What is best mid range MiniDV Camcorder

Discussion in 'Video Cameras' started by JimboSlim, Apr 15, 2005.

  1. JimboSlim

    JimboSlim Guest

    Hi Videoers

    I had my Sony TRV50E Mini DV stolen in Barcelona.

    I now have the Insurance money.

    I have gone off Sony because they use Memory Stick which is expensive and
    lower in capacity than other flash memory.

    I want one with SD Card or support more than one type of card.

    I was homing in on either PANASONIC NV-GS250 or a PANASONIC NV-GS400
    Or a Canon MVX350i and MVX330i for my new mini DV
    camcorder.

    What is the best Value the Canon or Pany?

    Any Advice Jimbo
     
    JimboSlim, Apr 15, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. JimboSlim

    Tony Morgan Guest

    You can buy 1GB for £55 and 512MB for £30. Is this significantly more
    expensive than other memory cards?
    You are obviously unaware of the Pro and Duo memory sticks (up to 2GB).
     
    Tony Morgan, Apr 15, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. JimboSlim

    JimboSlim Guest

    JimboSlim, Apr 15, 2005
    #3
  4. JimboSlim

    JimboSlim Guest

    Hi Tony
    Where do you get your 1Gig for £55? thats much cheaper as any I have seen.
    IS that New or off E-Bay?
    I was looking at 1gig SD card 1GB Secure Digital Memory, Item Price =
    £39.95, this was from Aria Technology including VAT & Free delivery Special
    offer at the time. I think £15 is significant.
    My Sumsung Still Digital will take either Sony Duo or SD so I got the SD at
    the time because of this Aria offer.
    Typical Sony prices are much higher than you Quote.
    924259 Memory Stick PRO 1GB £114.16 ex, £134.14 inc.


    Sandisk 1.0 GB Memory Stick Pro Duo
    5 Year Warranty. FREE DELIVERY
    Price: £82.09
    £96.45 inc. VAT
    more info...
     
    JimboSlim, Apr 15, 2005
    #4
  5. JimboSlim

    Tony Morgan Guest

    Have a search on Ebay under "Buy Now".

    I've become an Ebay fan after fairly recently buying a pristine "1 hours
    use" Sony DCR-TRV80E for £325.
     
    Tony Morgan, Apr 15, 2005
    #5
  6. JimboSlim

    JimboSlim Guest

    Hi Tony

    Hmmm that's not a true price comparison. I think you must agree that Sony
    Memory Stick is Significantly dearer than any other type of flash Memory.
    You can get SD ram off E_bay a lot cheaper than Memory Stick.
    Jimbo

     
    JimboSlim, Apr 15, 2005
    #6
  7. JimboSlim

    JimboSlim Guest

    Hi Tony

    I have just been looking at the camcorders on E-Bay Buy Now its a mine field
    out there!
    Grey imports, 2nd hand masquerading as new, USA models, Its a lucky dip and
    you were probably a lucky one with your Sony. Still haven't made up my mind
    which one to go for. I must admit I loved my Sony that was nicked. But time
    has moved on. Had a look at your web page very good stuff on there.

    Jimbo





     
    JimboSlim, Apr 15, 2005
    #7
  8. JimboSlim

    Tony Morgan Guest

    Perhaps not. I haven't really looked (other than the occasional glance
    in passing) at the price of non-memory stick media.

    But I do believe that it's not a valid reason for not buying Sony, since
    the stills on the overwhelming majority of camcorders leave a lot to be
    desired - especially compared with a digi-still camera.
    I must confess to having been somewhat locked into memory sticks. My
    laptop used them, and now I've got a 5.1Mpx still camera that uses them,
    so I've got a little pile of them ranging from 4MB upwards :)
     
    Tony Morgan, Apr 15, 2005
    #8
  9. JimboSlim

    Tony Morgan Guest

    I was. It was owned by a US serviceman who had just returned
    unexpectedly to the US from a foreshortened tour of duty in Germany. I
    spotted it because it was an "E" model for sale on the US Ebay.

    I nearly bought a second-hand VX1000E BTW, but decided against on the
    basis of size.
    I've got a couple of friends with Pannies and one with a Canon and
    though I'm perhaps biased, both my old TRV30 and my new(ish) TRV80 seem
    to be of a better build quality than other makes.
     
    Tony Morgan, Apr 15, 2005
    #9
  10. Are you going to be using the still picture function a lot?
     
    Laurence Payne, Apr 17, 2005
    #10
  11. JimboSlim

    JimboSlim Guest

    Hi Laurence

    Yep I had both on my old Sony and I did use the Stills a lot on the
    camcorder when I was using the camcorder. even though I do have a Still
    Digital camera.

    When on Holiday or at a special function my Wife will often use the Still
    Camera while I am using the camcorder.
    But I often take a lot of stills as well. I am not a good photographer so I
    use the Scatter gun technique and take lots of pics then delete the bad
    ones. That's one the big advantages of Digital over Film.

    I also take a lot of bad video and delete a lot in edit. So I buy a lot of
    minDV tapes and have many memory cards as big as I can get I.e. 1gig plus.
    I delete lots of stuff before I burn a DVD or CD to watch on the Tele. So I
    really want a Camcorder that will take SD cards.
     
    JimboSlim, Apr 17, 2005
    #11
  12. JimboSlim

    John Russell Guest

    But DV camcoders have at best a 1 mega pixel CCD, that's about the
    resolution of a phone cam!
    Pick the camcorder for the quality of it's video and shove a cheapo 3mega
    pixel CCD camera in your pocket.
     
    John Russell, Apr 18, 2005
    #12
  13. JimboSlim

    John Russell Guest

    My point is that just becuase they can add a "photo" mode to a camcorder
    dosn't mean the pictures are worth having at the expence of video
    performance.
     
    John Russell, Apr 18, 2005
    #13
  14. JimboSlim

    Tony Morgan Guest

    In message <42640250$0$94525$>,
    It really depends on your interpretation and definition of "picture
    quality" and "resolution" are.
     
    Tony Morgan, Apr 19, 2005
    #14
  15. JimboSlim

    JimboSlim Guest

    Hi All MiniDVers

    My experience of Stills taken from a Camcorder appear to be very different
    to the rest of this group replies,
    My Old Sony TRV50E Mini DV gave very good still picts, I am sure Tony would
    know but I think it was rated at 1.5 Mega Pix for stills. My son & daughter
    both have Phone Cameras fairly new but gen2, one is a Nokia the other a Sony
    Ericson the pictures they take are crap I don't think they could be 1/4 Meg
    Pict but I don't Know.
    Any way AFAIAC you cannot compare Camera phone picts it is a ridiculous idea
    to me.
    The Stills from my stolen Camcorder were almost as good as what my Sony
    Still camera took all be it 3.2 Mega pix. I think many new camcorders now
    exceed 2 Mega pix. I bought a cheap Samsung Still Digital Camera which is
    rated at 4.0 mega PIX but the picture are not as good as the Sony Still
    Camera also lost in same Bag.
    And only a little better that the Sony TRV50E Mini DV Still Picts. Why does
    Video performance have to be compromised if a Camcorder has the ability to
    take stills? Tony claims that Still quality is much higher on Sony than
    other brands such as Canon Panasonic JVC etc which is making me swing back
    in favour of Sony again.
    Basically any views on what is the best mid range Camcorder with still
    taking ability?
    Cheers
    Jimbo
     
    JimboSlim, Apr 23, 2005
    #15
  16. JimboSlim

    Tony Morgan Guest

    Did I say "much"? All camcorders have reasonable lenses, but when
    someone designs a lens with a 10x or 20x zoom, then all other things
    being equal, the quality will be lower than on a digital still camera
    with (say) a 3x zoom.

    Quality, to me, covers good colour reproduction and good (but not
    over-cooked) contrast. The limiting factor here is the lens itself, but
    can be affected by the camcorder's digital signal processor that
    processes the image.

    Then of course is the number of pixels that the camcorder (or digi-still
    cameral) has. This is the limiting factor of how big a print you can get
    from an image while keeping the image "sharp" - actually free from
    pixillation when printing to larger sizes.
    A good yardstick IMHO is:
    up to 1.2Mpx you'll get reasonable prints up to about 5"x4"
    From 1.2Mpx up to about 1.6Mpx you'll get reasonable prints up to about
    6"x4.5".
    From 1.6Mpx up to about 2Mpx you'll get reasonable prints up to about
    7"x5".

    All (tongue in cheek) subject to all other things being equal.

    In the mid-range I like the Sony HC40 (a couple of guys I know have
    them).
     
    Tony Morgan, Apr 23, 2005
    #16
  17. JimboSlim

    Rob D Guest

    There are now many DV cameras with 2 or even 3 megapixel stills capability:
    http://www.dvspot.com/reviews/sony/pc330-review/index.shtml
    Lots of folks on one review site stated that the camera above took better
    pictures than their still cameras of similar resolution level!

    Rob
     
    Rob D, Apr 24, 2005
    #17
  18. JimboSlim

    John Russell Guest

    If you decide to buy camera with poorer video performance becuase you want
    to take stills, or take stills to a different card format then you are
    making a compromise which adversly affects video quality.

    The eye is very good at integrating moving images, yet look at what happens
    when you freeze frame. Jaggies and other anomalies become noticable. The
    still performance of "video" quality CCD's isn't good enough to match a
    cheap film camera. Samsung even produce hybrid camera/camcorders becuase of
    this.

    Just becuase you can't see any differnce dosn't mean there isn't any. The
    next thing you will argue is that you could never see why someone would buy
    an SLR when a cheap kodak camera produced results which where just as good.
     
    John Russell, Apr 26, 2005
    #18
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.