Video Camera Not Good for Photos
Gadgets have been getting smaller as they get better, and such is certainly the case with video cameras, whose heft has dropped dramatically over the years. But there's such a thing as TOO small, as I found with the powerful but pint-sized Everio GZ-MC500 from JVC.
This palm-snuggling unit, retailing for $1,799, performed admirably as a video camera but a little less so as a digital still camera.
The most convenient resting place for my thumb turned out to be the LCD screen, located smack in the rear of the camera. All that pressure and skin oil can't be good for the precious screen in the long run.
The back portion of the unit can pivot about 45 degrees, allowing the user to look down into the LCD while pointing the lens straight ahead. But my thumb still gravitated toward the screen.
JVC gets a design ding for that one but frankly the unit is so small there's nowhere else to put the LCD.
Enough about controls; let's talk image quality.
The video footage and digital stills are stored on a nice 4-gigabyte Microdrive memory card that comes with the unit. There's even a second onboard slot for a SecureDigital flash memory card that can be bought separately.
I tested the unit in several lighting conditions, indoors and outdoors.
For video, the Everio GZ-MC500 has it in spades. The unit employs 3CCD technology for image capture. For the uninitiated, CCD is short for charge coupled device, a type of electronic sensor that can gather optical information. Three CCDs, one each to gather red, green and blue image information, usually means superb video footage quality.
Indeed video was amazingly sharp.
The unit also boasts a respectable and buttery smooth 10x optical zoom, and I was also surprised at how stable the footage was, considering the small stature of the unit. Handheld operation can get shaky, but JVC's onboard digital image stabilization worked well to steady the footage.
After importing the video files from the Microdrive card to my PC (most inexpensive CompactFlash card readers will do) it was easy to trim the clips with the video-editing software that came with the unit and burn the final product to DVD. Viewed on a television, the footage was crystal clear.
I'm a bit of an audio quality freak, and the JVC unit really excelled there. There is little if any discernible operating noise from the unit while recording, even while zooming the lens. Voices and ambient noise all enjoyed stunning clarity. This is simply the best audio I've heard from units in the sub-$2,000 range.
That's the good news.
The bad news is that the unit's photograph capabilities came up a bit short.
The Everio GZ-MC500 is promoted as a 5-megapixel-class digital still camera. The key word here is "class," and further explanation from JVC shows it's really talking about "pixel-shift technology" that purports to deliver what the user would get with a true 5-megapixel camera.
The photos I took in automatic and manual modes weren't even as good as hundreds of photos I've taken with my trusty Canon S400 4-megapixel camera.
It still holds true that a dedicated camera for still images usually beats the pants off any hybrid operation.
The battery life also came up a bit short in the performance department. You'll get about an hour of continuous record time on one charge, although you can record two hours or more of video footage onto the memory card in "normal" and "economy" mode settings. That's like eight hot dogs and four hot dog buns. Both quandaries will ruin a picnic.
That said, the top-notch 3CCD technology combined with flash memory video storage in this small form should not be overlooked if you're in the market for something that captures brilliant, vivid video footage.
By RON HARRIS
Associated Press

movie vs still phtography?
First, pixel shifting for resolution is a technology borrowed from old color monitors. The technique was called overleaf; where, by shift to the next pixel the resolution may appear to be twice better. This is because human eyes can not discern any change less than 1/30th of a second. It is different when you print the picture on paper, when you will see only half the resolution.
The real problem is also that shutter speed of a movie camera is set; whereas, a still camera can vary its shutter speeds for action or stills. Some purist also say that single focal length lenses are much better than zoom, even aspheric lenses fine tuned for less diffraction, where shifting focal length compromises resolution and contrast.
re: movie vs still
ooo, very informative. Makes me wish I had ratings enabled!
Thanks for your comment.
----
You talk the talk, but do you waddle the waddle?
Return to lens design philosophy?
Today, many cameras and camcorders go back to basics, and use single focal length fine tuned for resolution and contrast, then use digital zoom perhaps with enhancements. The pictures and movies, then can be further improved by editing software.
I cut my teeth on Dr. Kingsley of Kodak's optical dersign book he had published some years ago. Optics have not changed much.I have personally designed and polished silicon IR aspheric lens where single element has the best antidiffraction results.
Lens coating is everything in optics; and I have visited the famous Optical Coatings Lab in Santa Rosa, Calif. Where Pentax 14 layer multicoating was born. Interesting but true. OCLI has the only thin film coating machines designed by themselves doing the special jobs for Polaroid camera mirrors, and Sylvania flash bulb reflectors.
Digital pictures are so important; not many wbesites, however, dealt about it in depth.