Canon MV600i PAL vs Canon Optura 20 NTSC

[ArtistRay]

I'm looking at Canon MV600i (PAL) and Canon Optura 20 (NTSC), both cost pretty much the same. Here's the tricky part, although MV600i uses PAL having 625 lines, but the CCD resolution is only 800,000 comparing to Optura's NTSC 525 lines, with a CCD resolution of 1,330,000. Can anyone suggest which one is a better solution? Thanks a lot
Spec Comparison:

Optura20 / MV600i

CCD: 1/4" / 1/6"

Resolution: 1,330,000 / 800,000

Lines: 525 / 625

Format: NTSC / PAL

 

[Ute Giddeon]

NTSC is the North American video standard. PAL is the European video standard. They're not compatible and conversion is expensive. So if you live in New York, you want the NTSC camera.

Some American filmakers, when using video, will shoot with PAL because it's framerate and therefore motion blur more closely approximates film. Spike Lee's Bamboozled was done this way. But unless you have multi-format editing equipment, or have the budget and time to convert the formats, you don't want to be shooting with PAL.

A guy on the subway Friday night noticed me dragging around some camera equipment and struck up a conversation about it. He turned out to be the location sound mixer for Lee's past several movies, and we talked specifically about Bamboozled. Ah, synchronicity. The mind delights in making connections, I hear.

 

[ArtistRay]

Thanks Giddeon. I think my question was either incomplete or unclear. I'm aware of the compatibility of NTSC and PAL, however, I never connect my camcorder to any device other than my PowerBook, I edit movies with iMovie3 and Final Cut series. I wanted PAL because it has a more lines and slower frame rate close to film. However, I'm a bit confused about the CCD resolution, I wonder how the NTSC CCD with 1,330,000 pixels would look compare to PAL CCD with 800,000 pixels.... QUALITY is what I'm looking for.

 

[Ute Giddeon]

Video resolution is fixed, and isn't affected by the quality of the camera. All PAL video cameras have the same resolution (625 horizontal lines) and all NTSC video cameras have the same resolution (525 horizontal lines). Yes, PAL has the better resolution. So if resolution is your only concern, the question you have to decide is "Do I prefer PAL over NTSC because of its resolution?" not "Which of these two cameras do I want?" Also, anytime you showed your PAL videos on NTSC equipment, you'd lose that resolution.

CCD resolution is one of the ways consumer video camera manufacturers try to muddle consumers. The "megapixel" count on a camera package refers to the camera's still photo resolution, not video resolution.

As for the quality of the cameras overall, you probably want the NTSC camera because it has a much larger CCD. Larger CCDs = better image quality. Low color saturation is one of the main tell-tales that you're using a home movie camera. Larger CCDs give you better color. 1/4 inch is pretty small, but 1/6" is miniscule.

But: Because the frame rate is slower on PAL cameras, more light gets onto the CCD with each frame, so color is better. I suppose that a sixth-inch CCD in a PAL camera might have the same color performance as a quarter-inch NTSC CCD. You'd ahve to shoot the same subject in the same light with both cameras and compare the results.

What kind of video are you making? How do you intend to distribute the final product? Unless you intend to distribute your videos entirely on the net, or are an expert and equipped to deal specially with PAL in an NTSC country, you'll want the NTSC camera.

 

[ArtistRay]

Thanks again Giddeon, seems that you're the only one answering this question, and very very knowledgeable on this topic. I've had a Canon ZR25mc for 3 years and shot clips here and there. I'm about to seriously make feature films once I get a new PowerBook G4(my 400Mhz model is too slow now).

I want to invest on a PAL camcorder for reasons: I'm only a college student, don't have much budget so I figure I'd go with a PAL and use it for a long time. I also plan to shoot in 16:9 mode for some movies, since 16:9 lens would cost me $300 I'd just sacrafice some resolutions that I gained in the first place(with PAL over NTSC). At last, I want a frame rate close to the real film for a "less-video" feeling. Also, I never hook up camcorder to anything other than my computers with PAL compatible software like iMovie and Final Cut, so I figured it doesn't matter that much with the compatibility issues.

So far I found Canon MV600i for $440, and seems like my best choice since I can't really spend any more money than that. Would anyone have a better suggestion?