Professional Camcorder or very high resolution handycam?

Question

I wish to capture professional quality video and at the same time very high resolution images.
In still images I like NIKON manual lens adjusting types. I always want focus control manual and not autofocus.

I have experience in capturing video using still digi cam of SONY 5.1mp
I'm not able to understand what exactly is the difference between DIGI CAM captured video and CAMCORDER captured video! I understand STILL IMAGE resolution absolutely well but want to learn what decides quality in VIDEO...
whats CCP? how does this video capturing through camcorder work..why professional movies can not be made with camcorders?
Please help.. also if you have some recommendations on specific camera models on still and or movie ...let me know

Answer 1

sorry, but if you want "professional quality" video, then don't even think of getting stills of 1 MP or less. Video is restrained to standards. SD is restrained to a size of 720x480 pixels and 60i fps in NTSC countries (USA, Japan, etc.), and 720x576 and 50i fps in PAL countries (rest of the world). HD has a bigger size, but 1080p, the highest resolution HD, is about 2.1 MP.

Basically, theres no big difference between still cam captured video and video captured by a video camera. Video is a gimmick for still cams, and still pictures are a gimmick for video cams. However, Im not saying theyre worthless features. But if you want pro quality video, then go looking for just high MPs. In fact, lower might be better (although not always).

I think since it sounds like you are a photographer, get a pv-gs400. Its about 2.5 years old, and is discontinued, but you wont get manual features for that price from anyone else, plus native 3 16:9 (widescreen) chips. Grab a used one on ebay for about $700 or less. It has a 4 way hybrid manual focus/zoom/iris/shutter ring.

and finally, why cant movies be made on camcorders? They can. Starwars II and III did, using cinema HD cams. (and just because Im saying starwars doesnt mean I like it. If i had my way, tolkien would still be alive and there would be 6 lord of the rings movies instead of 3, and peter jackson would be god). Okay, so maybe not camcorders, but definitely digital. Most movies are shot on 35mm (bad for photographers, great for filmmakers), which allow s you to see that awesomely large picture on the screen. Camcorders just cant provide that much resolution (yet). Remember, a movie is a series of still frames (and an awesome story as well, but were skipping that part). If you had a 10 MP cinema camera (theoretically), take each uncompressed frame, which would be several MB (Im not familiar with picture file sizes), and mulitply that by 24, and then by 60, and then by at least 90. Thats why most major films are still shot on film. Hope this helps!

Answer 2

pretty much eberything is explained above, so i just like to add some camcorder models for u to consider.
Why not getting both? a Pro (or semi-pro, to be exact) and HD cam, all in one? Because u need both n u cant settle for less.
There r various semi-pro HD cam that r quite affordable, although still expensive compared to casual users' camcorders.

For under USD4000.00=
If u like Sony, they have:
FX1 = 1/3 3CCD, manual controls, the 1st semi-pro HD cam.
FX7= 1/4 3CMOS, a new 2006 model, uses new CMOS chips.

Or, how about Canon?=
XH A1= 1/3 3CCD, a new 2006 model, greater manual controls, XLR inputs, 24F (well, its better than nothin).. this babe rocks!