Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years.

Thanks,

CNET Support

Question

Panasonic HC-920 Gain Problems

Apr 27, 2015 11:25AM PDT

I have recently bought the panasonic hc x920 for around 1000 and i am dissapointed with the low light in it. I need a camcorder good for green screening and dark scenes. Here is a link to a dark scene test i need.

http://s1167.photobucket.com/user/BrandonTr3/media/BACK_zpszhfk1fze.png.html

If you zoom in youll see how the quality drops and the gain increases.
Is there a camcorder that is almost or is perfect for this?

Discussion is locked

- Collapse -
Answer
1. Amazon has it for 100 less.
Apr 27, 2015 11:29AM PDT
- Collapse -
PS. That perfect camcorder.
Apr 27, 2015 11:41AM PDT

Will likely run 10 times more money to hold a huge lens and bigger sensor to make up for the bad lighting.

Why not light the shot? It's far cheaper than trying to make up with the camera.

- Collapse -
You have a choice.
Apr 28, 2015 1:52AM PDT

Consumer-grade camcorder with small lens diameter (in this case, medium - per consumer camcorders) and small imaging chip system (in this case, decent sized - but with the lens diameter, the low amount of light just can't get to it) - add LOTS of light;
or
Use a prosumer/pro grade with LARGE lens diameter and LARGE imaging chip system - and add light but maybe not so much.

Compare the lens diameter (49mm) and size of the imaging chip system (3MOS 1/2.3") in the HC920 to something like a prosumer Sony HDR-AX2000 (72mm lens diameter - 1/3" 3CMOS). More light is allowed in the larger lens diameter, and more light is processed by the larger imaging chip system. And there are more manual controls on the bigger camcorder - in this case, you can control the video gain as opposed to the auto control setting taking care of that for you.

I have been using a Sony HDR-FX1, last year got a NEX-EA50UH - because I thought a dSLR would be a good way to go - I am not disappointed with the selection (67mm diameter lens + APS-C single imaging chip), but it is nowhere near where the FX1 is relative to low light behavior. I recently picked up a HDR-AX2000. It dances circles around the EA50UH (for low light environments).

As for the Panny GX7 link you provided... you won't get the low light performance you want - it is a little dSLM and the four thirds imaging chip is about 30% smaller than an APS-C sized sensor found in other dSLRs. We already know a dSLR's single imaging chip probably won't meet your requirement. The GX7 is designed to capture still images - and while video capture can be good, video is a convenience feature. As an aside, if you read the manual
ftp://ftp.panasonic.com/camera/dmcgx7/dmc-gx7_en_om.pdf
A couple of things camcorders don't do... Typically there is no 29 minute, 59 second duration or 4 gig single file limitation. This is listed on the single page 25 devoted to video. That's interesting to note since the manual is around 90 pages. Compare this to the manual that came with the HC920... And while this may not impact the GX7, it is not uncommon for these types of cameras to overheat after about 15-20 minutes of video capture use - and they take a while to cool down (and never hit the 29 minute duration limit). It is possible this particular model does not have this issue. Like I said, these are not video quality image issues - but this is nowhere near being any type of "camcorder" - its video capture is purely a convenience feature. If you thought you need to add light for the HC920, you'll need to add even more light for the GX7.

If you insist on Panasonic for video and dealing with the low light issues you are imposing, you should be looking at the AG-AC130 or others in that line with large diameter lens (72mm or larger) and imaging chip systems (3MOS 1/3 inch - 6mm - or larger). The manual controls, specifically manual video gain control, will be more appropriate for your stated use. Yes, they are more expensive. Your trade-off is to add more light and the expense that adds rather than replacing the video capture device.

In the end, you'll end up spending about the same $... I chose to go in the direction of spending more on the camcorder. Others I know have gone the dSLR route and ended up with multiples of the same camera (one in use while others cool down). But using a consumer cam? That I have not seen because of the issues you have already identified and lighting is difficult to move.

- Collapse -
Thanks for that.
Apr 28, 2015 3:22AM PDT

Yup, fixing lighting by changing the camera is as expected a few thousand more. There are tomes about how to light a scene which I've found to be cheaper by a few thousand. The one thing I want to mention is that your newer videographer often tries to fix it with a single light. Sorry folk, but I find myself setting up 2 to a dozen light sources to get it right.
Bob

- Collapse -
Reply to profit
Apr 28, 2015 5:36AM PDT

I completely agree with you but i lit my area up more and it still is just as grainy for osme reason

- Collapse -
Grainy.
Apr 28, 2015 5:45AM PDT

Now that's a different discussion on its own. Your discussion was/is about gain or uneven field lighting.

Grain is another area in video usually seen it lower end devices, lighting issues or odd settings. Remember, the grainy video topic is well done. https://www.google.com/#q=grainy+video

What other cameras do you have? Sometimes your iPhone is better and shocks the camcorder/camera folk.
Bob

- Collapse -
FX1?
Apr 28, 2015 4:45AM PDT

So is the Sony HDR-FX1 a recommended buy for my situation?

- Collapse -
The FX1 I looked at used tape.
Apr 28, 2015 4:54AM PDT

This could cause new video folk to explode as they learn why we moved away from tape. I also wonder about a spec a read about 30 FPS. This looks very outdated.
Bob

- Collapse -
FX1s resolution
Apr 28, 2015 4:49AM PDT

I loked up the FX1 and it seems to only do 1440x1080 and not 1920x1080. Is there one that is perfect for low light AND is 1920x1080?

- Collapse -
Scope creep.
Apr 28, 2015 6:29AM PDT

The FX1 was used as my example for the optics and imaging chip. When the FX1 was new, it was one of the first prosumers that did high definition video (HD video can have resolution of 720 or 1080 horizontal lines, the FX1 does 1080i low compression, HDV format, high definition video) and records same to digital tape. This means your computer must either be equipped with a firewire port or you get an external box from the likes of Black Magic Design (Intensity Shuttle - the one that can grab the transcoded component video signal).

(For completeness, the FX1 was introduced to the world in 2004 - for a 10-year-old camcorder, it continues to do a great job.)

The discussion started as "video noise" and now we have the scope creep of 1920x1440... That's why the HDR-AX2000 and Panny AG-AC130 were listed. Big diameter lens & 3-chip imaging similar to the FX1 but different recording media and video compression methodologies. The AX2000 and AC130 record AVCHD-compressed video to flash memory cards (as opposed to HDV video to digital tape). USB cable from camcorder to computer or remove the card and use a card reader can work - depending on the computer hardware and editor (Adobe After Effects should be fine, assuming it is a current version - which is what is in the link you provided).

- Collapse -
Thanks again.
Apr 28, 2015 6:46AM PDT

I can't imagine folk getting the FX1 today due to tape and 1080i. These 2 areas alone would have folk screaming in the circles I run.

But then again my son is an audio engineer for a video house so he learned the trade and knows audio and lighting.
Bob

- Collapse -
I try to get the best gear
Apr 28, 2015 7:19AM PDT

I can when it is available... discretionally income is funny that way. The FX1 has had a good run, but the AX2000 is now in the stable. For the moment, multi-cam shoots use the FX1, NEX-EA50UH and AX2000. When properly set up, most mortals can't see the difference between the video captured by the different cams.

There is nothing that makes for "screaming in circles" other than an understanding of the tech and the requirements/limitations each has. Last year, I used the NEX-EA50UH to capture video of Law Enforcement's view of a DUI checkpoint (they asked me to do the job) - I figured that "dSLR" would be newer, better, large APS-C imaging chip and all that... only to find that the FX1 dealt with low light much better so I used the FX1 for this year's video under the same poor lighting conditions and my suspicions were confirmed... Hence the AX2000.

As long as the FX1 continues to run, I'll keep using it. Multi-camera shoots are fun to edit. I suppose I could have sprung for the new 4K FDR system, but I haven't yet seen the "compelling reason" to jump on that bandwagon.

- Collapse -
The new folk can't handle tape it seems.
Apr 28, 2015 7:31AM PDT

They'll dive into it, try USB in spite of all those that warn them off. Next they are asking for USB to Firewire cables or adapters.

Yes, I know this area but would not advise anyone today to go near tape or firewire.
Bob

- Collapse -
Camcorder choice
Apr 27, 2015 12:05PM PDT
- Collapse -
So is this uneven gain?
Apr 27, 2015 12:41PM PDT

Remember we are talking consumer, not prosumer and lens don't have compensation for gain/loss across the lens like better DSLRs. By moving to a DSLR you get that but for 1080 shooting, that sensor has too many pixels. It's been kicked around that a bigger sensor with 1920x1080 pixels (OK 2 to 8 megapixels) usually wins low light shots.

I like your selection as I've used a lot of DSLRs instead of camcorders.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonic-lumix-dmc-gx7 notes a nice remote control app from Pan.
Bob