Help me decide:Which HD camcorder?CMOS Sony Or 3CCD JVC?

[allnighter]

I am trying to make a decision between two 120GB High Def camcorders:

The Sony HDR-SR12E with a CMOS sensor and 5.1 D.Digital sound.



Full specs here:
http://www.sony.co.uk/view/ShowProduct.action?prod...

OR


The JVC GZ-HD6EK 3CCD.


Full specs here:
http://www.jvc.co.uk/product.php?id=GZ-HD6EK&c...


Picture quality-wise am I better off going for the 3CCD JVC and sacrificing 5.1 DD sound?

Your opinions will be very much appreciated.
Thank you

[toohuge]

I think that either would do. I would go for the sony personally as the surround sound microphone is a pretty cool gadget to have and if you got the JVC all you would ever think is i wonder what surround sound would sound like.

In terms of picture quality reading spec sheets is inconclusive, both will output to 1900x1200 which is massive resolution and i imagine that you would need some serious kit to begin to see the difference in quality between the two.

Ask a camera shop if you can borrow one for the day/weekend and see what you think.

[allnighter]

toohuge said:

I think that either would do. I would go for the sony personally as the surround sound microphone is a pretty cool gadget to have and if you got the JVC all you would ever think is i wonder what surround sound would sound like.

In terms of picture quality reading spec sheets is inconclusive, both will output to 1900x1200 which is massive resolution and i imagine that you would need some serious kit to begin to see the difference in quality between the two.

Ask a camera shop if you can borrow one for the day/weekend and see what you think.

I have just invested in an Adobe Creative Suite3 production premium package (which cost more than the above camcorders will do) and a BlackMagic intensity pro HDMI capture PCI-E card for lossless HDMI capture(fantastic kit).


Specs here:
http://www.blackmagic-design.com/products/intensit...


The main question for me is how good is the Sony CMOS compared to JVC's 3CCD? I have always been told that 3CCD is the best when it comes to colour and picture quality.If the JVC had 5.1 DD I would have gone for it, but my priority is of course the High def picture quality.







ETA:English is not cooperating today.

Edited by allnighter on Saturday 8th March 14:08

[twister]

allnighter said:

I have always been told that 3CCD is the best when it comes to colour and picture quality.

All things being equal, this is true, but are all things equal for these two? I don't know how these two cameras shape up, but when I got my HDSR1 it was winning all the image quality reviews even when compared against comparable cost 3CCD cameras...

[Balmoral Green]

I have had an HD 3CCD Everio for almost three years now, it's been very good, the video quality is superb. The stills are rubbish though, my five year old Ixus gives much better pics. I don't know anything about the Sony, but I won't buy Sony because I went through a patch where in a bizarre coincidence several Sony products I bought all failed one by one in a relatively short period of time.

[toohuge]

Sorry i did not read the specification properly. i thought both had the triple sensor arrangement. I would opt for the triple CCD as that is what most pro cameras use. It makes a lot of sense to do so.

[twister]

toohuge said:

I would opt for the triple CCD as that is what most pro cameras use. It makes a lot of sense to do so.

Indeed, all things being equal, using one sensor per colout channel makes loads of sense. The problems start when you begin to make the inevitable compromises necessary in a consumer-level camera - for a 3-chipper you've got the cost of the 3 sensors plus related electronics, and the optical splitter used to separate the RGB components, plus the extra manufacturing costs to align the 3 chips, whereas in a single chipper all you've got is the single sensor/electronics. So for a given price point, you can either spend your sensor budget on a single decent quality chip or on three lower quality ones - for the two cameras mentioned by the OP, Sony are using a 1/3.wibble inch sensor whereas JVC are using 1/5 inch ones... The question then is whether one decent sensor gives you the same/better quality than 3 lower-quality sensors, and that's one of those questions the answer to which is very much a personal thing.

So yes, for the same sensor technology, 3 chips win every time, but you'll have to pay a premium for them. For two similarly priced cameras, with otherwise comparable specs (lens, storage type/size, resolution etc) the 3-chipper might be more of a marketing ploy than a genuine attempt at increasing the image quality over the 1-chipper...

[cirks]

Not knowledgeable about either of those but it may be worth looking at the Panasonic HD-SD1 (now SD5) - Pretty sure 5.1 surround sound on it. Despite coming from the same stable, Panasonic has a much better reliability reputation than JVC according to most tests I've seen.

[allnighter]

Thank you all for your replies: Panny is not an option as it has no hard drive.My inclination is towards the 3CCd JVC now after the comments on this thread.On paper the JVC seems to have the edge quality-wise (Full HD at 26.6 Mbps) as opposed to Sony's 16Mbps.The JVC has the facilty for adding an external microphone (a bonus) but loses out on 5.1 DD sound.
Basically I don't mind paying extra for a 3CCD camcorder if the quality will surpass CMOS.Cost-wise CMOS does make sense in keeping camcorders wallet frienly.However wallet-friendliness does make sacrifices.
Now it's just a matter of waiting for the release date.Can't wait.
Any tips on who's the best online camcorder retailer for JVC?

[gixxer1000]

Did you go for the JVC in the end? I am considering it myself. I'd be very interested in how you are getting on with it (assuming you bought it of course).

Cheers,
Gixxer