Aaugh, I'm being mobbed by piclisters! ;-D I delayed as I haven't had time to fiddle with the actual files produced yet. The software included is, for all intents and purposes, useless (on the video end - the pictures are managed by the same software Canon uses with their SLRs, which is very good for what I need). I'm going to be looking at a few packages over the next week or two, but AVCHD is still a new format for HD video. I complicate matters further by using a Windows Vista 64 system as my main machine - Sony's video editing software, for example, installs but then crashes on startup. I still have 3-4 more AVCHD editing packages to try out, and expect I'll find something suitable this week. For now I'm using my XP laptop to transfer the video to an external HD. The laptop is not a speed demon, though, so I'm no going to attempt to edit video on it. The included software doesn't download on my Vista 64 system - it loads, and downloads smaller videos (50MB or less) but fails on larger videos. I imagine it's a driver issue Canon will eventually clear up, but as I'm saving them to an external drive anyway it doesn't matter which computer I use, so for now I'm using an XP system to take the video from the camera. The file format on the SD cards is not what you get on the PC, though, so at the moment I do have to transfer from the camera rather than an SD reader. It looks like a bunch of transport streams and a bunch of files with meta information, and the included software probably grabs the necesary files and stitches them together during the transfer. The latest nightly build of VLC (VideoLanClient) plays the raw M2TS files just fine, and I expect I can use it to transcode (and I've seen messages online saying ffmpeg works with AVCHD M2TS files now) so I don't expect it to be a roadblock, but I do wish the included software had more features, especially regarding transcoding the video to a standard mpeg4 AVI. I'm told that for 32 bit XP and Vista users, there are several good editing programs available that work out of the box - I'm running a non-standard setup. As far as the camcorder itself - - Battery life is as good/poor as described (about an hour on highest quality, 90 minutes on lower quality). I purchased a second regular battery and an external charger. I might get the extended battery later, or wait for a quality generic to become available. - Video quality from the camcorder to an HD monitor is VERY good using component out. - Audio quality is better than I expected - certainly good enough for most usage. Not noisy, picks up quiet sounds easily and clearly (small children speaking quietly). I'm pleased with it. Haven't tested for stereo seperation. - Low light performance is good - recorded a stage play from a few rows back, colors, etc were good. Could detect a slight graininess of the video. Pointing away from the stage into the darkened audience and you lose most color while the 'grain' becomes very noticable, but everything is discernable. - I do wish it was wider on the wide angle end - I found myself backing up in small rooms to get the view I wanted. There's a wide angle lens available, but I don't want the wider view so badly that I'm willing to spend $100+ on it. - Contrary to published reports I had no problems slipping the camcorder into my shirt pockets and pants pockets. It fit very nicely and I had no worries about it falling out - it goes completely inside. I'm probably going to buy a plain glass filter for it so I don't have to worry about dust or scratches on the lens from having it hit other items in my pockets - the front lens cover is held closed by springs, and opens easily if touched from the front. - The still camera images are good - I'm used to the Canon XTi DSLR which is noticably better, but it was good enough that I didn't carry the slr around with me on a recent vacation and instead used the camcorder - better than the point and shoot's I've used in the past. Now that I think about it, I have a sample: http://flickr.com/photos/adavis/2734495254/ Exif: http://flickr.com/photos/adavis/2734495254/meta/ - I'm still very surprised at the macro capabilities. Really very nice. Combined with the zoom I wish I had the camcorder with me rather than the SLR on a recent visit to a buterfly house. I couldn't get a great picture of a flying blue morpho, but I suspect a still HD video frame would have been better than what I did capture. So, the only issue I have right now is that I don't have a good video software workflow. Having not owned a camcorder before, and having heard from friends that most camcorders don't come with good software I wasn't expecting to have this set up quickly anyway, but I do wish the software had enough functionality to convert to something that Vimeo or Youtube can eat. I'm planning on taping the next Go Tech meeting (Ann Arbor local maker/electronics/computers/CNC/robots/etc enthusiast group) next Tuesday, so I expect a few days after that I'll have some video online, and I'll see about putting some of the raw stuff up so you can see what it produces. Hopefully I'll have a workflow setup by then that requires almost no effort to go from camera to HD Vimeo online. Let me know if you have any questions or want me to try something with it... -Adam On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 7:54 PM, Vitaliy wrote: > Carlos Marcano wrote: >> So, Adam, how has this nice looking camera been doing? > > Yeah, you promised to tell us more! :) > -- > http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive > View/change your membership options at > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist > -- EARTH DAY 2008 Tuesday April 22 Save Money * Save Oil * Save Lives * Save the Planet http://www.driveslowly.org -- http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist