which is better the SR1 or the gz-hd3

I was on the process of finding the best offer on the Sr1 till i ran into the the hd3. It seems better than sr1, but I'm not sure as I'm new at this. Basically I'm looking for a convinient camcorder for documenting different segments of my life as part of my university degree. The video and audio has to be boadcast quality. I like the compactness look of the hd3, but then there's the Sony brand behind the Sr1. Confused.

Frankly, Sony's brand isn't what it used to be. Not because the quality of what they're putting out has fallen, but because of Sony's obsession with forcing their customers into proprietary technologies such as the memory stick, their own spin on formatting, and a host of others which the others, like Canon and JVC won't do.

Having said that, I think you'll need to keep in mind what editing platform you'll be using. If you're on a MAC, you'll want to be sure you're using the very latest software in order to have compatibility with the SR1. On the other hand, JVCs may not be too compatible either.

If you're on PC, then you don't really have to think as much on that end. Personally, I agree with Leo LaPorte. If you're going to be dropping a thousand dollars on a HD camcorder, you won't do any better than the Canon HG10. It's strength is in it's 24p recording capability which will make your documentary really stand out like a film. And it will be broadcast quality.

I don't want to confuse you further, but don't get too caught up in the brand celebrity status that is SONY. They make good stuff, but in my view, the proprietary nonsense undercuts it a great deal.