Another format bites the dust

[toups]

Just ordered some Sony Digital8 (Hi8) 8mm tapes for my Sony Camcorder. Found out these tapes are being discontinued. Oh well, nice format while it lasted.

Guess I'll have to think about upgrading camcorders at some point or else re-using tapes after uploading rather than using as archive storage. Of course once my camera dies, I will be out of luck unless e-bay comes to the rescue. (My camera can read both my Hi8 and Digital8 tapes, not sure many can and all have been discontinued.)

 

[danj]

I always liked the Hi8/8mm format. Quality was better than VHS unless one went to the expensive SVHS format. I had a very nice Hi8 camcorder that I mistakenly let one of my sons borrow. You know the story - he broke it.

Hope you're buying as many tapes as you can afford. It never hurts to have a few extras......

 

[toups]

Actually I liked Hi8 better than Digital8. Digital8 was uncompressed video while Hi8 was analog. Both were very good but you could get 2 hours on a tape using Hi8 but only a shade under 90 minutes using the extended mode in Digital8 (60 minutes using standard whatever that meant.) Not sure digital bought anything over analog in this case.

 

[cratz2]

Other than cost, are there any particular reasons or features of your existing cameras that you can't find in current/recent cameras? I know stepping into a semi-pro camera or a DSLR can be pricey and daunting, but there are many 'mirrorless' cameras available for very reasonably that are capable of giving excellent to entry level professional results. There are too many to mention but the Panasonic GH2, for example, is available for used for $250-300 with a kit zoom lens. Add a wider aperture prime and I bet you'd be really surprised with the results. Many of the Sony NEX/Alpha mirrorless cameras are impressive as well and can sometimes be found for $200-250 with a kit lens.

I realize that's not the point of your thread, but just throwing it out there.

As an aside, I saw about 20 new Hi-8 tapes at a Goodwill a couple months ago for $.69 each.

 

[toups]

Other than cost, are there any particular reasons or features of your existing cameras that you can't find in current/recent cameras? I know stepping into a semi-pro camera or a DSLR can be pricey and daunting, but there are many 'mirrorless' cameras available for very reasonably that are capable of giving excellent to entry level professional results. There are too many to mention but the Panasonic GH2, for example, is available for used for $250-300 with a kit zoom lens. Add a wider aperture prime and I bet you'd be really surprised with the results. Many of the Sony NEX/Alpha mirrorless cameras are impressive as well and can sometimes be found for $200-250 with a kit lens.

I realize that's not the point of your thread, but just throwing it out there.

As an aside, I saw about 20 new Hi-8 tapes at a Goodwill a couple months ago for $.69 each.

Definitely a valid set of points. Well, cost is one reason but not an overriding reason and another is a reluctance to "trash" a perfectly good camcorder. The camera in question was what I consider to be almost semi-pro so other than not being HD it supported a variety of features including 16:9 format images and manual override of focus and exposure.

Another reason is that it will take time to research to see what is currently available. Cameras as opposed to camcorders usually have limitations with respect to record times for recording live events.

I guess I have a problem with replacing equipment that currently meets my needs with new variants that may or may not have the features I use. Plus there is always a learning curve with new equipment, sometimes the curve can be steep.

Guess I might need to check out other sources for tapes.

P.S. Just as a relevant example, when I had to replace the Hi8 with the Digital8 model because the tape drive failed on the Hi8, I had roughly the same features and similar image quality but reduced record times.

 

[gizzyman47]

I see these tapes often at my local thrift store for cheap.

 

[cratz2]

If I happen to see any tapes, I'll be glad to grad 'em for you.

I understand what you mean about sticking with existing gear that you know well. I had an XL1 for a long time, past it's expected use by most years, but I finally replaced it with a used HG21. Discounting the HD ability, I'm still not sure which is/was the better camera. The XL1 sure did a lot of things right for the time and for the money. I didn't realize until recently that the movie 28 Days Later was shot the on XL1.

 

[Late Boomer]

Actually I liked Hi8 better than Digital8. Digital8 was uncompressed video while Hi8 was analog. Both were very good but you could get 2 hours on a tape using Hi8 but only a shade under 90 minutes using the extended mode in Digital8 (60 minutes using standard whatever that meant.) Not sure digital bought anything over analog in this case.

Digital8 is the same as DV. It is a high-quality format that is better than any analog standard definition format including Betacam SP. Hi8 is consumer-grade analog format. It can try competing regarding luminance resolution (~400 vs 550 TVL), but its chrominance resolution is as abysmal as the basic Video8 or VHS or SVHS, about 30 TVL. Garbage. No wonder no one used VHS or Hi8 for serious filmmaking back in 1980s and early 1990s.

Definitely a valid set of points. Well, cost is one reason but not an overriding reason and another is a reluctance to "trash" a perfectly good camcorder. The camera in question was what I consider to be almost semi-pro so other than not being HD it supported a variety of features including 16:9 format images and manual override of focus and exposure.

Is it true 16:9 or just a matted 4:3 frame? Can it record in progressive-scan mode? Does it have a gentler gamma profile to lift the blacks and avoid blowing out the whites? I don't think so.

I understand what you mean about sticking with existing gear that you know well. I had an XL1 for a long time, past it's expected use by most years, but I finally replaced it with a used HG21. Discounting the HD ability, I'm still not sure which is/was the better camera. The XL1 sure did a lot of things right for the time and for the money. I didn't realize until recently that the movie 28 Days Later was shot the on XL1.

An older, bigger, semi-pro camera will have more manual controls, but in terms of sheer image quality newer consumer camera trump a 10-year old pro camera most of the times. No contest.

I would agree that constant replacement of equipment is not environment-friendly. But I would raise the bar higher than Hi8/SVHS. @toups, at the very least you should shoot in DV. I personally had a 4K camera and sold it, don't feel I need 4K now, and handling HD is easier with my computer. To me, the difference between HD and 4K is much less noticeable than between digital HD and Hi8.