Sony HDR-SR1 AVCHD/H.264 High Definition Camcorder Review

[Jerry Jones]

http://tinyurl.com/ydwgnb

AVCHD video is still not perfect. The image is noisy, but because the consumer HD market is so limited in choices right now (3 Sonys and 1 Canon) it manages to hold its own by comparison. Also, HD video is still a novelty. Most people raised on a steady diet of increasing compressed standard definition cable television will just stand back and say, “Wow, look how sharp!”

Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

[Hulk]

Darn, I really wanted to like this camera. Noise and limited audio control break the deal for me.

- Mark

[Jerry Jones]

Darn, I really wanted to like this camera. Noise and limited audio control break the deal for me.

- Mark

The data rate is what turns me off.

Sony's HDR-UX1 -- the 8cm DVD model -- is the worst with a constrained data rate of 12 Mbps.

Sony's HDR-SR1 -- the hard disk model in the review -- is only a tad better with a constrained data rate of 15 Mbps.

It seems obvious to me that Sony is protecting its HDV lines because the official AVCHD maximum data rate specification was raised from 18 Mbps to 24 Mbps in July of this year:

http://tinyurl.com/ylc2za

This was a quiet, but VERY SIGNIFICANT revision to the AVCHD specification, in my view.

It sends a signal from both of the major manufacturers -- Matsushita & Sony -- that they have camcorder designs in progress that will make use of that maximum data rate.

Those camcorders will be worth the wait.

Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

[Helevitia]

Even with the noise, I'm sure the camera will look better than 99% of the cameras out there. For someone like me who has been waiting for a decent non-tape camera for literally years now. I think this one will finally succeed where others have failed. No tape is a gigantic plus in my eyes. I've always hated dealing with tape. 4 hours of HQ HD, 27 hours of HQ SD. The battery will now be the limiting factor. No need to carry around extra DVDs or tapes, 5.1 audio(that I hear sounds really good). The ability to just transfer "data" from the camera to my hard drive is awesome. This camera also has way more bells and whistles than the HC3(which I returned for many reasons).

The downsides I see are, no support for AVCHD yet, but I'm sure this will be the defacto standard after some time. Some noise(but this is relative IMHO), proprietary memory stick but I really don't plan on taking pictures, tht's what I have a Rebel XT for, propriteray hot shoe and this is a bummer.

Also, I hear the data rate with AVCHD is not constant like HDV so the quality will be a lot better at much lower bit rates. This is what I've read though, I'm not sure if this is true or not. And what's up with only 2 audio channels with HDV? That seems like a huge mistake in my eyes.

So I'm seriously considering buying this since I have a 4 month old. I could record in SD for now until the AVCHD standard becomes more common place and easier to work with. Anybody else wnat to throw in there two cents good or bad as to why I should or shouldn't buy it? Thanks!

[Jerry Jones]

You're right.

Most people will think the video's great.

I just can't get over the fact that Sony is charging so much money (around $1300) for an AVCHD camcorder with a bit rate that is a full 9 Mbps BELOW the specification's possible maximum bitrate.

Plus, the stills aren't that great at 4 megapixels.

On the other hand, most consumers would probably also think that the Sanyo HD1's MPEG-4 (not H.264) video is "great."

The Sanyo can be had for $550 (although there have been disturbing reports of reliability problems).

Still, the Sanyo shoots great 5 megapixel stills, I'm told.

Those are the two "extremes" right now.

Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

[Helevitia]

I just can't get over the fact that Sony is charging so much money (around $1300) for an AVCHD camcorder with a bit rate that is a full 9 Mbps BELOW the specification's possible maximum bitrate.

You think this might have to do with CPU power? I'm thinking there is a bottleneck from the CPU that limits the bitrate. It's interesting that the bitrate is higher on the SR1 compared to the UX1 yet the UX1 gets 20 minutes more of battery life.

Although I may cringe at some of the noise I see, I don't think it will be enough to deter me. I'd love to see some footage though. The HC3 looked damn good in bright light, but dark rooms and it started to get pretty noisy. I know the SR1 is worse. Hopefully it's not too much worse. I played with it in Fry's the other day and it is definitely a kick ass camera.