I want to purchase a digital camera that takes still pic's and video.

[Camping Griswalds]

I think the ones that have the little cd's seem neat, but my mom has a kodak (not sure wich model, but bought "new" in christmas of 04) and she and my son took great pic's and videos. They stored on her memory card, and when we downloaded the card to make a disc of the pic's it also did the video clip. My son told me that it ate up the battery though and that it took up a lot of memory. What do you use and or reccomend? I'd love to not have to take 2 cameras, because it always ends up that we leave the video camera behind because it's heavy.

Also what do you do for batteries?

 

[ukcatfan]

There are a few good cameras out there that take good video also. The problem, be prepared to bring A LOT of memory. I have a Canon S1 IS. It will take very good video, but will only fit abot ten minutes on a 1GB card. It also limits the file size to 1GB, so it is not possible to take anything longer than ten minutes even if you have a larger card. I believe that some other cameras use MPEG encoding to squeeze more on a card. The downside is that it sometimes degrades the quality. Another drawback to cameras with video is that most do not allow zooming during shooting. I would do some research online and then go to a store after you have narrowed it down to check them out in person.

The bottom line in my opinon is that you have to invest a pretty large amount of money to get camcorder quality. If you just plan on taking mostly pictures with a few videos, then it can be affordable.

 

[lucincia]

This is what we got and I am loving it.

The link is to the Sony web site -

http://tinyurl.com/a5gv4

3 chips camcorder with 2.8 megapixel still photos. I have a 512 MB card in it for photos and it can store over 300 photos in high res mode with minimal compression. It uses MiniDV for video. You can save video to memory cards, but why would you? Why would you want to capture your Disney memory in 640x400 format?

All this in a package slightly larger than your average digital camera. Very, very compact and light weight.

Just remember to buy some extra batteries!

Can't wait to use this on our upcoming Disney trip. No more hauling multiple camera equipment

 

[tjevans]

I have a Kodak DX7590 and love it. It's pretty pricey, but you can get some good deals on refurbished ones on Ebay (that's what I did).

Keep in mind that the video you take with a digital still camera is nowhere near as good as what you would take with a video camera. If you plan to show the video on a tv screen or even full-sized on a monitor, it will probably look very pixilated. The resolution is just not good enough for the video to be blown up to that size. Just like the stills taken with digital video cameras are not as good as the ones taken with a still camera.

There are also problems I've read about the cameras that take pics on the little cd's (other than the price of the media). I think that the cd's are not as interchangeable with other advices as people think.

Also, check out this thread on digital cameras.

 

[Tanya]

I actually just saw an advertisment for Samsung... It was a video camera plus digital all in one... I think it was 5.1 megapixel. The advertisement caught my eye... I am going to check it out... my luck it will probably be very pricey!!!!

Good Luck...

 

[oogieboogie]

cameras for digital pictures
camcorders for digital videos
keep them separate.

if you must get a 2-in-1, then go with the Samsung: http://product.samsung.com/cgi-bin/nabc/campaign/duocam/b2c_optin_duocam.jsp

why? because it has 2 separate lenses for the 2 separate functions. One lens for the camera, one lens for the camcorder.

Otherwise, get a camcorder and a camera. There are plenty on the value/budget/low-end that are pretty good for both functions.

 

[Tanya]

Me again... I tried to paste the web site for Samsung.... Here it is below or just go onto Samsung.com
It actually has 2 lenses...!... It's looks cool.

http://product.samsung.com/cgi-bin/nabc/campaign/duocam/b2c_optin_duocam.jsp

 

[roliepolieoliefan]

DH and I just looked at that Samsung this past weekend at best Buy. It was I think around $550.00. We decided though to go the 2 camera route. Got a Canon digital and a sony camcorder. Both are very compact. We were told the Samsung is the best route to go if you want an all in one.

 

[lucincia]

Quality of photo taking on camcorder is improving rapidly, faster than camera taking quality video. So, if you want 2-in-1 function, look for videocamcoder with nicer photo taking ability, rather than the other way around.

Depending on how large of a photo you want to print at the end, you may not need super megapixels. For standard snapshots and maybe a blow-up to 8x10, a 2-3 megapixels is fine for your consumer grade photos.

Canon is coming out with a videocamcorder that takes 5 megapixels photos. I think it's coming out this month.

Also, if you can afford it, look for videocamcorder with 3 chipsets and low lux rating. Lot's of dark places within Disney World you will find the low lux rating come in handy. Also, the 3 chipsets really make a difference. I have 4 camcorders sitting here right now that I have been using and my Sony PC1000 one blows everyone else away in terms of video quality.

Yes, of course, if you're a professional and want super quality stuff, you would want separate equipment. But, then again, you would not be asking about it here Heck, if you want quality photo you should stick with SLR.

But, we're talking about convenience and quality here, not just quality.

 

[Tanya]

What Canon digital did you get?... I am getting so confused with all the different models!!!! I have a sony digital that I love but I am so annoyed with these people... My shutter is stuck closed and they had wanted $200 to fix my camera which I think is ridiculous... I have a canon camera (not digital) and the pictures are crystal clear and awesome!

 

[NoelGypsy]

I started out with a Photomax (2 MP) camera back in the day and then went to an HP I forget which model. It was a 3 megapixel. Then I got a Sony P92. All of these cameras were good and they took still shots and video. The biggest problem was the battery life. I was recharging and buying batteries all the time. When I had the HP I bought the docking station that recharged the batteries, I think it was ont here more than I used it ... LOL
When I went to buy a 5 MP, I was looking at the new Sony that came out. I went to many different places and heard the same thing from non-commision salesmen.. buy an olympus. I also asked a few photographers who work in Manhattan and they said Olympus is the way to go. The reasons they told me were, one the battery life is great. I went to Disney for 7 days Dec 2004 and I only had to charge it up once. I took probably 600 pictures on one stick and used another for video. The second reason is the lens. Most of the digital cameras have a plastic lense... olympus uses glass lenses. The 5 MP Sony I was looking at had a glass carl zeiss lens, but all the salesmen told me the battery life is not that good, and I know that from my previous Sony camera. I will tell you, I see a BIG difference in the quality of the pictures from the plastic lense to the glass lens. I have 2 olympus cameras now.
The 5 MP model camedia C-5000 (cost me around $350.00) and the 4 MP model stylus 410. Between the battery life lasting longer than other cameras and the glass lens, I am hooked on Olympus.
Hope this helps