Slashdot Mirror
Reviews for Digital Camcorders?
bluprint asks: "I've been looking for information regarding digital camcorders. Googling for 'digital camcorder reviews' (and other variations) of course brings up tons of results, but I thought I would get input from the slashdot crowd. Does Slashdot have any suggestions on these camcorders considering price, features and quality? I plan to use it for my summer vacation, but also intend to keep it for many years (possibly even after I have kids, in a couple years), so I'm willing to spend a little more for something high quality, which uses media that will be around for a while. I'm not interested in fancy/artistic things like video editing on my computer, I just want high quality video, preferably keeping it under $1000. Are there suggestions on where to read some thorough, quality reviews of different products, and maybe even educate myself about what to look for in a digital camcorder?"
i've found dvspot.com to be a wonderful resource
price, features and quality? I plan to use it for my summer vacation
You need the most powerful zoom you can find. The bigger the zoom, the further away you can be from the nudist beach.
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
Get one with a low LUX number. The lower the number, the better it will record in low light situations like indoors.
A lot of camcorders ***cough***Sony***cough*** advertise having things like "Night Vision", but have a really crappy LUX rating, which makes them useless unless you are outdoors in the bright sun or in total darkness.
I'm a big fan of the canon line. The quality is great, the image stabilization is amazing, and the form factors are way more usable than the other major brands. I always felt like I was going to accidentally flip switches and press buttons with everyone else's cameras. Anyways, my humble opinion. It's a place to start looking.
I've heard from pros that you really want a camcorder with three CCDs. They pick up more detail in the darker parts of the image. I think the cheapest are in the $1,500 range, though.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
Best camera for the price. Flourite lense. Small form factor, better quality picture and sond than anything for less than a Canon XL-1.
It has FireWire out as well as super video. The picture quality is breathtaking and Canon has better red tones than anybody. Enough features to do about what ever you want. Absolutely intuitive user interface, great battery life.
It Rocks.
Despite the proprietary memory stick technology, you can't beat the features and quality.
The coolest feature of course being the IR nightshot. When I was DV camcorder shopping last year, I wasn't able to find any other brands that had it. Don't be taken in by "lower shutter rate colour night mode".
A followup question: Does it make sense to capture analog (Hi8) and then convert to digital? Is that better value for money? Some digital midrange camera I saw (can recall the brandname) was rather slow at auto-focus etc.
I'm not interested in fancy/artistic things like video editing on my computer, I just want high quality video, preferably keeping it under $1000.
Not to be a troll, but wouldn't this question be better suited for a consumer electronics discussion board? I find it odd that you would ask the slashdot crowd about a product whose computer interface capabilities you care nothing about.
That being said, I have a $499 Sony digital-8 handycam. It works great, uses the ubiquitous digital-8 tapes (same form factor as hi-8), and has USB and firewire connections to boot!
I'd rather be a conservative nutjob than a liberal with no nuts and no job.
Ended up buying a Panasonic 3CCD camcorder on their recommendation and haven't looked back. They never seemed to give it a proper review, but it was still named their camcoder of the year.
Now I'm lusting after the JVC HDTV camcoders which record MPEG/2 to miniDV.
My computer fears my disk space requirements.
you don't need hardware based effects.
best thing I can tell you, find one with analog pass through. Most of the lower end dv camcorders don't have this, but many Sonys do. It will allow you to play analog footage through the camera allowing you to capture firewire in real time without using the tape (which I find crazy that a "digital" camcorder still acts in a linear fashion). Anything that makes your camera's moving parts 'go' will reduce the life of your camera.
If you are looking for a good video camera to just take good video then try the Mustek DV Series of Digital Camcorders. They are only $200. They are small and too the point. They take great video. 640x480 at great quality.
MPEG 4 Real time video recording frame rate - 30fps (352 X 288 )
640 x 480(VGA) video setting provides you
better resolution than VCD (352 X 288 / PAL ; 352 X 240 / NTSC)
With a 512MB SD Card you can record 2 hours of 640x480 video. This thing is great.
Limitations: It's not built for low-light.
It's also a still camera and mp3 player(?).
For $200 you can't go wrong.
that the answers you get from camera *owners* such as "I think XYZ is the best" are biased, simply because either they love their camera (with good reasons surely), or they don't like them so much but they'll never tell you "yeah, I bought that but I got had".
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
1) Get the best optical zoom you can, digital zoom is extremely overrated. Same goes for digital cameras too.
2) A format you are comfortable with (MiniDV or Digital8). After doing research for my digital camcorder I found that the mini-dvd format is completely ludicris and an utter waste.
3) Compatability - this could only be an issue if you don't have a Firewire port...if you don't...get one.
4) If you already have a digital camera don't even bother with looking at those features. Who wants to stop recording, mess with settings, take a picture, and mess around again just to take a picture that you could get with a digital camera faster and usually better quality.
5) Hot-shoe addon slot-thingy - great for zoom-mic's and external lights (ie expandability)
I think that's it...it's been a while since I purchased one (almost 2 years) but it has completely been worth it.
I find it's best to go to a website selling a load of cameras, get the ones in your price range. Whack thier model/make into google and add the word "review" on the end, voila! You can see which camera is preffered in your price range without picking around google too much.
Word up.
"I want to spend less than one thousand dollars on a camera that will have great video quality, last me >10 years, and I don't want or need to edit on a computer."
If you don't want or need to edit on a computer THEN WHY GET A DIGITAL CAMERA? Digital cameras are used SO YOU CAN EDIT IT ON A COMPUTER, without any hacks or having to go through a VCR and then to a TV-in port on your computer. I edited a movie with iMovie today and it was fine, I was glad to be able to do that instead of dubbing a VHS and hoping that it would work out ultimately, however bad it looked. Digital video looks good, and will look good, and if you compress it with a good codec (mpeg-2, divx;-)) it will still look good compressed.
Perhaps the biggest reason people go digital is the ease of transfer to a computer, and perhaps the low cost of media. If you are really into high-quality analog video (film) seems to be still hanging around after all of these years, and there is no doubting the quality of the result, as well as the archive capabilities.
However, you did ask for digital, so here is the answer. I'd probably go with the miniDV format. With this, you have tons of options. I've seen miniDV cameras on ebay for less than $100 (albeit first-gen low-qual, no frills models). The real high-quality route seems to be going with the likes of the Canon XL-1 (and related models). I've seen some great quality results coming from these cameras, and I spotted one in use during the filming of The Italian Job (check out the dvd special features to see it used), presumably for proof shots, dailies, etc.
Not sure if that helps you, and even the miniDV format may be obsolete in another couple of years.
Good Luck!
I've used several Sony and Canon camcorders extensively in the past few years. My all around favorite is the Canon GL2, but I think that would be out of your price range ($2000). Even though you don't plan to do computer editing, the digital formats (Mini-DV) are the way to go because they provide higher quality and don't degrade as quickly. Higher quality digital camcorders use 3 CCDs, and the others only use 1 CCD. Either way, you will get far better results than using a consumer analog camera. Unless you already have shot a lot 8mm or Hi8 tape, don't bother with Digital8. The quality is the same, but it will be harder to find compatible playback decks or cameras in the future. I personally am using a Sony TRV-27 right now for most purposes. I think it's been replaced with a different model now. Check out sonystyle.com for current models.
He might have some reviews worth reading.
Dan Ruther's Site
Fellowship 9/11
May I humbly suggest that you google for 'digital camcorder reviews'? You should get tons of results.
This side up.
For under $1000 dollars, most camcorders from major brands are pretty similar to each other in functionality. Some might have cool little features that others don't, but if you are just doing point-and-shoot type stuff it doesn't make too much difference. I think miniDV is still the best bet for PQ/price. I wouldn't think about going to a tapeless model yet. Home videos are something you keep for a LONG time. You may be watching these 20 or more down the road and tape is still the best archival format. Just pick something out that has the features you want. The tiny ones that will fit in the palm of your hand will be towards the top of your price range, but they aren't funtionally much different than the less expensive larger ones. CNET has a camcorder review section with lots of user comments. That might be a good place to start.
I bought a Sharp WD-450 last year. It was cheap ($450), has a good lens (26X optical zoon Canon) and takes good pictures as long as it's in bright light (candlelight == bad). I used it to produce a martial arts instructional DVD & some videos for DragonCon.
... I'm starting to do some for-hire video work & a wireless mic comes in handy.
... the bottom line is that it takes great video. It has a bunch of manual controls that aren't required for most home videos.
... good site that often reviews the same camera twice (from two different authors) to provide more information. They lean towards pro equipment, so don't be put off by a camcorder they rank as a 7.0 or 7.5 ... it might be just fine for what you need.
The problem is it's a single CCD camera, so the color depth & quality isn't so good. I also couldn't plug in an external mic
I just bought a Sony TRV-950 (about $1400), a three CCD camera that came highly recommended for price vs. quality. It's got a bunch of Bluetooth features that I don't need
I think something like my Sony is overkill for vacation videos & baby pictures. For under $1000 you can get a 3 CCD camera from Panasonic, like the PV-DV953. You can also find good cameras for personal use in the $500-$700 range. You can go cheaper, but just make sure you get a good lens. Some of the lower-end camcorders use lousy lenses. I was okay with that first cheap Sharp camera because it has a Canon lens. These days, $1,000 will buy a camera as good as the $10,000 studio cameras I used to use for college television.
For reviews I use camcorderinfo.com
Try www.epinions.com for user reviews of products like this, with links to pricing scans on the net. I've gotten lots of information on things like TVs and video camcorders on this site, and you get to hear what people think who usually own the item.
the one that matterrs is optical, not digital. My experience is that digital zooms are as useless as tits on a bull.
When searching for a camcorder, you'll be given a choice between Digital Image Stabilisation (DIS) or Optical Image Stabilsation (OIS), with the optical being much more expensive. If you ever wish to shoot image from a moving source (a car, train etc), then definately go for optical image stabilsation. It uses mirrors to stabilise the image instead of software, and produces a less jerky image, especially when you zoom in. Canon's are pretty good in that respect.
Revolution = Evolution
So this is somewhat offtopic, but being in the ask slashdot section it seems to squeeze in barely...
But why is it that no matter what question gets asked, if the question is not phrased with the word google in it somewhere, someone is bound to flame away ranting about why they should have just used google in the first place (I guess with about a million plus viewers someone is bound to be in a bad mood on any given day).
On the other hand, they could very well ask a question that was probably answered very well by a trip to google, but they are just curious as to what the slashcrowd (tm) thinks/uses/wishes.... in which case couldn't they all do us a favor and include some of the resources they found, perhaps as a second paragraph of the original question (similar to book reviews, slashback, etc...)
Of course, I fall in the third bucket where I rant for the sake of ranting.
Canon products are superb. Sony isn't even close in their consumer market.
A year or so back I spent a couple days reviewing camcorders at Best Buy, Electronics Botique, etc., then bringing the tape home and messing around with seeing what was best.
A couple things I liked about Canon camcorders:
- image stabilization (it works wonderfully, and is a great thing to have for those who don't want to carry around a tripod or such)
- nice, crisp images (I bought a camcorder that was made prior to Canon's 'new' image quality technology they've been marketing. it's still better than the competition
- bright colors and good darkness compensation
- small, well designed, and sturdy
- interchangeable batteries with other Canon products
- (generally) standard lenses and filter attachments
I'd recommend buying a canon ZR miniDV camcorder, as they're small, sturdy, have good battery life, and fit nicely in a day pack. They're easily palmable.
I recently got a Canon Powershot G5. I'm equally impressed with it. I can use my ZR battery (511) in my Powershot, and vice versa. Very nice.
Canon is, IMO, the quality peer of IBM in the camera world.
~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
Lens quality is one of the most important things If you have an 900gigapixel CCD looking through a little plastic sub kalidescope quality lens the pictures going to look like crap. The Mars rover had a one megapixel CCD with a $1 million lens. Oh and flash memory costs too much to hold anything substantial.
I'd recommend simplydv.co.uk. Their reviews are detailed an impartial, and they give you a good idea of what to look for in a DV cam.
I recently bought a Canon MVX150i (Optura 20 in US) and it's been really good. I recommend buying from a company that has a good reputation in imaging, like Sony or Canon - you're more likely to get good metering and quality optics. These are the most important things in any camera.
Oh, and buy a second battery.
I just went shopping for digital camcorders. I did lots of research and tried lots of them out. This one I chose because it is compact, takes 1 megapixel photos, and it is inexpensive compared to its peers. I like the interface, the LCD screen is touch sensitive so it draws buttons on the screen that you can touch to select. I have not been impressed with the ability to transfer video - the only way that I can see is to play the tape and attempt to "capture" the data rather than actually copying the data bit by bit, as you would think a digital camcorder would do. This is unfortunate, because it means to transfer high quality data, you have to have enough bandwidth through the entire pipeline Camera -> USB -> Memory -> IDE -> Hard Drive to be able to catch every frame as fast as the tape plays. I don't know if this is the same for ALL camcorders, but I know it is for this one. Otherwise, I am very pleased by this camcorder.
I know we never RTFA- but didja look at the subject at all?
Consider the Panasonic PV-GS70. It's the cheapest 3ccd camera you're going to buy new...MSRP of $999. 3ccd's will help in low light and give a greater picture quality. Unfortunately, compared to Sony, Canon, and other Panasonic offerings, the GS70 uses a smaller CCD, so low light performance isn't THAT great. Still, the picture is excellent.
You're going to be best off spending the most possible, especially if you want the camera to last a long time. I would also consider a Canon GL1 or GL2, a Sony TRV900 or TRV950, or a Sony VX1000, VX2000 or VX2100. All of those cameras are more expensive, but considered industry standards as far as lower end 3ccd prosumer cameras. Also, they're excellent in low light.
Also, I would consider buying used. You'll be able to pick up a Canon GL1, a Sony VX1000, or a TRV900 a lot closer to your $1000 price point.
Also, a few general rules: If you wont use it for stills, don't be swayed by high still picture resolutions. Stick with MiniDV as opposed to DVD recording camcorders or other formats (Sony offers several), and go to a store and check the camera out yourself. Sometimes the "feel" of a camcorder will simply put you off regardless of how great it is.
Check here for reviews and what not:
www.camcorderinfo.com
www.dvspot.com
Also, google for whichever camera and clips. I've found several comparisons with actual clips from all of the above mentioned cameras.
Good luck!
I'm also looking to buy a digital camera, but I'm having trouble finding out exactly how much linux support there is for various models. The linux firewire site has a list of cameras and the usual "works" or "doesnt work" descriptions for linux support, but as I'm sure we all know, there are various levels of "works" when it comes to linux.
Does anyone here have any actual experience of using a digital camera under linux?
:wq ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
If you plan to take it on vacation, size matters. A big camcorder with lots of features will go unused.
I have a Canon Elura. For various specs reasons I won't go into here, I chose it over the small Sony's. I've been very happy with it. The best part is that I can fit it into a (large, jacket) pocket and carry it around, so I have it with me on vacation. It's also a pretty good camcorder.
Do choose a camera that uses mini-DV. The MPEG cameras can only be used with special Windows software that comes with them, and don't take great video. The mini-DV format is as open as these things get, and you can edit the results in several different packages.
You do have tradoffs with these tiny things. The biggest is that you often get camera noise on the soundtrack. Because of the mechanics of the situation, that's hard to avoid without an external microphone.
Another good purchase I made was on a short(!) book on making videos with my camcorder and iMovie. Its section on using the camcorder (don't zoom, shoot a little introductory footage, etc) really made a difference -- without it I would have been just wasting tape since I wouldn't have wanted to view the result.
And finally, expect to make a 5-minute video from your full day of filming. That's just the way it is.
do not get the Mustek for family stuff. It only shoots at 10 fps at 640 x 480. that is weak!!
get a mini DV, since they are smaller, and since you aren't doing any real filmmaking, you don't need any manual controls, though manual focus option would be cool. all the brands at a retail store are decent. Get the warranty, it's worth it.
and the whoever stated above regarding the 8mm tapes as the same "form factor" as Hi 8/ D8 is a complete nerd.
...::----::...
I am in no way affiliated with this sig.
With similar criteria my friend, who's now a father of two, wound up with basically the same Sony camera that I got. And as far as I know, neither of us have any significant gripes.
Also, if there were such a thing, I would have jumped at a camera that could do frame by frame stuff, so that I could make dumb movies of my furniture moving around or something. But that's just me. (un?)Fortunatly, such cameras were way too expensive at that point.
If I had to do it again today, I'd probably be leaning toward mini-DV, or DVD media for reasons of quality and compatibility.
I got a JVC MiniDV video camera. I made an extensive check (since price was a concern) and discovered that pretty much any camcorder with a good optical zoom (forget digital zoom, go for at least 10x optical), MiniDV format and a FireWire port would do.
Now, what you do is get a nice, big hard drive (mine is 120 GB), a FireWire card (in my case, I bought the Pinnacle DV Studio, amazing software, with cable and card included for about 90 bucks) and a DVD burner.
I can capture an hour of video, edit it and burn to DVD in about 3 hours... not too shabby. And you can back up the DVD as much as you like. Plus, in my case, I also keep the MiniDV cassette as the ultimate backup.
Not to be cynical, but if you just want something for taking home movies, I wouldn't spend a lot and get something "to last".
Why not, for example, spend $500 today and get something nice, and then $500 a couple years from now when you have kids. By that time, you'll probably be able to buy a High Definition Camcorder for that price. Progress in the digital imaging world is moving forward pretty quickly
I mean, I wouldn't spend that kind of money unless you need all those features now and you probably don't.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
No one watches family videos, not even the family. Unless you and your good lady wife are planning some more interesting videos, dump the video and stick with a still camera. People actually look at still pictures, and they can be e-mailed easily.
Ask the people who record all the movies and upload them on BitTorrent.
i'd have to agree that if you aren't interested in doing the editing on a computer (why you'd want to do it with dubbing decks or (heaven forbid) the camera itself, i can't imagine), you needn't bother with a digital format like mini-dv or digital 8. You can get a nice analog Hi8 camcorder for fairly cheap.
I also agree that you should get the highest optical zoom you can find. I bought an older sharp mini-dv that doesn't have pass-through, but it does have 26x optical zoom, which is pretty nice if you're doing touristy things. digital zoom is lame, and shouldn't even enter into the equation. the CCDs on video cameras don't have anywhere near the resolution of a still camera, so any sort of digital 'magnification' that you're going to get will be pixellated.
I haven't found a real use for the IR or low light capabilities of cameras, but perhaps there are some. Mine does light amplification, but unless you're trying to shoot a black and white Blair Witch lookalike, i don't know how useful such a thing would be.
Seriously, why go digital at all if you don't want to do video editing on your 'puter? You can get much more for your money with analog: cheaper media, better zoom range, far superior low-light capabilities. I can't think of a single reason to go digital if you don't want to edit film.
"War is God's way of teaching Americans geography." -- Ambrose Bierce
I love my Canon Xi, it's just easy to use, small, take great pictures and video! Not quite as expensive as the GL or XL line. About 3CCD, in the old day if you wanted good color saturation, but with the new CCDs you can get excellent colors with only 1! I can't buy Sony because everything I buy of theirs breaks! (TV, VCR, DVD, Camcorder, Walkman) Just my jinks!
Highend consusmer: Canon & Sony
Pro: Canon, Sony, Panasonic
Lowend consusmer: Everybody else.
You get what you pay for!
You should also check out Canon's new digital camera that takes full quality Video (640x480 @ 30fps) 10x optical zoom etc, etc, etc. Just anounced yesterday! The wave of the future is going to combine Video and Photography.
-Have fun!
P.S. Video editing equals mac!
I just bought the Sony DCR TRV-38 over christmas, and so far I'm pretty satisfied. It had the best collection of good optics and features for around $700. Some features I thought were important:
records to MiniDV - this is the highest quality recording medium. miniDVD may be more convenient, but you pay for it with more compression.
manual focus ring - Ever tried focusing with a menu, or two buttons. The ring focus is the way to go.
Spot focus - nifty feature. You can touch an object on it's lcd screen, and it focuses on where you touch.
records in wide-screen format. 16x9
Optical image stabilization - much better than digital image stabilization.
quality optics.
nice large LCD
The only negative thing I've found so far, is that in low-light settings, the image looks kind of noisy. I've heard this is a problem on all/most digital camcorders with price $1000.
Computers don't make mistakes. What they do, they do on purpose.
Hell, for $200 I'd rather have a Hi8 analog camcorder than the crap you're talking about.
He wants to spend $1k for a camera. Why recommed a $2k camera?
I have a canon ZR65, costs $500 and has excelent image quality. Not too good for night shots, but otherwise excelent. It's incredibly compact, has good bat. life, tons of features which are useful for creating profesional looking videos including the best image stabilization out there (canons in general tend to) and text/image overlay. It has "firewire" interface and is overal an amazing camera. I used that camera to record all videos found on My website, and those videos have had the quality significantly reduced for the internet. NOTE: Videos are of things being burned/shot/smashed and most of them have been slowed down with Adobe After Effects. You can see what the camera's recordings look like in low light in some of the videos.
-- Alex Broadwin
I find epinions.com to be pretty handy for getting reviews of consumer electronics.
The key to making video watchable is to edit. Take a lot of footage and edit it to make the footage watchable. Instead of leaving the camera on for 30 minutes at the birthday party. Make a 2 minute music video showing the highlights. People will want to watch that, it's more easily distributed via the Internet.
Finally, even if you don't believe in editing, importing digital video to computer and making a DVD out of it is very easy. Plus it's easier to send and store DVDs than it is to send and store VHS tapes.
Tripod stability: This is important. The DVDA-69 has a shock-stabilised tripod mount, which allowed it to score a perfect 5 out of 5 for the "4-way fat bitch fuck fest test". As regular readers know, this is where we get over 500kg of pounding lesbian flesh to get jiggy in a tub of jelly and film the whole damn thing. Lesser cameras produce an unwatchable shaking mess due to the harsh vibrations. The DVDA-69 felt barely a tremor during this tough test due to the inertial stabilisation and digial shake correction. Fantastic.
Flesh and genital colour tone reproducibility: The DVDA-69 was presented with our standard test panel of 3 vaginas (one hairy, one pierced, one shaved) and 3 penises (one regular, one large, one 'rock splitter'), and tested for accurate flesh tone reproducibility. The CCD sensor did a reasonable job, reporting back 89% faithful colour repro even on an 8x macro pussy zoom shot, but for those seeking ultimate chromatic reproduction, try the new Panasonic CockViewer 7000 (see our previous review). 3 stars out of 5 on this test.
Sound capture authenticity: Again, we used our standard voice test panel of "Oh yeah do you like that bitch?", "I'm gonna cum all over your titties!" and "Give it to me give it to me give it to me SQUEEAAALLL", captured through the standard camera microphone. The DVDA-69 did a good job of capturing mid to high end frequencies (it scored a perfect 100% in the 'anal jab scream' test, but there was some distortion in the optional 'blacks on blondes' sub test where our Barry White sound-alike test subject was able to induce a bit of fuzziness with an orgasmic "Oooooohhh yeeeaaaahhh". 4 out of 5 stars.
Environmental robustness:. The toughest test of all. Basically everyone just jizzes all over the camera lens and we see if it still works. Things were going well until some spooge leaked into the tape compartment, requiring tedious manual cleaning. Not a real competitor here, and certainly bested by the Canon PowerGyno A700 Intruder Edition, which was not disturbed by even the most savage gang banging facial action. Sony is really going to need to work on this if it is going to be seen as a serious player in the home market. 2 out of 5.
Summary: A reasonable entry by Sony into the crowded home camcorder market. Good performance for standard types of fuck-filming, and you can expect your pounding, flabby buttocks to be faithfully presented on the screen during playback. The camera has several ease-of-use features, such as a 'Thumb-off' record button, allowing the user to simply hang the camera around their neck when filming 1st-person blow job scenes, allowing both hands to be used to guide the girl's head onto the end of your cock. But the lack of moisture resistance means that hardcore users will need to look elsewhere for top-quality gyno movies. 3 out 5 stars overall.
One of the problems is that camcorders are sold by tape technology & pixel count. What is missing is a frank discussion of image quality, which is often really missing from some of the lower-quality cameras.
"Real" video cameras that cost $5K and up are specially designed to capture color images well, and in some cases will make people look better than they actually are. My favorite camera is the Panasonic Supercam. Despite being S-VHS, its image looks way better than any DV camera I've ever used. This is because it has a high-quality ($1000) lens, and good digital signal processing to make the image look great.
I suggest looking at DV.Com if you are serious about image quality review.
Of course, form-factor is also important. A lot of people don't mind a horrible looking picture if they can put the camera in their pocket. That too is a valid choice.
No, I prefer the Mars Rover type where everything come out shitty brown, rather like life on Earth.
Ignore the Lums which isn't a good standard for light... look at apature size (smaller the better)
Don't give a crap about digital zoom. You always want optical. Digital zooms just make pixels bigger.
The Canon &R 70 mc Is a NICE camera, I have had one for almost a year now, Used it for my graduation and a few other things such as vacation etc, logical to use once you RTFM. The only thing lacking is that you have to buy your own DV cable if you are going to do digital capture to your computer from the tape, The battery lasts nicely and recharges fast
Snowden and Manning are heroes.
I'm an editor for reality television and behind-the-scenes materials for DVDs. If you're looking at the $1000 range I've always recommend a Sony to my buddies. If you can eke it out, get the 3CCD TRV-950, otherwise, just get one of the consumer-grade single CCD Sony cameras- they're all a solid buy, have good optics (which, like the guy above said, is easily one of the most important issues) and well-built.
The main weapons of choice for the guys on film sets would either be the Panasonic DVX100 or the Sony PD150. Yeah, these are a little out of your proce range (understatement) but if you really want something that will last and has outstanding image quality, you can't lose with either. The new JVC camera that records HD to a MiniDV tape actually only has a single CCD, so you'll get good sharpness but little in the way of color depth- and when you compare images in a side-by-side, you realize how important the vividness and clarity of your colors can be.
One final thing to note- the Sonys in general have a much more solid build quality than anything else out there. The Panasonic has a really unique look in 24P mode, but it's not quite as robust and it can't handle low light as well. Good luck.
I just inherited $7500 from my grandmother, God rest her soul. I want to do something good with the money. I believe my first purchase will be a donut. I want to spend less than $1000 on the donut. It has to be sweet, and low in fat if possible. I like chocolate filled, but I might be willing to consider just about anything with a nice glaze on it. I've searched the web for donut review sites and haven't found any, so I figured I'd put it to the slashdot crowd. So, what kind of donut can I get for under a grand?
-_-_-
There are 0x40000000 types of people: those who understand 32-bit IEEE 754 floating point, and those who don't.
here is a list of MiniDV camcorders under $1.000, with reviews.
I personally have a 1-year-old Sony DCR-TRV950, a 3 CCD camera with excellent low-light sensitivity. I like it a lot, except for the stupid sony stick stuff. Apart from that, the quality is excellent and the camera was under $1000 at the time.
So I'm looking for an inexpensive CD-MP3 player onlline. I find the iRiver IMP-50 and the price is right. I Google for some online reviews and I notice that the reviews seem strangely similar...in fact, they're the same. Googling for "I have heard of iRiver many times but I cannot afford" brings up over 100 hits. What the heck? Astroturfing from iRiver? Someone with too much time on their hands? Who knows.
Seriously, this is the best one ever! Hurry up, less than 24 hours to bid!
There are 0x40000000 types of people: those who understand 32-bit IEEE 754 floating point, and those who don't.
The GL series is better than prosumer, and as a previous poster said, why recommend a $2K camera when he wants less than $1K.
http://www.dpreview.com/
Some of the Sony's still have a version of the night cam that can still "see" through some clothing in certain lighting conditions and fabric.
I have the Sony TRV19. I have "enjoyable" shot of an ex....
You say you don't want fancy things like video editing. Let me postulate that what seems "fancy" is, in fact, part of a future that you will want to take part in.
d ers_boom_bust_04_28_03.htm
The one thing, in my opinion, that is most important in a new camcorder, is MPEG. You do NOT want to have a bunch of Hi-8 tapes in 5 years, that you will end up wanting to move to a native digital format, and have to buy a MPEG encoder card and move them in that way. How do I know? Because that is what I do. Why do I do it? Because nothing, I mean nothing, beats having your videos in a true digital format. In 5 years, your iPod will play these videos like watching them with the Divx player on your PC. People will move videos around the way they move music.
DVD burners are cheap. Hi end editing software like Adobe is pricey, but stuff like the Nero 6 package can do it for much less. You can make a DVD of your vacation footage, you can put in titles and a menu with software that comes with your burner, like the stuff from Ulead. In 5 years, IP multicast under IPv6 may allow you a better method of streaming videos, or you can compress them into MPEG-4 and get Windows Media Server to stream them, so your buddies can see them and all you need is a cable modem or DSL today.
Get to know and love the rtsp:// link!
Seriously, the next gen of cameras bypass ALL of it and ONLY use MPEG as the storage in flash. That is the future. Saying what you said, is tantamount to saying "hey I just want a Sony walkman that plays CDs without skipping when I run, nevermind that fancy pants MP3 stuff" 2 years ago. Sounded reasonable at the time. Now, that walkman gathers dust.
Here are some of the MEPG only cameras: http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/MPEG4_camcor
I played around with making videos back in the days of VHS-C, as did my Dad (who, before that, used to make movies with Super-8 film). Although video editing software is much easier to work with than the edit controllers then available, it's still a bitch to do. To make something watchable, you end up shooting 10 times what makes it to screen, particularly of the interesting bits of whatever it is you're doing. Therefore, you're too busy shooting to enjoy whatever it is you're there for in the first place. Despite image stabilizers, to get decent footage (and to stop your arms getting tired) you need a tripod anyway, as well as extra batteries, auxiliary microphones...and it goes on. Getting decent-quality sound is also a bitch. Then you have to edit it together. Often, once you get home you find that you're missing key things, so for future events you start making a shot list to make sure you get everything...so, to make watchable videos you end up becoming a video director rather than a participant.
If you're not into all that, you just want a record of a few things and you'll settle for Aunt Mildred being recognisable, a low-end camera will do the job just fine, and spending more than that is a waste. You'll make a far better video with a $500 camera with the right accessories and a bit of effort than a $2000 camera stupidly used.
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo
--Andy Finkel (J. Klass?)
i've had a zr30 (older model) for three years now and i love it. highly recommended
honest question: Why is the mini-dvd format a waste? In the topic about digital evidence tampering i suggested that mini-dvd cameras would be a good idea for police b/c they've got heaps of space (for pictures) and they're write once. I realize they might be crummy as camcorders, but are they also shitty cameras?
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
As a professional cameraman my only recommendation would be to get a camera that has 3 CCDs, as opposed to any single chip(ccd) camera. It means that colour(or color as you colonials call it !) resolution is much greater and the level of detail is maintained in most situations. I myself have a Sony Trv900(aka PD 100(DV cam version)) which has more than earnt it's asking price. Unfortunately Sony no longer seem to make a camera of this quality. Though the lens size could be better it seems to outperform the VX2000(PD150) in many situations. But of course budget and usage could well determine choice.(perhaps I'm a bit of an image whore), also there is a panasonic 3 chip that also provides true 25P(progressive scan(or whatever the NTSC equivalent is)) which gives a much more 'film' type look, but a lot can be sorted out in post - it depends on what you intend to use camera for. We all have our own ideas about what is a good picture, best thing is to try things out yourself before comitting yourself to any choice and don't be too influenced by what people like me say, you alone can make the decision about what is adequate for your usage. Toadguy
1. Mini-DV is a popular and relatively inexpensive format.
2. DVD recording units just don't have it together yet.
3. Upgrading to a unit that could take pictures was pointless, since I have two digital cameras already with far more functionality.
4. The analog connection cable that comes with the unit allows me to playback and record to a VCR.
5. The DV (Firewire) connection (cable not included) gave me digital editing and formatting capabilities. You need some software to do this and I wuh-sed out and went with Pinnacle Systems' Studio version 8 for Windows instead of looking Linux. It works great. My old Windows PC didn't have Firewire, so I spent less than $50 on a PCI Firewire card.
It's not fancy, but with this setup I record VHS tapes for the technology troglodytes and burn CD/DVDs for everyone else. I can even edit the videos, copy them back to Mini-DV and then record the polished final clip to VHS. Not real elegant, but all for under $600 US.
Final note, video eats hard drive space so count on setting aside at least 5GB just to get going without saving anything long term to disk.
I have one of sony's miniDV camcorders with the carl zeiss lense. Its a very good camera. Caputered lots of great moments with the kidos. I don't know why you wouldnt want to edit on the computer as someone else said no one wants to watch an hour of your raw footage half of which is just staring at the lense cover when you accidently bumped the camera and it turned on. I like to take a month or so worth of videos footage of my kids get a fun song for background music and make a three-five minute video, convert to mpeg2 and burn to a cd-r which will play in most dvd players (i dont have a dvd burner yet, but even so a 5 minute video will fit on a cd-r just fine) JV
I have quite a few VHS tapes that I have no intention of editing but am digitizing so I can not have to worry about the tape degrading.
It makes sense to go with a digital camera even if you don't care about editing just so you can quickly back up your videos on DVD +/- R
It's a big giant pain to digitize things in real time.
Ben
Work Safe Porn
Send me $999, and I will personally see to it that a fresh Krispy Kreme donut is delivered right to your door.
I also have a special Donut Of The Month club for a flat fee of $5000 a year.
--- Ban humanity.
Things to note:
-MiniDV is the way to go right now (decent tape prices, wide availability, good resolution, small size).
-MiniDVD's are expensive and not good for motion stuff (optical skip!).
-MiniMPG tapes are pricy but smaller. The quality is actually less than MiniDV due to the inherent compression, since it's native MPEG2 format (yeah, I know MiniDV is compressed, but not nearly as bad).
-Digital8 is more of a stop-gap between the world of digital and Hi8. Lower resolution and uses 2x the tape (so a 90 min Hi8 tape only lasts for 45 min)
- Be wary of zoom and resolution claims. High levels of zoom is pretty impractical (digital or optical) due to your shaky hand, and the speed of the zoom (ever notice that TV and movies don't whip up and down from 1x to 40x)? Resolution is another tricky thing. All media formats have a standardized resolution, so a mega-pixel camcorder won't be any better (at least on a normal CRT TV) than a lower res one.
- Lens quality is important, as the light-gathering abilities (and distortions) affect the image actually more than the CCD itself. Try to get the best you can get in that respect.
- If you only have a CRT TV (or older projection TV), the limitations of your TV will hold back the quality of the video. You'll notice a HUGE difference in quality from your computer screen vs the TV.
- You're going to have to transfer the material one way or another, even if you don't edit it, if you want to share your memories. The general public doesn't have MiniDV VCR's and such. Even the MiniDVD you have to duplicate if you want to share the video. Keep in mind a possible loss (potentially major) of quality when transferring to another media, whether it be VHS, VCD or SVCD (preferred).
Editing video has become surprisingly easy, but still pretty time-consuming if you want to make something nice. But the quality you get is phenomenal. It's like your own TV show, to your liking. Once you start, it's hard not to get hooked. Good luck and happy video memories!
... like the new Powershot s1.
Most home video is absolutely unwatchable because the cameraman films 30 minute shots. Ever see a video from a birthday party? Ugh. Especially if you aren't thinking about editing (big mistake), that video is going to be painful.
With the digicam's, you can usually take 30 sec clips - sometimes even longer. This is much more appropriate for family style videos. (how long does it take to say "hi gramma" or "look at the new puppy" anyway? Don't torture anyone with 45 minutes of little johnny's 1st viola lesson.)
The s1 does 640x480, and it's also a digital still camera. Smaller, easier to carry, less obtrusive, and less annoying to the people being photographed and/or recorded.
I speak from experience - I have 7 unwatched dv tapes from my trip across america in 2000, but this week have emailed/posted 3 different little clips of my dog from my s40. And I work in broadcast...
And if you don't have a short film you want to make, ignore the people telling you to get a GL-1 or some such. Yes, canon is awesome, and yes, 3 chip is nicer, but come one... I use my dinky optura with a little post-processing and mix it in with Digibeta and most of the time, it looks fine. Don't get caught up in specs.
whatever you use three to five years from now, it won't be one of the standard definition interlaced analog formats like PAL or NTSC or SECAM. It will probably be one of the 18 digital broadcast formats proposed over the last few years. Actually it will probably be a switchable 1080i for high definition digital video that uses MPEG4 instead of the DV codec. You will be happy although it will not edit nicely but you won't care. BTW, editing is not artsy-fartsy. It should be invisible. What you have seen is something *else*. I can't help having high standards, so sue me.
For the time being -
My advice is that you look at the camera from the front and get the one with the biggest optics. All of the microphones that come on the cameras suck big time, most of the controls on cheap cameras like you want will be the same. The light gathering ability is key to getting a decent picture in low light. I'm guessing that you are not big on light wrangling. Get a nice little short shotgun microphone to put on top. This is 50% of what you recognize as a good picture. Everybody will compliment you on your camera ability when they can hear the child's first words rather than the grownup's wretched cooing and noises from behind the camera from an open pattern microphone. If anybody mods this down, I will give you a lecture on CCDs, light, and filters. Oh, I forgot, get a circular polarizer instead of a UV filter to protect the lens. When you are outside, you will need both the neutral density filter and the polarizer. The camera you buy really doesn't matter as long as you buy one from a real camera company. Sony, Panasonic, JVC, Canon, Ikegami. Find someone with the Prosumer B&H catalog.
take a look at this:
DCR-PC105 Mini DV Camcorder with Additional Accessory Kit - includes: Battery Pack, UV Filter, Tripod with Bag, 4 Year Extended Warranty, Wide Angle Lens, Soft Carry Case and Lens Cleaning Kit
B&H# SODCRPC105K at 899.95
The wide angle lens is great in the living room during holidays. You are going to spend the money anyway. The camcorder should be between 4 and 5 hundred for your pusposes.
Here is the short shotgun you need it is REALLY cheap
Azden Price: $ 54.95
ECZ-990 - Super-Cardioid Shotgun Condenser Camera Mountable Microphone MFR# ECZ990 B&H# AZECZ990
If you choose to take any of this advice - this is my open source licensing agreement ---- promise that you will white balance on a white card - not a piece of copy paper or a shirt. Coated white stock works welll and is cheap.
Any preoccupation with ideas of what is right or wrong in conduct shows an arrested intellectual development. (Wilde)
In my case, these were what I missed:
- External microphone input - essential if you ever want to use a more suitable microphone than the omnidirectional ones that come with the camera.
- External video input - essential for one or two VHS tapes that you need to digitize.
- Digital still - my camera did have this feature, only the image quality was so poor it was really only usable when shrunk down into thumbnail sizes.
Also, make sure you allocate money in your budget for a bigger battery. The one that comes in the box will probably last you around 30 minutes on a full charge. This time pressure will severely impact your choice of shots.Hope this helps.
I've used Canon's ZR series DV camcorders since the "10" version and I have been very satisfied. They are small and use the ubuqitous MiniDV tape standard. They have a hotshoe on and can accept an external mic (essential). Some features that mean nothing: takes still pictures, too! Has a 500x digital zoom! Accepts flash memory of some sort! Baloney. Just make sure it's MiniDV, has firewire and a few sensible extras like can take an external mic, or can digitize input from a VCR.
Also, I would advise anyone to rethink the "I'm not interested in computer-based video editing" idea. Lesson for you folks. Ten years ago young fathers everywhere bought up non-digital camcorders like crazy. The result is a shoebox filled with really crappy home movies that nobody wants to watch, even the people who shot them. The reason is because they aren't edited.
Life is largely boring. If you shot an hour of video you might get 15 minutes of usable stuff. Cut out the crap. Add some music, add some titles. It makes all the difference and with basically free editors from just about everyone there's no excuse not to do it. Burn yourself a DVD when you're done, even. Do not let your hour-long boring-as-hell-movie sit in a shoebox for lack of editing.
You like your Macintosh better than me, don't you Dave? Dave? Can you hear me Dave?
For what its worth, I've had a panasonic minidv camcorder (18x optical zoom) for a number of years. My shots have started to come out much better when I started to use a tripod.
..
The "Image stabilization" both cameras have helps, but if you want the shots to look really good use a tripod or brace the camera on something (a tree/wall). Its a royal pain in the butt to lug one around. but they have some very small light ones that do the trick. If you don't you risk making viewer sea-sick or having video that looks like blair witch
Note that the more you zoom in the harder it becomes to hold the camcorder steady. to that 22X zoom is harder to hold steady zoomed in than a 10x.
My camcorder has a "headlight" that clips on the top. It lights things up. This has been very usefull, because most consumer camcorders will record in low light they tend to use a slow shutter speed and look grainy. (This kills batter life though)
I'll summarize someother points:
+MiniDV is great. Almost broadcast quality (NTSC).
+get a good lens on the camcorder
+3 CCD is better for better color/sharper but may be out of you price range
+Image stabilization is good. Optical stabilization is better than digital but both work
+Buy the biggest battery you can find and use the one that comes with the camcorder as a spare.
Happy shooting
I too bought the Elura. I have to say it is a great form factor. I took it on vacation and it was all I needed. I used a larger memory card and bought the small case that goes on your belt. I was able to take it everywhere and it really didnt get in the way. The digital photo's it takes dont compare to a dedicated digital camera, but they were fine for vacation photos.
One caveat... Canon (at least mine) does not seem to play nice on firewire. It works fine in iMovie if it is the only firewire device, but if I have my external fw drive plugged in the system locks up. I googled around and it seems that Canon is a little out of spec on firewire. Wish I had known before I bought mine, so I thought I would pass it on.
Amen! to that one. Pinnacle Studio 9 is an awesome editing package, really is. Not pro, but easy to use and has enough power it won't leave you feeling let down by its abilities.
Sorry folks, editing on linux is just not that mature yet short of some pretty high end and complicated or proprietary stuff. Plus really, Pinnacle Studio 9 is just very good.
*honesty note, i am a former employee of an authorized pinnacle dealer.
I'd say your recommendations are pretty much on the mark.
I did quite a bit of research for the "Best under $1000 camcorder" a couple years ago, and at the time, decided on the Sony TRV-730. I'm not more than an "occasional user", so I may not be the best person to speak for long-term durability of this particular model - but it's always worked well for me. The "Digital 8" format it uses has a nice side-benefit, in that it can play back regular 8mm tapes (allowing easy transfer to VHS tape). Sony's "NightShot" and "Super NightShot" modes are a little cheezy - but they do work extremely well if you add an optional IR light that slides onto the camera's hot-shoe. Sure, it'll film everything in greenish shades - but sometimes that's the effect you're looking for.
The only thing I disliked on this camera was the memory stick for still pictures. Still photos were noticeably darker than anything filmed as a movie to tape. It really needed a flash of some sort unless you were taking the still photos in bright, outdoor lighting.
Overall though, picture quality for video was excellent (best in its class at the time, for a single CCD camera), and it can film for a LONG time on one of the larger, optional battery packs. It's compatible with about every video editing package I've ever tried it with on both my PC and Mac, but has quite a bit of built-in editing capabilities too (which I never really use).
I picked up a Samsung SCD27 at Best Buy a few months ago for around $400, and it pretty much does everything I'd want from a DigiCam:
* 8x optical zoom, +10x digital zoom (enough to go insane with pixelation), good image stabilization
* Good low light operation: has both a headlamp and powered IR night vision, as well as slow shutter speed modes
* Stereo mic
* Relatively large 3.5" LCD
* Can record from AV in (so you can convert other people's analog videos to DV.
* Takes 640x480 jpegs & 320x160 mpegs onto Sony memory sticks (I didn't bother with this, my digital camera can do better)
You owe it to yourself to get a firewire cable and download the digital videos to your computer, though. iMovie comes free with MacOS X, and Windows Movie Maker comes free with WindowsXP from windowsupdate. All you need is a whole bunch of disk space, and maybe a CD or DVD burner to dump all of your videos to something less expensive than DV tapes. You'll have more fun with the fancy video editing than you think, and at worst, it doesn't really take that long.
Just remember that raw DV format is huge, so you'll need a lot of disk space (~15GB / 60min DV tape) before you compress your files into something more reasonable. Windows Movie Maker seems smart enough to compress on the fly if you have a fast enough machine, though...
I agree with you, I bought a miniDV (Canon ZR65) and have to say that importing the video onto a PC (Mac & PC in this case) is a breeze. It takes time (realtime, damn), but I video taped a get-together of a local Tai Chi club on Friday. Had it on the computer on Sunday when I had the time, and, after buying some blank DVD's I had a rough burn Monday night.
Pinnacle only works well for chopping, splicing and putting in graphics.
If you're doing serious editing work with multiple video sources, you'll need something serious like Video Vegas, Final Cut Pro or Adobe Premiere.
-------- -------- Support Wesley Clark for president!!!
After researching several brands I recently bought a Sony TRV-22. Things I like about it include:
1. Crisp, bright images. It was the only camera I tested which did not show severe visual artifacts. The lux rating was also significantly lower than similar Canon models, meaning the picture looks better under low light conditions. I am very impressed with the picture quality.
2. Size. It is smaller than nearly every other similar MiniDV model. This makes it easy to carry around and shoot inconspicuously.
3. USB/IEE1394 output. Most have this. S-video input/output and composite output also.
4. Programmable shutter, exposure, etc.
Things I did not like:
1. $585 was a little more than I wanted to spend.
2. Warranty is a crappy 1 year.
3. Software is shite. You will not want to use the included video authoring software.
If you're simply an amateur like me, don't listen to those who say you don't need zoom. I use zoom frequently to help compose shots better. When you're filming spontaneous action it doesn't work to walk back and forth trying to get the subject in proper perspective. Get a good optical zoom b/c you will appreciate being able to fill the entire frame with your subject.
If you store video to your PC, you will only need to buy 3 or 4 tapes because you can reuse them. This may not work well on vacation if you don't bring along a laptop.
That said, there is really no reason to spend more than $700 to buy a good camera to use on vacation. The extra features, such as digital effects, you will not use while on vacation at the beach. Add your effects in post processing through software on your PC.
I actually have a Canon ZR-40. It's the cheapest of their cheap line, but it's been taking a beating from me. I'm actually not only using it as a camcorder, but as a firewire streaming analog capture device, and as a transfer VCR. In the latter capacity, I put about 5+ hours a week of wear on it, recording at the satellite dish out in the living room and playing back into the computer. Been doing this for a year and so far so good. I figure this is about the amount of wear that the average camcorder gets put through in about 80 years; let's face it, most people buy a camcorder and put about 5 hours a year on it if that.
This is my 3rd camcorder, but my first digital. I like it better than my other two, which have both been Sonys. I personally am staying away from Sony now. 4 years ago when I bought my last one, nobody was beating them on features, but now many companies are, and my experience (based on only 2 camcorders, admittedly) is that Sonys will just be dead one day with no warnign and cost $300 to fix. This happened to me 3 times with 2 camcorders made 5 years apart, both Hi8.
I have now owned three Canon digicams (still own two of them, one a digital Rebel SLR), a Canon scanner and a Canon photo printer, so perhaps I'm not the most unbiased person. But in each case, I didn't buy out of brand loyalty really, I looked around and the Canon was what I liked the best at the time; I just found myself with a room full of Canon stuff at the end.
little as you can.
quality will continue to increase in the next 24 months. price will continue to come down. i think it would be better to get more frequent hardware updates by investing in cheaper hardware than investing in the best there is(currently), only to find out that a new manufacturing process has reduced your great camrea feature into a commonpalace item.
for example, features like night shot or image stabilization. these were features that only existed on a few select cameras only a couple of years ago, but now, they are now more likely to be standard features. the fellow who spent $1500 plus last year on a camera might be less hesitant to upgrade, compared to the guy who spent $600 on a cheaper camera in the same timeframe...
get into a cheaper camera now so you can quickly upgrade to a nicer camera in a year when you first born is soon to arrive!
take a look at the elura/optura line from canon, if you need a place to start. these are decent camera that can be had for less than $500 and still offer good features/performance.
three can keep a secret, if two are dead - benjamin franklin
Its all pretty amaturish, but you can at least see the results using our setup on the website, http://hoodlumzproductions.com[/shameless plug].
"Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
When's the last time you watched a movie that showed a lot of zooming? Did you know that film camera lenses don't even have zooming capabilities?
Once Upon A Time In Mexico had several shots with zooming, albeit it was 'filmed' in high definition with the Sony HDCAM 24p- it had a zoom lens, among other interchangeable lenses. Lots of tv shows and some movies are being shot with cameras like this. You don't notice zooming in a Hollywood movie any more than you notice the focusing, because professionals know how to do it subtly and effectively.
You should notice that every movie has lots of extremely high focal length shots, especially for back-and-forth conversations shots- it's a sure sign of a very amateurish production to always use the default wide angle. The point of a zoom lense on a camera is not to shoot while zooming, but to allow a huge number of different focal lengths. Since anyone using a cheap consumer camera is unlikely to buy or want to hassle with lense add-ons, and no low-end cameras have interchangeable lenses, a big optical zoom gives them maximal freedom.
You're right that it is annoying to shoot scenes very close by because these cameras are telephoto oriented, but there's always more stuff further away from you than closer by.
I bought a Sony DCR-TRV33 about half a year ago when I decided I wanted a digital camcorder. I payed around 630 for it, seems like you can get it for around 560 now. I like it alot, but you can definitely get something better by now for under a $1000. Now onto my real point. /. knows, the internet is great because between ebay, pricewatch, pricegrabber, and the other shopping bots, you almost never have to pay retail for anything. You must however be very careful when buying expensive electronics such as digital camcorders online. Once you choose a model, do not buy it from any site that does not EXPLICITLY state that your camcorder is NEW, INBOX, FACTORY FRESH, and that it comes with a new manufacurer's US warranty. Not just any warranty, a US warranty (assuming you live in the states). A seemingly valid warranty from Sony Japan won't do you any good. If this information is not clearly stated in the item description or in the site's FAQ, you can pretty much guarentee your not getting a new product with a valid warranty.
When I payed 630$, the MSRP was around 800$ at sonystyle.com . As everyone on
The second thing you need to lookout for is sites that push accessories. Its no secret that companies in many industries make all the money off accessories. You can get an inkjet printer with a rediculiously high DPI for 70$, but a black ink cartridge for said printer is 35$. Gillete was happy to send me a free Mach3 Turbo in the mail, since two replacement blade cartridges costs more than the razor. Its no different for camcorders. Every site will try to sell you zoom lenses, extra batteries, extended warranties, tripods, carrying cases, etc. When I first tried to order my TRV33 from one such site, because they had a low price and a US warranty, I recieved an email telling me I had to confirm my order by telephone. I called and the guy on the other end supposedly was confirming my order but really tried to sell me accessories and an extended warranty. When I declined and said I just wanted the camcorder, he said it was being drop-shipped directly from Sony, and would arrive in a week. It never came, and it was never going to. Because I didn't order any accessories, they simply didn't process my order. There are plenty of shady websites like this when in it comes to camcorders, and many sites are actually the same company. I know that was lengthy, but its good information to go in with when looking for a good price on whatever camcorder you decide on. In summary:
1. If there is not an explicit guarentee that the product is new and factory fresh with a valid US warranty, find another site.
2. If you didnt buy any accessories and have to call to "confirm your order", find another site.
Don't just buy from the cheapest place on pricegrabber, you get what you pay for.
Moderation Totals: Flamebait=2, Troll=1, Redundant=1, Insightful=6, Overrated=1, Underrated=1, Total=12. (not mine)
Three chip cameras are dropping in price, like everything else these days (except oil). However, I'm not sure if any three-chip models have fallen below the $1000 threshold yet. The standard bearer in the cheap *pro* DV market is the Canon XL1, which is a steal at $5000. Check the fan sites that others have posted here for news about three-chip deals.
One simple rule for its versus it's
Surely a 40GB+ drive would have big advantages in speed, durability and editing than the tape and dvd cameras. A simple camera/firewire combo that plugged into an iPod for realtime storage would be sweet.
One of these days I'm moving to Theory - everything works there
Of course everyone recommends what they have because to them it was the coolest/best one they found. I bought a JVC GR-DVM96U for about $600 and its been far above anything I expected. The thing is small enough to fit in my pocket yet it has every toy I wanted in a miniDV camcorder: stereo recording, nice LCD, 1 megapixel still camera with SD card, 10X optical zoom, firewire for DV transfer, USB for SD transfer, MPEG recording. and even some features I didn't want: MP3 sound effects, "night" vision... just my opinion
I am surprised that no one has put down DPreview.com. Best site in my opinion, and has a lot of different reviews up there. Reviews are really in-depth, have excellent comparisons to other cameras, and include sample photos that the guy took personally.
Forget /. Just go to the Simply DV Bulletin Board. A wide range of users from novices (who ask questions) to pros (who answer them).
When they came for the communists, I said "He's next door. Take him away. Goddam commies."
Use it. Figure out what you don't like about it. Sell it on eBay for a couple of hundred and repeat every couple years, rather than "keeping for several years". Keep all of the original boxes and stuff - makes the eBay offering look better.
I am going thru the same issues right now with digital still cameras - many of which now also do digital video. All solid state. Quality sucks on the movies, but hey, it is a still camera. This example is also relevant, since you can see where it is going. Many current still models also do 640x480 30fps "movie" modes now. Last year's were mostly 320x240 12-15fps... you will probably want some sort of tapeless dv camera in a couple of years...
Just tell the wife up front that you are saving hundreds of dollars now, so you can spend it again in 24 months. [The guys version of look how much I saved on these shoes.]
Selling your used-but-in-good-condition cameras other gear is similar to the how-long-do-I-keep-the-car question. Buying new certainly costs more, but in the case of electronic gear, IMHO, the utility is greater [cars, by-and-large, do the same thing, cool gear really does get better.] If you are going to drive it into the ground where the resale value is nil, get something decent now. If you follow the good-enough plan, just get good enough.
This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
An all in one camera is your best bet. Here is a link to a sample from the camera. http://web1.canon.jp/Imaging/pss1is/spl/data/MVI_0 638.AVI
Sooner or later everyone is going to have one of these.
General info available at:
http://www.powershot.com/powershot2/s1is/index.htm l
For memory get a 4 gigabyte microdrive that comes with the muvo mp3 player at dell. Cost $210.
Total cost around $800.
If you can't wait till April for availability then my next suggestion would be a Sony DSC-v1. I currently own a Canon S230 with 512mb CF card and that works great for taking videos.
- Great Audio/Video playpack under Mac/Linux/WinX if you have an All-In-Wonder card from ATI on the PC (Mac's, no problems (Firewire)).
:)
- Great snapshots with the digital camera feature.
- 50x zoom (better than my new Sony 3.2 mega-pixel digital camera).
- Video out connections plug right into TV, hit playback and your watching your movies.
- Comes with VHC-VHS Adapter for playing with older VCR's.
Drawbacks?
a) Had to replace the factory battery after four years. $50 bucks (Not really a complaint, but when the rechargable goes, it goes. No warning. This sucks when your out on a faimily gathering with no backup).
b) No USB, Firewire/Serial only (My model, this might have changed by now).
c) The wife won't let me record her naked
This camera cost me around $650 spacebucks in 1998. Check the features on the model you want to purchase. It should be cheaper now as well.
Enjoy,
It's just the normal noises in here.
Its simple in your case - buy a camcorder that records to DVD disc instead of tape. Simple to archive. Simple to play back on a DVD player. Consumer reports rated the Hitachi DVD camcorder as high in quality as any miniDV camcorder in the same price range.
This is the best, unbiased site I've found for reviews of cameras: Steve's Digicams
I have a DCR TRV22, but if I could go back in time, I would spend a little extra to get the 33.
These two models pretty much have all the functions you'll ever need, including analog-to-digital conversion, which I used a lot til I ran out of old tapes to convert.
My only beef with it is that when I got a protective filter to screw on top of the lense as a precaution, the provided lense cap wouldnt fit on top.
I also got to compare my Sony MiniDV camcorder with my brother's Canon ZR45, and I still prefer mine to his.
I've found Steve's digicams to be an excellent source Of in-depth reviews.
The main site has volumes of info on cameras, printers, software, and even batteries.
Good luck
I don't know whether you anticipate much tripod use with your camera, but if so you should pay attention to whether a camera can change tapes while on a tripod. When I was looking for a camera, I found that most of the sub-$1000 models either loaded the tape from the bottom (which means that you have to take the camera off the tripod to change tapes, a real pain) or didn't have an external microphone jack. I was looking for a camera for interviews, which is why tripod use and a mic jack were important to me. I eventually purchased a Panasonic Palmcorder PV-DC152 and was very satisfied.
The above post hits all the major points - good stuff!
You absolutely cannot go wrong with a GL2
It's a 6 MP digital still camera with 6x zoom that takes beautiful still photos, but, it films 640x480 VGA movies at 30 fps with Sound (mono admittedly).
This means it shows in excellent quality on a SD TV as normal size and flicker free. It's compact, uses 4x AA batteries, has full playback with sound on the camera. You can connect direct from the camera via USB 2 or with an AV cable to your TV / Video.
The main limitation is that the camera takes Compact Flash or xD cards, and unless you have a 1GB or above CF card, you won't get more than 10 minutes of video. But for the future, with 4 GB cards coming out, you'll be able to get an hours worth of footage.
I've found for happy snaps of family, parties etc. the short video clip is the way to go. No conversion needed when transferring onto your PC, although the included editing software is great, enabling your short clips to be quickly reduced to an emailable size. You can then edit and transfer a edited movie onto your CF card and then record direct to VHS tape from your camera.
And that's just the video feature apart from the full 6 MP 'prosumer' digital still camera features you get as well!
I'll vouch for the Sony Digital-8 cameras too. I picked up a DCR-TRV120 at the end of '01 from a fellow who'd barely used it. Included manual, cables, additional higher-capacity battery, camera bag, UV filter, and even a couple of tapes: US$436. eBay is a goodThing.
Good camera. Nowhere near as small as the lovely little MiniDV cameras out today, but for the price, hey -- the picture is brilliant over S-Video. It's got FireWire, and I've got iMovie. It's wonderful. Plenty of features, can do wide-format, yadda yadda. And the tapes aren't hard to find.
NightShot doesn't turn the dark into day, but it afforded me some good clear footage one night after a couple of cars collided on my streetcorner. And even without NightShot, having used it for iChat AV with a friend, I can say it's got better low-light performance than the iSight.
One thing that sold me on this one was the video pass-through conversion, so I can take analog video-in and stream it as DV to my computer. It's purportedly not as high-quality as a dedicated video converter, but again, for the price, I'm not complaining.
I have heard good reports about the Canon DV cameras as well.
As for web resources: My first stop for video-camera info is DVSpot, from the same fellow (Jeff Keller) who runs the Digital Camera Resource Page.
I have had a Canon XM1 for around 4 years - it is an absolutely great camera - it was about the cheapest 3CCD camera at the time, but it beats even pretty expensive single CCD machines hands down.. The new model is the XM2, check it out..
"You lied to me! There is a Swansea!"
After working for a year at Future Shop, the Canadian Best Buy equivalent, I've found the Canon line to be my favorite. They are reasonably priced, unlike sony, they have high quality lenses, unlike panasonic, and they rarely need repairs, unlike jvc. Avoid anything with still shots. Stills on Camcorders suck. If you want to take pictures, use a digital camera. If you want to take movies, go with a high-res format like miniDV. The Canon ZR series is easy to use and will take care of the needs of 90% of people. For those hardcore video people out there, check out the optura and elura series cameras. If you want to get more hardcore than that, you want a beta-cam which isn't really a commercial product. At least, you wouldn't catch me using a beta-cam for home movies.
I own a Canon DV-MV400i and when using the built-in microphone, the noise coming from the motor is recorded onto the tape. I don't prefer using an external mic - I bought a DV to be small, easy to carry and to be used instantly. Unfortunately this is hard to test when you go into a shop - you need to wire the cam to a TV or amplifier to hear the disturbing background noise.
I found Camuser.uk helpful.
I opted for a Panasonic GS 10 which costs 150 Euros (~180 USD) less and is somewhat leighter than Sony's comparable model (PC 105). Picture quality in low light conditions is a bit better with the Sony. Featurewise those cameras are 99% equal. I didn't like Sony's touchscreen (though that is definitly my personal opinion and it's not bad at all). I didn't like the fact that the Sony's batteries can only be charged inside the camera (at least that's what you get, when you buy the camera; an optional battery charger may be available).
If you want to spend more than 600 USD, IMHO you'll have to check out the 3-CCD camera from Panasonic. They are a big improvement, which all the cameras in between aren't.
I wouldn't buy anything but MinDV. Hi 8 is dead and only useful if you want compatibilty with your old camcorder.
The new DVD(-RAM) recorders are expensive, while picture quality is lower (due to higher compression) and are therefore a waste of money. (They may get really interesting, but the first generation isn't).
And as many have pointed out: Digital zoom is worthless. A 100x-zoom with a normal 800.000 pixel camera means 80 pixel resolution left and is completely useless.
Bye egghat.
-- "As a human being I claim the right to be widely inconsistent", John Peel
First off let me say that I've been reading /. for over 6 years now and I FINALLY got an account so I could post and get some of this karma and play the mod point game. Thanks to /. for a great site.
.25x
I recently purchased a low end JVC DV camcorder for about $280.00 at my local retailer. It's a great bang for the buck and I'm glad I bought a cheap one first because I feel like I have a better feel for what I'm going to be looking for in the next one I buy. I intentionally bought cheap, because I knew I was going to want to upgrade later, when I was more familiar with my needs.
Already, only two months later, I can tell what's important. Other people have mentioned these things and I hate to reiterate, but here we go...
#1 Lens Quality. I don't care how many TeraPixel your camera is, if the lens is shit, you cannot get a good image. Someone clarify here, but even the mars lander only uses ~ 1Mpixel pickups, but the lens is so good, it provides excellent images. Lens, lens, lens.
#2 Zoom. Digital zoom is absolutely worthless. If you want to zoom digitally, it's better to do it 'post-production'. Get a good WIDE-ANGLE to start with, because most of your shooting will be done at close distances (in the house, at the back yard picnic, birthday party) and you really want to be able to get the WHOLE picture. I have a 16x optical zoom with a 700x digital zoom and I can honestly sax I shoot 90% of my video at 1x and I wish it went to
3. Firewire. I don't care if you think you will use Adobe Premier or IMovie now. The truth is, you will someday and you're going to want firewire DV output. It's addictive editing your home movies and adding titles and music. Most DV cameras will have this, some don't and some use USB. Get firewire.
4. LUX or Light. Make sure your DV camera is good with low LUX or had a built in light or a bracket for mounting a light. DV cameras slow the shutter speed when light conditions fall below the amount requires to shoot properly. End result: choppy, grainy video that you end up throwing away.
If you want options like the ability to take still pictures on to a memory card, then Megapixels become more important, but for normal video, anything more than 1 Mpixel is useless because it exceeds the capability of your television, anyways. Fight the "more-is-better" mentality when dealing with megapixels unless you plan on making prints from your still shot taken off of the camera.
Of course, things like battery life are important, too. However, I find it just as easy to pack another battery in my bag and keep it handy, if needed, but I almost never shoot for more than an hour anyways.
Look for a camcorder that focuses on doing it's job, putting pictures and sound to tape, and avoid ones ith a lot of extra bells and whistles. While the new DV camcorders that have a built in DVD-ROM have a special 'wow' factor, I think it's a lot better to get a DVD burner in your machine and go that route.
Just my $.02
Look at all the advice given out so far, you're looking for something that is: Small high quality not battery hungry fairly reasonable in price has neat features like 'low light mode' 'wind noise cancelling' and an image stabiliser. Go for the Canon MV series. They have the lot, are firewire, compact and pretty good quality. I bought an MV600 for 350 ($650(!!!)) and it's pretty neat. I had to pick up a firewire cable for it though, as well as video editing software which cost a fair bit more. The guy that was talking about having to buy accessories was right, you'll need a tripod, case, extra DV tapes and probably an extra battery and maybe a light for night use... You're probably looking at $900 for the whole setup which is pretty much in the range you're looking for. I did a lot of looking around to find the best camera for my budget and this one was the best at the time-even apple used to sell them I believe so they can't be bad at all :) .
Well recommended.
http://www.frenchgeek.com/
We have a cannon ZR10 from 4 years ago. It uses miniDV and has servd us well. Recently got a new battery for it and had to have the loader repaired after a drop/ I think the replacement model today is the ZR60 or 70;
"The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
First recommendation is don't buy any that cost under $500. Walk into any Best Buy or (better still) Frys and hold every model. You will discover that those cheapie models have alot of play in them when you open the LCD or feel fragile when you try to open the tape door. As soon as I hit the $600+ price range the machines felt solid.
Choose one that has accessibility and comfort. I avoided the Canons because they had so many buttons right near the LCD hinge. I don't care if the buttons flash colors. Their placement and how well they work is what counts.
Chose the right format. There is only one right format: DV. VHS-C and SVHS-C are not as good, and the latter is not common. Solid-state camcorders only record low-quality MPEG4 to flash memory. 8mm is dead in the water. digital 8 is the usual Sony wannabe that no one else wants. DVD is lower-quality than DV and does not lend itself to frame-by-frame editing like DV's intra-frame-compression-only format. DV's audio is not compressed and goes up to 16-bit, 48KHz. Plus DV tapes are easy to find and not too expensive.
Choose IOs. Firewire and USB should be minimum requirements but there are models that lack one or the other. Yuck. Not many have USB 2.0, though. I didn't see any in the stores. Samsung and Sony use Memory Stick. Everyone else uses SD. Analog output is a minimum requirement for hooking up to a standard TV. A nicer camcorder will have analog *inputs*. JVC GR-DV800 has composite AND S-video input and output! Useful for backing up analog footage to DV format if you don't have a capture card.
Still pictures probably don't matter much. Don't expect super quality from a camcorder regardless of megapixel advertising.
Low light recording is hard to get right on a non professional camcorder especially without a light. GR-DV800 is passable in dim light, but not awe inspiring. Would want an optional light attatchment for that.
Manual adjustments for focus and white balancing should be available and easy to use.
Optical zoom is what counts. GR-DV800 is 10X optical zoom. Not the best, but not bad. You rarely zoom in that much anyway.
How good is the auto focus? Is the color quality good? Again I picked the JVC.
Canon's Optura 20 seemed good but there were reviews on amazon about motor noise being picked up by the microphone. The only negative review about the JVC-DV800 was finicky compatibility with non-Lexar SD cards, but if you're not taking still pictures you don't care.
And nope, no PC version. Anyone attempting to do serious film work on a PC is nutz. Thats like trying to fuck without a dick. You can use the strap on, but you wont feel anything. Same experience.
I couldn't agree more. I use a Canon Optura 100mc (highly recommended; although discontinued in favor of the inferior 200mc) My general rule of thumb is keep all my edited home movies down to around 5 minutes, or less (depending on circumstances, of course) because in general that's really about the extent of most people's attention spans. Also, I like to follow the guideline of "leave the audience wanting more" instead of "show them every stupid little detail." Cut your scenes just narrowly enough to convey the meaning of the scene and nothing extra, but avoid the MTV "1 second per scene" fast edit crap where your brain barely has time to process one scene before the next three hit your mental FIFO buffer.
http://www.steves-digicams.com/digvideo.html
I went through the same problem of looking for a camera to record vacations and my children growing up. I ended up buying a SONY DCR-TRV50 when they came out a few years back. I still use it all the time.
I would recommend buying a collapsible tripod as well for those times you record long plays, talent shows, etc. (holding a camera for a long time can put your arm to sleep no matter how light they are)
Also, if you plan on doing digital editing on your computer (and who doesn't) get the fastest transfer capability from the videocam to the PC. The DCR-TRV50 has firewire which makes editing a snap. Enjoy!
Quality
Size
I/O options
Widescreen
there's a compromise to get what you want... a tiny lightweight camcorder can't be fitted with an ideal lens, will have reduced I/O options due to lack of space. Battery life is also a compromise, the two-hour LiIon battery for my Sony TRV80e is quite big and adds a lot of weight.
Some choices that haven't been examined closely already:
Digital and analogue in options; the former necessary for capturing the edited video from your computer (DV is a disk hog, you will need a DVD writer, or put the video back onto tape unless you're willing to buy many 100+ GB drives)
Widescreen - there are some true widescreen-sensor camcorders now; note that the number of pixels is the same, they're just wider.
Comments on features already discussed here on /.:
Three CCD? Costs a lot extra but the quality may be worth it; beware of GL70 which is 3CCD but doesn't get such good reviews, perhaps because it was a marketing ploy rather than a technical innovation
MiniDV vs micromv vs digital8. Anything except minidv will be a dead loss, the other formats are proprietary or dying. MiniDV tapes are ubiquitous, cheap, available worldwide.
As people said, still image capability should be your lowest priority. USB streaming, bluetooth, etc also vaguely useless (that said you can control and preview pictures on a sony camcorder from certain sony clie PDAs!).
And finally... see if you can borrow one for a long weekend to be sure you'll be able to live with it.
i agree with the points on zooms/nightshot etc (i'm actually in the middle of editing a bunch of rave footage, shot on a PD150, believe me, nightshot's no substitute for lighting or a high end camera which works well in low light...will be on http://www.symbiosisnet.com and http://www.circuitviii.net). the PD150 is great, broadcast quality for about GBP2800...that may not help you tho :)
YOU JUST CAN'T expect to end up with decent looking footage without cutting it. even if you just stick one good take next to another (better than the homer simpson star wipe school of editing), surely you have firewire and at least double digit GBs of drive space?
A digital format will enable you to copy your films to a newer technology in the future, with no loss of quality.
Also, make sure you can input NTSC signals, so you can connect the camera to a VCR and copy your old VHS movies, should you have any.
Avoid overpriced, proprietary Sony battery technology. I'd rather spend my money on a second, backup battery than a $100 battery that tells me how many minutes it has left, gets it wrong, and dies prematurely.
Slashdot entertains. Windows pays the mortgage.
i like the canon sd100 digital elph.
it takes digital pictures and avi movies
and stores them on an sd card.
of course the reason i bought it is that
i already have a 512 MB sd card for my sharp
zaurus and can just take it out and wirelessly
transfer the media to my linux box website
another cool thing is that i can put the video out
line that comes with it into my ati tv card and
use it as a webcam for gnomemeeting...
Look at the new SONY DVs that write to a small 3 inch CD. Why? Because when the filming session is over the "movie" is permanently on the CD to keep forever and there's no extra steps to do to preserve the "event". Sure the little CDs cost 25-50 cents but they are forever. The specs on the $899 Sony looked better than the $1099. YMMV. Both can be bought for way less via the Web so you can stay under your $1k. Optical zoom of course is the one to look at, not Digital "blowup" zoom.
I've seen like 3 reviews in 2003 about digital camcorders. I'm starting to get tired of them. Yes. I read PC Magazine. I don't have a laptop in my bathroom.
I talked to a few people who had one and they all recommended finding one with a builtin light because while in outdoor conditions the picture quality was amazing, indoors it was very grainy. We found most miniDV camcorders don't come with a light so we specifically looked for one and found a panasonic. Indoors the panasonic took crappy pictures, alot worse than our VHS-C and when you turned the builtin light on it seems to record stuff in slow motion or something. It was weird.
Anyways, to make a long story short, we tried a couple, either their indoor quality was crap, made too much noise and you could hear it on tape, etc. In the end we went with a sony TRV-19. Indoors picture quality is really good, outdoors its amazing.. The sound quality is amazing as well.
Before this I was never a sony person.. I always thought they weren't worth the extra few dollars you'll pay but in the case of camcorders its definately worth it. I've read reviews of other camcorders and they say what they lack in optical quality they make up for it with extra features over the sony. But really, when you look back on it, do you care if you have an extra features or do you want your memories to be as crisp as possible?
Also keep in mind that the only difference (mostly) between lower end models and higher end models is features. The basic camcorder is the same. The difference between the JVC's is a slot for a memory card. With the Sony the difference is a memory stick and the option to act as a pass through for VHS conversion. Since most camera's are only comparative to a 1meg digital camera we didn't think this feature was worth the extra money.
If you plan on doing any editing on your computer buy a big HD.. 2 hours of video raw is about 30 gig.
"Thanks to the remote control I have the attention span of a gerbil."
We tried panasonic, jvc, etc but SONY was the best and their night vision, while bringing back memories of the Blair Witch project has really come in handy.
For anyone interested in buying a camcorder find a store with a good return policy and try a couple until you find one you like. Take reviews like the parent post with a grain of salt.
"Thanks to the remote control I have the attention span of a gerbil."
The only puzzling thing about the iChat setup is that the camera is shutting itself down after four minutes or so, even with the AC adapter plugged in. So far, I've power-cycled the Sony and it's come back fine. I haven't looked deeply into it, so there may just be a camera setting I need to change. Otherwise, it's great -- iChat AV automatically recognizes it; zero configuration.
Check PC magazine, they have had articles in the past few months with 5-6 reviews per article. Based on that the Oct 1 article, I got my wife the Elura 50 and she's real happy (thank God!)
The features I personally would like in a camcorder are:
The camcorder I have has the first two features. I really wish it had the third. I have some good software that can calculate motion vectors and convert the interlaced picture into progressive nicely, thus this becomes the least important feature. BTW, I always convert to progressive scan before making an SVCD or DVD from my video.
And for the record, I do no editing. I just want the quality of a digital medium. Someone else suggested that film is higher quality, but the remark was clearly made by someone who has never worked with movie film. The cameras are big and bulky due to the amount of film consumed on a shoot. A 12" reel of 16mm film lasts 30 minutes.
Comparing the digital camera's picture to that of analogue formats, it beats out Hi8 and S-VHS-C a little bit, 8mm a bit more (though 8mm is not bad), and completely smokes VHS-C. DV and D8 cameras are much less costly than S-VHS-C, but more expensive than Hi8. Analogue does not offer wide screen that I have seen. My digital camcorder can do 4:3 (720x480), 16:9 letterboxed to 4:3 (720x480, but only 720x382 is active), or 16:9 (720x480).
Oh yeah, my camera is a JVC DVL520U.
www.wavefront-av.com
I went through the very same thing myself a few months ago. I got the most help and best ideas from Circuit City. The sales person, who was not comission-driven, happened to be a college student at the local Fine Arts school nearby. He really knew his stuff and gave up a lot of great information about which products they had. Yes, we could save a few bucks buying on the Internet, but with the horror stories posted here, not for me, thanks!
-mS
I want a Canon Optura Xi. You can find them new off ebay for around $1000 and it has a 2 megapixel CCD for still shots (better than most I've seen). Get brain washed by fancy flash...
That's one of the crudest, most foul /. postings I think I've ever seen.... and I laughed my a$$ off throughout the WHOLE thing! :)
(Modded up as INFORMATIVE for the real-world examples I'll have to try with my new camcorder...)