You can see many examples of digital stills from the GS400 here...

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=33194

they don't look bad to me. but they are unnecessary, IMO.

Well, you can just buy the DVC30 for better low-light performance.

My vote goes for better "low light."

I think an SD card slot can be a good thing to have... especially if you can key in a lower-third, a logo or a bug as a transparent image from the card right over the live video as you're recording. Sort of an instant watermark function built right into the camcorder.

But that just seems like another unnecessary feature. And how many people would actually overlay an image on their video as they shoot (especially users on this board)? I sure wouldn't for fear that it's there permanently, and I may want the footage later on for something else that requires a watermark not to be there.

I don't think they must do away with stills, but using high pixel CCDs, devoting resources to furthering pixel-shifting, etc...does more harm than good. And I wouldn't care if Panny could get 6MP stills out of one their vid cams because my still cam could do the same and still fit in my pocket.

In the same vein, still camera manufacturers need to lay off the movie modes and concectrate on less noise at higher ISOs, speeding up shutter lag, time between shots, power consumption, etc...

My still camera needs a mic just as much as my video camera needs MP CCDs... ;)

I know we'd get better models (still and video) if all these companies stopped trying to cram in so much junk and just concentrated on worthwhile features...I mean, does anybody still factor digital zoom limits when deciding on a new cam anymore?


OK, I'm sure some do, but probably not the ones buying the higher end models like the GS400.

>Amen. By doing away with the digital stills they could also do away with the >memory card hardware and the USB port and cable. Maybe the cost >reduction for these things would offset the cost of bigger CCDs.

I guess it's a dream to envision higher data rate MPEG4/MPEG2 written to the memory card or USB hard drive.

I guess such features are appealing to those that want a small package for video and stills. Though, would anyone want the picture features if they knew that it reduced video low light performance ?

>In the same vein, still camera manufacturers need to lay off the movie >modes and concectrate on less noise at higher ISOs, speeding up shutter >lag, time between shots, power consumption, etc...
>
>My still camera needs a mic just as much as my video camera needs MP >CCDs... ;)

Someone has to make a video-capable device at this size. When I compare my Canon S40 (4MPixel camera) to the crisp, clean footage from my VX2000,
I can't help but wonder about the disappearance of spontaneity. Casual subjects are used to cameras, but huge camcorders with lens hoods and external microphones bug them out. I just ordered a Panasonic GS250 that will help with my content, but I know it's not as portable as a little digital camera.

I want three manual rings instead of one ring from gs400.

I want usb2 port for uncompressed and unmanipulate data stream directly from ccd.

I don't think any of my request is dear or hard.

Regards
Leigh