I am looking into buying our first camcorder. We'll be moving overseas to a developing country with it, so I want one that is compact, and inexpensive (so that I'm not too sad if it gets broken or stolen!). I was looking at the Canon FS100 and it seems to meet those requirements. We are also looking for a point-and-shoot camera with video and are looking at the Canon SD1100.

I was looking at sample videos from the FS100 on vimeo.com - I haven't been real impressed, but I didn't know if the quality issues are due to the camera itself or the files being made lower resolution for uploading. My question is, is the quality on the FS100 significantly better than what I can get when using the video on the digital camera? Mainly I will be using it for short family videos which I will post online, or longer videos which will be burned to DVD and mailed to the grandparents, for them to watch on their televisions. I do like the Canon HF100 but it is significantly above our price range. If the FS100 is not a whole lot better than the digicam video, we might just wait a little while to get a camcorder. If anyone has other suggestions aside from the FS100, I'd appreciate that too.

Video I did with a "Canon Powershot S2 IS": http://vimeo.com/1320398

Video I did with a "Canon Powershot 570 IS": http://vimeo.com/708928

I have no idea what your budget is.


Do you already have a decent still camera which shoots video? That is what the title "FS100 or just use the video on my digicam?" implies.

The "PowerShot SD1100 IS" is very small the Canon FS100 is not very small as compared to the SD1100.

My guess? You need a good digital camera which takes decent video...



Rich

I do not have a good still camera for video yet. We are going to be buying the SD1100 soon to have a pocket P&S handy. I have a Canon XTi (dSLR) for my more serious photography, but it does not take videos.

My budget is in the $300-400 range, but if the quality of camcorders in that price range is not significantly better than what I can take using a P&S digital camera, then I would consider going a step up. I've looked at the Canon HF100, and really like what I see, but it is significantly more expensive.

The Sanyo HD1000 is close to your price range and Amazon has it for $449.99.

Also at Amazon you can pick up Canon HF100 for $625.00.

I found some clips online of the HD1000 - looks fantastic. My only concern about this one is that some reviews say it does not have good image stabilization - I have an essential tremor (my hands shake) and this is one feature that I absolutely need. Can anyone comment on this? From the product details on Amazon, it says it does have image stabilization but it seems like some people still have a lot of trouble with camera shake with it.

My only concern about this one is that some reviews say it does not have good image stabilization - I have an essential tremor (my hands shake) and this is one feature that I absolutely need. Can anyone comment on this?

It does have image stabilization - but only a digital one. Optical image stabilization as used in higher priced Canon and Sony camcorders are usually better. Digital one can be decent too, but looks like HD1000's one is poorly implemented.

Another question since the HF100 and the HD1000 are HD camcorders. I do not have an HDTV to watch these videos on, and neither do my family members who I would be sending these videos to. My laptop has a DVD burner but it is not HD (Matshita DVD-RAM UJ-860). I do not want to buy a second burner. Would I just be wasting my money on an HD camcorder then? When I look at clips online from the FS100 vs. the HF100, the quality from the HF100 looks so much better (I have a ThinkPad R61 with a GMA X3100 graphics processor).

If I burn DVDs on my non-HD burner, and my family watches the DVDs on their non-HD televisions, will there still be a difference in video quality compared to what I would get from the FS100 or something comparable?

You can hook up any HD camcorder to a standard TV and still be able to view the picture.

You can edit the HD files and than export it to a standard DVD-R that play on most DVD players. You can even transfer the files directly to a data DVD without any editing and the PS3 play them just incase you decide to get one in the future.

As for rather the converted SD DVD’s from HD camcorders will look as good as the FS100’s, I think it’ll look much better but even if you cant notice a difference, it’s best to have your original files in HD because in several years, you’ll wish you bought an HD camcorder instead of a standard camcorder. That’s one of the reasons why I bought the then $2,000 Sony HC1 over the then $1,500 Panasonic GS400 back in the summer of 2005 to take with me to the Azores.

Another question since the HF100 and the HD1000 are HD camcorders. I do not have an HDTV to watch these videos on, and neither do my family members who I would be sending these videos to. My laptop has a DVD burner but it is not HD (Matshita DVD-RAM UJ-860). I do not want to buy a second burner. Would I just be wasting my money on an HD camcorder then?

First, you can record HD video on any standard DVD with any standard DVD burner (using AVCHD format, the same format as HF100). But this DVD won't play on standard DVD player, you need a HD player such as PS3 to play the disc. So if you don't have HD player or HDTV, you must then downsize and re-encode the video to Standard Definition format; and it would take you longer to do that.

I don't think HD camcorder is worth it in your case, unless you want to have the original HD video clip stored away, and enjoy them in the future when you upgrade to a HDTV and HD player. HD camcorder is still evolving very quickly; those you can buy in the next 2 to 3 years will be significantly better than those you can buy today.

If I burn DVDs on my non-HD burner, and my family watches the DVDs on their non-HD televisions, will there still be a difference in video quality compared to what I would get from the FS100 or something comparable?

HD Camcorder can make better video and may have better low light capability, because some (such as HF100) use bigger sensor than lower priced standard definition camcorder. But it would require a lot of time to convert all the video.

HD Camcorder can make better video and may have better low light capability, because some (such as HF100) use bigger sensor than lower priced standard definition camcorder. But it would require a lot of time to convert all the video.

Define "a lot of time" to convert all the video?

Define "a lot of time" to convert all the video?Depends on your computer.

Depends on your source video and what you are doing to your video.

Depends on the software you will be using to do what you plan on doing.

A real wild guess might be 1 hour of video could take up to 5 hours, but I really hate to estimate that. There are too many variables. How long is a rope?




Rich

I do the same thing, shoot on hd, then downconvert to standard dvd.

Software is the key.

6 months ago all I could use was the software that came with my camcorder (UGH!)

Today, just about every package can recognize my camcorder files, and edit them, and export them for standard dvd. It's gotten so much simpler in 6 months, and it should only improve from here.

BTW, my down-converted movies look much cleaner than my miniDV footage (Sony DCR-HC21)