analogue vs digital camcorder

[everglade]

I'm just looking into buying my first camcorder which I'll be using primarily to film trains on, so a lot of fast moving images. I take it digital cameras have no trouble with this? You dont get jumpy or blocky images if things are moving fast do you? I'm only concerned as my digital camera is rubish compared to my old analogue camera for quality of images. I'm sure an analogue camcorder would be OK but I was hoping that digital may give a better crisper image with better colours and be better for capturing via firewire to the PC. Any feedback much appreciated.

[guns1inger]

Certainly easier to transfer to the PC than analogue. Quality, on the otherhand, is in the eye of the beholder (as evidenced by the vinyl is better than digital audio crowd). As a general rule, the more you spend, the better the quality of image, as the more expenisve have multiple CCDs, better lenses, and more manual control. Look for a camera that allows you to vary the shutter speed, and has 3 CCDs and good lenses and you should be OK. See if you can audition a couple for comparison.

[Dr. DOS]

Check out CNET for some unbiased reviews and some users hand on experiences.

http://www.cnet.com

[mikesbytes]

All new cameras, regardless of whether they are digital or analog use digital methods to capture the video. The difference between digital and analog camera's is whether the captured digital signal is converted and stored on an analog tape, or stored on a digital tape.

The probem you descirbed with the digital still camera generally doesn't happen with video cameras. I suggest that you read the reviews for the individual cameras and pick the specific camera for your needs.

[MOVIEGEEK]

I have a Canon Optura 10(miniDV) and am very happy with it.As was mentioned above look for 3 CCD(depending on your budget),high CCD pixels(>800K),high optical zoom(>14x) and large still resolution(>1024x768).Other features such as analog passthrough and USB out are nice too.Most camcorders nowadays have image stabilization which is very handy.
http://www2.shopping.com/xPP-Camcorders~V-rows

[Cornucopia]

re: Digital Still cams being crap compared to analog...

There is a HUGE range of capabilities (and $) with Digital still cams, but you got to remember that you're going up against 35mm film (usually), which has between, say ~3000x2200 and 6000x4400, depending on the ASA/Film Grain. How many of us have digital cams that are that good and have an equal or better # of features. Nevertheless, there ARE digital cams that are as good as analogs--man are they sweet!

The analogy of Video cam isn't quite the same. Because it's video, it already has an electronic imager. It also has a limit to the resolution (once it's recorded, not within the imager), that being SD (720x480). The analogy would work better if you compared Digital Cams to Film-based Hollywood Movie (35mm or better) cams. Then you can say that only recently with the Hi-Def cams is there any competition.

DV-based cams already have 1 strike against them by losing 1/2 the chroma info (either 4:2:0 or 4:1:1), so it's best IMO to get a 3CCD cam to offset this and retain at least the "truest" representation of the real colors as possible.

As most moderately priced and upwards cams have decent enough pixel count, I wouldn't worry too much here. I usually go for adjustability features (esp. incl. defeating the ALL-AUTO crap). Analog Pass-through is very desireable also, especially if you've already built up a library of analog tapes.

Scott