinated by the Zoom Q8 which must surely be an audio recorder for the Zoom range of products that is designed to record sort of a "guide" video track for syncing other camera's recordings to a decent audio recording....?

Peter

@browj2

Hi John.

Judging from looking at some of his other videos and the fact he lives in Las Vegas I think it's possible but on the cheaper units I wouldn't have thought he would need it until he got to the higher end of the price range. A lot of the cheaper models are quite soft and I only know that from borrowing such similar cameras from my wife's school during summer holiday periods. Mainly similar to the JVC unit he looked at.

My own feeling is that my Osmo Pocket is better than over half of the ones he showed for quality and sharpness all be it with a fixed aperture and much smaller sensor. I think because phones can do quite a good job now if you don't mind the fact the bokeh is more or less out of the equation that you have to pay quite a bit for something to beat them quality wise. Finding something better at less cost is going to be difficult. Good HD quality is really a lot more costly than one would think and phones represent good value for money because there are a lot more phones sold than camcorders or cameras.

Look at the amount of people who come here moaning because of problems with the encoding of the files from their phones. It shows how many people are using phones and think the footage is worth editing properly which it can well be if the shooting conditions are not too demanding.

The main problem for the average person apart from picture quality is the stabilisation, as I find although my main camera that has an ASP-C sized sensor and I can get a good bokeh out of with the right lens and a better picture, has two main flaws as a portable camera for either on the spot use or even planned work. The main one is the stabilisation. Not in the normal sense, it has good stabilisation for 'the shakes' but if you point a camera up or down or are hand holding while walking you get what I would describe as the 'jello' effect where the picture changes shape as if the corners of the image are going from leaning in to leaning out (or vice versa), giving it a jelly type of wobble.

The other is weight and size.

With my Osmo Pocket I can pack everything I need into a small bag less than 7 x 4 x 3 inches. That includes filters, microphone, battery brick for recharging, spare memory cards, X axis stabiliser (to reduce bounce when walking) wi-fi transmitter to my phone that I can remotely control the camera from if need be with and a small tripod stand.

Because The Osmo Pocket has a gimble head it can also track an object I select in the frame automatically. It's main weak points are lack of variable aperture and a fixed lens, (so fixed field of view) You can't change the battery (74 min run time on one charge but you can using it while recharging hence the power brick). Small screen if you use it without a phone but usable, and all functions are touch screen. Internal mic suffers wind noise outside but is good quality inside. The other big problem is it's lack of size. It's easy to loose the add on bits like filters that are not much larger than my thumb nail and magnetic. Drop one of those in long grass and you will never find it.

It is my main camera for video though because it has a lot of advantages. There are still not a lot of these around. I've never seen anyone else with one. Because it's small no-one takes any notice of it. Great for what I mainly do, recording events. I can literally put it in my pocket. It weighs six and a half ounces. Going from carrying three DSLRs around (plus all the extras) for my photography shoots to just carrying the Pocket for video is sheer bliss.

On the other hand for more serious stuff I take my other camera for video as well for focal reach but that normally means a tripod and fly-cam stabiliser which is heavy to use and difficult to control and balance but does help it 'glide' when on the move.

However, none of this is relevant to the enquiry and me going off on a tangent😆😉.

Ray.

@Scenestealer

Hi Peter.

Yes that's an odd one I'd never seen before. I think what the video is showing though is it is difficult to find a half decent camcorder that is better than most phones at around the same price you would pay for a phone that has a half decent camera built in. A few years back I would not have said that but when I look at what people produce with phones now you have to wonder.

I think you may be correct although the sound with the hyper-cardioid mic left a bit to be desired. Sound of course would also be a consideration when buying and my personal opinion is you really need a mic jack most of the time or an external audio recorder but that can be just more work in post. Even when a camcorder does have such a jack it doesn't automatically mean the ADCs are any good. A major point he skipped.

Ray.

I was a bit lost with the Vixia cameras. My broken (external screen connection to the body) camcorder is a Canon Vixia HFR21. So, what is Vixia vs Canon?

The main difference with cell phones is having the optical zoom on the camcorder. My DSLR is great for video recording so long as one is using manual focus otherwise it has a tendency to hunt during a recording and go out of focus, it's on a tripod, and no zooming because that is manual and definitely not smooth.

I miss my HFR21.

On the other hand, my GoPro Hero 5 works very well, but not for 4K (fisheye). The big thing for me is the built-in GPS. Just wish I had a gimbal.

So, it depends on what one is doing and the resolution that one wants, full HD or 4K, in order to narrow down the choice.

John CB

@browj2

Hi John.

I think a decent Camcorder with the right lens is unbeatable and so it should be. By the same token a good HD camcorder is going to outperform any decent digital stills camera that shoots 4K.

Dedicated Camcorder lenses are just better for focus and light consistency. The problem is cost. To beat a good phone I think you are looking to spend at least £500 and even then at second hand unless you are going the action cam route with fixed fov and aperture, and even then a good one is around the £300 mark new.

The main problem then becomes one of grain noise in almost anything short of sunlight conditions.On the other hand a green screen is mentioned, so one assumes some form of lighting as well to reduce green screen problems (colour not being even) and the lack of bokeh is not a problem if adding your own backgrounds.

Which then begs the question, 'Why not a cheap DSLR?' using a fixed focal length and fov of around f5.6? Everything would be in focus (after initial focusing) and switch the lens to manual to avoid motor noise.. You get a decent sized sensor for not much money. Something like a Nikon D3400 with kit lens? Not even a kit lens. Some very decent old manual lenses out there would do because of the lack of need to focus more than once. Second hand with lens around £280 but mono sound. May need an additional sound recorder.

n.b. Vixia cameras can handle SDXC memory cards.

Ray.

@weedavy6969

Hi

I would suggest you go to a camera shop or Curry's and look at video cameras and get a feel for them. Consider a reputable make eg Sony or Panasonic and full HD as a minimum - there are some good offers around including slightly older models such as the Sony HDR-CX405 Full HD Handycam Camcorder from Amazon.

If you do not have one you will also need a tripod - eg Velbon are a long established manufacturer and have a decent range at starting with the Velbon EF-41 - see Argos.

@CubeAce has suggested a DSLR - personally I would avoid these for video - my philosophy is use the correct tool for the job, not to mention the weight difference and at the price bracket you are looking at the stock kit lens tend to be soft and would not match a similar price good brand video cameras for sharpness.

HTH

John EB

@johnebaker

Hi John.

I have only been giving suggestions as to alternatives and said throughout a camcorder should outperform a DSLR for video within the price range but his Galaxy 9+ already gives a good video output with good sound.

Looking around I found some good videos taken with the Galaxy 9. It will be hard to beat on both image and sound quality which is stereo and what sound like decent inboard mics. John CB asked if I thought in the video I put up comparing camcorders had some form of beautification applied. I don't think so. I think it is down to aggressive noise reduction in the camcorders to counter the effects of using small sensors.

That is not necessarily a bad thing but it does change the look of the output.

Ray.

@CubeAce

Hi Ray

. . . . I have only been giving suggestions as to alternatives and said throughout a camcorder should outperform a DSLR for video within the price range . . . .

I am not disagreeing with you, it was a personal opinion of using DSLRs for video and, IMHO,there are more reasons, than I listed, to avoid using them for video.

The Galaxy is good at video, I have a different model and it is a good standby if I have not got my camera with me.

OT: at least I know my sports cam will fare well if I lose it in the water

Re @browj2 comment

. . . . use a smoothing filter on his face for almost all shots? With a couple of exceptions, his skin is too smooth. See my tutorial on how to do this. I didn't need to do it for myself when I made the tutorial, but now, the mirror says otherwise . . . .

I have to agree with John CB see at 5:47 in the clip something has been done - either a filter or as in the movie/TV industry anti glare make-up and maybe lighting.

John EB

@weedavy6969

For what you are using the camera for, why not just stick with the Galaxy S9+?

@CubeAce @johnebaker

I'm not going to go through the video again, but I found that in almost every scene, the guy's face was very smooth, but a couple of times, particularly when he was further away from the camera, I could see more detail, like whiskers and a few wrinkles. There was smoothing in the shots not done using the demonstration cameras, so it wasn't just the camcorders noise-reduction doing this. Also, I don't recall my camcorder doing the same job on faces; I'll have to look at some of the videos.

So, makeup, lighting and skin smoothing. Las Vegas? I would have said California surfer dude.

John CB

@johnebaker@johnebaker

There seems little point in doing a camcorder comparison test if you are going to do post production on the output of them.

He's mainly a photographer doing video to show his photography on YouTube. He has other photographic sites and there is definitely makeup involved with those. The output of some of the cheaper camcorders in that video remind me of the odd bit of video I used to take with my old bridge cameras around 2006.

I also wondered if it would be better to spend the money on lighting rather than a new camcorder as the lighting could be equally expensive, but there may be other reasons for wanting an additional recorder that could include shooting with two recorders at once, plus we don't yet know the whole intended setup.

If green screening is as hard (or harder) to get right as infinity screen shooting, then lighting must be a key component to getting a good outcome in my opinion.

Ray.

@CubeAce @weedavy6969

For musicians, 2 cameras are better than 1, 3 better than 2, etc. For example, You can set one up for the long shot (cell phone) but as close as possible, one zoomed in on the singer's face, another zoomed in on the guitarist or the guitar (or whatever instrument), another roving (try to keep out of the line of vision of the other cameras, and use a tripod). That gives you plenty of material to work with for multicam. Of course, doing this against a green screen starts to get tricky with a roving camera.

John CB

Hi guys..thanks for all the replies! I really think the Galaxy S9+ is FAB for video recording..but when I'm recording with the Samsung..a couple of things annoy me..

Firstly - when trying to sort the shot out ..and the phone is in the phone holder..I look at the phone to see what the video looks like on screen,then, go over to make adjustments, and by the time I've got back...the phone has gone back to the home screen!

Then have to open the camera again and reset the shot

..and if I have to reset the scene yet again ..

......AGAIN the phone has gone back to the Home Screen! I've tried setting the phone's time out to 10 mins, but that doesn't seem to affect the camera! The camera just goes back to the home screen after about a minute! Never figured out how the keep the Samsung phone camera on ALL the time!!! ...becomes really fiddly!

Also ...when filming in 'Portrait mode' when I import it into Magix Movie Edit Pro the Samsung video is always in 'Landscape' and I have to rotate it 90 degrees EVERY TIME! Then takes ages to render as the video has to be turned! That's just a couple of reasons I was looking to buy a proper Video Camera! Dxx

@weedavy6969

Hi

Have you tried using some of the "Cinema" apps that you can get for cell phones that give you more control? They may stop the camera going to sleep, although I still think a dedicated Video camera is the way to go from the point of lens quality and focal length range, and ease of use. I have had higher end Panasonic and Sony Handycams as in the video and can only comment that I thought the sound on the Panasonic SD900 was better than my current Sony AX53. The latest Pana VXF1 in the video appears to have even more in the way of sound tailoring settings.

@CubeAce @browj2

John CB asked if I thought in the video I put up comparing camcorders had some form of beautification applied.

I know that my Panasonic applied some skin smoothing when "Portrait" mode was selected during Intelligent Auto or Manually.

Peter

@Scenestealer

Hi Peter.

That could be but may indicate you can't turn it off if it was a revue. I thought John was talking about post production work. Some phones of course also can do this. My own personal take on this is if you are ugly like me then no amount of beautification really helps 😆. Some of those cheap cameras though use the old early definition of HD meaning 720 x 1080. It's like having a cheap in car video recorder, totally useless if you want to get a number plate.

Whatever happened to a face having character or dignity with age? Or Botox? Or perhaps a couple of large bulldog clips at the back of the head? 😁.

Ray.

@weedavy6969 re:

Also ...when filming in 'Portrait mode' when I import it into Magix Movie Edit Pro the Samsung video is always in 'Landscape' and I have to rotate it 90 degrees EVERY TIME! Then takes ages to render as the video has to be turned!

I'd do some more research on this. Yes, a re-render will occur here, but it will also occur with any other edit such as your greenscreen, titling, cropping or any other video effects. I don't have much experience with MP4 smart rendering, except that when I have tried it, it didn't work; a full render took place each time.

I would second Peter's suggestion re trying another camera app; that certainly doesn't sound like normal camera behaviour.

@CubeAce

......but may indicate you can't turn it off if it was a revue.

You mean an all male revue? Aw no.....sorry, not that type of revue!😆

Whatever happened to a face having character or dignity with age? Or Botox? Or perhaps a couple of large bulldog clips at the back of the head?

That all helps but I reckon our eyes have their own smoothing filter that progressively adds the effect as we get older and gnarlier. It's called Presbyopia or Long sightedness and it works for me!

Peter