maybe this stuff has been answered in the past,
so a link to an old discussion may do it also ..

I intend to buy a Panasonic a NV-GS300EG-S camcorder
http://www.panasonic.be/servlet/PB/menu/1220752_l6/index.html

or  a VDR-D300EG-S
http://www.panasonic.be/servlet/PB/menu/1219931_l6/index.html

both 3CCD, optical stabilisator ..

NV = miniDVD
VDR = DVD

But what are the pro and contra's of a
miniDV vs DVD camcorder  ?

digital storage on miniDV , i heard ..

_ it keeps more pixel resolution than DVD ( with mpegx compression)
_ a miniDV-tape has a longer lifetime as DVD


digital storage on DVD :

_ supposing I have USB or DV-out on my camcorder ?
   how easy is it to get the video-stuff on my PC ?
   I there an advantage of using my PC-DVD-reader ?
   I heard that to have a readable camera-DVD,
   a time consuming finish-this-dvd-disk-procedure
   has to be started on the camcorder.

in general :
_ costs miniDV vs DVD ?
_ is DVD too early, and a hype for camcorders ?

Some pratical experiences to share here ?

Jef

Show quote Hide quote A miniDVD camcorder employs DV-25 standard compression that has a data rate
of 25 megabits per second.  A DVD camcorder uses DVD-compliant mpeg2 that
has a data rate that tops out around 9 megabits per second, or nearly 3
times less than miniDV.  DV-25 compresses each frame individually.  Mpeg2
compresses temporally, meaning it calculates data for subsequent and prior
frames from a reference frame.  Though mpeg2 compression can be very
efficient and effective, DVD camcorders do transcoding in a single pass, and
on-the-fly.  Optimal mpeg2 compression requires, at least, an analysis pass
followed by a compression pass.  For this reason, mpeg2 transcoding will
always yield better results when done on a computer in software than in a
consumer camcorder.

Finally, miniDV is readily editable, mpeg2 much less so.  If you're going to
do anything beyond simple cuts, e.g. titling, transitions, effects and
correction, it will be much easier to do using captured DV-25 from a miniDV
camcorder than mpeg2 from a DVD.

If you mean it is higher resolution than DVD-compliant mpeg2, for any given
scene that includes movement, this is true.

Probably true.  Tape has been around for many, many decades and, when
properly used and stored, will last a long time.  The jury is still out on
DVD+/-R.

If it is a miniDV camcorder, it should have an 1394/Firewire/iLink output,
which is the standard for transferring high-quality video to a computer.
This interface is supported by virtually all video editing packages.

Very easy.  Using 1394/Firewire/Earthlink, it is simply a question of
connecting the camera, opening your capture software (which may be part of
your editing program), and starting the capture.  "Capture" in the context
of miniDV, is a misnomer, as it is a bit-for-bit transfer of data from the
camera to the computer, just like copying any file.  With DVD camcorders,
you can "rip" the resulting DVD.  Ripping, too, creates a bit-for-bit copy
of the video data.  However, as noted, mpeg2 is not easily edited.

Not if you care about the quality of your video.

Many DVD formats require finalization, so perhaps that' what you're
referring to.

I'm sure there are cheap cameras available in both formats.  What you will
not find, however, is quality cameras in the prosumer range that shoot on
DVD.

It's neither too early nor too late.  It's just a means of making it easier
for those who want a simple to operate consumer camcorder, don't intend to
do much editing to the result, and don't care about the quality of the
video.

Show quoteHide quote

I need to clarify this, because it is mixing concepts.  All NTSC-standard
digital video (480i)  is displayed at 720 x 480 pixels.  In this context,
the number of pixels per frame are the same for DVD or for miniDV.
Resolution, however, also refers to the resolving power, i.e. how many lines
can be resolved by a given format.  MiniDV will, usually, have better
resolution than the same scene transcoded to DVD-compliant mpeg2.  Note,
however, that resolution (in this context) is a function of a lot of factors
beyond the compression scheme and data rate.  A camera with crappy optics, a
single tiny sensor and cheap electronics will not provide as much resolution
as a camera with a good lens, 3 large sensors and decent electronics,
regardless of the storage medium employed by the camera.

As I said, DVD, as currently implemented in consumer camcorders, is an
inherently-poor recording medium that yields lower-quality video than an
equivalent camera that employs miniDV.  However, there are almost certainly
really lousy, cheap consumer miniDV camcorders that can produce as poor, or
poorer video than a DVD camcorder.

Show quote Hide quote Thanks for the help,
and I will go for the miniDV camcorder.

Jef

Recording from Cable Box
Problem receiving a block of channels
How to capture video from a JVC GVR-DL300
Cleaning MiniDV Camera
Problem with Sony TRV308
Camcorder review website?
HD CAMCORDER
JVC GR-D90 U problems...
JVC GR-D90 U problems...
Advent ADR660 Remote Control