Another digital video camera question - GoFuckYourself.com

boneprone · 02-21-2001, 04:50 PM

Im looking not only for a good digital video camera, but looking for one that takes still pics as well. Im not referring to a digital that does stills because I know the wuality is poor, but looking for a camera that does good video and ok to good photos as well for around 800.00

Is it possible, and does anyone recomned one they have heard of or used.

------------------
Webmaster/Owner
www.boneprone.com
icq: 66883099

Dyanna · 02-21-2001, 11:29 PM

I still haven't seen one that even makes OK photos - best I've seen does 640 X 480 and they look awful (compared to even a 100 dollar still camera), unless it's a close-up shot.

We use a Canon Elura and it does have progressive scan still capability - not sure what the price is now since we bought it a while back, but at the time it was the best out there. Something better may have come along though by now

And if you do find a good one PLEASE let us know! LOL

I do know one guy runing a site and I'll ask him what they are using right now. It generally takes them a few days to answer email but if you don't hear something from me shoot me an email to remind me.

Corpsie · 02-21-2001, 11:37 PM

Most camcorders take really shitty still images, they don't look too bad when you reduce them to 50% (360x240) but even then it looks "wide" and adds 20 pounds to people.

It's better to get a still camera for that purpose also. It will keep the wear and tear off of your camcorder (which will cost more to repair and has more moving parts)

exit69 · 02-22-2001, 11:28 AM

I have to definately agree with the others when saying you want to have a seperate camera for stills. I do alot of things with my DV cam however generally stills from it are of less than optimal quality... blury, too much motion, etc etc... you want to get a stand alone that you can use for stills..

Now, the question is does that break your budget then? I've seen some inexpensive DV cams.. JVC's GR-DVF31 is currently like 460 on Cnet's Shopper.com (electronics, Camcoders, digital video, sort by price), which would leave you a bit of room for a decent still camera as well

Corpsie · 02-22-2001, 02:07 PM

If you do get more equipment, check out http://www.jandr.com/ for the best prices.

You have to call them though and haggle.
I got my Sony 570D (dvd player) for $380
instead of $450 (everywhere else)

Comparison shopping rocks!

misterwalrus · 02-22-2001, 02:11 PM

I have to agree with everyone else on this one

02-21-2001, 04:50 PM	#1
boneprone Hall Of Fame Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Portland Oregon USA Posts: 34,415	Another digital video camera question Im looking not only for a good digital video camera, but looking for one that takes still pics as well. Im not referring to a digital that does stills because I know the wuality is poor, but looking for a camera that does good video and ok to good photos as well for around 800.00 Is it possible, and does anyone recomned one they have heard of or used. ------------------ Webmaster/Owner www.boneprone.com icq: 66883099

02-21-2001, 11:29 PM	#2
Dyanna Registered User Join Date: Feb 2001 Posts: 43	I still haven't seen one that even makes OK photos - best I've seen does 640 X 480 and they look awful (compared to even a 100 dollar still camera), unless it's a close-up shot. We use a Canon Elura and it does have progressive scan still capability - not sure what the price is now since we bought it a while back, but at the time it was the best out there. Something better may have come along though by now And if you do find a good one PLEASE let us know! LOL I do know one guy runing a site and I'll ask him what they are using right now. It generally takes them a few days to answer email but if you don't hear something from me shoot me an email to remind me.

02-21-2001, 11:37 PM	#3
Corpsie Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: detroit, mi, usa Posts: 474	Most camcorders take really shitty still images, they don't look too bad when you reduce them to 50% (360x240) but even then it looks "wide" and adds 20 pounds to people. It's better to get a still camera for that purpose also. It will keep the wear and tear off of your camcorder (which will cost more to repair and has more moving parts)

02-22-2001, 11:28 AM	#4
exit69 Registered User Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Rockville MD USA (with Mountain View, CA on my mind) Posts: 62	I have to definately agree with the others when saying you want to have a seperate camera for stills. I do alot of things with my DV cam however generally stills from it are of less than optimal quality... blury, too much motion, etc etc... you want to get a stand alone that you can use for stills.. Now, the question is does that break your budget then? I've seen some inexpensive DV cams.. JVC's GR-DVF31 is currently like 460 on Cnet's Shopper.com (electronics, Camcoders, digital video, sort by price), which would leave you a bit of room for a decent still camera as well

02-22-2001, 02:07 PM	#5
Corpsie Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: detroit, mi, usa Posts: 474	If you do get more equipment, check out http://www.jandr.com/ for the best prices. You have to call them though and haggle. I got my Sony 570D (dvd player) for $380 instead of $450 (everywhere else) Comparison shopping rocks!

02-22-2001, 02:11 PM	#6
misterwalrus Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Burbank, Ca Posts: 270	I have to agree with everyone else on this one