# Suggestions for HD camcorder (that takes stills)



## tocaj (Nov 30, 2010)

Hope this is in the correct forum.
Now that I have my new quad core machine I'd like to get myself a good HD camcorder. I would like one that also takes good stills as I hate carrying 2 cameras around with me.
Any suggestions? Obviously something that cooperates with a Mac is a must, and I'd prefer to keep it under $1000 if possible.
Thanks!


----------



## Guest (Jun 9, 2011)

I don't have advice for a camcorder for you, but I've not really seen any that take good stills personally to be honest. I guess it depends on your definition of what good is and what you want to be able to do with the stills after the fact. Even a full HD 1080p camcorder sensor is not huge resolutions when it comes to stills -- it's roughly the equivalent (effectively) of about 2 Megapixels (depending on how you do the math and if you take into considerations 3ccd sensors vs. camera sensors).


----------



## Niteshooter (Aug 8, 2008)

That's a tough one, a good HD camcorder to me might be the Canon XA10 HD.... but that's double your budget and not really set up for stills.

Have you looked at some of the Superzoom point and shoot cameras that can do HD video as well as 12 - 14mp stills? The Panasonic DMC-FZ100 with it's 14.1 mp CMOS and 25mm - 600mm Leica lens is interesting or the Fuji HS20 with it's 16mp EXR CMOS 24-720mm lens and the ability to shoot full HD as well as high speed video at reduced resolution at 320 fps.

Or the Canon T3i which would hit just at the $1000 level with kit lens and has a much larger APS-C CMOS sensor.


----------



## Niteshooter (Aug 8, 2008)

Wow $250 for a 20D with grip and batteries? I think I paid that much just for the grip when it came out.....


----------



## tocaj (Nov 30, 2010)

mguertin said:


> I don't have advice for a camcorder for you, but I've not really seen any that take good stills personally to be honest. I guess it depends on your definition of what good is and what you want to be able to do with the stills after the fact. Even a full HD 1080p camcorder sensor is not huge resolutions when it comes to stills -- it's roughly the equivalent (effectively) of about 2 Megapixels (depending on how you do the math and if you take into considerations 3ccd sensors vs. camera sensors).


I looked at the Sony HDR-XR550V this weekend that claims it takes 12MP stills...am I being misled?

As far as the superzoom point and shoot cameras go, I have one now that takes good video...as long as you're not moving or zooming in/out. Thats when you get the "stuttering" and video quality tanks


----------



## chrisburke (May 11, 2010)

How about something like a nikon d90..


----------



## Guest (Jun 9, 2011)

tocaj said:


> I looked at the Sony HDR-XR550V this weekend that claims it takes 12MP stills...am I being misled?
> 
> As far as the superzoom point and shoot cameras go, I have one now that takes good video...as long as you're not moving or zooming in/out. Thats when you get the "stuttering" and video quality tanks


It's most likely the way they do the "math" on it (as mentioned in my first post). From what I've read most of the manufacturers will represent things in a way that makes them look better. The giveaway for this is this spec, which is the maximum pixels the sensor captures at one time:



> Video Actual (Pixel) : 4150K Pixels (16:9)


In actuality it's a 4MP sized sensor, but they talk about 12MP photos because it's most likely doing 3 "captures" for one photo (Red, Green, Blue) @ 4MP each. Technically using 12MP worth of pixels to capture it (sort of), but in the end it's still only sized as a large as a 4MP image would be.

Also from just reading the specs on it right now it's saying that it's a CMOS based sensor as well. Do some research on this before you buy it, it's quite possible that it will have the same types of issues as DSLR's do for video (Rolling Shutter aka jellocam) that most CMOS based setups have. That's the "stuttering" video quality you're talking about.


----------



## Niteshooter (Aug 8, 2008)

tocaj said:


> I looked at the Sony HDR-XR550V this weekend that claims it takes 12MP stills...am I being misled?
> 
> As far as the superzoom point and shoot cameras go, I have one now that takes good video...as long as you're not moving or zooming in/out. Thats when you get the "stuttering" and video quality tanks


Hmmm could depend a lot on the camera. As mguertin mentions the specs for video cameras are a bit cagey when it comes to still specs. I guess the question is, what's more important the video or the stills aspect of the camera.

If it's stills cameras that can shoot HD video then a lot of pros are using the Canon 5D MK II which is excellent for both and a lot of broadcast is shot on them. The Canon 60D has been gaining some ground too. In the 4/3 cameras the Panasonic GH2 has got a pretty solid following though the lenses of choice is pricey being the 14-140 (24-280 cropped) and there is also a Leica version which is a bit more expensive.

But perhaps you need to give us more of an idea of what it is you are looking for otherwise we'll just be tossing out suggestions that you can shoot down.


----------



## yeeeha (Feb 16, 2007)

chrisburke said:


> How about something like a nikon d90..


I have a D90. It takes great still images. Video? Not there. i.e. I gave up on recording video with the D90.


----------

