Hi Laurence

Yep I had both on my old Sony and I did use the Stills a lot on the
camcorder when I was using the camcorder. even though I do have a Still
Digital camera.

When on Holiday or at a special function my Wife will often use the Still
Camera while I am using the camcorder.
But I often take a lot of stills as well. I am not a good photographer so I
use the Scatter gun technique and take lots of pics then delete the bad
ones. That's one the big advantages of Digital over Film.

I also take a lot of bad video and delete a lot in edit. So I buy a lot of
minDV tapes and have many memory cards as big as I can get I.e. 1gig plus.
I delete lots of stuff before I burn a DVD or CD to watch on the Tele. So I
really want a Camcorder that will take SD cards.


" Payne" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 14:20:11 GMT, "JimboSlim"
wrote:

I had my Sony TRV50E Mini DV stolen in Barcelona.

I now have the Insurance money.

I have gone off Sony because they use Memory Stick which is expensive and
lower in capacity than other flash memory.

I want one with SD Card or support more than one type of card.

Are you going to be using the still picture function a lot?

"JimboSlim" wrote in message
...
Hi Laurence

Yep I had both on my old Sony and I did use the Stills a lot on the
camcorder when I was using the camcorder. even though I do have a Still
Digital camera.

When on Holiday or at a special function my Wife will often use the Still
Camera while I am using the camcorder.
But I often take a lot of stills as well. I am not a good photographer so
I use the Scatter gun technique and take lots of pics then delete the bad
ones. That's one the big advantages of Digital over Film.

I also take a lot of bad video and delete a lot in edit. So I buy a lot of
minDV tapes and have many memory cards as big as I can get I.e. 1gig plus.
I delete lots of stuff before I burn a DVD or CD to watch on the Tele. So
I really want a Camcorder that will take SD cards.


" Payne" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 14:20:11 GMT, "JimboSlim"
wrote:

I had my Sony TRV50E Mini DV stolen in Barcelona.

I now have the Insurance money.

I have gone off Sony because they use Memory Stick which is expensive and
lower in capacity than other flash memory.

I want one with SD Card or support more than one type of card.

Are you going to be using the still picture function a lot?



But DV camcoders have at best a 1 mega pixel CCD, that's about the
resolution of a phone cam!
Pick the camcorder for the quality of it's video and shove a cheapo 3mega
pixel CCD camera in your pocket.

John Russell wrote:
"JimboSlim" wrote in message
...

Hi Laurence

Yep I had both on my old Sony and I did use the Stills a lot on the
camcorder when I was using the camcorder. even though I do have a Still
Digital camera.

When on Holiday or at a special function my Wife will often use the Still
Camera while I am using the camcorder.
But I often take a lot of stills as well. I am not a good photographer so
I use the Scatter gun technique and take lots of pics then delete the bad
ones. That's one the big advantages of Digital over Film.

I also take a lot of bad video and delete a lot in edit. So I buy a lot of
minDV tapes and have many memory cards as big as I can get I.e. 1gig plus.
I delete lots of stuff before I burn a DVD or CD to watch on the Tele. So
I really want a Camcorder that will take SD cards.


" Payne" wrote in message
. ..

On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 14:20:11 GMT, "JimboSlim"
wrote:


I had my Sony TRV50E Mini DV stolen in Barcelona.

I now have the Insurance money.

I have gone off Sony because they use Memory Stick which is expensive and
lower in capacity than other flash memory.

I want one with SD Card or support more than one type of card.

Are you going to be using the still picture function a lot?



But DV camcoders have at best a 1 mega pixel CCD, that's about the
resolution of a phone cam!
Pick the camcorder for the quality of it's video and shove a cheapo 3mega
pixel CCD camera in your pocket.




Picture quality doesnt really have anything to do with the resolution in
that its the lens that gives bad or good picture quality. The resolution
just determines how good the actual image is saved. I.E. a 1 mega pixel
picture taken with a camcorder would be better than a 1 mega pixel
picture taken with a phone.

"StephenH" wrote in message
...
John Russell wrote:
"JimboSlim" wrote in message
...

Hi Laurence

Yep I had both on my old Sony and I did use the Stills a lot on the
camcorder when I was using the camcorder. even though I do have a Still
Digital camera.

When on Holiday or at a special function my Wife will often use the Still
Camera while I am using the camcorder.
But I often take a lot of stills as well. I am not a good photographer so
I use the Scatter gun technique and take lots of pics then delete the bad
ones. That's one the big advantages of Digital over Film.

I also take a lot of bad video and delete a lot in edit. So I buy a lot
of minDV tapes and have many memory cards as big as I can get I.e. 1gig
plus.
I delete lots of stuff before I burn a DVD or CD to watch on the Tele. So
I really want a Camcorder that will take SD cards.


" Payne" wrote in message
...

On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 14:20:11 GMT, "JimboSlim"
wrote:


I had my Sony TRV50E Mini DV stolen in Barcelona.

I now have the Insurance money.

I have gone off Sony because they use Memory Stick which is expensive
and
lower in capacity than other flash memory.

I want one with SD Card or support more than one type of card.

Are you going to be using the still picture function a lot?



But DV camcoders have at best a 1 mega pixel CCD, that's about the
resolution of a phone cam!
Pick the camcorder for the quality of it's video and shove a cheapo 3mega
pixel CCD camera in your pocket.


Picture quality doesnt really have anything to do with the resolution in
that its the lens that gives bad or good picture quality. The resolution
just determines how good the actual image is saved. I.E. a 1 mega pixel
picture taken with a camcorder would be better than a 1 mega pixel picture
taken with a phone.

My point is that just becuase they can add a "photo" mode to a camcorder
dosn't mean the pictures are worth having at the expence of video
performance.

John Russell wrote:

"StephenH" wrote in message
...

John Russell wrote:

"JimboSlim" wrote in message
...


Hi Laurence

Yep I had both on my old Sony and I did use the Stills a lot on the
camcorder when I was using the camcorder. even though I do have a Still
Digital camera.

When on Holiday or at a special function my Wife will often use the Still
Camera while I am using the camcorder.
But I often take a lot of stills as well. I am not a good photographer so
I use the Scatter gun technique and take lots of pics then delete the bad
ones. That's one the big advantages of Digital over Film.

I also take a lot of bad video and delete a lot in edit. So I buy a lot
of minDV tapes and have many memory cards as big as I can get I.e. 1gig
plus.
I delete lots of stuff before I burn a DVD or CD to watch on the Tele. So
I really want a Camcorder that will take SD cards.


" Payne" wrote in message
m...


On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 14:20:11 GMT, "JimboSlim"
wrote:



I had my Sony TRV50E Mini DV stolen in Barcelona.

I now have the Insurance money.

I have gone off Sony because they use Memory Stick which is expensive
and
lower in capacity than other flash memory.

I want one with SD Card or support more than one type of card.

Are you going to be using the still picture function a lot?


But DV camcoders have at best a 1 mega pixel CCD, that's about the
resolution of a phone cam!
Pick the camcorder for the quality of it's video and shove a cheapo 3mega
pixel CCD camera in your pocket.


Picture quality doesnt really have anything to do with the resolution in
that its the lens that gives bad or good picture quality. The resolution
just determines how good the actual image is saved. I.E. a 1 mega pixel
picture taken with a camcorder would be better than a 1 mega pixel picture
taken with a phone.


My point is that just becuase they can add a "photo" mode to a camcorder
dosn't mean the pictures are worth having at the expence of video
performance.



yep - agreed.

In message ,
StephenH writes
Snipped...

Picture quality doesnt really have anything to do with the resolution
in that its the lens that gives bad or good picture quality. The
resolution just determines how good the actual image is saved. I.E. a 1
mega pixel picture taken with a camcorder would be better than a 1 mega
pixel picture taken with a phone.

It really depends on your interpretation and definition of "picture
quality" and "resolution" are.

--
Tony Morgan
http://www.camcord.info

Hi All MiniDVers

My experience of Stills taken from a Camcorder appear to be very different
to the rest of this group replies,
My Old Sony TRV50E Mini DV gave very good still picts, I am sure Tony would
know but I think it was rated at 1.5 Mega Pix for stills. My son & daughter
both have Phone Cameras fairly new but gen2, one is a Nokia the other a Sony
Ericson the pictures they take are crap I don't think they could be 1/4 Meg
Pict but I don't Know.
Any way AFAIAC you cannot compare Camera phone picts it is a ridiculous idea
to me.
The Stills from my stolen Camcorder were almost as good as what my Sony
Still camera took all be it 3.2 Mega pix. I think many new camcorders now
exceed 2 Mega pix. I bought a cheap Samsung Still Digital Camera which is
rated at 4.0 mega PIX but the picture are not as good as the Sony Still
Camera also lost in same Bag.
And only a little better that the Sony TRV50E Mini DV Still Picts. Why does
Video performance have to be compromised if a Camcorder has the ability to
take stills? Tony claims that Still quality is much higher on Sony than
other brands such as Canon Panasonic JVC etc which is making me swing back
in favour of Sony again.
Basically any views on what is the best mid range Camcorder with still
taking ability?
Cheers
Jimbo

"Tony Morgan" wrote in message
...
In message ,
StephenH writes
Snipped...

Picture quality doesnt really have anything to do with the resolution in
that its the lens that gives bad or good picture quality. The resolution
just determines how good the actual image is saved. I.E. a 1 mega pixel
picture taken with a camcorder would be better than a 1 mega pixel picture
taken with a phone.

It really depends on your interpretation and definition of "picture
quality" and "resolution" are.

--
Tony Morgan
http://www.camcord.info

In message , JimboSlim
writes
Tony claims that Still quality is much higher on Sony than other brands
such as Canon Panasonic JVC etc

Did I say "much"? All camcorders have reasonable lenses, but when
someone designs a lens with a 10x or 20x zoom, then all other things
being equal, the quality will be lower than on a digital still camera
with (say) a 3x zoom.

Quality, to me, covers good colour reproduction and good (but not
over-cooked) contrast. The limiting factor here is the lens itself, but
can be affected by the camcorder's digital signal processor that
processes the image.

Then of course is the number of pixels that the camcorder (or digi-still
cameral) has. This is the limiting factor of how big a print you can get
from an image while keeping the image "sharp" - actually free from
pixillation when printing to larger sizes.

which is making me swing back in favour of Sony again. Basically any
views on what is the best mid range Camcorder with still
taking ability?

A good yardstick IMHO is:
up to 1.2Mpx you'll get reasonable prints up to about 5"x4"
From 1.2Mpx up to about 1.6Mpx you'll get reasonable prints up to about
6"x4.5".
From 1.6Mpx up to about 2Mpx you'll get reasonable prints up to about
7"x5".

All (tongue in cheek) subject to all other things being equal.

In the mid-range I like the Sony HC40 (a couple of guys I know have
them).

--
Tony Morgan
http://www.camcord.info

"John Russell" wrote in message
...

"JimboSlim" wrote in message
...
Hi Laurence

Yep I had both on my old Sony and I did use the Stills a lot on the
camcorder when I was using the camcorder. even though I do have a Still
Digital camera.

When on Holiday or at a special function my Wife will often use the Still
Camera while I am using the camcorder.
But I often take a lot of stills as well. I am not a good photographer so
I use the Scatter gun technique and take lots of pics then delete the bad
ones. That's one the big advantages of Digital over Film.

I also take a lot of bad video and delete a lot in edit. So I buy a lot
of minDV tapes and have many memory cards as big as I can get I.e. 1gig
plus.
I delete lots of stuff before I burn a DVD or CD to watch on the Tele. So
I really want a Camcorder that will take SD cards.


" Payne" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 14:20:11 GMT, "JimboSlim"
wrote:

I had my Sony TRV50E Mini DV stolen in Barcelona.

I now have the Insurance money.

I have gone off Sony because they use Memory Stick which is expensive
and
lower in capacity than other flash memory.

I want one with SD Card or support more than one type of card.

Are you going to be using the still picture function a lot?



But DV camcoders have at best a 1 mega pixel CCD, that's about the
resolution of a phone cam!
Pick the camcorder for the quality of it's video and shove a cheapo 3mega
pixel CCD camera in your pocket.

There are now many DV cameras with 2 or even 3 megapixel stills capability:
http://www.dvspot.com/reviews/sony/p...ew/index.shtml
Lots of folks on one review site stated that the camera above took better
pictures than their still cameras of similar resolution level!

Rob

"JimboSlim" wrote in message
...
Hi All MiniDVers

My experience of Stills taken from a Camcorder appear to be very different
to the rest of this group replies,
My Old Sony TRV50E Mini DV gave very good still picts, I am sure Tony
would know but I think it was rated at 1.5 Mega Pix for stills. My son &
daughter both have Phone Cameras fairly new but gen2, one is a Nokia the
other a Sony Ericson the pictures they take are crap I don't think they
could be 1/4 Meg Pict but I don't Know.
Any way AFAIAC you cannot compare Camera phone picts it is a ridiculous
idea to me.
The Stills from my stolen Camcorder were almost as good as what my Sony
Still camera took all be it 3.2 Mega pix. I think many new camcorders now
exceed 2 Mega pix. I bought a cheap Samsung Still Digital Camera which is
rated at 4.0 mega PIX but the picture are not as good as the Sony Still
Camera also lost in same Bag.
And only a little better that the Sony TRV50E Mini DV Still Picts. Why
does Video performance have to be compromised if a Camcorder has the
ability to take stills? Tony claims that Still quality is much higher on
Sony than other brands such as Canon Panasonic JVC etc which is making me
swing back in favour of Sony again.
Basically any views on what is the best mid range Camcorder with still
taking ability?
Cheers
Jimbo

If you decide to buy camera with poorer video performance becuase you want
to take stills, or take stills to a different card format then you are
making a compromise which adversly affects video quality.

The eye is very good at integrating moving images, yet look at what happens
when you freeze frame. Jaggies and other anomalies become noticable. The
still performance of "video" quality CCD's isn't good enough to match a
cheap film camera. Samsung even produce hybrid camera/camcorders becuase of
this.

Just becuase you can't see any differnce dosn't mean there isn't any. The
next thing you will argue is that you could never see why someone would buy
an SLR when a cheap kodak camera produced results which where just as good.