Digital Still/Video Camera Combination?

[RADIOMAN015]

Working on some budget proposals for equipment next year fiscal year (FY 12, starting in October) and for the Squadron Public Affairs Office, looking to buy a combination digital still/video camera.  Likely I don't really want to spend over $200.00, but of course even less would be good.  Generally for pictures for websites or news releases we are limited to not more than 2-3 mb (typically I give them 1 mb on news releases), BUT also I'm looking for a video capability also to upload likely to you tube and we can link back to the squadron news web page.

So anyone that has some experience with combo still/video cameras, I would appreciate your comments.

RM   

[Майор Хаткевич]

Pretty much all still cameras WILL take video. Quality in good lighting isn't that bad either.

[wuzafuzz]

Pretty much any of the point and shoot cameras will create nice stills and will shoot YouTube quality video.  The only caveat might be using your feet for zooming.

I bought a used 6MP point and shoot from from KEH Cameras for less than $100.  It does pretty decent little video clips too but it won't film for more than a few minutes at a time.  If you work in short clips anyway it would work fine for you.

I have bought cameras from KEH all the way down to "bargain" grade.  In over 10 years of shopping I have never been disappointed.

[Eclipse]

Generally for pictures for websites or news releases we are limited to not more than 2-3 mb (typically I give them 1 mb on news releases), BUT also I'm looking for a video capability also to upload likely to you tube and we can link back to the squadron news web page.

What you send to the media or post on a website should not be related to the original's resolution, which should always be taken at the highest quality resolution and highest quality the camera is capable of and with digital zoom disabled.

You edit the photos for publication before sending them, but you can never recapture those photons.

[a2capt]

I will say .. I've always followed the "digital zoom off" mantra, but after a factory visit to Nikon, of the 5700.. it came back turned on, and while I was pretty sure it was a hack mode judging on what I saw on the viewfinder, I tried it anyway. For what it is, I was pretty darn impressed.

At least it's not "easy" to get into digital zooming, the button has to be held for some amount of seconds before it will swap into it. OTOH, every digital video camera I've ever tried where they have this "330X Zoom!!" garbage, even just 1 of those X's into the digital mode .. What a joke.

[ProdigalJim]

I've equipped many of our reporters with Kodak Zi-8 HD cameras. They were Kodak's answer to the Flip video camera a few years ago. We like the Zi-8 because:

1. It's cheap. They can be had for about $140.
2. It shoots high-def video in 16:9, which is what most high-quality video for the web is doing these days
3. It includes a jack to plug in an external mic if the internal mic quality isn't suitable for your purposes
4. It runs a long time on a charge
5. It's the size of a cellphone
6. It offers decent digital zoom
7. One-button operation for techno-challenged reporters
8. Built-in USB so you just plug the camera into your USB port and it's a drive
9. Shoots HD stills
10. Exports in normal standard formats, both video and still (no weird proprietary need-a-special-driver/codec/package needed to use or edit)

The Flip people are going out of business because most casual users are satisfied with their cellphones for pictures and quick clips. Don't know what the Kodak version is doing...I bought 10 Kodak units for my newsroom two years ago, and they're doing really well. EvilBay may have some Kodak Zi-8s for even less.

We really like 'em!

[a2capt]

Something from Kodak that doesn't use voodoo to export, and require some crappy UI based software tool? Wow.

On the still photos, does it take the picture "after" the button was pressed, or "when" it was pressed?

A typical problem with Kodak stuff has been the latter, where you press and move the camera while pressing, instant blur. The difference is nanoseconds, but it matters. If the camera is buffering, vs. monitoring, the output is better for most users who otherwise have not a clue whats going on and need that one button thing..

[ProdigalJim]

Something from Kodak that doesn't use voodoo to export, and require some crappy UI based software tool? Wow.

On the still photos, does it take the picture "after" the button was pressed, or "when" it was pressed?

A typical problem with Kodak stuff has been the latter, where you press and move the camera while pressing, instant blur. The difference is nanoseconds, but it matters. If the camera is buffering, vs. monitoring, the output is better for most users who otherwise have not a clue whats going on and need that one button thing..

Well, I have to admit that often, yes, it has that nanosecond delay. In our case that's usually when something especially cool is happening and we move quickly to take a picture...in which case we call it the ohnosecond.

Seriously, though, we've managed to minimize that by just being careful...push gently, use the mini-tripod, brace it somewhere, etc.

And sadly, most of my guys struggle even with one-button toys, a fact I find even more astonishing when you consider that many of them hold instrument ratings, multiple-engine, etc.