«

In several reviews of camcorders, it has been stated that
even though a camcorder can take, for example, 3MP stills,
(giving a size of 2048 x 1496), the quality of camcorder stills
is nowhere near as good as those produced by the equivalent
digital still camera. For example, can the Panasonic PV-DV953
produce as good still pictures as a 3MP dedicated still digital
camera? Does the PV-DV953 use interpolation / digital
addition of extra pixels to increase the size of its still pictures
to 3MP?

Similarly, can the new Sony DCR-PC330 produce as good 3MP
still pictures as the equivalent Sony 3MP digital camera? Now
that camcorders can take 3MP still pictures, these hybrid camcorders
are becoming more attractive because you need only one camera
for both your movies and stills.

see: http://reviews-zdnet.com.com/Sony_DC...-30520123.html

This article says that Sony switches from a CMY filter array on its
CCD to RGB, which provides a better scheme for color reproduction.
I wonder if this would improve the quality of this camcorder's digital
stills?

Can anyone explain why the quality of stills from camcorders may not
be as good as the equivalent sized stills produced from digital still
cameras? This is becoming an important issue because people are now
being asked to pay a considerable amount extra for camcorders that have
2MP and 3MP stills capabilities.

Jessica

My 953 takes better stills then my dedicated 2.1 mil. digital camera.
The way to go would be to have 2 dedicated pieces of equip.
Camcorder and hi pixel digital camera Like 4 or 5 million pix dig. camera

Stills from camcorders suck my ****ing ****!


"Jessica" <> wrote in message news:<O%pcb.3584$>...
> In several reviews of camcorders, it has been stated that
> even though a camcorder can take, for example, 3MP stills,
> (giving a size of 2048 x 1496), the quality of camcorder stills
> is nowhere near as good as those produced by the equivalent
> digital still camera. For example, can the Panasonic PV-DV953
> produce as good still pictures as a 3MP dedicated still digital
> camera? Does the PV-DV953 use interpolation / digital
> addition of extra pixels to increase the size of its still pictures
> to 3MP?
>
> Similarly, can the new Sony DCR-PC330 produce as good 3MP
> still pictures as the equivalent Sony 3MP digital camera? Now
> that camcorders can take 3MP still pictures, these hybrid camcorders
> are becoming more attractive because you need only one camera
> for both your movies and stills.
>
> see: http://reviews-zdnet.com.com/Sony_DC...-30520123.html
>
> This article says that Sony switches from a CMY filter array on its
> CCD to RGB, which provides a better scheme for color reproduction.
> I wonder if this would improve the quality of this camcorder's digital
> stills?
>
> Can anyone explain why the quality of stills from camcorders may not
> be as good as the equivalent sized stills produced from digital still
> cameras? This is becoming an important issue because people are now
> being asked to pay a considerable amount extra for camcorders that have
> 2MP and 3MP stills capabilities.
>
> Jessica

There's more to a picture than pixels. Also consider quality of lens, CCD,
No. of CCD's, Zoom capability, low light ability, etc. etc. My $2500+ VX2000
video camera takes much better 640 x 480 stills than my old, el cheapo
640x480 still camera I used to have for $99. I also have a Sony 5 Megapixel
still camera that does much better. The video camera has a limited number of
pixels but they are really good pixels.

Also consider the final destination. The Sony 5 Megapixel camera does a much
better job when printing an 8 x 10 glossy, but when doing a slide show on
DVD for watching on TV, you really can't tell much difference between it and
the VX2000 video camera.

Assuming you have some experience with manual controls, there are also a lot
of factors that control your ability to get the proper focus, depth of field
and lighting that affect picture quality. Pixels are just one of a number of
factors and not not necessarily the most important.

Ed


"Jessica" <> wrote in message
news:O%pcb.3584$...
> In several reviews of camcorders, it has been stated that
> even though a camcorder can take, for example, 3MP stills,
> (giving a size of 2048 x 1496), the quality of camcorder stills
> is nowhere near as good as those produced by the equivalent
> digital still camera. For example, can the Panasonic PV-DV953
> produce as good still pictures as a 3MP dedicated still digital
> camera? Does the PV-DV953 use interpolation / digital
> addition of extra pixels to increase the size of its still pictures
> to 3MP?
>
> Similarly, can the new Sony DCR-PC330 produce as good 3MP
> still pictures as the equivalent Sony 3MP digital camera? Now
> that camcorders can take 3MP still pictures, these hybrid camcorders
> are becoming more attractive because you need only one camera
> for both your movies and stills.
>
> see:
http://reviews-zdnet.com.com/Sony_DC...-30520123.html
>
> This article says that Sony switches from a CMY filter array on its
> CCD to RGB, which provides a better scheme for color reproduction.
> I wonder if this would improve the quality of this camcorder's digital
> stills?
>
> Can anyone explain why the quality of stills from camcorders may not
> be as good as the equivalent sized stills produced from digital still
> cameras? This is becoming an important issue because people are now
> being asked to pay a considerable amount extra for camcorders that have
> 2MP and 3MP stills capabilities.
>
> Jessica
>
>
>
>

"Ed" <> wrote in message
news:bkv2st$68ggq$...
> There's more to a picture than pixels. Also consider quality of lens, CCD,
> No. of CCD's, Zoom capability, low light ability, etc. etc. My $2500+
VX2000
> video camera takes much better 640 x 480 stills than my old, el cheapo
> 640x480 still camera I used to have for $99. I also have a Sony 5
Megapixel
> still camera that does much better. The video camera has a limited number
of
> pixels but they are really good pixels.
snip

> "Jessica" <> wrote in message
> news:O%pcb.3584$...
> > In several reviews of camcorders, it has been stated that
> > even though a camcorder can take, for example, 3MP stills,
> > (giving a size of 2048 x 1496), the quality of camcorder stills
> > is nowhere near as good as those produced by the equivalent
> > digital still camera. snip

Thanks Ed for these comments, I agree there's more to a picture
than pixels. I think there is also quite a difference in the CCDs
that are available for use. See for example this article:

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...1157575,00.asp

Some people have told me that a 3 megapixel still from
a good camcorder would probably only be the equivalent
of a 2MP picture from a dedicated digital still camera. I guess the only
way of really knowing is to compare the output of a selected camcorder
with that of an equivalent digital camera and see if there is a noticeable
difference. I have found that enlarging a very small part of a photograph
to quite a large size soon shows up the quality of the digital image.
I wondered whether still cameras use the same type of CCDs as camcorders
and whether they process the image in the same way. For example, there
are progressive CCDs and interlaced CCDs.

Jessica