Which Camcorder is for me?

[jungleexplorer]

I know this is going to sound dumb, but here goes. I have not bought a new camcorder for 10 years. The camcorder I have been using for the last 10 years is a Sony DCR-TRV350. It has been a great camera. I originally bought it as a cheap way to convert all of my old analog 8mm videos to digital. Back then a good analog to digital capture card went for over $1000. This camera was one of a few crossover cameras that could do the converting on board and even enhance the analog video almost like up converting. It has been a wonderful camera, doing everything I have wanted it to. It still works, but my wife is wanting something smaller for Christmas. I have been looking around and I am confused by all of the new terms and conflicting reviews. It seems like for every camcorder that one person really likes, another person absolutely hates it. Personally I don't want to take a step down from what I have and since it has been so long, I would think that technology should be better then it was 10 years ago, right? So I was hoping that I could get some advice from you guys about all this new stuff.

The bottom line of what I am looking for is something that is going to be as good or better then what I already have.

1. The number one question is video quality. I want something that will shoot video that is as good or better then Digital 8.

2. Number 2 is sound. The mic on my DCR-TRV350 is awesome and can record HiFi Stereo sound at 16bit quality. I have shot school plays from 10 rows back that sounded as though I was plugged into the sound system. I have a canon SD1100 IS (still camera) that shoots OK videos but the mic stinks.

3. Number 3 is low light capability. My DCR-TRV350 is a 0 Lux, so surely after 10 years they made something better.

4. Number 4 is price. I paid $250 for my DCR-TRV350 off the shelf brand new so I am thinking that I should be able to get something as good or better for under $300.

The above are absolutes but there are a few things else I would like. The higher the optical zoom the better. Sony seems to dominate in this area with optical zooms of X60 being common on their units. But with higher optical zooms come shakiness so image stabilization seems like a must. My has Sony Nightshot and that has come in handy sometimes, but I can live without it as long as the camera has a good built-in light.

Thats about all I understand about camcorders these days. I all I want to do is shoot good video with good sound and have a good zoom. I don't know if an HDD camcorder has any quality advantages over a flash unit, but it seems like having the HDD on board might be better for continues shooting. Any advice would be very helpfully as I am trying to buy this for my wife for Christmas. Thanks

Oh! here are a couple of units I am looking at.

Panasonic SDR-H60
Sony Handycam DCR-SR47
Canon FS200

[Baldrick]

Please CHANGE the topic subject. Simple Newbi Question doesn't say anything. Just click on the edit button to change.

[jungleexplorer]

How about "Which camcorder if for me?" I am not really sure what to title it. I am a newbi and my question is simple and I need an answer. I thought my title (Simple newbi question needs answering" was appropriate.

[Baldrick]

Thanks!

[jungleexplorer]

Did I say something wrong? Because there have been 84 views of my question and no answers other then to tell me to change the subject. Surly it can't be that complicated?

[aedipuss]

well you wrote a novel and have high expectations on a low budget. decent consumer cams run 700 up these days.

the world has pretty much moved on to HD so SD is like a poor stepchild, especially in the consumer market place. there are slim pickings and maybe none produced soon. nothing much good to say about those cams you list. read the online reviews yourself.

[pippas]

There are lots of folk in your position, who have replaced their old cameras with a nice shiny new one, only to find that despite all the newer bells and whistles, many of the features are inferior to the older cameras.

Obviously, the biggest change is the progression to HD. Very impressive detailed images, but all too often only in good light.

The newer sensors tend to be smaller than the earlier ones, within the same 'market' band, and low light performance can be disappointing compared to the images from the larger earlier sensors.

Nearly all 'consumer' camcorders now use CMOS sensors, whereas the earlier camcorders used CCD.
Not a problem in itself, but you might need to be aware of the fact that all current cmos camcorders use a 'rolling shutter'. These can cause some strange artifacts, especially when used in a fast panning or high vibration situation.
There are some details about both types of sensor here: http://www.dvxuser.com/jason/CMOS-CCD/
For general 'everyday' shooting, cmos sensors are fine.

As far as audio is concerned, then things have gone backwards, IMHO, especially with regard to the cheaper consumer camcorders.
Very few now have external mic inputs, and special effects like 'zoom' mics and 'surround ' mic clusters tend to dominate, at the expense of decent mic preamps found in the earlier cameras.

You do need to pick your requirements pretty carefully, to make sure your shiny new camcorder is not a disappointment, compared to your old camera.

And unless you are considering one of the 'hybrid' cameras/camcorders, like the Panasonic FZ38, then I suspect you'll be spending more than you first thought, to get a decent replacement.

[jungleexplorer]

aedipuss

I agree that I wrote a little long, but I was only trying to be clear. As far as High Expectations, I totally disagree. Technology advancements has alway resulted in better quality for lower prices, especially in the digital camera market and you know this. You can buy digital cameras today for $100 that shoot quality that you would not have been able to touch for less then $2000 10 years ago. I bought my Canon SD1100 IS for $200 when it was brand neww on the market and was rated the #1 point and shoot camera in PC World magazine. You can now buy a 1TB HD for $89 and a 2GB SD card for under $10. What would have you paid for any of these items 10 years ago? Shall I continue with a thousand other examples or have I made my point that to expect the same or better quality for the same price I paid 10 years ago is by NO MEANS high expectations. I never said I was looking for PRO quality, I just want something that will shoot as good or better video then my 10 year old Sony Digital 8.

Now you might be right in saying that I will have to spend $700 get a camera that is as good as my old Sony, but you have to admit that that would that total opposite of the technology trend of, bigger and better at a low cost. I remember seeing 32" LCD TVs for $5000 10 years ago, now you can buy them anywhere for under $500. But again I reiterate that you might be right that digital video technology has gone the opposite direction and is offering poorer quality at an increased price. But to accuse me of having unreasonable and high expectation is completely unfounded, unless you are one of those elitist types that snob their nose at anyone that does not want to take the deep plunge an go professional. Unfortunately their are quite of few of these types of people that plague forums these days and make it very difficult for regular consumers to get some reasonable (non-snobby) advice. I hope that is not true of this forum.

If you believed that my expectation were unrealistic with the digital video technology trend, all you had to say was; "Hey buddy, I hate to be the one to tell you this, but unfortunately digital video technology is really poor and behind other technologies and if you want something that will come close to your old Sony digital 8, I am afraid it is going to cost you a lot more then you paid 10 years ago." Don't you think that would have been a lot better then blaming me for expecting the digital video industry to have kept up with the rest of the industry?

[jungleexplorer]

pippas, I love you. You have been very helpful, and unfortunately confirmed my fears about modern video technology. I had a sneaky feeling that what you are saying was true from the hundreds of reviews I read, but I wanted someone to explain it and you did just that. Thank you for being such a great help.

[jungleexplorer]

pippas

As I said in my first post I have a Canon SD100 IS and I was at first impressed by the video quality when compared to my former digital still cameras (Sony Mavica CD200 & Sony DSC V1), but I did noticed that there was a lot of jumpiness when I paned. I was hoping that this was just a result of low shutter speeds on a digital still and that a camcorder would not have this. If I understand you correctly, I can expect this to some extent even on a camcorder? I guess when it come to video, analog is still king.

[jungleexplorer]

What do you think of this unit? JVC GZ MG 465

[aedipuss]

you might look into the canon hv20/30/40 series. minidv tape shoots SD or HDV. when equipped with an external mic they are imo the best consumer cam available today for under a grand.

[jungleexplorer]

aedipuss

Thanks, but I ran out of time and needed to buy so I bought the JVC GZ MG465. I could not find many reviews for it, but the ones I did find indicated that it a middle of the road camera between standard entry level and professional. I did not find a single negative review for it and it was originally priced above $500. It has some low light features that if they do what the claim, it will be better then any other model I looked at. So I am crossing my fingers and hoping I made the right choice.

[aedipuss]

$350 at buy.com for a no longer made model. the replacement is the MG630 that retails for $399 and can be found online for under $300.

[lordsmurf]

You can get a good Canon ZR series DV camera for the budget available.

[jungleexplorer]

aedipuss

I wish you would have told me there was a newer model to the JVC GZ MG465 when I asked about it, but it's too late now. I did go ahead and look at the canon hv20/30/40 models you recommended and though they are said to have excellent video quality the reviews I read by pros said they have below average low light performance. Top that with the fact that they only have a dismal 10X zoom (unacceptable for a video camera) and I think my money would be better spent buying the Canon PowerShot SX10 or 20 which would give me a 20X zoom lens, great stills and reasonable video for $350.

[zoobie]

I've seen lightly used HD handicams with decent specs going on ebay for $150..
New is a waste of money to me so, as mentioned, I'd stick to the big boys handicam lines like the used HV20/30/40, Sony HC1/3/5/7/9 and similar.

You can use your savings to buy some decent software.

The HC1 is fondly remembered as one of the the first big HD consumer handicams to hit the market. Now of course outdated, it still has some features today's handicams don't.