Which camcorder should I get?
 

I know this aint the OTHER HARDWARE section, but since this spot gets the most traffic (and subsequently the most camera-gurus), I'd figure to ask here.


With my baby boy coming in just two months, I realize that my old crummy VHS-based camcorder isn't cutting it anymore. So I need something nice to capture the baby moments with. So I've narrowed it down to two:

I can get this one right now (with extra tapes, a bag, and memory card):
http://www.circuitcity.com/ssm/Canon...oductDetail.do
+ VERY CHEAP
+ Easy to edit videos
+ 60 minutes of recording at decent quality
- It's on DV tape, so not the best protection
- It's only SD resolution (around DVD quality)
- crappy low-light recroding

or this one next month (with only what's in the box, and MAYBE an extra +-RW):
http://www.circuitcity.com/ssm/Sony-...oductDetail.do
+ HD (1080i) recording with support for SD format as well
+ 60 minutes of recording with AVC codec (same as Blue-Ray movies)
+ Great Low-light recording
- Super expensive
- Can't edit videos as easily
- SUPER EXPENSIVE

Id recoment canon or Samsung.

remember theres many options with digital camcorders.

but If you dont want the save pics to memory card option you can still save pictures of exactly the same quality to the digital film its self. that will save you at least 100 quid.

second option is if you want to edit to and fro on the camera get one with DV in and out.

try and find one with the highest optical zoom in the price range dont go for the digital zoom because the images will be grainey and also you will loose the moving subject quicker due to the high magnification.

Really appreciated. Though I already knew all that coming in (which is why I've narrowed it down to these two).

So, any suggestions between the two choices?

ive always liked canon quality ease of use and feaures so id get one of those

I wouldnt touch sony personally even though a few years back I had almost every av component of the brand in my house at one point

BUT

samsung are good because they are a trade off between quality features and price

Cool, so that's one for Canon

fook me 86 quid for a canon too

me might procure a camera from las vegas

Whatever you do, don't get a Hard Disk or DVD based one, because they are crap (well not as good as the tape versions at least). Having said that, there are some new Hard Disk based HD cameras on the horizon, but I haven't seen any reviews of them yet.

Anyway, if you are after a SD camcorder, I recommend one with 3 CCDs. Sony is actually a good make (I have a Sony SD camcorder ATM), although you will want to make sure you have at least 1 year warranty with whatever you get. Panasonic also make some good 3CCD camcorders.

If you are after a HD (Hi-Def) camcorder, then get a tape based one (HDV). Sony's HC1, HC3 and Canon's HV10 are 3 good models, however they all have their plus and minus, so I would check out a full review. Basically:
HC1 - lots of connectivity options
HC3 - better IQ, but less connectivity options than the HC1
HV10 - best in good light, plus good stabilizer, but not as good as Sony in low light

However many of the current consumer SD camcorders will provide a better picture than the current pro-sumer HD camcorders (although at a reduced resolution of course).

Interesting...

So you're saying that the DVD-based UX1 may not have have as good a picture as that canon (or the 3CCD miniDV ones)? I mean, obviously I'm getting a huge resolution increase, but if things like color reproduction, noise, micro-blocking are huge issues with the Sony camera, I may as well go with canon here.

What exactly IS the downside to the DVD based HD camcorder anyway (it still get's 60 minutes with the AVC codec - aka. H.264)



BTW, I'm going to be playing whatever video i have on a 50" 1080i HDTV, either through the camera (with the canon), or with the PS3 (the sony)

HDV (tape based HiDef Camcorders) use a compression of around 25Mbits MPEG2. Hard Disk ones use a compression of around 13-15Mbit AVC, DVD generally uses under 10Mbit AVC. Even though HDV uses MPEG2, it is still better quality than the current AVC camcorders (the compression artefacts aren't as noticeable on the HDV ones).

The thing about 3CCD camcorders is that they generally produce better colours than the current pro-sumer HD camcorders. There are one or two 3CCD pro-sumer HD camcorders out at the moment, but then they are only Hard Disk or DVD ones.

So at the moment, if you really wanted HD, I would go for the Sony HC3 or Canon HV10 (depending on what you are mainly going to shoot). Otherwise get a Canon/Panasonic/Sony 3CCD DV camcorder.

See, I'm confused.

From reviews, I've heard that since AVC is quite a bt better of a codec than MPEG2, it doesn't require as high a bitrate to give good results. This model specifically is supposed to be at 12Mbps and put out a picture closer to HDV than HDD-HD.

The other HD suggestions are just outta my pricerange, so I guess it'll most likely be an SD 3CCD miniDV cam.

I'm heading to the store in 10 minutes, so I'll see for myself and report back here.

Well the reviews I have seen say the compression artefacts are noticeable on the AVC ones.
Anyway, I hope you find something you like. http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...ies/smile1.gif

Ok, went ahead and got the panasonic miniDV 3CCD pv_gs300.


Gonna play around for a bit. Thanks for the help Perfect!

That's a good camera, hope you take some great footage with it! [thumbup]

My wife got me the Canon ELURA 70 for Christmas 2 years ago. Of course they were alot more expensive then.

I am for the most part happy with it.It is small and lightweight. The image stabilization doesn't seem to do ****.

As you have a baby on the way, I would get something that is easy to use. You are going to have ALOT less free time on your hands.
EDIT: see you got something. Enjoy. :)