August 2006
Video shootout
How the latest cameras stack up against camcorders
Many digital cameras, including 30 of the 32 newest models in the Ratings (available to subscribers), can record video as well as stills. Many of those cameras can make recordings as long as an hour
(storage permitting), record high-quality, MPEG-4 video at rates up to 30 frames per second, and zoom while recording. What's
more, they're generally smaller and lighter than most camcorders. (For one exception, see the Sanyo Xacti C6 camcorder in
our Ratings and Recommendations, available to subscribers.)
How good is a digital camera as a camcorder substitute? To find out, we tested the new models that claimed to have near-TV-quality video capabilities. We excluded models that do not record at least 30 frames per second at 640 by 480 resolution, because those aren't comparable with camcorders. We recorded scenes with moving and stationary objects, text, and color charts, then viewed the recordings on TV monitors, comparing them with videos of the same scenes shot with a high-rated digital camcorder.
Two cameras stood out: the Olympus Stylus 720SW, $360, and the Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ1, $320. They produced video comparable to that from a high-rated camcorder, though they were merely competent as still cameras. The other cameras didn't come close to high-rated-camcorder quality because their video contained "noise," blocking that appears onscreen.
The bottom line. Most of the digital cameras we tested aren't especially good stand-ins for a high-rated camcorder but can be adequate, as long as the shooting environment is well lighted and there isn't a lot of fast-moving action. Most people should buy a camera for its photographic performance and features, not its video quality. But if you value having a single device that has very good video quality and competent still-image quality, you have two options: Consider either of the digital cameras that stood out in our tests or, for more money, consider a camcorder among those in our Ratings (available to subscribers).
How good is a digital camera as a camcorder substitute? To find out, we tested the new models that claimed to have near-TV-quality video capabilities. We excluded models that do not record at least 30 frames per second at 640 by 480 resolution, because those aren't comparable with camcorders. We recorded scenes with moving and stationary objects, text, and color charts, then viewed the recordings on TV monitors, comparing them with videos of the same scenes shot with a high-rated digital camcorder.
Two cameras stood out: the Olympus Stylus 720SW, $360, and the Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ1, $320. They produced video comparable to that from a high-rated camcorder, though they were merely competent as still cameras. The other cameras didn't come close to high-rated-camcorder quality because their video contained "noise," blocking that appears onscreen.
The bottom line. Most of the digital cameras we tested aren't especially good stand-ins for a high-rated camcorder but can be adequate, as long as the shooting environment is well lighted and there isn't a lot of fast-moving action. Most people should buy a camera for its photographic performance and features, not its video quality. But if you value having a single device that has very good video quality and competent still-image quality, you have two options: Consider either of the digital cameras that stood out in our tests or, for more money, consider a camcorder among those in our Ratings (available to subscribers).
