Any affordable digicams with HD video mode + zoom?

[tcsenter]

I have a friend who wants it all on a budget: an HD camcorder that takes better photos than her current Kodak EasyShare. I told her I would be surprised to learn there is a camcorder under $1000 that can do photos as good as her Kodak in most any scenario, nevermind better than. I also encouraged her to use two devices rather than try to get one that does it all, but she was really set on the convenience of just one device. Since she will be taking much less video relative to photos, I suggested she might be better off buying a digicam with a decent HD video mode.

Are there any digital cameras with 720p (or better) HD video mode that support using the zoom while shooting video...under $500?

 

[Gooberlx2]

Panasonic Lumix ZS3 or ZS7.

 

[tcsenter]

Panasonic Lumix ZS3 or ZS7.

Holy crap. Just sifted through the specs and features on the ZS7. Does this camera have any short-comings? Wowzers for the price! My current and previous two cameras have been Canon but Panasonic might be my next camera, if Canon doesn't step up and bring some more crave-worthy features at this price.

Any others to consider?

 

[corkyg]

Yeah - take a look at the Canon Powershot SX-20.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...S_Digital.html

 

[Gooberlx2]

Yeah - take a look at the Canon Powershot SX-20.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...S_Digital.html

Good call, I didn't realize they released a new one.

OP, I like to go to sites like Vimeo and search by camera model. Then take a look at samples people have uploaded.

I can say I'm very happy with my ZS3, though its flash is pretty weak and it does have trouble focusing in low-light. Though it does have an AF-assist lamp, I think it's too weak. From the one review I've read, focusing may have been improved with the ZS7.

 

[tcsenter]

Hmm, I've had the SX10 IS for several months. Only thing I don't like about it is the ISO performance above 100. The default is 80 and it takes wonderful shots there (and @ 100), but it requires really really good lighting. If the lighting dips just a little, particularly indoors, or you use the optical zoom at all, the camera is quick to crank up the ISO to 250, where noise really starts getting noticeable. I wonder if the SX20 IS improved anything there?

My thinking was that I might get better-than-average ISO performance by going with a larger-bodied camera and lens that will let in more light, but there are some compact cameras doing as well or better in similar lighting. Its really my only complaint with this camera.

Thanks!

 

[corkyg]

Us old timers are used to more grain in low light film photography. The digital buzzword for that is noise. What's the big deal? Noisy information is better than no information. BTW - the bigger the sensor, the less noise at low light. I use the SX-10 regularly for low light work in church - even high ISO. The noise is insignificant in printed illustrations averaging 4x6 or 3x5.

When I need really good low light stuff, I use my 5D and a f/1.2 lens. The use of a flash is a no-no in most churches.

BTW - the SX-20 ISO is increased from a max of 1600 to 3200. So, I would expect the noise at 400 to 800 to be much less.

 

[tcsenter]

I don't print-out too many photos, I just view them on monitors or send the digital images to others.

 

[nonstopjoe]

is highly rated and costs a bit over $300. Takes great stills and video as well. Be sure to get at least a 16gb Class 6 SDHC card as the HD video eats up memory. I have the predecessor FZ1 (2002) as well - it came with an 8mb SD card included.

 

[corkyg]

I don't print-out too many photos, I just view them on monitors or send the digital images to others.

I don't print either - but the church puts them in their monthly publication, and some end up in the local newspaper. Here is an example from today's paper. The show was illuminated only by a small reading light, otherwise total darkness. ISO 1600. If it were enlarged, it would be noisy - but, so what?

http://www.azstarnet.com/news/local/foothills/article_187bc46f-bdac-5c84-9c43-c7036f4c6963.html

Anyway, my point is that "noise" is greatly over looked at, primarily by enlarging the image beyond what it was intended to be.

 

[AnitaPeterson]

Here's my take on this matter folks...

I have the SX1, which makes 1080p video with stereo sound. I love it. But the resulting .MOV files are huge, and most editing programs will have problems reading them. The only way in which I can deal with them is by passing them through HandBrake, and converting to 1080p .mkv or .mp4. From here on, you can edit them further or burn them directly to a BD-5 (DVD-R).

The SX20 will only do 720p, but it still uses the .MOV format. It could be that the editing will be just as difficult.

On the other hand, the Panasonic cameras use AVCHD Lite, which has its own set of quirks - see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AVCHD#Editing

In the end, you should also consider the batteries - the Pannys take LiIon, the Canon standard AAs.

I still think the Canon TX1 was the best hybrid ever, but it was way ahead of its time.

 

[Gooberlx2]

have the SX1, which makes 1080p video with stereo sound. I love it. But the resulting .MOV files are huge, and most editing programs will have problems reading them.

I downloaded a sample .mov. Looks like they're using h.264, but giving it something like 40Mbps average (over the course of the 9 second clip)...which is probably a lot more than needed, and would certainly result in HUGE files. That's 5MBps.. Even variable, I think they're giving the codec more than is needed. I'd bet you'd be safe around 17-20Mbps average, probably even less.

I'm not sure why editing programs would have trouble. It's just regular h.264 video and PCM audio streams in a .mov container. If your programs don't like the .mov container, you could use Avidemux to copy the streams to a different container...but there's nothing particularly non-standard going on here that I can see.

 

[AnitaPeterson]

I downloaded a sample .mov. Looks like they're using h.264, but giving it something like 40Mbps average (over the course of the 9 second clip)...which is probably a lot more than needed, and would certainly result in HUGE files. That's 5MBps.. Even variable, I think they're giving the codec more than is needed. I'd bet you'd be safe around 17-20Mbps average, probably even less.

I'm not sure why editing programs would have trouble. It's just regular h.264 video and PCM audio streams in a .mov container. If your programs don't like the .mov container, you could use Avidemux to copy the streams to a different container...but there's nothing particularly non-standard going on here that I can see.

Ah! Good, someone who knows video!
I had problems with Vegas crashing when opening the SX1 footage. I'm not too fond of Pinnacle, and I'm not impressed by Ulead. Playback is choppy, these files need massive or GPU-assisted acceleration. In any case, the best conversions were lengthy and only resulted in a 1/3 size ratio... with Handbrake, I go as far as 1/10, within the same timeframes but even better-looking AND more playable results... alas, editing has to come at a later stage.

What are the specs on the AVCHD Lite files from the Pannys, do you know?

Edit - wow, you've an ASUS UL30vt... nice... I have the AS1410.

 

[Gooberlx2]

Lesse, my ZS3 looks like it encodes video at ~14-15Mbps average h.264. Audio is 192Kbps AC3. The AVCHD specs only go up to something like 24Mbps video (wiki says up to 28Mbps for 1080p/60p video)

I imagine the chop comes from the file having so much damn bitrate. I will say I'm not a fan of any of the consumer video editors, and I'm too poor to buy a real editor. Ulead was always buggy for me, but I've always heard fairly positive things about Vegas...dunno what the problem there would be. Maybe try Adobe Premier Elements.

Yeah, I really like the Asus. I just wish the touchpad was a bit bigger and the screen panel was IPS. Still, I couldn't beat the specs, size and battery life for the price when I bought it.

 

[Gooberlx2]

My Dad just bought a Samsung HZ30W from Costco yesterday, for his and my Mom's trip to Turkey. I'm definitely eager to see how the results are and compare them to my ZS3.

 

[irse]

Sony HX5V does 1080i and 10x zoom. You can use the zoom while doing video. Has GPS on it too. Quite a camera. Got one. Haven't played with it a whole lot but really like it.

 

[hackmole]

I would take a look at the Panasonic ZR3. It has the same specs as the Panasonic ZS7 except it only has 8 x telephoto instead of 12 x. The 8 x telephoto is the best telephoto for this camera size because the ZR3 is a smaller camera than the ZS7 and it can easily fit into a shirt pocket. Most of those other cameras mentioned are bulky monsters and the day of the bulky monster is over with. People want and need to carry their cameras in their shirt, pants or jacket pocket every day. You can't do that with a bulky monster.

 

[AnyMal]

Take a look at Nikon Coolpix P100

 

[DesiPower]

Sony HX5V does 1080i and 10x zoom. You can use the zoom while doing video. Has GPS on it too. Quite a camera. Got one. Haven't played with it a whole lot but really like it.

Are you still happy with the camera? and major issues with the pic quality?