Help chosing 1080p video camera

[eodeo]

I want to get a decent, simple point and shoot 1080p/30fps video camera. Sort of like nvidia GTX 960 is to the GPUs, preferably at the same price point at ~200e

All I really care about is as clear picture as possible- ideally a true 1080p camera- not a fuzzy 640p upscaled over 1080p surface. I'd like to be able to take pictures too. As long as it can shoot true 4k images, not 720p upscaled with plenty of blur like a smartphone would do it.

I'll shoot clips in seconds and I don't care about audio, or high fps- as long as it has true 30fps. I want simple h264 mp4 files with easy/simple usb flash like way to transfer files to my win7 64 desktop where I'll use Adobe AE to edit them.

I'd pay up to 500euros if the difference in picture quality is notable enough over the 200e versions. Help much appreciated.

 

[basroil]

http/www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1116096-REG/canon_0154c001_powershot_elph_350_hs.html

You might want to look into an actual camcorder if you want just video, maybe something like http/www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1110405-REG/canon_0280c002_vixia_hf_r600_full.html

And no, there is nothing that is "upscaled" even in cellphones. In fact, most cellphones nowadays downscale their output by default because nobody really needs that 20MP image (which is >5K). Sensor size does matter though, and either of the two I gave you have sensors several times larger (physically more area) than most cellphones.

 

[eodeo]

If anyone else cares what the actual answer is that two things matter to a camera:

1. sensor size- the bigger the better- preferably APS-C as a minimum (these are noticeably more expensive than the small crap they put into most phones/cheap cameras)

2. Year of production. The newer the camera the better.

What does NOT matter to a camera: a) brand b) mega pixels

 

[basroil]

If anyone else cares what the actual answer is that two things matter to a camera:

1. sensor size- the bigger the better- preferably APS-C as a minimum (these are noticeably more expensive than the small crap they put into most phones/cheap cameras)

2. Year of production. The newer the camera the better.

What does NOT matter to a camera: a) brand b) mega pixels

You have a lot to learn.. Your "answer" is stupid as hell, confusing marketing for something that matters.
1) Sensor size does NOT matter, pixel pitch does, but ONLY for low light performance. If you have 20MP full frame vs 10MP full frame, based on the same tech, the 10MP one will have better low light performance.
2) Year of production mean diddly squat. A 7 years old 5D MKII will still take amazing photos and video in the hands of a professional. Hell, most "best cameras of XXXX" lists put both the 5D mkIII (>3 years old) and the 5DmkII (>6 years) above most cameras of the current year because of how good they are.
3) Brand DOES matter, but things other than sensor quality. Want an F1.2 50mmL lens? Canon only. Want an "affordable" 200-400 F4 lens? Nikon only. Want an 85mm T1.3 lens? Canon only. Hell, the body design philosophy for different brands can mean the difference between something you want to shoot with and something that doesn't feel right.
4) If the photographer/videographer doesn't know what he's doing, all the cameras will look equally bad.

 

[eodeo]

I want to thank you for your continual interest in this thread and I want to apologies for not acknowledging your earlier post.

More importantly, I want to thank you for your help and interest. However, the cameras you suggested initially fall into the "crap" category by default. One is small sensor "x times zoom" disaster, and the other one is an actual 3MP camera. You have to be particularly tech illiterate to miss how terrible that is. It would have been terrible 10 years ago. 20 years ago it would have been below average.

I'm sorry if you disagree, but the sensor size is the most relevant thing about a camera. It dictates it's price range, it's options, add-ons, its performance in both low and regular light. It is easily, single handedly the most important thing about a modern digital shooter.

Year of production? Tech evolves so fast. For pictures, it matters a lot less. This is true. A 5 or even a 10 year old camera can still make excellent photos albeit noticeably slower than a modern shooter of the same price range. For video, which I was primarily (but not solely) interested- date means everything. APS-C camera from 5 years ago can't hold a candle to the more modern ones.

Along with new and more advanced h264 algorithms in place, even more important is the way camera can encode and write such large data. CPU inside the camera is based on the available tech, and tech in the mobile changes DRASTICALLY, every year. Getting an older camera guarantees lower performance and slower shooter more than anything else - every year.

To defend brand importance you speak of lenses- that literally do not matter for 99.9% of the shots. For video, they matter even less. Why?

When you get a decent APS-C camera, it will NOT have "x times zoom" ridiculousness- it will actually have an appropriate mm size for the lens. More importantly, it will come with its own kit lens that is perfect for most if not all of the shots. You REALLY need to have a particular reason (and knowledge) to even consider getting a different lens than the one you've got.

Lastly, for people that just want to get "a decent, simple point and shoot 1080p/30fps video camera. Sort of like nvidia GTX 960 is to the GPUs", my answer gives them that. No nonsense answer that is easy to understand and follow. Just try and find a bad camera based on my 2 step evaluation. At the very least, anything you find will be leaps and bounds better than either camera you suggested.

 

[basroil]

You are absolutely hopeless. I have ten years of professional photography experience (and a bit more non-professionally), and speak from that experience, having used both professional and non-professional equipment, cameras and camcorders alike. Pretty much everything you stated is wrong, and simply because you assume specs actually matter. They don't, at least not as much as practically everything else including the user.


For everyone else interested in a similar question, visit dpreview, cinema5d, and other dedicated photo/video websites to see actual performance comparisons rather than taking specs face value