Recommend a video camera replacement?

all HD video cameras that record to SD cards will fail the "blur" test, it has nothing to do with "shutter speed". Pallidin is an optimist, the Group of Frames is not 4 or 5 but fixed at 8, that is what the H.264 MPEG4 standard is all about. 1 real frame is recorded then the next 7 are virtual, they only exist by interpolation on playback. the good part about the DVD camcorder you had is it used MPEG2 encoding which uses a variable GOF so it does a better job with action than any consumer HD camera (except for HDV which is also MPEG2). miniDV is the best since it has no virtual frames, no intraframe compression, and because it is interlaced it actually makes 60 images per second for very smooth slow motion. i am glad you tried the ZX3 before buying, but i am afraid that you are not going to find an HD camera for $400 that does what you need. If you stick with standard definition, then you can get MPEG2 HDD cameras or even miniDV at your price. If you go to HD, then HDV is the only option, but at about 6 times your price.

Your asking for the impossible. Fast motion capturing and HD camcorders do not go together to make a watchable video. HD camcorders interpolate the video. This means the lens assembly takes and records a frame, then electronic systems in the camcorder, that are no part of the lens assembly, make the next 4 or 5 frames. Now the lens assembly puts a frame on the storage media, followed by 4 or 5 of electronically created frames and this goes on and on throughout the flick. Terrible for action video shots, where 35 of 50 frames in any shot are not from the lens, rather from electronics within the camcorder, these 35 frames being a guesstimation of what the video should look like.

If you want frame by frame coverage, MiniDV tape camcorders do not create frames, they record frames, all from the lens assembly and transfer that info directly to the tape drive.

I recently purchased the Canon Vixia HF R21.

Overall, I am thoroughly impressed with the camcorder. The functions are over the top. There is literally nothing that cannot be done with this camera without being a professional. The instructions, in a pdf file, are sometimes not clearly explained. The icons on screen are very small and a person with corrected vision may not be able to make out what the icon is. However, once you see the results of filming, it is very surprisingly sharp and clear. The Auto function lets you get into filming very quickly without going through the camera manual. Once you go through the instruction manual, you will be amazed at all that this camcorder can do. I really like the interactive screen to change functions and make adjustments. The IS function is also excellent. This is one of the reasons I selected this camcorder because of the IS function on my Canon digital camera

Now, the con side. I am very dissapointed at the battery life of this product. Maybe I am spoiled by my Canon XSi digital camera battery. I have never had the XSi battery to even need recharging on trips of two weeks and I take a lot of pictures. I charge the XSi battery before leaving and now I do not even take the charger. On the Vixia camcorder, the battery runs out in two hours or less. So on an ordinary trip, you may have to break out and buy an additional battery and charger. This to me is very disheartening. I have made my disappointment made known to Canon.

The Sony HDR-CX115. I'm not sure whether it does slow motion play back because I've never needed to test this, but it most definitely can write to SD card, a big screen with touch features as well as buttons on the body, and it is one of the better HD cameras. It is also within your budget at about £299, so about $350? It is also very light and compact.

A newer model could be the HDR-CX160 which has 16 GB on board memory but you can also have an SD too so lots of room for HD recording as 4GB generally only allows half an hour of recording in HD!!! This does 50 fps, and again in your price range. :-)

I hate bridge cameras, so my place is you're dropping it sluggish with one. the reason I dislike them a lot is they're designed by ability of promoting - not by ability of engineering. promoting has taken the misperception of the amateur digicam shopper that extra pixels are extra helpful - bigger ability zooms are extra helpful; and designed a digicam around those misconceptions. additionally they even lead them to seem as though a mini-DSLR to extra enforce those misconceptions, a lot that some consumers have even called them "expert" cameras. those are what bridge cameras are - they're made for enhancing revenues and not the rest. easily, bridge cameras are merely run-of-the-mill compact cameras, and with a great zoom lens and severe megapixel sensor - they under-carry out different compact cameras. Superzoom lenses, alongside with individuals that are 14x and extra - extraordinarily those ridiculous 30x lenses, have optical high quality matters. it extremely is confusing for digicam manufacturers to even make a severe-end 12x superzoom for DSLRs (that value as much as $a million,000), so how undesirable do you think of a 30x $30 lens would be. I base this on my very own journey. And in spite of the undeniable fact that I even have not individually examined each and every of the bridge digicam lenses, I owned a bridge digicam in the previous getting disgusted with it and finally dumping it. For my money, a miles extra helpful optical lens is interior the 4x to 7x variety. And bridge cameras even have overkill megapixel sensors, which basically leads to poor low-mild overall performance and important shutter delays as a results of would desire to technique all of that documents. Compact digicam sensors interior the 10Mp to 12Mp variety look to accomplish maximum suitable. So take a basic component & shoot digicam, then upload an excellent zoom lens and severe megapixel sensor, and you have a bridge digicam. A right designed component & shoot, alongside with a Canon G12, Canon S100, Nikon P7100, or Nikon P310 will massively outperform any bridge digicam.