Digital Video Camera

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by will, Oct 25, 2004.

  1. will

    will Guest

    hi,

    i'm looking to buy a camcorder for my 2-week south island trip (ie don't
    have the opportunity to offload data) at the end of the year.

    i was looking at Sony's DVD model, but i gave up because of its 30min
    recording time, which is a bit too low, and at around $30 per DVD-RW,
    it'll be quite expensive to buy enough to last for 2 weeks.

    so back to Mini-DV, is Panasonic's 3CCD worth the money? is Sony still a
    good brand to consider? i just need one that is easy to operate and
    produces reasonable video quality for TV viewing later on.

    i notice some camcorders have MPEG4 recording to SD cards, how is the
    quality compared to recording to Mini-DV. someone at a retail shop told
    me SD card is only for photos, all video goes to Mini-DV.

    still-imaging is not as important.

    thanks

    will.
    will, Oct 25, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. will

    thing Guest

    will wrote:
    > hi,
    >
    > i'm looking to buy a camcorder for my 2-week south island trip (ie don't
    > have the opportunity to offload data) at the end of the year.
    >
    > i was looking at Sony's DVD model, but i gave up because of its 30min
    > recording time, which is a bit too low, and at around $30 per DVD-RW,
    > it'll be quite expensive to buy enough to last for 2 weeks.
    >
    > so back to Mini-DV, is Panasonic's 3CCD worth the money? is Sony still a
    > good brand to consider? i just need one that is easy to operate and
    > produces reasonable video quality for TV viewing later on.


    Personally I would not buy Sony, to proprietry (hence tape prices) and I
    have had bad experiences.

    I have the Panasonic GS170 (now its the GS200 I think) for still
    pictures it is all but useless except for rough snaps but for movies I
    think it is very good.

    The GS200 does MPeg4 to the sD card I believe, you will need large
    memory cards (1gig ones) and its compressed so the quality will probably
    not be as good as MiniDV. The Panasonic tapes are resonably priced so
    just get 6~9 tapes.

    As a hint, once you buy a particular brand of MiniDV tape, stick to that
    one brand as different brands use different lubricants which can combine
    and gum up the camera, not good.

    www.tomshardware.com had an excellent review/howto of the GS170 and
    making movies so that is why I bought one, I have not regretted it so far.

    http://graphics.tomshardware.com/video/20040524/index.html
    http://graphics.tomshardware.com/video/20040614/index.html

    I bought a 5.1 Mpixel HP camera for stills, well worth it if you want a
    hi-res automatic camera, it does very nice pictures, and I like the
    software bundle which also works on Macs.

    I bought the HP camera and the GS170 for ($2100incl GST) less than the
    price of the GS200, ($2500) so think on what you want.

    regards

    Thing

    >
    > i notice some camcorders have MPEG4 recording to SD cards, how is the
    > quality compared to recording to Mini-DV. someone at a retail shop told
    > me SD card is only for photos, all video goes to Mini-DV.
    >
    > still-imaging is not as important.
    >
    > thanks
    >
    > will.
    thing, Oct 25, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. thing wrote:
    > I have the Panasonic GS170 (now its the GS200 I think) for still
    > pictures it is all but useless except for rough snaps but for movies I
    > think it is very good.
    >
    > The GS200 does MPeg4 to the sD card I believe, you will need large
    > memory cards (1gig ones) and its compressed so the quality will probably
    > not be as good as MiniDV. The Panasonic tapes are resonably priced so
    > just get 6~9 tapes.


    my sister just got one of these and a 1GB SD card(~$165+GST wholesale).
    The stills suck, but for video it is sweet.

    --
    Dave Hall
    http://www.dave.net.nz
    http://www.karyn.net.nz
    Dave - Dave.net.nz, Oct 25, 2004
    #3
  4. will

    will Guest


    > my sister just got one of these and a 1GB SD card(~$165+GST wholesale).
    > The stills suck, but for video it is sweet.


    #### i read that GS120 is a dumb-down version of GS200, i wonder if i
    really need that 2.2MP (plus few features) or is 1.7MP enough, since i'm
    not into still photos on camcorder anyway.

    are non-3CCD models (GS55 or something like that) still worth looking at?

    and on Panosonic's booklet, 512MB is enough for 1 hour MPEG4 at the
    super-fine (highest) setting. comparing this to 1GB 8cm-DVD's 30min, i
    guess the quality will suffer a bit. but i have 3x512MB SD cards lying
    around, so it's an incentive to use non-Sony.

    will.
    will, Oct 25, 2004
    #4
  5. will

    SNOman Guest

    will wrote:
    > hi,
    >
    > i'm looking to buy a camcorder for my 2-week south island trip (ie don't
    > have the opportunity to offload data) at the end of the year.
    >
    > i was looking at Sony's DVD model, but i gave up because of its 30min
    > recording time, which is a bit too low, and at around $30 per DVD-RW,
    > it'll be quite expensive to buy enough to last for 2 weeks.
    >
    > so back to Mini-DV, is Panasonic's 3CCD worth the money? is Sony still a
    > good brand to consider? i just need one that is easy to operate and
    > produces reasonable video quality for TV viewing later on.
    >
    > i notice some camcorders have MPEG4 recording to SD cards, how is the
    > quality compared to recording to Mini-DV. someone at a retail shop told
    > me SD card is only for photos, all video goes to Mini-DV.
    >
    > still-imaging is not as important.
    >
    > thanks
    >
    > will.

    What's the deal with getting video from your DV camera to PC HDD for
    editing these days? I always thought the small sony dvd cameras would be
    a good option as presumably each time you take a video segment it
    records a separate mpeg file to the dvd which you can then just copy
    stright into your PC. With tapes don't you still have to run a capture
    utility and capture your video from tape to get it into your PC?
    SNOman, Oct 26, 2004
    #5
  6. will

    nick Guest

    "SNOman" <> wrote in message
    news:clk230$eqs$...
    > will wrote:
    >> hi,
    >>
    >> i'm looking to buy a camcorder for my 2-week south island trip (ie don't
    >> have the opportunity to offload data) at the end of the year.
    >>
    >> i was looking at Sony's DVD model, but i gave up because of its 30min
    >> recording time, which is a bit too low, and at around $30 per DVD-RW,
    >> it'll be quite expensive to buy enough to last for 2 weeks.
    >>
    >> so back to Mini-DV, is Panasonic's 3CCD worth the money? is Sony still a
    >> good brand to consider? i just need one that is easy to operate and
    >> produces reasonable video quality for TV viewing later on.
    >>
    >> i notice some camcorders have MPEG4 recording to SD cards, how is the
    >> quality compared to recording to Mini-DV. someone at a retail shop told
    >> me SD card is only for photos, all video goes to Mini-DV.
    >>
    >> still-imaging is not as important.
    >>
    >> thanks
    >>
    >> will.

    > What's the deal with getting video from your DV camera to PC HDD for
    > editing these days? I always thought the small sony dvd cameras would be a
    > good option as presumably each time you take a video segment it records a
    > separate mpeg file to the dvd which you can then just copy stright into
    > your PC. With tapes don't you still have to run a capture utility and
    > capture your video from tape to get it into your PC?
    >


    When you transfer DV via firewire it is already mpeg compressed, and the
    process transferring it is just ftp
    The signal remains digital from the CCD onto tape, the compression codec is
    in the camera.
    nick, Oct 26, 2004
    #6
  7. In article <> in nz.comp on Tue, 26 Oct 2004
    11:11:03 +1300, will <> says...
    > hi,
    >
    > i'm looking to buy a camcorder for my 2-week south island trip (ie don't
    > have the opportunity to offload data) at the end of the year.
    >
    > i was looking at Sony's DVD model, but i gave up because of its 30min
    > recording time, which is a bit too low, and at around $30 per DVD-RW,
    > it'll be quite expensive to buy enough to last for 2 weeks.
    >
    > so back to Mini-DV, is Panasonic's 3CCD worth the money? is Sony still a
    > good brand to consider? i just need one that is easy to operate and
    > produces reasonable video quality for TV viewing later on.
    >
    > i notice some camcorders have MPEG4 recording to SD cards, how is the
    > quality compared to recording to Mini-DV. someone at a retail shop told
    > me SD card is only for photos, all video goes to Mini-DV.
    >
    > still-imaging is not as important.
    >
    > thanks
    >
    > will.


    DVD recording is compressed so if you want to edit before putting it onto
    a DVD of your own this is not the way to go.

    For any format that is not tape, consider that the data rate of DV is 25
    Mibps which works out to 187MiB/min (IIRC). Anything using less than that
    is compressed in some way. If it records to a memory card then either it
    is very short or compressed massively.
    Patrick Dunford, Oct 26, 2004
    #7
  8. In article <clk230$eqs$> in nz.comp on Tue, 26 Oct 2004
    12:26:24 +1300, SNOman <> says...
    > will wrote:
    > > hi,
    > >
    > > i'm looking to buy a camcorder for my 2-week south island trip (ie don't
    > > have the opportunity to offload data) at the end of the year.
    > >
    > > i was looking at Sony's DVD model, but i gave up because of its 30min
    > > recording time, which is a bit too low, and at around $30 per DVD-RW,
    > > it'll be quite expensive to buy enough to last for 2 weeks.
    > >
    > > so back to Mini-DV, is Panasonic's 3CCD worth the money? is Sony still a
    > > good brand to consider? i just need one that is easy to operate and
    > > produces reasonable video quality for TV viewing later on.
    > >
    > > i notice some camcorders have MPEG4 recording to SD cards, how is the
    > > quality compared to recording to Mini-DV. someone at a retail shop told
    > > me SD card is only for photos, all video goes to Mini-DV.
    > >
    > > still-imaging is not as important.
    > >
    > > thanks
    > >
    > > will.

    > What's the deal with getting video from your DV camera to PC HDD for
    > editing these days? I always thought the small sony dvd cameras would be
    > a good option as presumably each time you take a video segment it
    > records a separate mpeg file to the dvd which you can then just copy
    > stright into your PC. With tapes don't you still have to run a capture
    > utility and capture your video from tape to get it into your PC?


    With DV on firewire you are just receiving the digital data stream as it
    comes off the tape. This may take a little while in real time, once it is
    in the PC you can do what you like with it.

    A file in MPEG4 may be convenient but losing quality from the
    compression.
    Patrick Dunford, Oct 26, 2004
    #8
  9. will

    thing Guest

    will wrote:
    >
    >> my sister just got one of these and a 1GB SD card(~$165+GST wholesale).
    >> The stills suck, but for video it is sweet.

    >
    >
    > #### i read that GS120 is a dumb-down version of GS200, i wonder if i
    > really need that 2.2MP (plus few features) or is 1.7MP enough, since i'm
    > not into still photos on camcorder anyway.
    >
    > are non-3CCD models (GS55 or something like that) still worth looking at?
    >
    > and on Panosonic's booklet, 512MB is enough for 1 hour MPEG4 at the
    > super-fine (highest) setting. comparing this to 1GB 8cm-DVD's 30min, i
    > guess the quality will suffer a bit. but i have 3x512MB SD cards lying
    > around, so it's an incentive to use non-Sony.
    >
    > will.


    Did you read the tomshardware review? 3ccd camera's are supposed to give
    far better colour.

    I would suggest getting a 3ccd if you can afford it and use it enough
    and what you will be taking film off is very important to you. I got a
    3ccd for the quality I can only take film of my family history once.

    regards

    Thing
    thing, Oct 26, 2004
    #9
  10. In article <Tjgfd.23049$>,
    "nick" <> wrote:

    >When you transfer DV via firewire it is already mpeg compressed, and the
    >process transferring it is just ftp


    It is not MPEG-compressed. In particular, there is no interframe
    compression, since that stuffs up editing. It's more like JPEG, or at
    least DCT-based.
    Lawrence D¹Oliveiro, Oct 27, 2004
    #10
  11. will

    RT Guest

    "Lawrence D¹Oliveiro" <_zealand> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <Tjgfd.23049$>,
    > "nick" <> wrote:
    >
    >>When you transfer DV via firewire it is already mpeg compressed, and the
    >>process transferring it is just ftp

    >
    > It is not MPEG-compressed. In particular, there is no interframe
    > compression, since that stuffs up editing. It's more like JPEG, or at
    > least DCT-based.


    There is interfield compression on DV
    mpeg is DCT based, and mpeg2 can be used for editing.
    RT, Oct 27, 2004
    #11
  12. In article <> in nz.comp on Wed,
    27 Oct 2004 20:40:35 +1300, Lawrence D¹Oliveiro <ldo@geek-
    central.gen.new_zealand> says...
    > In article <Tjgfd.23049$>,
    > "nick" <> wrote:
    >
    > >When you transfer DV via firewire it is already mpeg compressed, and the
    > >process transferring it is just ftp

    >
    > It is not MPEG-compressed. In particular, there is no interframe
    > compression, since that stuffs up editing. It's more like JPEG, or at
    > least DCT-based.


    There is a small amount of compression applied to DV, but nothing like
    MPEG level.
    Patrick Dunford, Oct 27, 2004
    #12
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Irwell

    Using a digital camera as a video camera.

    Irwell, Feb 1, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    423
    Roger Halstead
    Feb 4, 2004
  2. Hellenic Mensa
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    421
    John McWilliams
    Aug 30, 2004
  3. Don and Liz Campbell

    Digital camera vs Video camera CCD

    Don and Liz Campbell, Feb 27, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    281
    Jim Waggener
    Feb 27, 2005
  4. mike bishop

    Video camera -vs- digital camera with video function

    mike bishop, Jun 14, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    642
    Tzortzakakis Dimitrios
    Jun 14, 2007
  5. digital video camera with video in

    , Nov 3, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    380
Loading...

Share This Page