We want to get a digital camcorder.
There’s a wedding coming up, some travelling, later perhaps more interesting “subjects”, and then of course there’s the gadget dimension.
Among the criteria for selection are:
- Relative ease of use: OK, I’m geeky, but devices with less than 85 keys are often impossible to figure out…
- Dependability: We’re prepared to back up to HD and other media, but we still want to be able to trust the media.
- Quality: The raw footage should be raw, not compressed. The images are more important than the sound.
- Future proof: I know, not possible in this world, but it seems it’d be OK to go for HD?
- Comfortable: Small and handy, likely to just be available and ready to go when needed.
Currently on the short list is the Sony HDR-HC3. Compared to its predecessor, the HC1, there are improvements as well as changes to the worse, but overall it seems it’s progress.
What to do?
ObSemWebAngle: Ideally, it should also include GPS integration and other ways of content description! ;-)
Quality: The raw footage should be raw, not compressed. The images are more important than the sound.
Anything of a reasonable size and price (not many tens of thousands of $currency) is compressed. There are different kinds of compression which affects the quality and the workflow options, but they are all compressed. (The typical standard for “regular user” standard definition is DVCAM).
– ask
Right, it’s not a black/white issue.
DV(CAM) uses MPEG2, which is a lossy compression algorithm/technique, and I guess it just doesn’t get any better than that (for a reasonable price).
However, just like with JPEG the compression is configurable, one could hope that would also be the case for a camcorder…
BTW: What’s “best”, in light of the above: DVD or tape?