I want to buy a camcorder for under $500?

Rex

I will use it at my sons sports games and to capture memories of my new born and the rest of my family. Whats my best choice?

Answer
Here's a list of the top camcorders for 2006:
http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/CamInfo-Selects-2006.htm

and a helpful buying guide:
http://www.easycamcorders.com/content/Beginners-Guide.htm

Top Christmas Gifts for this year!?!?

Kevin L

Preferably electronics or something to do with action sports

10 or more if you can : )

Answer
Kindle Wireless Reading
iPod touch
Flip UltraHD Camcorder
Blu-ray Disc Player
Wireless Internet Camera
iPod nano
Digital SLR Camera
HD Pocket Video Camera
GPS
Portable DVD Player
Clock Radio
LCD HDTV
http://www.amazon.com/gp/redirect.html?ie=UTF8&location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.amazon.com%2Fgp%2Fbestsellers%2Felectronics%3Fie%3DUTF8%26ref_%3Dpd%255Fts%255Fpg%255F1%26pg%3D1&tag=products07e-20&linkCode=ur2&camp=1789&creative=390957

Powered by Yahoo! Answers

Any filmmakers opinions on which is more important to upgrade first the camera or the editing equipment?

top sports camcorders image

guitargeek

I'm an amateur filmmaker, and I have a decent HD camcorder, a Canon Vixia HF10. I also have decent editing software on a fairly powerful laptop. I'm starting to work on more projects and i'm looking to upgrade some stuff so I was just looking for opinions on what should come first a better camera with more controls? or better editing software/hardware? Please let me know what you think.

Answer
Well first a lesson in terms. You are not a "film maker" you are a video maker. Film makers live in Hollywood and don't use video cameras they use film cameras.

I spent a career dong television news / sports photography. Everything in the chain is important but I always found that the quality of the camera and its lenses are the first step to a quality product. If the camera isn't producing no amount of editing will help it. If the camera is producing any editor will do because of the initial quality of product. Don't mis understand my use of the word "any" because quality here too is very important to maintain that quality as the video goes through.

This is along the line of what I'd consider a "professional" that will yield the kind of results you're looking for.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/684198-REG/Canon_4454B001.html

You'll want to add comparable editing gear. A lap top may do the trick but it's limited. You're going to want a much bigger computer to edit with.

Are videos on the Canon SX10 as good as the one on the Canon FS100 video camera?

jhoo828

I need a nice (not HD) video camera. I decided that an SD-based Canon FS100 would at least be close to the image quality on my old Sony TRV250 Hi-8 camcorder. Rather than pay for the FS100 alone, would the video quality on a new Canon SX10IS be about the same as well as giving me a nice still cam?

Answer
You can't quite get both in a single model, yet.

By spec, the Canon's movie mode is decent enough... it's recording at 640x480, which is a "square pixel" version of the standard 720x480 that pretty much all NTSC SD camcorders use... slighly lower pixel count, but it's not a huge issue. Canon still recording tends to be in same ballpark as lower cost video camera video... I have not used this particular model, but in general, I can state this. 30fps will be a bit more "movie like" than the 60i (interlaced) you would get with regular video. If you're making DVDs, you might notice this, particularly with sports and other fast moving things. If your goal is computer video, the non-interlaced video from the SX100 might actually be preferable (I don't know if the FS100 has a progressive mode... most of Canon's HD models do today).

So look at compression.. the SX10 can record 1 hr. 30 min on an 8GB flash card, while the FS100 at top quality can record 1hr. 50min.. That sounds like the SX10 is actually using less compression, but we have to check the format. The FS100 records in MPEG-2, as used on all DVDs. At that bitrate, the FS100 is slightly better than DVD quality.

Checking into the SX10, I find that, like most digital still cameras, the SX10 uses Motion-JPEG for video, which is very similar to the DV format. To DV and MJPEG are simpler compression schemes than MPEG-2, so you need more bits per second to get the same quality. DV camcorders use 25Mb/s, while the SX10 is recording around 11Mb/s here. So I would expect this video to be relatively low quality, compared to DVD or the FS100, at least in terms of digital noise (artifacts and other ugly bits due to compression). It might still look fine, but it's probably more like one of the FS100 "long play" modes rather than top quality.

Next is sound.. most digital still cameras have pretty evil microphones, in mono, and no way to add an external one. The SX10 is a bit better than this.. you can't add a mic, but at least it's recording in stereo. Also, the mics are apparently just above the lens housing, and thus less probe to being blocked by your hands (a real problem with many still cameras used for video).

Then there's "features while recording". Traditionally, most digital still cameras with video recording were not good camcorders, even given their limitations, because some features didn't work during recording. The first one I had with this mode, a Canon from the 90s, didn't even keep the viewscreen active. It's more common for autofocus, autoexposure, and/or zoom to not function while doing video. Some do it.. I have a Panasonic TZ5 which does keep everything active during video, and functions as a somewhat reasonable camcorder (with bad sound and too-high compression, but I have used it as a third video camera on shoots from time to time). So I looked it up, and while it's not easy to find, one review (included below) did find that auto-focus/exposure remain active during video, and you can zoom. In general, this camera is better designed for video than most.. for example, there's a separate video button which can be used in any photo mode -- most DSCs make you switch to a different "movie mode", which is a bit annoying (my Panny is like this).

So yeah, I would bet that the SX10 would deliver video comparable to the TRV250, if not quite on par with the FS100. And naturally, the stills will be dramatically better than using the FS100 as a still camera. You are limited to 4GB file sizes, which means you get about 40 minutes at top quality before you have to stop shooting, but you can start again right away if you have an 8GB memory card (my Panasonic is the same way... it's because they use the FAT32 file system on the SD card, which is limited to 4GB maximum). With some limitations, it's going to be decent for casual video use, much better at least than most digital still cameras.

Powered by Yahoo! Answers

Is it possible for a camcorder to have 100x optical zoom? Would it be possible to use even with a tripod?

top sports camcorders image

Jake

My cousin has a camcorder with 70x optical zoom and it works fine.
I recently saw one that had 78x optical zoom, it was Panasonic.

Why do people say it wouldn't be possible to have 100x optical zoom?
78x optical zoom isn't that much less than 100x.

Answer
optical zoom over 20x is not very practical. megazoom is a result of using very tiny CCD imagers. for a 1/4 inch format CCD, the normal focal length is 4mm, 20x is 80mm which is 3 inches a rather reasonable size lens for a plam held camcorder. 100x would be 400mm or 15 inches, that is a lot of glass to hang in front of a 1 inch thick camera. then there is the problem of light gathering. for reasonable pictures in daylight, the lens needs a minimum iris opening of f4. the "f" factor is the ratio of focal length divided by lens diameter. so for 400mm to achieve f4 it would need to be 100mm diameter or 4 inches. But you might realize that the biggest problem is stability, to prevent blur, OIS is usable to 20x. That prevents blur but it does not control bounce or similar unintended movement, that is you will have sharp images of something that is bouncing. Here is where a tripod is needed. Television sports cameras use 40x to 50x lenses from Center field at baseball, or stadium top for football. But that camera is mounted on a $250,000 vibration supression mount, not a simple tripod. The megazoom may be something of value for still digital photos where the effective shutter speed can be increased to get a clear single frame. CCDs are getting down to 1/8th inch size with would reduce the example numbers in half. but then you have to cram the 12 elements used in a normal servo zoom (one that tracks focus) into minimum thickness of 2mm. that is why the flip cameras don't have optical zoom. and the funny thing is, all the sports people want to put "baby death" super fisheye lenses on their cameras, just the opposite of megazoom.

What is a good vid camera that will make good vids for youtube, and be easy to transfer to a comp for editing?

Drew

I'm looking for a good camcorder with good picture and sound quality. I know very little about the different types of video cameras (hard drive, etc.) I plan on using it to transfer and edit videos on my computer. I won't spend more than $350. A specific model would help me most, but a simple explanation about which type of camera would be best for me would be appreciated.

Answer
The Optura 600 from canon

The Optura 600 represents the flagship of Canon's 1 chip MiniDV camcorders, the king of the Optura line. Retailing at around $1100 (up approximately $400 from the Optura 60), your money might be well-spent. The 600's huge 1/2.8" CCD promises excellent video performance, a category the Opturas have traditionally faired well in. Matchbook bodies seem to be all the rage, combining portability and deed. Many matchbooks, however, present handling issues, and may annoy those expecting a professional feel to match the large price tag. We hope the Optura 600 brought its "A-game," because we dropped it in the middle of the ring to face off against the top MiniDV consumer cams of the year.

Video Performance
The Optura 600 sports an enormous 1/2.8â CCD with 3.5 effective MP. The camcorder also uses Canonâs RGB Primary Color Filter for a boost in video performance. The difference these specs makes becomes obvious when you compare it to the Optura 60. The picture appears sharper and the colors are richer. The grayscale is also much more sharply defined.

Because this is Canonâs top of the line consumer camcorder, we held it up against the top models from other manufacturers. Compared to the GR-X5, one of our top video performers this year, the colors are a shade darker, and overall you might say that the Optura 600âs spectrum is more even. The black/white contrast looks better in the JVC GR-X5, however. The colors from the Sony DCR-PC1000

Powered by Yahoo! Answers