[ASB]

I've spent a while wading through reviews etc and am now no less confused than when I started.

I'm looking for a DVD camcorder to about £350. Main use is family days out. A large part of this is likely to involve my daughter on her dressage pony, so some motion but not particularly rapid. There will also be occasional night usage. Still camera would also be useful - but quality is not particularly important, justy snapshots.

It needs to be DVD so that the minidisc can just be stuffed in a DVD and played (plgging the camera in etc for play back is a non starter really).

It needs to support a RW format of media given the comparativley high cost of write once.

I also need to be able to upload onto a PC for editing (prefereably without having to buy any expensive software). Editing use is likely to be restricted to making a compilation and burning to DVD. I would prefer to upload via USB, but I guess could just read the DVD on the PC. [Reason for USB is so that iy can hopefully be really easy for my wife to import, she would prefer this to picking files]

I don't know about resolution, the sort of budget I am looking at only really seems to ocver 0.8mp - are these OK? Would it be sensible to up the budget and go for 1.3 or even 2 MP.

Playback is only likely to be on a max 28" TV.

Any suggestions would be much appreciated.

[redsox_mark]

In that price range; 3 to consider are: Sony DVD205, Panasonic VDR150, or Canon DC10.

Number of MP over 0.8 isn’t important for Video – video has a fixed resolution of about 0.4 MP. Extra MP are only useful for better stills.

For the occasional still ability to use a memory card is useful (some models only store the stills on DVD). And you’d like USB…

Of the models above, the Sony doesn’t have USB or a memory card. Both the Panasonic and the Canon do. I’d expect quality to be similar. The Panasonic records to DVD-RAM/-RW/-R… The Canon DC10 uses DVD-R and DVD+/-RW. Sony does DVD-R/-RW/+RW.

If you can spend a bit more (getting for £500) the Sony DVD405 would give you better quality and also tick the USB and memory boxes.

[Kronenbourg]

Looking for something similar. Mother in law wants to buy father in law one for his birthday. He is a swimming coach so wants one for filming swimming galas as well as taking on holiday, skiing and for when they are looking after my daughter.

DVD is preferrable to minidv just to avoid the hassle of transfering to DVD.

[AlanSmithee]

I'm planning on buying my first camcorder and I sympathise with the originator of this thread ("read a lot of reviews and still confused") but in my case I couldn't even find a "What Camcorder" magazine in the shops - so finding this forum on-line (and associated links) has been very useful. After a couple of hours(!) reading around the subject I've come up with the following received wisdom:
1. Pound-for-pound/dollar-for-dollar a MiniDV (digital tape) device gives a better quality picture than a DVD camcorder, so unless the convenience of DVD is a must-have I'd be better off with a MiniDV (which can always be used to burn a CD-ROM etc via a PC)
2. 3 CCDs are notably better than 1.
3. For a leisure user (like myself) image stabilization and low light performance are of most importance.
4. Due to the different modus operandi of a camcorder and a digital camera, a camcorder is not a good substitute for a digital camera, so it is not really worth spending time and money on getting a camcorder with a good stills function.
5. Digital zoom is meaningless - optical zoom is the only zoom value worth looking at (I knew that one already)

I'd welcome feedback on the above, plus other important points for us newbies to consider. Of course, any suggestions for the make/model of £200-£400 camcorder would be greatly appreciated!

[Robert5988]

I am in the same situation re buying a camcorder and have reached the same conclusions as AlanSmithee above; and would welcome the same advice.

One further question please. I send a lot of time in the USA and was considering purchasing there. Provided I bought a Canon/Panasonic/Sony I would have thought they would be identical - except for the battery charging. Is this correct?

My laptop charger works happily on 110v or 240v and many modern portable battery operated equipments are OK on either voltage. Can anyone confirm the situation with camcorders please.

[redsox_mark]

AlanSmithee,

I broadly agree with you - a few specific (minor) points:

1. Yes, though most likely you will want to burn a DVD via the PC, not a CD.

2. Yes, but there is more than just the number of CCDs... including the size of the CCD(s). But all being equal 3 is generally better than 1.

4. Agree that a camcorder is no replacement for a good stills camera - BUT, a MP camcorder can be useful, as it can take decent stills, and there will be times where you don't want to carry both a video and stills cam with you.

Robert5988,

Power is not a problem, but if you buy in the US you will most likely get a NTSC camcorder. As we use PAL in the UK you really are best with a PAL camcorder. Not all PAL TVs will handle the NTSC signal out of the camcorder... and PAL is better resolution than NTSC anyway.

Interesting discussion and advice! I want to be able to transfer my old VCR tapes onto DVD and have heard that the Canon MV960 will do this. It's mini dv format. Are there any other comparable camcorders (UK purchase).

[redsox_mark]

There are others (AV-in, or analogue-digital pass thru) is what you are looking for... the Canon 960 I believe is the cheapest that does it.