Why would anyone go with the 20/30/40 instead of the HSF10/100

[jrod81]

So I am gearing up and getting ready to shoot a 30 minute short. I was going to go with a higher end camera like the XHA1 or the HMC150, but have recently changed to considering a smaller camera like the 20/30/40 or the HSF10/100...
1). I am just curious why anyone would go with the tape format of the 20/30/40 over the tapeless of the HSF100. Are there other differences that justify the 40 and HSF100 being relatively the same price?
2). I will be shooting everything in 24 so is that an issue on either of the cameras?
3). Also, I will be adding a DOF adapter onto the camera and can't decided between the Handy35.com or the Letus Mini... any suggestions?
thanks guys
jared

[iThinkergoiMac]

1. Tapes are a little higher quality and don't use AVCHD so the computer doesn't have to work nearly as hard to process video from a tape.

2. The HV40 is the only HV series camera that doesn't require pulldown removal for true 24p. I don't know how it works for the tapeless cameras...

[Maxwell]

Why didn't you shoot your short with the XH-A1? Like Imac said your computer has to have a lot of power to handle AVCHD. Well good luck!

[Snazzy Flapper]

I will be adding a DOF adapter

Why does everyone call a 35mm adapter a DOF adapter? DOF ALWAYS EXISTS in everything you shoot. How shallow or deep it is, is of course a matter of physics.

[jrod81]

the xha1 was a friend's and well... using other people's stuff is always a sticky situation. i suppose it could still be an option but i would love to have my own setup

[Bif]

1. Tapes are a little higher quality and don't use AVCHD so the computer doesn't have to work nearly as hard to process video from a tape.

I think you have this partially backwards. In the HV series while the sensor is 1920x1080 and the bitrate 25Mbps what is recorded to tape is 1440x1080. AVCHD in the HF series is 1920x1080 at 17Mbps (higher bitrate in the HF S series) and when I compare video shot in HDV to video shot at 1920x1080 on my HF100 there is a visible and noticeable difference in favor of the AVCHD.

AVCHD is often the "little bit higher quality".

2. The HV40 is the only HV series camera that doesn't require pulldown removal for true 24p. I don't know how it works for the tapeless cameras...[/QUOTE]

Canon's current tapeless cams will still require pulldown removal for true 24p.

[hepabst]

I just got an HV40 last week. I had 2 hv20's and made nice flicks with them and thought I'd get the lastest version because I don't have the money right now for a super new Mac (6000.00). I have a dual G5 2.7.

Unless someone has tried it with a step down ring, I do not beleive my Letus Mini will work on a 58mm filter ring (HFs 10/100). Has anyone tried it?

I will say not having to reverse telecine the 24 is sweet. It just drops into the timeline no problem. The file format from the camera is 1080p24.

[venture]

To sum it up, I think tape's advantages are easy archiving, and lower computer system requirements. I did talk about this a bit on my site (link in my sig). Regarding video quality, it used to be accepted that the HV20/30/40 had higher quality than the comparable AVCHD cameras, but others would know better if that is still the case.

Can anyone speak to transfer times? I had always assumed that tapeless camcorders would transfer footage to a PC faster than a tape-based camcorder, but on a recent Leo Laporte podcast, he was discussing how disappointed he was to find that a new camcorder (I'm not sure which model) with flash storage actually was slower than real time in transferring the video to the computer. He's a big HV20/30 fan, by the way.

[Rumpelgeist]

I had always assumed that tapeless camcorders would transfer footage to a PC faster than a tape-based camcorder, but on a recent Leo Laporte podcast, he was discussing how disappointed he was to find that a new camcorder (I'm not sure which model) with flash storage actually was slower than real time in transferring the video to the computer. He's a big HV20/30 fan, by the way.
Do not bother with camcorders with stupid built-in flash memory. Use memory cards. Pull out, stick into computer, copy. On my machine it takes about 1 minute per 1GB.

[Kyleman]

Do not bother with camcorders with stupid built-in flash memory. Use memory cards. Pull out, stick into computer, copy.

Agreed, I Don't like the idea of built-in flash, just because its something extra that can fail, and I wouldn't use it much anyways. I just ordered an HFS100 with a Sandisk 8gb Extreme III SD card. Cant wait when it gets here Friday (12th).

[Yzed]

Also there is no viewfinder on HFS10/100 series !!! In my opinion it is a huge difference in feature (i always use it).

[venture]

Do not bother with camcorders with stupid built-in flash memory. Use memory cards. Pull out, stick into computer, copy. On my machine it takes about 1 minute per 1GB.

Yea, I should have been more clear. When I said "flash memory", I was referring to memory cards, which, as I understand it, are flash memory cards. You're really hamstringing yourself if you limit yourself to the built-in storage. I'm not sure if Leo was referring to the transfer times on a camera with built-in flash, or flash media.

[koolpenguin89]

Why does everyone call a 35mm adapter a DOF adapter? DOF ALWAYS EXISTS in everything you shoot. How shallow or deep it is, is of course a matter of physics.

People call it that because some of the companies that make them call them that, and because precise control over the depth of field is one of the main reasons for purchasing a 35mm lens adapter. Also its more a matter of optics than physics.

Dylan

[Shadow_7]

My main concern with flash based cams is at what point does the mercury dictate IF the camcorder can even be used. To my knowledge, tape based cams aren't as restricted in that regard. And at current, at least where I live, I can't just walk into a store and buy a suitable SDHC card for my camcorder. Otherwise I like the transfer rate of a card reader. It makes moving things around so much easier. Plus being able to re-use the media over and over is a plus. Although I desire the A/V INPUT of the HV series, and a focus wheel.

[Rumpelgeist]

My main concern with flash based cams is at what point does the mercury dictate IF the camcorder can even be used. To my knowledge, tape based cams aren't as restricted in that regard. And at current, at least where I live, I can't just walk into a store and buy a suitable SDHC card for my camcorder.
Blah. Unless you use cards for storage, you don't need to buy them again and again, they are rewritable.

[pro-hobbyist]

I would like to point out on the subject of computer demands that AVCHD takes up a lot less hard drive space than HDV.

[Snazzy Flapper]

Also its more a matter of optics than physics.


I won't bother pointing out how stupid that comment was.

[Rumpelgeist]

I won't bother pointing out how stupid that comment was.
You just did.

[Yzed]

Remember that tapes allow durable save of the rushes (even though some may consider that a hard drive is secure, i dont).

Besides, i easily and flawlessly write my edited movies back to tapes in full HDV format without recompression. You would need blue ray disk for AVCHD and, what i dont know about but maybe you can clear it up for me, maybe still a small quality loss cause blue ray film will be of a different compression than native avchd rush.

[SenorKaffee]

If I had to buy a new camera now, I'd choose a tapeless cam. I don't use the viewfinder, I don't write back to tape. Adapters are available for both cameras, you just have to order the right one.

I'd say get a AVCHD sample from somewhere and try to edit it in your NLE - this will give you a realistic impression how well your system will handle this format.

@pro-hobbyist

I'm not sure if you mean the files recorded by the cam or finished movies in that format. AVCHD includes data rates up to 24 Mbit, that's pretty close to the 25 Mbit of HDV. Finished movies distributed over the internet usually use only a fraction of that bitrate.

[Rumpelgeist]

Remember that tapes allow durable save of the rushes
Without a deck to play them, the tapes are useless. Cards are so cheap now that some people already use them for long term storage.


Besides, i easily and flawlessly write my edited movies back to tapes in full HDV format without recompression.
You don't add ANY effects? Not even color correction?


You would need blue ray disk for AVCHD
Nope.


and, what i dont know about but maybe you can clear it up for me, maybe still a small quality loss cause blue ray film will be of a different compression than native avchd rush.
Nope.

[Yzed]

@ Aramis :

- can play the tapes with the camcorder (what desk do you talk about?)... can keep the rushes to edit them in 10 years, but ok, you can save on SD cards as well (still expensive in my opinion !!!! but fine, it gets cheaper every day)
- i try to not correct all the rushes, thus some of them are not recompressed by Vegas, however that's true
- Blue ray not needed for avchd : does your SD camcorder read the edited footage ? i do not find the "render as ACVHD" option in Vegas. What kind of reader do you use, how does it work ? how to make sure the codecs are understood by the reader ? (computer connected to your TV?)

I do not know much about the post-processing and reading for AVCHD format Aramis but i'm glad if you can clear that up for me. In fact, i found it so easy to edit / write back HDV / read it in the camcorder / archieving rushes and thousand tapes / ... Once the rushes are on the hard drive anyway you get the same things as AVCHD (but easier format to edit!). I also feel like time consuming capture is the ONLY downside to tapes actually... but do you capture 5 hours of footage every day ?

Only thing i am worried about tape is that i'm always scared to delete footage by mistake, which can barely happen with SD card. It happened once to me, i filmed on very nice and fresh footage (i was not awake that day, had rewind the tape) and lost very nice stuff (/CRY).

[Jack Frost]

I will agree with you very much on what you said below.

#1 - Rewinding a tape to play back footage is a PITA.
#2 - Forgetting to fast forward the tape to the end of your footage
is another PITA, and YES ! ... if you forget, it's a bad thing.

I own the HV20, my friend has the HF 100. He can shoot video,
then play it back 2 seconds later. He can then start shooting again a second later, - basically going from playing back footage, to recording new footage.

This is a huge PLUS when you think about it. Because of this, I very very seldom even play back a tape... it's just not worth it, and I would never wish to forget to fast forward to the end of my current recording.

Yeah scary stuff indeed.


@ Aramis :

Only thing i am worried about tape is that i'm always scared to delete footage by mistake, which can barely happen with SD card. It happened once to me, i filmed on very nice and fresh footage (i was not awake that day, had rewind the tape) and lost very nice stuff (/CRY).

[Rumpelgeist]

> can play the tapes with the camcorder (what desk do you talk about?).

Camcorder is a deck. When/after it is gone, your tapes are useless. You will be running around like a mad dog trying to find a deck for your HDV tapes. On contrary, you can find zillion of computers to stick an SDHC card in. Or you can buy a $10 adapter to USB and find a quadra-zillion of computers to stick it into. And if they come up with different card format you can just copy files to another card/disk/whatever. Tapes are very unflexible.

> Blue ray not needed for avchd : does your SD camcorder read the edited footage ?

Why do I need to put edited footage back to camcorder?

> i do not find the "render as ACVHD" option in Vegas.

Render as AVC transport stream. Build AVCHD file structure with an authoring program.

> What kind of reader do you use, how does it work ?
> how to make sure the codecs are understood by the reader ?
> (computer connected to your TV?)

You mean, the player? I have a Blu-ray disc player. I also have a 24-inch monitor, so I usually watch my stuff on a computer, who needs a TV :)

> but do you capture 5 hours of footage every day ?

No. On contrary, with an HDV camcorder I have to wait until the tape is fully recorded, it is like a month. With a card-based cam I pull out the card, copy new files onto a computer, then stick the card back into the cam. Just like with a digital still camera. Pure bliss.

[net]

> can play the tapes with the camcorder (what desk do you talk about?).

Camcorder is a deck. When/after it is gone, your tapes are useless. You will be running around like a mad dog trying to find a deck for your HDV tapes. On contrary, you can find zillion of computers to stick an SDHC card in. Or you can buy a $10 adapter to USB and find a quadra-zillion of computers to stick it into. And if they come up with different card format you can just copy files to another card/disk/whatever.

Then once the decks are scarce, there will be people/companies who still have decks and you will have to mail them the tapes so they can transfer the footage into data for you.
Perhaps one day, in the not-too-distant future, blank tapes will be a lot more expensive because they cut back production or just because they can charge more.

[pro-hobbyist]

Net - There are already services set up where you can pay to have your VHS and 8mm tapes put on DVDs.

The hf100 records at 17mbps, and its files come out to roughly 8gb/hr. That is small enough that if you get a 500gb HDD for $85 you can put 62.5 hours (63 DV tapes) on it, put it in a safe somewhere, and have an affordable archive. 63 tapes, on the other hand, would cost you $157.50. Therefore, AVCHD is cheaper (and easier!) to archive.

[Jack Frost]

Hmm, so the Canon 5D Mark II basically does 2x the mbps ? , I find that kind of hard to believe.

What about the HV20 ? anyone know the mbps of it ?

I just bought a 1 Tb drive for $99, Seagate, 32 megs of cache, SAta II.

Hard drive prices today are amazing vs even 2 years ago.



Net - There are already services set up where you can pay to have your VHS and 8mm tapes put on DVDs.

The hf100 records at 17mbps, and its files come out to roughly 8gb/hr. That is small enough that if you get a 500gb HDD for $85 you can put 62.5 hours (63 DV tapes) on it, put it in a safe somewhere, and have an affordable archive. 63 tapes, on the other hand, would cost you $157.50. Therefore, AVCHD is cheaper (and easier!) to archive.

[Rumpelgeist]

hmm, so the canon 5d mark ii basically does 2x the mbps ? , i find that kind of hard to believe.
mjpeg

[troyhv20]

The hfs10/100 records at 24mbps.

[net]

What about the HV20 ? anyone know the mbps of it ?

I just bought a 1 Tb drive for $99, Seagate, 32 megs of cache, SAta II.


The HV20 is 25mbps, the bandwidth is megabits per second (not megabytes).

HV20 will take up 13 gigs of hard drive space for every hour of tape.

1TB = 1000 gigs

1000 gigs/13 = about 77 one hour tapes...(although your HDD may read something like 950gb when installing it due to manufacturer's capacity measurements/the way your OS reports it).

[mr_mayat]

Hi,

Been reading this forum for quite some time and learn a lot from it, but this is my first post. Here' my take on the issue:

A few months back before purchasing a HV30, i did consider the going tapeless.

A few things I thought about before going for the HV30.

1. I don't have a pc with the power to edit AVCHD.

2. From experience I don't find capturing from tape a bother . I always do something else while capturing, like I did for previous camcorders.

3. I don't trust harddisk or cards too much. Even on an enterprise server where I work photographs and media files have got corrupted. Plus, my camera memory card got severely corrupted after 1st use. Fortunately it was still under warranty then.
But I guess there's no turning back, hdd and mem cards are here to stay.

4. Adding to that, the server backups uses tapes.

5. Tapes are cheap. About $3 a pop, so can always keep a dozen or more spares and they are easily available.

6. As for reviewing the footage, I can always do a blank search.

The only downside to tape is you end up with a huge library of tapes and you either re-use the tape or patiently catalogue them, which is a huge PITA.

AVCHD is the now/future but I think the HV30 can last me for at least 3 years. By then, HD hybrid camcorder/DSLR would be common. And it going to have memory cards too.

Hopefully my pc/laptop will have the firepower then.

[DebG.]

....

HV20 will take up 13 gigs of hard drive space for every hour of tape.

1TB = 1000 gigs
....



That has been the case for me except when I capture in Full as opposed to Large for HDV. It goes from around 13 gigs space to about 4 x that amount of space. That's quite a bit more hard drive storage, but if I want to maintain the best quality, especially for future purposes (eg Blu-Ray, etc.), then that seems what you have to do.

Is that reasoning correct?

Thanks, Deborah

[vadis]

Also there is no viewfinder on HFS10/100 series !!! In my opinion it is a huge difference in feature (i always use it).

+1

[Yzed]

Aramis i see you are marketing avchd, however some of your comments are biaised about hdv :
- you do not have to wait the end of the tape before reviewing it: just rewind, play, then use the function/feature that searches for the end of the tape and gets the cam ready for new footage.
- HDD storage : you get it with HDV as well, and size does not matter anymore. But with HDV you still get tapes archieves IN ADDITION to other kind of storages.

[Jack Frost]

Ah ! .... you hit on one of my pet peeves with my HV20.

I can't tell you how many times I've lost a bit of tape, at the end of a tape because I know I don't have enough time left on that tape to tape an event.

For example, I have about 10 mins of tape left in my HV20, I'm sitting at my daughter's school, and start filming.... oops, I had better stop I think.... the even hasn't started yet, oh look it now says I have 6 mins left.... crap !, so I stop filming before the event starts and take the tape out, flip it to "safety" mode ( so that you can't re-record on it ) and then pop another new tape into the camera.

I have done this countless times, many times with a good 10 mins of tape left.... seems like nothing, but when you pay for a 60 min tape, and you don't use it all, it's not good, and that adds up over time.

Yah, tapes are on their way out, that's for sure. One thing I must mention, is that I do really believe the electonics require to run tape is much more elaborate, - when you look at the mechanism that turns the tape, that records the tape... there's a lot of stuff a camera maker puts in there.

I equate it to the days of VHS machines, vs DVD players. Did you ever open an old VHS machine ? and see the stuff inside ? ... it's mind boggling the amount of electronics in there, including the tape mechanism.

Now open an old DVD player.... it's so simple, it's so elementry vs the the VHS machine.

I guess my point also is this, in reality, flash camcorders will be less expensive to make once people, all people are using them....

Yup tape camcorders for the general public are on their way out, I will use my HV20 until it dies, and then that's it, it's onto an AVCHD camcorder.

One thing I wonder...... will AVCHD be around for some years to come ? or will AVCHD be replaced by something else ?

ah and I almost forget, how I wish I could pop a card out of my camcorder and just use that footage I just shot. In order to do so is a big ordeal. Rewind tape to section
you want, hook cam to computer, open editing software, capture footage.... it's a bunch of time.

I also own a Canon TX1, and because it's a flash based ( not AVCHD though ) camera, I tend to favor it, many times over my HV20, just because I can shoot a 20 video for my
parents, pop out the card, copy the video over to the computer and 3 mins later the card is back in my Canon TX1 video camera.
This cam does 720p video, which isn't bad, the quality is pretty darn good for such a small camera, but it isn't 1080 HV20 quality, that's for sure !




No. On contrary, with an HDV camcorder I have to wait until the tape is fully recorded, it is like a month. With a card-based cam I pull out the card, copy new files onto a computer, then stick the card back into the cam. Just like with a digital still camera. Pure bliss.

[Jack Frost]

I'd like have somebody explain this,
I don't understand it.

As far as I know, when you record with the HV20, the largest capture is
13 gig per hour ( per tape ) it's actually exactly 12.9 gigs.

There is no way to record more than 12.9 gb per hour, that's it, that's all. When you import this to the computer, you will also see that it's about 13 gb per tape, if you have
recorded about 60 mins.



That has been the case for me except when I capture in Full as opposed to Large for HDV. It goes from around 13 gigs space to about 4 x that amount of space. That's quite a bit more hard drive storage, but if I want to maintain the best quality, especially for future purposes (eg Blu-Ray, etc.), then that seems what you have to do.

Is that reasoning correct?

Thanks, Deborah

[Jack Frost]

Very interesting comment, and gives a little fire to my thoughts about AVCHD not lasting many years.... I'm figuring AVCHD is a stepping stone to something bigger and better in 5 years time.

Did you read something about this perhaps happening on a tech website ? or is this something you just thought may happen ? ... which I believe is the way it is going also by the way, so I agree with your comment.

not sure what you mean by "and it going to have memory cards too " though :hv20-smilie50:

Hi,

AVCHD is the now/future but I think the HV30 can last me for at least 3 years. By then, HD hybrid camcorder/DSLR would be common. And it going to have memory cards too.

[bluegrass]

Why?

Because it's an inmature workflow and it requires more expenseive hardware to get an equivilant product complete.

It's time is coming but it's not quite yet.

[zephyrnoid]

Why the same f-stop can result in a varying depth of field effect depending on the lenses compared

Why does everyone call a 35mm adapter a DOF adapter? DOF ALWAYS EXISTS in everything you shoot. How shallow or deep it is, is of course a matter of physics.
You are correct, however, given the relatively small (measured) maximum aperture diameter of the f1.8 on the HVXX built-in lenses; they do not yield the same level of bokeh as do f1.8's of physically larger optics as you would find on 35mm cameras and larger Video cameras. So the 'idea' is to force MORE bokeh by adding a large optic in front of a ground-glass, effectively turning the HVXX into a 'copy camera' . It works! The results are founded in physics, as you said. The reason they call them DOF adapters is that they really deliver much more Bokeh than the dinky stock HVXX lenses. They should really be called +Bokeh Adapters.
Sadly, all the extra money spent on adapters, external monitors and related mounting hardware, ends up costing about the same as a Canon MK5 with one lens, which you'll notice, has physically larger lenses, thus greater Bokeh (shallower DOF) at the same apertures as the dinky HVXX lenses.
As sensor technology improves along with cooling systems, the clip length of the new breed of hybrids, will become realistic (currently 12 minutes on Canon MK5) and then you'll see the cameras we're all working towards through hacking, come of the shelf, ready to use:hv20-smilie70:

[mr_mayat]

Very interesting comment, and gives a little fire to my thoughts about AVCHD not lasting many years.... I'm figuring AVCHD is a stepping stone to something bigger and better in 5 years time.

Did you read something about this perhaps happening on a tech website ? or is this something you just thought may happen ? ... which I believe is the way it is going also by the way, so I agree with your comment.

not sure what you mean by "and it going to have memory cards too " though :hv20-smilie50:

Panasonic has the Lumix GH1, DSLR with AVCHD. I'll bet this hybrid will be more common and affordable soon. Other manufacturers had done it but from what I've read, what Panasonic does is way better.

With this kind of device using memory cards, my next upgrade will surely be this kind of device. No more DV tapes by then. And no need for any DOF adapter.

[venture]

One thing I wonder...... will AVCHD be around for some years to come ? or will AVCHD be replaced by something else ?


Great point. That's the one PITA about video shooting/editing, and I guess computers in general. We shoot this stuff thinking it will last forever, but every several years the formats change. To keep our old stuff, we have to spend the time to transition to a new format. I have old DVDs from several years ago, that I'm almost afraid to play given what I hear about the lifespan of DVDs. *sigh* The never ending battle to stay current.

[tailschao]

That has been the case for me except when I capture in Full as opposed to Large for HDV. It goes from around 13 gigs space to about 4 x that amount of space. That's quite a bit more hard drive storage, but if I want to maintain the best quality, especially for future purposes (eg Blu-Ray, etc.), then that seems what you have to do.

Is that reasoning correct?

Thanks, Deborah
Incorrect.

I don't know how you're capturing, but the data recorded for 60mins on a HDV tape is 13GB in size. When capturing the footage, if you're doing it right, you are doing nothing more than effectively copying and pasting the 13GB from tape to hard drive - no change to the data at all. If you somehow end up with a 4x larger file size, you are re-encoding the footage while capturing - resulting in lower quality than If you had captured properly.

[Yzed]

The fact that something is new and shown as "the Future" does not mean it is better at this time. I do not jump into the "it's new, its better" marketing and lobbying. Actually i believe AVCHD might be the future but it's just not right now in my opinion, thus i'm waiting 2-3 years more.

When numerical cams appeared they were far from digital cams quality. DVD, mp3 & Cie do not have the charm (and even sometimes, the quality and richness) of the sound provided by old good Vinyls. When LCD computers screens been released they were really crap for gaming. When gazoil (american may not use these kind of engines though but in europe, we do) came out, these engines were not efficient at all compared to super. And so on...

I want to believe AVCHD is better than tapes and switch to flash cams, but i still see important advantages of tapes vs flash cams right now, for my use, and most of all i refuse the "it is new, it is the future, you must have" blind marketing and lobbying argument.

[DigitalSFX]

Reading all the comments I am still a bit confused.

I was about to buy a HV30 or HV40. But I read a review saying the HF10 has 900 lines, therefore broadcast quality.

My prime concern in quality. Which has a better quality ? whch one should I buy ?

The HF10 also has a higher bitrate - how does that effect the picture quality and video workflow ?

Secondly does HF10 have 'rolling shutter' problem like HV30/40 series ?

which has better sound recording options with external mics ?

And which is easier to edit ?


Thanks

[Yzed]

Reading all the comments I am still a bit confused.

I was about to buy a HV30 or HV40. But I read a review saying the HF10 has 900 lines, therefore broadcast quality.

No, i think it it is around 650 lines according to camcorderinfo.

HF10 is 1920x1080 and HV30/40 is 1440x1080, thus you may end up theorically with a slightly sharper image with HF10. HF10 has smaller sensor than hv30/40 that may affect low light sensitivity and DOF.


My prime concern in quality. Which has a better quality ? whch one should I buy ?

The HF10 also has a higher bitrate - how does that effect the picture quality and video workflow ?

That's untrue, HV30/40 have higher bitrate (25mb/s) than hf10 (17mb/s).


And which is easier to edit ?

HV30/40 hands down is easiest to edit (HDV). HF10 uses AVCHD that requires alot more power and the right softwares.

Take some time reading reviews like on camcorderinfo... and also think about what you want, features (flash versus tape, viewfinder, zebras & other features... etc).

[jet]

My take on this, i tried avchd for a year but depite the fact the cam i had gave a good picture[but certainly no better than my hv30]the only way i could see the whole 1920x1080 res is by cam playback or burn the cams files to bd, i could not edit them any way on my quad core pc only delete or shorten the files, any transition or titles would not render in 1920 so i had to convert to mpeg 2 which then came out slightly less resolution than my hdv cams.
many say the apeal of avchd is fast download to the pc but even if the files load fast to the pc it does take a time to get them to a working time line and i personaly like to watch what i have filmed on my hd tv beside the pc as it captures, at least it gives you some idea of what you plan to do with the film and if there are any faults etc.