camera, camcorder, ?? For VIDEOS.

I'm also currently in search for a camera / camcorder.
 
Last year, I've got myself my first digital camcorder, the Panasonic HC-V510, with the biggest zoom (I think) at that time and it also does full HD video. The reason I got the camcorder instead of a camera is I can let the video run none stop till the memory is full (with a power adapter, instead of the battery, video files split into 4 gig chunks). Most camera imposed a 20 min or so limit when shooting videos. Panasonic just updated the camcorder range with 2014 release with improved features, and if you do not need a big zoom, go for higher range for better image quality.
 
At that time, my other option is the Canon Powershot SX50 HS - everything is better with Canon, except that it can't shoot video none stop.
 
This year, I'm eyeing at the soon to be released Canon Powershot SX60 with rumor of 100x (edit : optical) zoom !! ..i'm easily excited by large zooms :)

I'm also experimenting with multiple cam view editing, and I'm going to add a cheap action camera copy to my projects : http://youtu.be/xnHDu-oW7_Y
 
I'm not too concern with audio recording with the above choices as I'll be using a portable Tascam multi track to do out-door audio recording if I'm not with Sonar.
 
If audio quality is of concern, have a look at the Zoom Q3/Q2HD units - but the video option would be limited.

When I shoot concert video, I use Canon HF-G10's and HF-G30.  Which is kind of the high end consumer, bordering on "pro-sumer" camcorders from the company.
 
The most important features in a video camera for concert shooting I think are:
Manual controls of focus, white balance, shutter speed and aperture.
Continuous recording.  (most DSLR's stop recording at 15-30 minutes)
Good zoom range.  20x is ideal.
Good low light sensitivity.  
 
The G30 fits the bill for all of these.  The G10 is limited by 10x zoom.  
 
Point and shoots, basic consumer camcorders, and DSLR's simply don't cut it for longer, and live productions.  

Okay that was enough of uploading those videos again.
But here they are and how they were done (as far I as can remember).
 
Blues, Blues, Blues James Armstrong Band
10/22/2012
https://www.youtube.com/w...o&feature=youtu.be

71.5mB - AVI file from *.mpg file of old camera to preserve the audio of original file.
4:3 picture for video (otherwise video codecs are not so great even to this day).
Sony Camcorder (11 years old now) used for video (DV tape camcorder). (ah camera could
have been brighter - yes it could have been - my fault). Have to use XP to capture
video or else there are no drivers for Windows 7 for the old camcorder. It was a good
camera, just did not sell that many so Sony quit supporting the drivers for it. Bah!


Goin'Down Slow - Samatha Fish Band
07/05/2013 Blues Fest
https://www.youtube.com/w...w&feature=youtu.be

386mB file video from camera as it was taken (*.mov file) 16:9 for video
HD Ready Camera used. (Nikon L120).

Both videos should be equivalent 48000 sample rate - 16bit for audio.
(except for streaming on utube which only streams at 128 bits (like *.mp3) if not HD,
which streams at 192 bits if HD).

Not much has changed in 10 years actually (all that much - sure there is HD) but the
picture is bigger and not using DV Tape like old camcorder just SD memory card - class
10 or 12 - has to be fast enough to take a video or else it only be for photos.
HD full resolution would be even more memory to make a video in a HD camcorder.
(60 frames/second instead of 30 frames/sec like HD Ready cheapie camera, and old
camcorder, ah, I guess I have forgot whatever that is probably 30 frames/second I am
guessing.)

If you change video codecs then you are at the audio resolution of the video codec
which may and usually does mean that the audio is not lossless. (Lossless video codecs
used here as far as I know - old camcorder definitely, and I guess also the new cheapie
camera also I suppose).

I am done with this~!
 
Oh, old Sony vidcam is only 320x240 picture size, cheapie Nikon camera is 1280 x 720 which is only HD Ready not HD full which is 1920x1080 picture size.
And way bigger video file in the end.
 
 

A

For concert recording.  The audio should always be recorded separately from the video.  Even in professional cameras, the on board audio is meant for sync reference, not for the finished product.  Major productions don't even record audio to cameras, they use SMTPE time code and record to external Sound Devices, Nagra, or similar recorders.  Unfortunately many bargain video guys don't know this.
 
Date and time will do nothing to help sync the audio or video, I may help you keep track of which files are which, but it is not timecode.  Modern software can easily and automatically sync multi-camera files with the corresponding audio by examining the audio waveforms.  
 
Camera audio distorts easily because of wildly high gain and crappy limiters.  If you can reduce the gain of the audio from the built in microphone you can substantially increase the audio quality.  It also help the editing software sync the audio because of stronger peaks. 
 
In truth, the built in microphones of the Zoom and Tascam recorders are not much different than what is built into a standard consumer camera, they are cheap, off-the-shelf electrets, but they are amplified and implemented better with higher quality conversion.
 
For the best results a separate audio setup with standard microphones is the way to go.   
 
For video quality concerns, remember that good lighting is good video.  It doesn't matter how cheap or how expensive the camera is, it will look crappy in bad light.   With modern technology the way it is,  even a cheapo camera can look decent in good lighting.  

Read reports on the best camera (camcorders) and realize that the zoom in feature (no so good on my old camera not noisy but jerky or too quick) makes noise (which will be picked up by any internal built-in mics and stereo is not really it's an X-Y pattern sorta) and anything else like video quality or anything is determined by what you may buy and cost more. Nikon has its Coolpix cameras like mine with one of them being with the new bigger chip (and still limited down) that costs $1019 maybe less depending on where you buy it, but it has no external mic in mini-plug connection and things like that - that I consider that I need. I mean my external mic (not the best either) cost as much as that cheap camera but has way better SPL (sound pressure levels) and all of that and a wind screen (yes the wind was blowing also interfering that day also) (by the river) and anything else that makes the audio reduce. Now some units have a microphone volume adjustment so you can control that, but usually the built-in mic is what is distorting, while the good external mic goes happily along and can record up to 140dB SPL or whatever you are going to use.
 
The new chip may be used in some more cameras (maybe camcorders which may have a bigger one in those to begin with) which will make videos even better and about all of them are using some form of compression in the electronics for the audio making it AAC or ACC whatever it is which can be looked up also and using a lot of memory with the SD whatever fast memory card or two or whatever the unit has in it to begin with. Some of those may come out a little later on like in June with that ASP-C whatever chip in them but then, being new, will cost more.
 
Well, there is the search function and the company, like Cannon, Samsung, Nikon, whatever but Nikon may not be rated all the good anymore, and surely they only come out with cameras, and there is Sony also and zooming has to have fast electronics and Sony has about the fastest one, but then there are sport cameras and camcorders and all of that and when all done, they all cost more, or more, or more, or even more.

And all that reading may give some headaches and such, but older technology used in cheaper units may work okay and all of that, but maybe for a few videos, recycling switches and life-time uses means more money usually a better unit unless perhaps you are Lexcia cameras whatever.
 
Take a deep breath!
 

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=1022654&Q=&is=REG&A=details
 
well??

Actually remember that I recommend nothing and you will have to try it out. It may be the one I was looking at last year at bestbuyo, but I am not sure, but it was one mentioned I think the $500 one ( ah, H52 maybe one of those though which as higher priced last year).
 
And on my computer I have a external cardslot (reader) and just put the SD memory card into that, and transfer the files over to my computer from the camera (excuse me - camcorder). I don't need USB transfer, I guess that may be for tablets or iOS or whatever you call those nowdays (iPad maybe).
 
Canon VIXIA HF R500 Full HD Camcorder (Black)
http://www.bhphotovideo.c...full.html/prm/alsVwDtl
$249

"If you're in the market, I suggest you opt for the 2013 models right now during the small window while they're cheap and before they disappear." (one of the website suggestion)

"And that new remote-monitoring feature seems to be optimized for -- or maybe even require -- the new Pan Table Accessory, a cradle for remotely rotating or tilting the camcorder. That'll run you $99.99." (since it is the HF R500, probably don't need or can't use that and again that was written at the website).

http://www.cnet.com/produ...n-vixia-hf-r500-black/

http://www.photographyblo...r50_and_vixia_hf_r500/

http://sexytechychic.com/...ital-camcorder-review/

http://hdvcam.net/canon/c.on-vixia-hf-r500-review/

 "Then you have to bear with the fact that the VIXIA HF R500 comes with no internal memory so you need to spend a bit extra on a SD card. Don’t forget too that you can save about $30 by getting the R400 if you are fine with the 53x and Baby Mode being restricted to a single individual. But even at $299, you can get a fairly high-capacity SDXC card that allows you to record more video than say the $449 VIXIA HF R52 model out of the box and still have some extra money so you can buy another accessory of your choosing."

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hard to find a review on it, since it just came out, but I know I was looking last year at one of those, but I did not want to spend that much as listed above which was the price back in 2013 on one of those models, so I bought the cheapie camera on sale then
for $250.
 
But for the price they want, it may be fine, and you may want to try it out at a store to make sure.
 
Oh! My files in my cheapie camera come out as *.mov files (or quicktime) but any company should have a transfer file program perhaps and software for the camcorder (camera). Nikon does and I downloaded an update to it just a few months back and new firmware revision for the camera. It was easy to do and was done in a few minutes. Mainly for viewing the videos but Windows Media Player works also or Quicktime which I never seem to use. I think it is mainly just a program so the files are put into a folder and shows a graphic icon (thumbnail) of what the video is and then another program to make a Panoramic view kind of thing perhaps only for photos, since it is a camera.) (whatever it is I guess).
??
You will have to look at what kind of files that camcorder has, but I think mpg files is not so good, (mp4 files are better and the other AHCD whatever is probably the best but may be sort of like for blue-ray or something like that, maybe not. (??????)
 
Buyer beware I suppose!
All I know is what I read!
 
And as far as I have read, any cinema mode on a camcorder ain't much and probably should not be used. You will have to read about that also, as my head is spinning around from all the reading. (ya, sorta).
 
Also on that HF R500:
Built-in Light/Flash Light - No
Flash - No
 
that means no hot shoe, which may or may not be important. (needed on photos ?? Handy to have but then a lot of camcorders or cameras are that way nowadays, and using an external mic - how - tape it on, the cord on my external mic fits on a hot shoe and only has about a 3" cord on it (stereo with a mini-plug like small jack headphone connection ). (?????)
 
I recommend nothing because whatever.................................................. has to be done by the buyer.

 
Here is something that may help with the under $500 reviews:
http://www.smartreview.com/digital-camcorder-buying-guide
 
Well, that enough babbling for another late night. Good Luck!
 Still more babble, and maybe it does have a hot shoe, not sure from photos of it.
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00I8VTUXQ?tag=smartreview302-20&camp=14573&creative=327641&linkCode=as1&creativeASIN=B00I8VTUXQ&adid=15F97318644DB2MSNG4T&&ref-refURL=
 
until I twist thumbs I believe nothing, and whatever is Beach Camera I think store there that has those perhaps.
???? (only joking about twisting thumbs). Oh, could be the 2013 model also, since minor few changes were made with the 2014 model. (again ????).
 
Okay, done!
 
Forgot to view your video, which I may do now.
Indoors, it may not be much until you stick a bright light on yourself making the video. I know my camera is not so good indoors with energy saving lights unless a lot of them are on. Might need a spotlight, or buying such a light may cost more then the camcorder.
 
I'm outta  here!
(Indoors is not outside in the sun).
 
 http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00HLDFTRS/hdvcamip-20
 
And as I said, I recommend nothing because the manufacturer to me always seem to make it look better than what it may be.
Oh, I looked at some of your videos, and some did not look all that bad to me. As for doing software or anything on a computer, that is another subject and I did not look at those videos.
??
To me, always try it out I guess.
 
 
 
 

In a day they change prices. Looked at some of your videos, did not look bad to me, but that is up to you.
There is (or was last night) a Sony for $598 that is rated good.
Otherwise to me, you won't get much for around that price.
I would go to a store first and see how it works and what it looks like (probably BestB).
 
Changing prices from what I saw last night, that is all I can say.
Canon RF H52 ($40 more, but more like the price I saw last year if I am remembering correctly).
 

Only thing about I take a video of is people looking through a telescope in the very dark no lights except small red lights nite at the stars. My old Sony has super-night time video but it is green and like I said the image is only 320 x 240 in size and DVC whatever tape. Now try and find a newer camera that actually goes down to 0 lux and the expense goes way up. I take a video of Mr. and Mrs. Bill Buffalo (acutally buffalos) chomping on the grass where they are at.

 (and I don't need a flash on my Sony from 11 years ago but the images are green in the very dark night and work for about goodly 30 feet).
(but the images are just all green).(sometimes noisy also in the video part).
 

 I might have to get the G20 since for 2014 it keeps up with the Sony I think for "ghost hunting" yes, with infrared - in the night filming.
Brah - ha - ha!
http://camcorders.reviewe...sony-hdr-cx760v-review
Price for the G20 Cannon has come down from last year and the G30 costs more.
 
Into the night!

 
 

Maybe it was a Panasonic for that $598.
Anyway to me no one should put up a video like this one.
Yuck!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFmsJRd_pCE
 
That is my take on it!
 
Anyway the Canon G20 is only 30 frames/sec at HDFull recording, so that's out.
I am not much into videos anymore anyway.

I thought mine were bad until I heard others, they may look better but the sound is terrible especially in that one.