--- Forwarded Message from Derek Roff <[log in to unmask]> ---
>Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 07:25:44 -0700
>From: Derek Roff <[log in to unmask]>
>To: LLTI-Editor <[log in to unmask]>, David Pankratz <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: #5839 Digital camcorders
>In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
>> Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 13:59:36 -0600
>> From: "David Pankratz" <[log in to unmask]>
>> Subject: Digital camcorders
>
> I'm wondering if anyone has experience with any of the "consumer'
> variety digital video cameras, i.e., digitial camcorders, those
> costing app. $1000. I'm looking for one that is relatively easy to
> use and that will easily produce still images as well as motion
> video.
Still images from a camcorder will be inferior to those of a digital
still camera costing much less. The resolution of the DV standard is
the equivalent of 640x480, with designed-in 5-1 compression. Some
camcorders can capture stills at slightly better resolutions, but
they are well below the quality of the current crop of still cameras.
If you plan to produce stills for web or screen images, they will be
fine, but if you are planning to make paper prints, you will probably
be disappointed by the low resolution. However, when I want web or
other low resolution stills, the camcorder can offer a big advantage.
I shoot about 10 seconds of video, while talking to the subject,
trying to get a good expression on their face. Using the computer
video-editing software, I can quickly select and export the best
frame from the ~300 frames shot.
I have experience with several of the consumer mini-DV camcorders
from Sony, JVC and Canon. The JVCs that I tried have a proprietary
implementation of the FireWire interface, and were incompatible with
the video editing software that I chose. This problem apparently
doesn't affect all JVCs. The three models of Sony and two of Canon
that I have used all worked well for computer editing of the DV
footage.
Sony models released this year have the advantage of analog video
"pass-through", which means you can plug a VHS VCR into the camera,
and it will output a DV video stream to your computer, for editing.
Older Sonys and all other camcorder brands require you to record the
analog signal onto DV tape first, and then play that tape to get the
footage into the computer. This extra step doubles the time needed
and multiplies the wear on the DV camera, so it is a bad idea if you
need to transfer and edit lots of analog tape.
Most of the Canon cameras require an extra "dock" accessory to
connect an external microphone. An external mic can really improve
the quality of your sound. Canon offers a feature on many of their
camcorders called alternately "progressive scan" and "digital motor
drive." Using this option to film your video can produce better
still frames and interlace-free video for web and CD use.
I haven't used the ZR-10, Canon's cheapest mini-DV camcorder. It has
been very well reviewed. I have tried one of the Sony Digital-8
models, which records DV video onto an 8mm video cassette tape.
Digital-8 cameras will also playback 8mm and Hi-8 videos, and convert
the signal to DV for computer editing. The camera worked fine, and
might be good if you already own a bunch of 8mm video. However, I
really like the smaller size and lower weight of the mini-DV cameras.
My first choice for a camcorder at the lower end would be the Sony
TRV 11 or the Canon Optura PI, which have street prices a bit over
$1000. If I couldn't spend that much, I would investigate the ZR-10.
For still images, I would buy a cheaper, smaller, lighter,
ergonomically superior digital still camera.
Derek Roff
Language Learning Center, Ortega Hall Rm 129, University of New Mexico
Albuquerque, NM 87131 505/277-4804 fax 505/277-3885
Internet: [log in to unmask]
|
