MiniDv Camcorders or Dvd Camcorders

[wan2no]

which one is better?

If this is obvious then you all would have a field day on this

I observed that few Dvd camcorders don't have a ilink interface. What's the reason behind it.

[edDV]

Obvious -- MiniDV is better for a few months to years.

See this link for hard drive MPeg2 to start:
http://forum.videohelp.com/viewtopic.php?t=300669

DVD camcorders record a compressed MPeg2. If all you want is shoot to DVD it might be OK. If you want a higher quality acquisition optimized for editng, DV is what you want.

MPeg2 DVD is more difficult to edit and the starting quality is less.

When DVD camcorders were announced, Sony said customers for this format do not want to edit on a computer. It is possible to edit but is it not as easy as DV.

[MJA]

MiniDV all the way

[slacker]

I'm also sitting in the miniDV tape loyalty section. However, with Panasonic and Sony announcing support for the AVCHD codec (18 mbps) and the oncoming 'attack' of the dvd and hd based camcorders, I'm afraid miniDV may be doomed. Anyone see another future path?

[edDV]

I'm also sitting in the miniDV tape loyalty section. However, with Panasonic and Sony announcing support for the AVCHD codec (18 mbps) and the oncoming 'attack' of the dvd and hd based camcorders, I'm afraid miniDV may be doomed. Anyone see another future path?

25 Mbps DV and HDV are the near future. 4-8 Mbps MPeg2 (DVD and HDD media) are the lower end alternative.

Next, a hardware encoded MPeg4 standard is likely. The camcorder will record at an editable medium bitrate (SD or HD). AVCHD might be it. I'd expect the 8cm DVD to be quickly dumped in favor of solid state flash media. After editing 4-9Mb/s Mpeg4 H.264 is the likely distribution DVD standard.

24fps progressive would be a disaster for handheld home camcorders. The standard will probably remain 29.97 or 25 fps interlace with optional 59.94 or 50 fps progressive.